I’m just going by common nomenclature. You absolutely can have it both ways, because I didn’t name shit. I’m just going by the abbreviations they commonly hold.
But they aren’t common nomenclature (as they’re only used by people who are being disingenuous), they don’t commonly hold (as they are not used by the studio, memory alpha, or really anyone in general other than trolls) and it doesn’t fit with the naming scheme of the series. So, like I said, you can’t have it both ways.
Yeah, I agree with you that anyone abbreviating Discovery as “STD” is doing it just to be obtuse. That said, the abbreviation rules aren’t quite as consistent as I’d like.
If it’s the original Star Trek series, it’s abbreviated TOS (The Original Series).
If it’s a spin off with a multi-word subtitle (Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Strange New Worlds), it’s abbreviated as an initialism of the subtitle (TNG, DS9, SNW).
If it’s a spin off with a single-word subtitle (Star Trek: Voyager, Star Trek: Enterprise, Star Trek: Prodigy), it’s abbreviated with the first three letters of the subtitle (VOY, ENT, PRO).
There are two series which violate these rules.
Discovery violates rule 3 by being abbreviated as DSC, instead of DIS.
Lower Decks violates rule 2 by being abbreviated LOW, instead of LD.
To be fair, I never mentioned the abbreviation rules themselves, just the naming scheme of Star Trek shows. The addition of ST to any acronym does line up with that. However, I agree on the Discovery front I disagree on the Lower Decks one. I’ve never seen anyone call it LOW, it’s always been referred to as LD.
I’m just going by common nomenclature. You absolutely can have it both ways, because I didn’t name shit. I’m just going by the abbreviations they commonly hold.
Not a single Star Trek series is officially abbreviated with “ST” for “Star Trek” in the title. “They” never named it that.
But they aren’t common nomenclature (as they’re only used by people who are being disingenuous), they don’t commonly hold (as they are not used by the studio, memory alpha, or really anyone in general other than trolls) and it doesn’t fit with the naming scheme of the series. So, like I said, you can’t have it both ways.
Yeah, I agree with you that anyone abbreviating Discovery as “STD” is doing it just to be obtuse. That said, the abbreviation rules aren’t quite as consistent as I’d like.
There are two series which violate these rules.
To be fair, I never mentioned the abbreviation rules themselves, just the naming scheme of Star Trek shows. The addition of ST to any acronym does line up with that. However, I agree on the Discovery front I disagree on the Lower Decks one. I’ve never seen anyone call it LOW, it’s always been referred to as LD.
Lower Decks is LOW officially? Never saw that before. Appropriately degrading, I suppose!
Perhaps rule 2 is “If it’s a spinoff whose subtitle contains at least 3 words”. That would be consistent with the evidence.
Removed by mod
TOS: Star Trek (The Original Series)
TNG: Star Trek: The Next Generation
VOY: Star Trek: Voyager
DS9: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
ENT: Star Trek: Enterprise
DSC: Star Trek: Discovery
And the rest!
The closest to “STD” was into darkness, which was STID