Nah, I’m dismissing complaints that have no basis. If you want to actually back up your complaint with something then go for it.

I didn't realize that opinions about shows need to be submitted for peer review before they can be valid. Of course, that also means that your position is equally invalid until you can show that your opinion is based on something that I think is acceptable.

But if you’re not willing to defend your stance then it’s because it’s indefensible.

Or because I don't have the time to write a dissertation on why two shows I watched several years ago weren't very good. And because you aren't coming across as terribly open minded on this subject.

So let me save us both time: I point out the general reasons I thought Discovery and Picard were poorly written. You dismiss the general positions until I can provide examples. I list examples of the things I thought were stupid, poorly thought out, or unsatisfying. You counter by pointing out similar things from individual episodes of any of the previous shows or movies. I explain why I think those things either weren't bad in that context or why they are easier to overlook in shows that had a different story structure, tone, and so on, and also that the existence of bad episodes in previous shows doesn't make the writing in future shows any better. You accuse me of having nostalgia goggles and being afraid of anything different. I point out that I am all for different, but I want that different thing to also be good. You fall back to claiming that my complaints are unfounded and we return right back to where we started.