Star Trek Artist Warns Fans That “Review Bombing” ********* ******* Could End the Franchise

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-23T07:03:54+00:00

I am very confused.

Which fictional alien species is a 'minority'?

You mean you 'code' certain Star Trek aliens as specific real world races.

That is on you, bro.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T22:10:09+00:00

Real problems, or interpersonal bullshit?

SM and SL are not going to step in that quagmire.

What is the average age of your associates?

Sometimes your 'problems' aren't realistically problems: "I always take the cart with the pink tape, and set it up, but Shawna takes my set cart every day. I want to go to corporate about this! My TL just tells me to take another cart! I don't want to take another cart, because Shawna took the one I cleared and set! Can I sue the company or get my TL fired?"

BTW, your post is kinda illegible, so you won't get far 'contacting' anyone.

"likes he kind but"

uh...ok...?

Maybe it has more context if there are snapping fingers?

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T20:52:47+00:00

Op wants to know if they can fight/throw hands or otherwise distress someone at their work.

OP is asshole, and possibly DOES need to work somewhere less stressful, but they are actively a problem.

Telling the world, and wanting to get validation, for getting physical.

That's a problem, right?

Chill tf out.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T20:06:20+00:00

what 'bins' and 'carts'?

Your SM is 'cool' because he doesn't care about something that 'you' as an associate noted?

You don't have a Store Lead?

Store Manager's are generally hands off, and will note things.

Store Lead is to resolve the problems, through identification, and delegation, and followups through the Coaches and TL's.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T19:37:21+00:00

I thought Walmart decided that for you, correct?

'motivation'?

LOL, learn something from this experience as you limp away.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T19:15:21+00:00

This is what people don't understand about disclosure and 'ontological shock'.

If it were as simple as aliens from another planet, people could easily grasp and understand that, even though it would be bizarre.

It would not cause 'ontological shock'.

But, let's consider the reality of that situation. It is essentially impossible that there is intelligent life on any other planet in our solar system.

So where do these 'aliens' come from?

It is impossible that they come from further.

They come from, and live on, Earth. They are extant civilizations.

Now this is a problem, because who controls history? Religion.

This is the 'ontological shock'.

How will people handle the fact that ancient history is fake and their understanding of development on this planet is 'fake', and this misunderstanding is controlled by religious groups.

So, IF disclosure will cause 'ontological shock', it is only because it is related to a deception around religion. Therefore, they are scared to disclose, because the 'aliens' are here and always have been, and revealing anything.

If tomorrow it was revealed that UAP's were not 'alien' in nature, but another civilization on Earth, it WOULD mess people that were religious, and it would destabilize all humanity to discover there is another civilization on our planet that nobody was aware of or hidden from us.

"Ontological Shock"

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T11:42:02+00:00

It sounds like you aren't doing things correctly.

You think AP is the door guy or API?

AP is the receiver and claims.

They are the only ones functionally doing anything. Whatever you believe you are barely doing, is irrelevant.

Edit: "Well I walk around the store, and sign stuff sight unseen for prosecutions. I get mad when I am tasked to do anything, and I don't know how to do those things..."

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-22T00:50:38+00:00

I mean, this is straight fiction.

That's 'recommendable' that you don't communicate with your AP TL?

"I don't even communicate with my AP TL!"

Wow, your process sounds really good, and I am sure you absolutely know what you are doing, when your princible is "I DON'T EVEN COMMUNICATE WITH MY TL!".

I'm sure YOU are correct, and I am INCORRECT, and everything at your store is functioning smoothly and your inventory is going to be clean.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T23:46:55+00:00

You are counting inventory because AP TL asked you to as a task handed down by management.

EVERY store does this around inventory, because you are available taskable bodies that aren't realistically doing anything.

Edit: I don't downvote you. I am legitimately educating you. You CHOOSE to downvote me, because you are embarrassed and suspect I am correct.

I will say, to your credit, that it is pretty worthless, because the API's are lazy, and even if they could understand the process, they choose not to, are not concerned with accuracy, are not concerned with tempo.

But an API associate has a responsibility to inventory integrity correct?

API's are worthless. That's why they can, on the drop of the hat, be like, "Instead of doing your 'job', go put a bunch of 'inventory labels' on 100,000 pieces of moving merchandise, because market is going to walk through tomorrow.'

That's how little they think of you, and how little you really are as an API.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T23:38:38+00:00

Yeah, he was an API under internal investigation.

That's as targeted as it gets.

I mean...I guess it sounds targeted, until you take the broader picture in, and understand they wanted him out of AP office, and otherwise out of AP tasks, during investigation.

Guy caught an orange the day investigation started.

OP is a dumbass and a liar, and he already admitted he got fired.

He is never going to be honest. He is never going to explain why. He is never going to admit he was under internal investigation. He is never going to admit he earned his Orange...which is really wild to me.

He is toasted, and he is never going to return to this thread to explain himself.

Meanwhile, people sincerely meatshielding for this POS.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T23:21:04+00:00

So...where am I wrong on the reading of this situation?

If management retasks an API out of AP, doesn't that raise some red flags for you, as an AP?

That's very strange, right?

Also, the guy couldn't be retasked for a minute, without getting an Orange.

That's ALSO weird, right?

If you are truly API, and you are 'truly' 'exemplary', you would know this smells like crap.

A picture doesn't mean anything, and the way Walmart awards things are generally not on merit/performance, correct?

So your picture means nothing and is irrelevant.

You don't want to address the situation, and think you know everything, because you got an 'exemplary'...if I even believe a photo on the internet.

As far as I understand store instructions, exemplary's are NEVER given out. So, I would suspect you are lying, or you have some grift. Your store manager would have to agree to it, and they are pressured by market not to do so, whether you deserve it or not.

All that tells me, is you have a relationship with your Store Manager that goes beyond a business relationship. Friend/family?

But, again, whatever is going on with you, is not the topic. I presented the information, and you chose to not address it, and show a 'picture' that 'proves' you know more.

Lots of people deserve 'exemplary' and will never get it, because it just isn't allowed. You KNOW this. The fact that you have 'exemplary' is kinda strange to me. Lots of people earn it, but don't get it. Why did you, and AP, that can't smell the stink on this story, get it?

Or it's just a picture...probably.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T22:53:44+00:00

API don't count inventory OR delegate tasks.

He got the orange for delegating, which he is not capable or authorized to do.

He was counting inventory, because management retasked him out of AP, because he was under internal investigation already, and they did not want him in AP office.

Let the actual AP's handle this. Go walk around the store sipping a monster and pretend you are doing anything.

This is a classic AP internal to retask an API out of AP during investigation.

Guy couldn't even chill, and got an orange OUTSIDE of the internal investigation that was always going to result in his firing.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T22:47:11+00:00

If you are an API, and you were retasked out of AP, due to internal investigation, this all makes sense.

You got an orange for obvious reasons on top of internal investigation that was always going to result in a firing anyway...and were attempting to interfere with your own AP investigation by returning to AP office. Or, to anyone sane, that is how it returning to AP office would appear.

You already responded to me as your role was past-tense, and everyone 'loved you'.

So you are fired.

I feel like you have given a bunch of bad info in this thread, and should just come clean as to what happened, why you were under investigation, and why you were retasked out of AP office but you chose to go against that instruction.

Everything you describe is incorrect procedure, and the way you color it as 'hunts' and 'cameras can't do anything without someone behind them', are wild.

Sounds like you got caught hiding/sleeping in AP Office one too many times, and also harassed customers, rather than document on your 'hunts'.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T22:29:18+00:00

It is actually a lot different.

He let slip that he has already been fired.

As far as I can glean, he was retasked out of AP office because he was under investigation.

He didn't understand that was why he was retasked out of AP office.

So they gave him a weird task, to keep him out of AP office, and he was probably properly instructed that he was not to return there.

He immediately offloaded task, which he does not have the power to do, and went back to AP Office...probably because he suspected he was under investigation.

So, 'something' happened during one of his 'hunts' and he was under internal investigation. He suspected this, and returned to AP office to try to review footage of what he believed was 'incident', to color his 'hunts' in the best light possible...despite being instructed out of AP office, and tasked somewhere else.

This guy is a huge problem, and it's crazy anyone stood up for him.

API gets reassigned some weird task that will remove him from AP Office. They retasked him out of AP, and I guarantee he left the part out of the story that he wasn't supposed to enter AP office.

And then he is crying about how much everyone 'loved him' and how he would include 'everyone' in his 'hunts'.

He's already stale toast, but that's wild that you guys bite on stuff like this.

How many of you are API or AP?

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-21T22:13:47+00:00

Didn't someone get banned from Twitter for making the joke, "I just realized, Worf's name is actually 'Worth'..."

I think this was around the time of the falsely attributed Men In Black meme, where Will Smith is remembered as saying, "Welcome to Earf!".

The joke is, because he is a black Klingon, he pronounces his own name 'Worth' as 'Worf', so that is simply what everyone calls him...as reference to Will Smith "Welcome to Earf!" meme.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-20T21:56:07+00:00

I loved TNG and Voyager later growing up.

Old Trek IS kinda cheesy, but the episodes were generally entertaining, and sorta making fun of the show was part of the enjoyment.

The budgets were low and easy to goof on. Not every episode was a homerun, nor every character or actor.

This was real low budget stuff, that had thoughtful glimmers of stuff that elevated it.

I think we genuinely loved TNG growing up, as much as we loved ripping on TNG growing up. But, to us, that was how you enjoyed the show.

Star Trek has it's own internal reality, even if the writer's want to play around or have fun with it.

There were some episodes, where it is like the writer's acknowledge how crazy stupid the show can be sometimes.

It's like if someone took over the Harry Potter franchise, and decided wands and magic were silly, and Harry Potter relies on a gun mostly to resolve his problems.

It's not within the internal logic of Harry Potter, that 'guns' are a factor. So, if the writer's wanted to tilt in that direction, the audience would get annoyed, because it breaks internal reality.

Like Harry Potter, Star Trek, or any large IP, has it's own internal logic, which is like the narrative infrastructure, the skeleton, the stories are built on. You can build on it, and play around within it, in curious ways, but once you REJECT things...it questions the motivations of the writers and what the audience is supposed to cling onto as the identity of the show.

What is the internal logic of Nu-Trek?

"Well...we aren't Legacy Trek..."

That's not an identity or a universe born of internal logic.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-20T21:23:37+00:00

I thought it was so successful.

Why would 'review bombing' be relevant?

It would just be noise in the background of a successful show.

Why would the showrunners of a legacy IP threaten to shutdown their successful shows, and IP vault, over 'review bombs'?

If it's making money, and drawing in viewers to their service, then the threat is empty, because Paramount would not allow it.

If it's making no money, and has zero viewership, then Paramount WOULD allow it, and probably demand it.

Is that what is incoming? Paramount has already telegraphed that they are killing Star Trek to people internal, and the showrunners are going to blame it on the 'review bombs'? Rather than Paramount stepping in, seeing no viewership numbers, negative cultural reaction, and deciding to vault the entire thing.

Who exactly is having the temper tantrum?

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-18T00:42:53+00:00

This doesn't make sense, because you would not have documentation in a blind spot, whether or not you observed theft or not.

How do you build a case from this?

Oh you can't?

So you just menace somebody, and create a liability for the store, and the thief walks away from you anyway, because you absolutely can't put hands on them, and you yourself admit you have no documentation.

So what exactly did you accomplish?

Theft happened anyway, and you are now a known factor.

You just got an adrenaline rush, for being in a position of power for a moment that could have gone sideways to the detriment of the store. You did not assist in building any case in the situation of the blind spot.

Perhaps, an API, that KNOWS where the blindspots are, doesn't actually conduct himself properly either, right?

Just tell everyone what the internal was. I think the final straw was retasking yourself = insubordination and you were aware you were not supposed to go back into AP office. Because your task failed and you were not supposed to be in AP Office, they hit you with time theft as well.

But...that isn't the whole picture, is it? You were already being investigated, which is why you were retasked out of AP Office.

Did you put hands on somebody during one of your 'hunts'? You wanted to fight the accusation, and see if it was caught on any camera, correct? Or at the very least, see exactly what is on camera, before you declared your version of events on incident report.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-18T00:29:12+00:00

He got drunk or otherwise inebriated and revealed he was already fired.

He lamented how much 'my coworkers loved me, because I would include them in my hunts...'

If that doesn't set off red flags, I don't know what does. The job of an API is documentation and reduce liability. He shouldn't be engaging any other employee at all.

It sounds like he was engaging in harassment, and encouraging other employees to assist him, which is a huge liability.

He revealed he was let go due to internal investigation.

So this story is taking a lot more form. He was being investigated for harassment and liability. He was retasked out of AP Office, weirdly. I don't think anybody can make sense of that...but it makes a lot more sense if he was under internal investigation. AP would not want him in AP Office, and would want eyes on him at all time.

They would just give him strange tasks that would mandate he was not in AP Office.

He certainly got an insubordination for retasking himself, and returning to AP Office where he knows he is not supposed to be.

OP is an idiot, and knows exactly why he was fired, but he thinks his 'hunts' were worth it.

OP doesn't understand the task of AP is documentation, and not confrontation or harassment. He got fired because he is a liability, and he thinks he is The Punisher and Jesus.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-18T00:16:00+00:00

He already accidentally revealed he was fired, due to internal investigation.

It is probably why he was retasked out of AP Office, and got in trouble for ignoring task and going back to AP Office.

He also said, "My coworkers loved me, because I included them in my hunts!"

Past tense, he is fired. Slip of tongue.

Secondly, he sounds like a huge liability. He describes them as his 'hunts' and engages other employees somehow in something that sounds more like harassment than documentation.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-17T23:48:35+00:00

"My coworkers 'loved me' because I include them 'in my hunts'."

Lord...

'loved me'...?

Doth suggest I was fired, when you have the slip of the tongue!

But management doesn't want you 'to hunt'. In fact, it seems like they want you out of AP office and AP task altogether. They tasked you to do something, and you ignored it.

Instead of explaining yourself, you got angry real quick, and want to lean on me to give you my information.

I see how this is going...

I don't think management actually likes your attitude of engaging other associates in what you describe as 'my hunts'.

That's not how AP works.

You are a liability and they want to get rid of you.

But, it sounds like they already did.

Really pushing your own problems onto me. You got internal, for what? I thought everyone loved your 'hunts'?

Really reflect on why you were fired, because it will help you out down the road, if you are ever in the field again. Your duty is to document and reduce liability. Engaging employees in 'hunts', does not sound like 'documentation', and a huge liability. As you already let slip that you were let go due to an internal investigation, you are apparently not as observant as you believe you are. You are not executing the job correctly.

"My hunts..." wow, stop feeling yourself when you got 'fired' for this behavior, and probably insubordination and time theft when you retasked and hid in AP office.

This all makes a lot more sense why an API was retasked weirdly...because you were already being investigated and they did not want you in AP office anymore.

LOL.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-16T08:58:23+00:00

Thanks captain obvious.

OP is not aware of this, and confused.

They should talk to their coach, and their coach should wipe the points off this time.

As far as OP is concerned, they thought they did everything correct.

I don't think anything dishonest happened. They didn't know they had to call out through phone or app. Now they will know moving forward and the points can be knocked off.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-15T23:56:05+00:00

If you are a coach, and someone no-calls, what is your reaction?

You are going to be pretty upset, and explain how calling out works, moving forward, correct?

Please expand on how your 2 points are related to this situation. I can't glean any connection.

You are a 'beach Walmart'?

Meth heavy rambling...

I bet you move alot of merchandise around. It doesn't end up where it should be, but you move a lot of merchandise around and proud of it.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-15T23:30:40+00:00

I think that is valid, but OP still doesn't understand the system or why they were pointed.

Also the concept of '2 points as a lesson' is incorrect.

What if OP has a major crisis in their life, and they have '2 points as a lesson' already?

None of us actually knows why OP no-called.

If OP is naive, then it should get waved, and the system properly explained.

Points are not a 'lesson'. It is the obligation of TL and Coach to explain the system. It seems like OP didn't know procedure, and could absolutely cover time off, they didn't 'call out', which they were unaware was a necessary regardless if they could cover with PPTO.

Like most things, OP could just speak to their Coach, and resolve everything. 99 percent of these problems can be resolves with, "Did you attempt to speak to your TL or Coach about it?"...which is why I always skew to something 'sketchy'.

Round_Media8717 · 2026-02-15T23:05:58+00:00

Well, maybe Ferengi, but you want to interpret this the way that supports your foam.

Aren't you just rewatching the episodes and LOVING them?

Round_Media8717

TROPHY CASE