aerc712 wrote:I sympathize with liking a design and not liking when people have dissenting posts. This isn't a matter of whether or not I like this design, it is a matter of whether or not the design fits the parameters of the derby's rules. As previously stated, I feel like the design is a bit of a stretch in terms of fully meeting the requirements of the derby. Star Trek might be important to sci-fi, but it's a bit of a leap to say that this design, as-is, shows whatever place Star Trek might have in cultural history. Disagree if you want, but that's my take on this design. Blame it on the fact that I make my living on teaching others about history.
Thanks, moharry (and I am a guy).
aerc712, I understand your concern, as I'm a big history buff (primarily the US Civil War and the ancient Near East). Even so, when I was evaluating ideas, I looked at Woot's operational definition(s) of "History", for the purposes of this particular derby.
1) "History" is defined as famous events that ocurred pre-1970.
The first TV broadcast of Star Trek is an event that occurred pre-1970.
2) "Famous" is defined as something more than just your goofy circle of friends know about it.
The first TV broadcast of Star Trek is something more than just my goofy circle of friends knows about.
The design has a TV screen, animals, ST uniforms (w/o copyrighted/trademarked symbols) and a common trope/meme from ST. So the elements for minimum inclusion are all there. I can think of much more important historical events than this (to your point) and even from this time period. Even so, the definitions of "famous" and "history" for this derby are so wide that this design isn't really a stretch for inclusion.