This is the problem, because you and I see this argument with different context. If you can't see this matter from my context, it is a futile to continue talking about this.
The difference being mine is the correct one as confirmed as the fact that the perspective of the show's main cast is the one that count's as the show's focus. Basic logic, really.
Nope, the matter is that you are too consumed with your own perspective, so you decide to refuse to see the context of my perspective. So it is impossible to discuss about the subject, because whatever I say is pointless. You won't see the things from my perspective.
They're the main cast. If they weren't the show's focus, than they wouldn't be the main cast. Then again, this is the same forum complaining that background bridge officers on Disco aren't getting enough to do. Silly me for expecting someone around here to understand what "main cast" means.
When you said about DS9, I remember about Babylon 5. Specially the later season where Sheridan has become the President. Didn't Babylon 5 told about the higher Echelons? the difference between the two will be the point of view that the story will tell. The Admiralty will mainly about Starfleet Space Operation, while Babylon 5 mainly about politic.
And silly me for expecting someone so closed minded like you to understand what the example that I showed you before in my original post. I used The Expanse as the example. And the context of my example is the war between UN (Earth) and Mars. I never used the Expanse as the whole series as my context. My context specifically pointed to the war, and when Asavarala or whoever she is attend the war meeting with the highest Echelons of United Nation. As the example to pointing my argument about Star Trek Admiralty.
It depends on how interesting or likeable people find a character, for various reasons. If they're just someone doing a routine thing in the background, some care about them less. If they have a cool alien look, or are doing something interesting, or have a particularly good line, or are featured just enough to make people curious, they care more.
Star Trek fans are used to supporting characters getting some development, alongside the main characters. While being limited to 10 episodes makes it somewhat difficult, its not impossible. If the background bridge characters weren't important, they would have been rotated out and replaced with new characters long ago.
No they wouldn't. They are there to 'fill out the bridge" and give stats. Characters have been rotated out like Ash, Nhan, Georgiou, Lorca and replaced by Pike, Book, Spock, Vance and Rillak. Those are your "secondary characters".
DS9 was the only series that did that. Otherwise, TNG, Voyager and Enterprise had characters in their main casts who never got much or even any development.
TNG and TOS did it all of the time. Sulu, Uhura, Chekov and Scott were a part of the team. Guys like DeSalle and Pitcairn were afterthoughts. Owo, Detmer, Rhys, etc. are often behind characters such as Vance and Rillak. It often Vance and Rilak who are treated as a part of the Burnham-Saru-Tilly-Stamets-Culber-Book team.
With who? Focus characters were either main cast, on off characters, or reoccurring guests stars like Barclay or the O'Briens. TOS rarely made use of it day players to any real extent. Almost no development beyond a name, a nationality or a quirk.
No more or less so than Detmar or that droid character on the first year of STD. They were day players. Scotty had a bit more to do than the others, of course. Fans made those characters into big deals after the series was canceled. We were starved for new shit to talk about.