Not at all. I was merely explaining why I think Discovery doesn’t challenge what’s come before, as a counterpoint to your claim that it does. That doesn’t mean I can’t also enjoy it, or feel that it enriches the franchise. I like both the original and the new BSG, for example. They’re completely incompatible universes, of course, and I don’t think the new one helps me reflect in any way on the old, or challenges my previous conceptions of anything from it. But I do enjoy them both, in very different ways, and I think that’s a common experience with reboots and remakes. Discovery isn’t as drastic a departure, obviously. But in itself, that has no bearing on whether I like the show or not.
i found getting more insight into characters that weren't significantly developed, such as Sarek, Miranda, Captain Pike, Number One, and even a view of Spock at an age I've never seen him before to add to my experience of Star Trek and to reevaluate those characters since its possible to do this, because its addition not reimagining. They aren't different characters with different sexes, different ethnicity, different pasts, Spock isn't played by a woman. Captain Pike isn't a robot. I get it that you refuse to let any of it seep into how you look at TOS. But I read a lot of Star Trek books and comics when I was a kid, like many other people have and looking for new ways to interpret Star Trek and not feel the need to divorce a new book from what we previously know is actually worthwhile, not dangerous and damaging.