Talk:Founder

Analysis

The Founders are a subset of the larger Changeling race. While all Founders are Changelings, not all Changelings are Founders. Until the end of the Dominion war, Odo did not consider himself a Founder, and neither did Laas - that doesn't mean they weren't still Changelings.

Also, the fact that the Founders founded the Dominion cannot be disputed so "consider themselves to be" isn't the best choice of words. Alex Peckover 15:52, Jun 2, 2004 (CEST)

Naming conventions

According to the guidelines shouldn't this page and Founder be swapped? - Avron 06:46, 19 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Agreed, why are the Founders allowed to be plural whereas everything else is referred to in the singular form? --Gvsualan 09:26, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I guess this just has been forgotten... Moved now. -- Cid Highwind 09:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page is NOT canonical

I'll correct it after I finish DS9: Search II Slamlander 14:29, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

"Canonnonical" is not even a word. And aside from improperly noting that on the page, would you care to specify what you believe is not canon? If anything, it may be inaccurate, but again, please specify so that others can understand what you are attempting to communicate. --Alan del Beccio 16:29, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

The paragraph which Slamlander pointed out as "contradicting canon" does not contradict canon, nor is it inaccurate, as the information was taken from the episodes cited. --From Andoria with Love 20:00, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

That paragraph is entirely incorrect. I just wrote the entire Search II page, with the help of the episode tape (I own the entire set). I just finished it and will now correct this page. Slamlander 20:52, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Yes, changing whatever you think is wrong may be more prudent, for at least if someone reverted it then you could start a dialogue. Also please be a little more polite about spelling. I more than anyone know how difficult it is... Makon 21:05, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I didn't do it earlier because I was still writing the Search II page. However, that it now completed and I have also complete corrections to this page. BTW, how are you polite with spelling? Please peruse, review, mangle, and dangle at will. Slamlander 21:33, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid I still do not see anything non-canonical about the previous version. In fact, if anything, it was just incomplete -- which is a far cry from non-canon. --Alan del Beccio 23:02, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. It seems all he did was expand on the previous info. --From Andoria with Love 01:30, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC)

If you don't see a huge difference between "But, after awhile they became distraught by ways of the "solids", so they began to believe that they must rule the galaxy to save the solids from themselves." and what is there now then I won't carry this discussion further. The whole issue is about underlaying intent. Not only did the previous version mislead the motives behind the Dominion War, it painted the founders of being some sort of misunderstood benevolent beings. The founders are not simply misunderstood and they were not even close to being benevolent. In fact, the only thing that stopped them from performing mass genocide, of all other races, was the impracticality of doing so with the resources that they had. The founders, perhaps due to the prior persecution, were extreme xenophobes. Evenso, because I was working quickly and I wanted to make a smooth fit with what was already there, I didn't do the edits as thoroughly as I think it really merits.

Yes, there is a difference -- as in, the original version was incomplete; there was nothing not canon about the previous version. In fact, the following quote from the Female Changeling seems to support the fact that they were initially benevolent:

• "The great link tells us that long ago our people used to roam the stars, searching out other races, so that we could add to our knowledge of the galaxy. We went in peace, but too often we were met with suspicion, hatred and violence."

• "The solids feared our metamorphic abilities. We were hunted, beaten, killed. Finally we arrived here. And here safe in our isolation we made our home."

There is no agrument on their initial state. It's their current state that is at issue. However, I'll let you go on thinking that the original was only incomplete as long as we are in agreement that the current one is more correct, while still being incomplete. ;) Slamlander 09:29, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Further references in "Treachery, Faith and the Great River" also support the idea that their initial intent was benevolent. Whatever the case may be, my point is, is that they never was nothing non-canon about the article, inaccurate -- maybe, but if anything, it was just incomplete. It's much easier to note that in the talk page rather (and by adding a {{pna}}) than vandalizing the page with improper means of justifying something you disagree with, without explaining what it is you disagree with to the rest of the community here. --Alan del Beccio 08:02, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I disagree but we may be arguing a difference in what canon is. To me, if it contradicts anything in a filmed episode then it is non-canon. The original article contradicted the next to last scene in Search II. Ergo, it was non-canon. The section that I rewrote was not speaking towards their initial state of benevolence, it was speaking to their current state and the original was absolutely wrong. Where can I find out more about pna, inuse, and other such tags? Oh, and "vandalizing" is much too strong a word. Had I known about inuse I would have used it. Slamlander 09:29, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I would like to refer back to Slamlander's statements about the Founders not being nice people and say this: HATER! --Schrei 09:52, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Referring to the Founders' rule by human standards of "benevolent" or "malevolent" does a disservice to understanding that the Founders are most assuredly not descended from a mutual cultural heritage with that which exists in the Alpha Quadrant. To the Founders, actions are neither benevolent or malevolent, but based on what they feel is necessary to protect themselves and their interests. While this is "malevolent" and "selfish" by human standards, there are examples enough in human history of numerous cultures viewing things the same way. When the Cardassians turned against them, the Founders sought to eliminate them as a threat...not only inside their own lines, but everywhere they existed. Ruthless, granted...but so is "understanding" that any lack of firm order...anywhere...is your enemy. --ChrisK 01:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Tense change

Apologies for accidentally putting it on the main article: This page, like several if not many others, keeps switching back and forth between the Founders "having done" things to them "doing them" here and now. Make up your minds, please, on tenses. --ChrisK 01:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Incomplete article

YOu may have noticed I've just put an "incomplete article" box on the article, because when I arrived at the page it looked so small, I'm sure there's tons more that can be written, eg. a list of named Founders and a redirect to any unnamed ones etc. Just think it needs a little work done. Dave 18:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to resolve this issue, I'd like to clarify that we tend to group links to people on pages regarding their species, rather than political affiliation. For example, links to the individual Changeling Founders can be found at Changeling#People. I've now removed the "incomplete" template from this article. --Defiant (talk) 19:44, April 22, 2015 (UTC)

Language

I'm going to assume Odo uses the Bajoran language seeing he was discovered by them. How about the rest of the Changelings? Has it ever been stated in interviews or article about the language of the Founder? As such do Founders, Vorta, and Jem'Hadar share the same language? I know they don't need verbal language to communicate with each other but they do engage other species so I assume they must be using a primary language. Or do they adopt the language to each race they assimilate? 112.201.130.3 13:52, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it has been said they speak Dominionese. --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 15:36, April 17, 2011 (UTC)