On space opera: The problem with Star Trek

Star Trek is an example of what L. Ron Hubbard called "space opera".
The reason the new reboots or resets or reimaginings ("Discovery", "Picard") suck so much is not because they are that bad.
It's because they are buried in their own past. They refuse to go beyond their origin. There are just NO original ideas.
Hubbard would say they are stuck in a past valence. Although Vulcans with sunglasses were sort of cool.

My first complaint with Star Trek is very simple: all these so-called alien worlds are located in our own galaxy (or as Hubbard would say "Guhlaxy").
That's just wrong. There probably is no other human-level civilization within a billion lightyears from Earth, if not much more.
To be more accurate, all these humanoid planets should be located a semi-infinite distance away.

Maybe you can only travel faster than light if you travel infinitely fast and far, entirely outside our light cone, to an onteleologically linked light cone inconceivably far away.
That could also explain the similarity between the humanoid aliens, or even why the aliens speak English, or whatever language the episode is dubbed into.
This was a real opportunity for "The Orville" to set themselves apart from Star Trek (or the space opera series that I have been personally developing for many years).
Unfortunately, producers keep ignoring the letters I write them.