"Plot protection" is as old as Star Trek itself. How else does one explain a Constitution class heavy cruiser with admittedly fragile power systems("Captain! The engines canna take the strain!") triumphing over numerous combinations of enemies numerous times? Hard to justify or explain the TOS Klingons or the TOS Romulans not blowing Kirk's arrogant butt clean out of the stars. Jimmy T. and Co. have more lives than a cat, don't they?
The only plausible answer is they are human. Humans are capable of amazing things when they believe in themselves. This was one of the things Gene was trying to explain to us. We hear him but we are not always listening, are we? Just because something is wildly implausible does not automatically make it impossible. We have a saying down at the race track, "You ain't racin' the car, Boy. You're racin' the driver." Occasionally we whom are serious fans of Star Trek to the point we immerse ourselves in it this deeply forget this. Enterprise is not a ship without her crew. She cannot do anything at all unless someone actives the correct application on the correct computer at the correct moment.
I have preferences as to what parts of Trek I like. I seldom voice these out loud because whenever anyone does so, it seems to start conversations about which series or film was the most ________ - fill in the blank as appropriate. It is all Star Trek is it not? Why are we concerned at all about which parts are sensible? To someone who is a Voyager fan, Katy is a brave, determined, heroic figure who can accomplish her mission despite the long odds against her and her plucky little light cruiser. Sure she's had some amazing luck. Most other heroes do as well. To break down some incident to the point where, "There's no way they could have done this because of blah blah blah..." kinda spoils the whole idea of Star Trek in the first place IMO.
ST:XI. Some hate it and are contemptuous of it. This contempt spills over onto those who did like it. This is wrong and should be spoken against loudly, repeatedly, and as often as possible in the most direct manner. Others may not view this disrespect with the same concern I do. Just because there are some parts of Trek I prefer over others does not mean someone else cannot enjoy something different. Nor does it mean I must now spend all my time ranting about it and trying to convince people my viewpoint is the only correct one and anyone whom disagrees with me is an idiot. AFAIK, this behavior will still continue. Or worse, apparently be encouraged. I do not know why, nor do I really care. I do think it is very sad someone will seize on any flimsy reason to be disrespectful to a part of Star Trek they dislike and by extension be disrespectful to those who do like it. Looks like someone missed the point Gene was trying to get across in the first place with the IDIC philosophy.
You want Voyager to not be touched by a weapon which takes a Cube completely apart? Okay, then. Howzabout we do this and then worry about the how later. Every single Star Trek series and film ever made has holes in the plot I can drive my eighteen wheeler through. Sideways with room to spare. There has to be some willing suspension of disbelief for the entire thing to get off the ground in the first place. I like Star Trek. There are some things which do make me cringe or think, "That's not possible!" But I am not willing to psychoanalyze those parts to death. Too much effort for too little return.