That's true, but it wouldn't explain things like Kirk's middle initial changing from "R" to "T",
I mean, the tombstone was created by a human-turned-demi-god who was going insane, so maybe we could cut him some slack if he misremembered Kirk's name while trying to kill him.
The rest of it - some of it are glitches we just have to deal with. The small stuff, like ships once having their own, unique emblem; only to make it universal, is something I don't think is that big of deal.
Inventing an entirely new fucking propulsion tech that can zap you vast distances in the blink of an eye, faster than the fastest warp speed, 80 years before Voyager gets stranded half way across the galaxy? That's overkill. And possibly plagiarism, depending on who you ask...
Then there's the stuff in between that I feel like don't necessarily need to be considered continuity errors, just because we don't have an obvious explanation upfront. If you can come up with a reasonable explanation, then it's not really an issue. Now the audience shouldn't always have to fill in the blanks with some of those things, especially the more gaping plot holes. I can forgive the unanswered smaller questions, or the less important details not being explained; but expect the writers to at least put in the effort with the larger ones, if they're going to insist contradicting themselves. To not do so, in my opinion, is lazy; whereas, as a would be writer myself, I'd find connect the dots, even they're sometimes unrelated, to be a fun exercise in creativity. It shouldn't just be exposition for the sake of solving a problem or getting picky viewers off your back; it should enrich the narrative, if you're going to do it.
A good example would be the Klingon ridges. I have mixed feelings with how Enterprise went about explaining it. It's a fine way of straightening things out, so to speak. I'm not sure if there might have been a better way to do it, if you're going to explain it. My fan theory, prior to the official explanation, was that it was really only those core crews lead by Kor Koloth and Kang - that they were sort of these young, rebellious captains back in the day, who, like a human getting a tattoo or piercing, had their ridges taken out; just for the hell and pain of it. They were making a statement and their crews followed their example or it was a body modification trend among Klingons. Then as they got older, most of them got over the trend and had their ridges replaced or regrown.
Would I have liked my idea over what they actually presented? I have no idea; I can't say Enterprise's explanation was worse. It's probably better. Maybe there were other ways to explain it, or it just didn't need an official explanation.
I also have my own idea explaining 7 and the Borg; and explores the question of just how long Section 31 actually knew about the existence of the Borg, and that they may in fact exist as an organization
because of and in response to the existence of Borg - before Q, before the existence of the Federation and even before the NX-01 unwittingly encountered them. It's not canon, of course, just my personal head canon.
But ask yourself, why does the Borg only send one ship at a time when attacking Earth; and with such long gaps between attempts?
With a lot of the newer stuff, I generally chalk it up to the fact that humans in Star Trek have a long history, so to speak, of mucking about in time; and assuming that because there's no overt changes that they can identify afterwards, all is well. When in fact the repeated incursions in history, the altered and re-altered history has resulted in an escalating problem with time, localized primarily in the Alpha Quadrant of the Milky Way; and with a focal point spanning human history. Such that, while events like Discovery or Picard appear to take place in a timeline that bears a passing resemblance to the history we know came before; it is in fact a severely damaged history, that is an altered history upon altered history, that is unstable and still in flux. And it doesn't even start with Discovery and Picard, or with the so-called "Kelvin" timeline. There's a reason that Enterprise came after Voyager; it's not a prequel, it's actually a post TNG/DS9/VOY timeline itself. And the changes only lead to other changes.
Bashir, Sisko and Dax get thrown back in time, disrupt the Bell Riots and think because Sisko poses as Bell and everything plays out close to how they remember it, everything is back as it was, but was it? Was Sisko's father alive before that event? Because he is afterwards, but it's implied that he wasn't before. And that if that changed, what else might be slightly different? Was Bashir genetically enhance before they went back? Would Sisko have been born after they "restored" history? Or is that why the Prophets felt the need to insure his conception and birth; if he would have inadvertently wiped himself out of existence?
Because the USS Defiant was sent back in time and into another universe during TOS,
that other universe's history is changed; which is why it looks different on Discovery from the Mirror universe in TOS.
And thus Q tries to prepare Picard, so humanity can understand the challenges that await them and the need to one day untangle these knotted histories, by instigating the paradox in All Good Things...