Due to an unfortunate mix of factors, I think this situation crops up reasonably often, and I find it darkly amusing, in a mild way. As I see it, Peter David is a very prominant author, and was pretty much the stand-out writer from the (forgive my youthful perspective) "old crop" of Trek lit scribes. He had and has a wide appeal and a lot of fans. So when casual Trek readers think of names, his comes up often. I've seen quite a few recomendations for "good Star Trek books?" that suggest Peter David first; lots of people have fond memories of both his earlier and more recent works. However, I think even those who like "Before Dishonor" would agree it's far from PD's best. I personally
count it as one of my least favourite Trek novels (I would mention that while he's nowhere near my favourite I have enjoyed plenty of Peter David's work in the past). But the mix of his name and the lead-into-Destiny
appeal seems to make a lot of people pick this one novel up as their introduction to modern Trek lit. Given my personal take on it, I always wince a little when people suggest that they're trying "Before Dishonor" as an entry point.
Still, as Therin
rightly pointed out, Peter David is just one writer among many, so a personal judgement on one book or even one author doesn't mean much when considering the entire line. There's a lot to choose from.