B5 vs Star Trek #3

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #3
Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 9/28/96 12:24:43 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

Maybe I have missed every episode that featured Dax, but I just find her character
BORING.
As for Torres(this reply is to you, Kewpie) she has been mistreated the most by Jeri
Taylor. What happened to the fiery Maquis woman we once knew(or any of the Maquis,
for that matter. All they do is die)? She and Chakotay have become emotional shells of their
former selves.

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 9/28/96 1:52:24 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<“Isn’t 2000m/s^2 a bit much? It’s 200gees! Isn’t *10*gees fatal??”>>

Now you know why seatbelts leave such big bruises…

But actually, even a tremendous deceleration is easily survivable as long as you only get it
for a fraction of a second. The guy with the seat belt got 200 gs for only .01 seconds, not
very long at all.
But the guy who only got 20 gs got it from a dashboard and windshield, not to mention the
street. And he got it across his face, for ten times as long as his lucky buddy. Which one
would you rather be?

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 9/28/96 6:05:05 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< My point is, fans of *quality* sci-fi tv have at least one thing in common.>>

Ah, but one man’s quality is another man’s trash.

And speaking of trash, does anybody remember the short-lived SF sitcom “Quark” starring
Richard Benjamin, Conrad Janis, the Barnstable Twins, and several others whose names I
forget. It was an excellent send-up of all kinds of science fiction, and was the closest thing
in American television that I have seen to the British series “Red Dwarf.” They did send-
ups of Star Wars, Star Trek, Lost In Space, and several other series. They did a “planet of
the jogging bimbos” and solidly connected it to Trek by mentioning a “roddenberry bush”
growing on the planet. And this was YEARS before Star Trek:TNG.

So why did trash remind me of the series? The ship was a garbage scow. (Another Star
Trek reference? See “The Trouble with Tribbles.”)

Was the show stupid? Yes. Was it good? Depends on your point of view. Was it funny?
Yes. Was it canceled after a short run? Hoo, boy. I think there were 6 episodes, all
golden. (About six months later, Conrad Janis was a regular on another “stupid SF
sitcom” — Mork and Mindy, playing Mindy’s father.)
Subj: “stupid sf” matter of opinion
Date: 9/28/96 1:57:24 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

….Lest we not forget, folks, if it weren’t for “Lost In Space” (a cult favorite among some,
BTW), some other actor may be playing Lennier today. This would *not* be good,
IMHO. I think Bill Mumy does it just right.

–Luna {:-)

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 9/28/96 5:28:31 PM
From: Rushylon 5
Posted on: America Online

<< I am talking about *respecting others’ opinions*, because these are *television shows*
and *opinions about television shows really aren’t worth a major online war*. Is there any
part of what I just said that you don’t understand?>>

I happen to be of the *opinion* that my deep felt feelings and *opinions* about Babylon 5
and the way it has touched my life is *definitely* worth a *major* online war. Guess
what; you now have to respect that *opinion* using your own logic.

And trust me when I say, it is much, much easier to understand you than you might think.

To all who have seen previous posts by me and note a bit of hostility in this one, you are
absolutely correct.

Rushylon 5

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 9/28/96 6:57:48 PM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

>>I happen to be of the *opinion* that my deep felt feelings and *opinions* about Babylon
5 and the way it has touched my life is *definitely* worth a *major* online war. Guess
what; you now have to respect that *opinion* using your own logic.
>>

I respect that opinion; I just disagree with it completely.
Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 9/30/96 3:02:51 AM
From: Rushylon 5
Posted on: America Online

<<I respect that opinion; I just disagree with it completely.>>

Much better. Disagreeing and respecting are different things, as is obviously shown
above. I think the argument got off kilter because someone disagreed, not disrespected. If
I am remembering correctly, someone said something to the effect of “If you don’t like
B5, you’re not a real SF fan.” On the assumption this is the correct saying, the person, in
my opinion, was wrong. I respected their opinion, but disagreed. I don’t feel any
disrespect was meant by the person that said (wrote?) that. Anything I like adds something
to my life; as such, I want to share it with people. Therefore, logically, I feel people that
don’t like the things I like are “missing” something. Doesn’t mean I don’t respect the
people or their opinions.

Rushylon 5

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 9/30/96 5:06:23 PM
From: Sharon3102
Posted on: America Online

I enjoy both Star Trek and Babylon 5. They both have their place in the sci-fi world and
with fans.

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/1/96 5:14:09 AM
From: Don1008
Posted on: America Online

I think “Trekmiester” has a nice ring. And what about people who side with B5? What is
the official
handle? And don’t forget about the mutant species (of which I am one) who likes both
shows. What should we be called.

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/1/96 5:18:41 PM
From: REBinAZ
Posted on: America Online

B5er’s.
Trekkers.

Mutant species? huuuummmmmm……how about, ‘ST5er’s?

Ro :-)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/2/96 10:16:37 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Ridax,

I was agreeing with most of your post when I came across it, Until I got to the part about
TNG crew not having any demons. You couldn’t be farther from the truth if you tried, The
fact is the characters on TNG are very human and each has a painful history; Tasha for
instance escaped the horrors of her childhood where roving rape gangs were the norms and
not only survive but become stronger for her experiences, Captain Picard was cut off from
his family and alienated from his brother because of the choices that he’s made in his life,
That he couldn’t reconcile himself with until the utter pain inflicted by the Borg caused him
to seek help with the only family he had left. Then there’s the torture and confusion Picard
went through at the hands of the Cardassians which affected him so deeply that at the end
he almost doubted himself. We have seen that Riker had a father so torn up by the death of
his wife that he became resentful and jealous of his own son, While that son carried the
bitterness of his father’s contempt for most of his life. We have seen Le Forge struggle
with his shyness while at the same time dealing with his blindness with ease and
acceptance. What of the Doctor who had to raise a son after the death of her husband while
being attracted to the man who brought her husband body home and who now commands
her.

I could go on with even more examples of these characters struggles and their realness
compared to the characters on B5, But I trust you see my point. There’s no way you can
tell me that these character didn’t have problems that are just as real and just as deeply felt
as those portrayed on B5. Further more if you watch TNG from the first esp to the last
their’s no way you can say these characters didn’t grow or change in some way over the
last seven or eight years. The same could be said of DS9 which also has characters
changing and growing even more so then TNG, “Real people” characters reacting in
situations just like anyone would in today’s society. Both shows and Voyager to lesser
degree all have a realness to the characters otherwise people wouldn’t care or watch what
happens to them.
JJC III

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/2/96 10:32:34 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Jvibber,

Winning the Hugo isn’t the big deal or the big fuss it’s great for B5 to be rewarded for it’s
great stories, The problem is when someone touts that win in Trekkers faces so as to try to
prove their show is somehow better then ST. Just because B5 did well enough to win some
awards and DS9 didn’t is no reason to get in our faces about it as though it proves
something as subjective as which show is superior. It’s seems to me it’s sour grapes to put
down ST in the ST folder with this win instead of just enjoying the accomplishment and
not whinning about how much greater their show is compared to ST.
JJC III

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/2/96 10:38:32 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Acdec,

Trekies has always been find with me, But then I don’t have anything against Treker either,
How about Babies for B5 fans or maybe Babs. I’m a B5 fan to so please don’t post me to
condemn my fan words it’s all in good fun.

JJC III

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/2/96 10:41:44 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

How about calling fans of both shows “those wonderful people with extremely good
taste?”

–Luna{;-)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/2/96 10:43:22 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

I think Tasha would have been a great B5 character. Flame away if you must, but I keep
seeing her as a Psi Cop……
–Luna {:-)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/2/96 10:59:35 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Ridak,

Your point about ST is a valid one, They do sometimes hit the reset button at the end of
their esp though they have been improving in this area for sometime now on DS9. I would
say though that B5 would be in the same boat as TNG and DS9 in terms of pushing the
reset button if not for that shows one saving grace, And that is it’s five year tightly written
storyline it has a natural way of having their characters grow, change and evolve from esp
to esp without seeming forced. DS9 does not have that gimmick to rely on as most of their
stories are single plots and maybe a secondary plot to keep things moving. So, as a result
sometimes characters may suffer in the presence of such a system from time to time, Even
so DS9 does manage to tell great and entertaining stories despite these flaws. Maybe you
could cut DS9 some slack because if B5 had been run as a series without the background
story it has they would be in practically in the same situation DS9 is currenty in.

JJC III
Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/2/96 1:42:51 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

DS9 Has gotten better in the past year or so. More of a continuing plotline, more depth of
character. I wonder if this is in response to what B5 is doing? I’m not boasting or gloating
here. I’m just wondering. I have also seen this theory written somewhere, whether on
the net or in a zine I don’t remember. But it’s a thought. BTW I really like DS9, and I’m
glad to see it improving with age, no matter what the reason.
IMHO, Bruce and Avery are also *ahem* improving with age. Watch an ep of “Spencer
for Hire” or “Scarecrow and Mrs. King”, and see if you don’t agree.

see ya,

–Luna {;-)

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/2/96 5:10:11 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<How about calling fans of both shows “those wonderful people with extremely good
taste?”>>

Too long. How about TWPWEGT?

Subj: Re: This Whole Argument
Date: 10/2/96 9:01:25 PM
From: Bowen4954
Posted on: America Online

B5 and Star Trek have nothing in common other than they are both of the sci-fi genre.
Everything else about them are opposites. So drop these asinine debates and just keep the
rest of us B5 fans informed of the new shows and plots. Thank you.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/2/96 9:03:23 PM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

My point about Star Trek characters not having any ‘demons’ is that these events have no
impact on them or their decisions outside of the episodes in question. After “Best of Both
Worlds Part 2″ and the episode that followed, it was back to happy-go-lucky Picard again –
Until the next Borg episode. In between, it had no effect on his character, he was
EXACTLY the same as he was before. In Babylon 5 the impact of these kinds of events
have lasting and profound effects from there on out. BIG difference!

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/2/96 9:22:38 PM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

>

Subj: Re:This whole argument
>Date: 96-10-02 06:59:35 EDT
>From: STAR K4597
>
>Ridak,
>
>Your point about ST is a valid one, They do sometimes hit the reset button at the end of
their esp >though they have been improving in this area for sometime now on DS9. I
would say though that B5 >would be in the same boat as TNG and DS9 in terms of
pushing the reset button if not for that shows >one saving grace, And that is it’s five year
tightly written storyline it has a natural way of having their >characters grow, change and
evolve from esp to esp without seeming forced. DS9 does not have that >gimmick to rely
on as most of their stories are single plots and maybe a secondary plot to keep things
>moving. So, as a result sometimes characters may suffer in the presence of such a system
from time >to time, Even so DS9 does manage to tell great and entertaining stories despite
these flaws. Maybe >you could cut DS9 some slack because if B5 had been run as a series
without the background story it >has they would be in practically in the same situation DS9
is currenty in.

True, but they didn’t start off that way so it’s not a valid point. JMS chose the serial
approach because it was the only way to tell the story. The Story arc give the show
cohesiveness. My point is that DS9 suffers from lack of cohesiveness and could benifit
greatly if it adopted the serial approach. I mean…you have a stationary station – the local
politics have to have impact and will undoubtly be long term influences. Also, too many of
the stories on Trek lack depth because they have to resolve the plot in one or two episodes.
The best stroies on trek are the ones that play out over time. Problem is that they take to
long between episodes when they do something lkike that and they still resolve it in some
pat fashion that lacks any real sence of ‘something gained/something lost’. After it all over
it might well have never even happened.

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/2/96 11:14:17 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

<<<

<<How about calling fans of both shows “those wonderful people with extremely good
taste?”>>

Too long. How about TWPWEGT?<<<

hmm…TWPWEGT…

hmmm…Isn’t that kinda tough to figure out for many folks tho?

How bout.
SciFans?
Subj: Re: This Whole Argument
Date: 10/3/96 12:11:52 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

I agree, Bowen that an *argument* about Trek Vs. B5 is inane and a waste of time, and
I’ve posted this opinion all over the net. But , IMO, debating over the merits and, yes,
failings of two quality sf programs is interesting and fun. DS9 and B5 have a lot in
common in that they are both set on a space station orbiting a planet. Voyager and TNG
have less in common with B5 *or* DS9. B5 was the first of the shows to be written,
althoug DS9 aired first.
Both shows have wonderful things about them to discuss, like, I could go on forever
about how much I like Odo and Quark, and Sheridan and Ivanova (and don’t get me started
on Delenn unless you want this post to go on forever). I could also go on and on about
how much I *hate* the Trek reset button and how I think Delenn behaved out of character
in “And now for a word” (I’m stopping now)……
The point is, it’s fun to debate in good humor, and not so fun to say “my show’s great,
yours sucks”. It could be the B5 vs Dr Who board and it would still be fun to talk about
why our favorites are our favorites.

Just my 2 Credits

–Luna {:-)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/3/96 3:26:13 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<My point about Star Trek characters not having any ‘demons’ is that these events have
no impact on them or their decisions outside of the episodes in question. After “Best of
Both Worlds Part 2″ and the episode that followed, it was back to happy-go-lucky Picard
again – Until the next Borg episode. In between, it had no effect on his character, he was
EXACTLY the same as he was before. In Babylon 5 the impact of these kinds of events
have lasting and profound effects from there on out. BIG difference!>>

Picard was never one to show his emotions unless something tramatic brought it out (like
another encounter with the Borg). But if you will notice that after “Family” Picard had
more of a social life, I think that he learned from BOBW that he was not the invincibal man
he thought he was. Also, Picard has always treated Dr. Crusher diffrently than anyone else
because of the fact that her husband died under his command.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/3/96 6:11:44 PM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

Geeeee….isn’t that convientent for them…Picard doesn’t show emotion. Of course, he’s
not the only one. When the other characters do show emotion, it’s always very one-
dimensional. Diana the empathetic, Beverly the pacifist, Picard the philosopher, Ricker the
stud, etc. The fact is that thte character’s on Trek are more symbolic representations of
humans more than anything else. Each one is there to serve a specific purpose in the show.
If you combined them all together you might actually have one real person!

Subj: everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/3/96 8:15:24 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online
>>Then there’s the torture and confusion Picard went through at the hands of the
Cardassians which affected him so deeply that at the end he almost doubted himself.<<

And in the next ep he was just fine…

>>Picard was never one to show his emotions unless something tramatic brought it out
(like another encounter with the Borg). But if you will notice that after “Family” Picard had
more of a social life, I think that he learned from BOBW that he was not the invincibal man
he thought he was. Also, Picard has always treated Dr. Crusher diffrently than anyone else
because of the fact that her husband died under his command.<<

See above. “Chain of Command” is one of my absolutely fave eps. But this storyline was
never followed up on. Which leads to…

>>They do sometimes hit the reset button at the end of their esp though they have been
improving in this area for sometime now on DS9…<<

As much as I love DS9, I will never forgive them for shrugging off O’Brien’s problems
after the ep where he was “mentally imprisoned”.

>>Geeeee….isn’t that convientent for them…Picard doesn’t show emotion. Of course,
he’s not the only one. When the other characters do show emotion, it’s always very one-
dimensional. Diana the empathetic, Beverly the pacifist, Picard the philosopher, Ricker the
stud, etc. The fact is that thte character’s on Trek are more symbolic representations of
humans more than anything else. Each one is there to serve a specific purpose in the show.
If you combined them all together you might actually have one real person!<<

Ouch! This was my biggest problem with TNG.

Subj: Re:everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/3/96 9:10:27 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

I’m sure there are one dimensional characters in B5, too. Unfortunately, I can’t think of
any…..
But I do agree that Picard is a complex character. So is Spock, Odo, and Kira.
If it weren’t for that darn reset button!

–Luna {:-)

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/4/96 12:54:20 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

Kewpie, did you just repost my argument intact? I don’t see any replies.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/4/96 1:39:40 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>You are putting words in my mouth that were never there.<<

“Take those words out of there; you don’t know where they’ve been!” I appologize for
that, then.

>> I do not think B5 sucks. I do not hate B5. I *do* hate the attitudes of B5 fans *and*
Trek fans when they go “Hate to rub it in your face, but…” (Archer) or embark on a
personal vendetta against television shows (Ford Thaxton). <<

In this, we are in agreement.

>>Again, I didn’t say “all B5 fans.” You’re making assumptions that are simply not
true.<<

Ah, well then, I’m sorry. Maybe I’m reading implications into your words that just
weren’t intended. In your first post, I got the impression that you did mean all B5 fans.

>>It was an example, and yes, I have seen others. I didn’t say that all B5 fans were
obnoxious. <<

There are bad examples of every type of group in existence. There are also bad
stereotypes and biases between all these groups. Somehow, I came to the conclusion that,
since you’d taken the care to isolate these examples of hostile members of a very large
group, specifically B5 fans, from the myriad jerks in countless clubs out there, you had
some sort of agenda or reason to bring it here and “rub our noses” in it.

>>The poster in question wasn’t joshing and he certainly wasn’t respecting her opinion.
<<

Ah. Then it still doesn’t change anything. This is still just another case of another loser
who can’t take rejection. No real big point or exceptional lesson can be found in this.
Again I state my reaction; *what’s* the big deal? I’m sure I’m not the only person who,
upon reading your complaint, exclaimed, “So the TANJ what?!?” Is there reason to take
this event personally over all other misconducts on the net and drag it to us? If you feel the
Hugo doesn’t matter, why are you here to complain about a Hugo post in ST when it
doesn’t matter? No big whoop, right? If it was because a B5 fan invaded a Trek board,
take it up with him personally. There’s no need to punish us for some mischief you know
we are innocent of committing. It certainly doesn’t require you to invade our board.

>> *That* is what I was trying to say. I am talking about *respecting others’ opinions*,
because these are *television shows* and *opinions about television shows really aren’t
worth a major online war*. Is there any part of what I just said that you don’t
understand?<<

Respecting others’ opinions and rolling over to take abuse on our own boards are two
separate and distinct actions. Are you suggesting that we should appologize to you for
what someone else with a similar affiliation to B5 did in order to respect the opinion of a
woman we’ve never met?
And this board wouldn’t exist if no one felt that opinions of tv shows weren’t worth
arguing over. Are you being disrespectful of that opinion? Personally, I think that it’s as
good a reason to debate as any. Debate is often fun, and when it isn’t, it’s educational. I
also believe that anything is worth fighting for when it means something to you. As I said
earlier, we wouldn’t be here if it meant nothing to us. We only watch because we care to
watch; if we care about it, then it matters to us. No one would waste the few seconds of
their life it takes to think about something if the thought wasn’t worth that small part of
their life. To waste hours watching a show, it *must* be important enough to you that
you’d give hours from your finite life for the experience. Everything you enjoy has as
much value as the opportunity cost (so sorry) of having it. For a book or show, it’s time.
For art or music, it’s time and work. Everything worth spending your limited self on is
worth making a part of yourself or all you’d have to keep from the experience is a gaping
void in your life. Therefore, yes, it is worth debating about. My life means something,
and for the necessary practice in debate, I would spend the time it takes to argue over a tv
show. I gain valuable skills in this!…

 

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/4/96 1:42:41 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>
The point is to use reason and discernment. Realize what is important and what is not, and
respect it. <<

I do use reason, and I respect the investment I have in this debate. But I’m having a good
time; aren’t you? >|-)

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/4/96 2:07:12 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>I’m not talking about being thin-skinned; I’m talking about respect. <<

??? You who complained about a comment even you admitted was dull and stupid are not
talking about being thin skinned? It takes sensitivity of an order yet to me unknown to be
insulted by an ill-mannered opponent’s less-than-striking insult to a third party when
involvement was kept clean off your hands.
Your preoccupation with respect, on the gripping hand, must be classified beyond my
grasp. We gave you all the respect you’ve righteously demanded (well, most of us) and
stayed out of the ST area, yet here you are because of one schmuck who feels it is his duty
to avenge B5’s viewership of its meeting and vile parting with some other onliner. Or do
you want our respect for your abrupt appearance in our realm crying vengeance for
Archer’s infiltrating your domain and taunting the Hugo? Is that how one earns respect
these days? Or is it a matter of the B5 Man oppressing you indirectly by daring to voice an
opinion you find offensive?
How do we go about showering you in this “respect?” Do we have to humbly beg
forgiveness at thy feet? Or is it enough that we stay silent and like sponges absorb your
dominant views? Is respect shown by our lack of response or by our inability to respond
without suffering charges of disrespect and suppression? Should I bask in your logic and
accept fault for another’s deed out of respect, or would you prefer to reign through
purchase of dirty injustices and convenient misunderstandings while I Have No Mouth And
I Must Scream? (Sorry, been writing half this paragraph just for the benefit of fitting that
in. A lot of work for a little fun? Perhaps… 😉

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/4/96 2:13:40 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>><<“Isn’t 2000m/s^2 a bit much? It’s 200gees! Isn’t *10*gees fatal??”>>

Now you know why seatbelts leave such big bruises…

But actually, even a tremendous deceleration is easily survivable as long as you only get it
for a fraction of a second. The guy with the seat belt got 200 gs for only .01 seconds, not
very long at all. <<

Still, that’s a fifth of a meter per second velocity or 20 centimeters distance travelled
difference between his rib cage (stopped by the seatbelt) and his internal organs, limbs,
brain, etc. Isn’t that a bit severe for whiplash?

>>But the guy who only got 20 gs got it from a dashboard and windshield, not to mention
the street. And he got it across his face, for ten times as long as his lucky buddy. Which
one would you rather be?<<

You have a point there.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/4/96 2:19:49 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

 

That was a nice response, Rushylon.

>>
To all who have seen previous posts by me and note a bit of hostility in this one, you are
absolutely correct.<<

You expressed yourself well; I hope, as Marcus says, you’re not repressed anymore.

Subj: Re:Nomenclature
Date: 10/4/96 2:30:53 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>
How about calling fans of both shows “those wonderful people with extremely good
taste?”

–Luna{;-)<<

How about “those tastes great and less filling people?”
Or “persons of enjoyment of dual space-operas” or “Fans of (B5+DS9)” or F(B5+DS9)
or FB5+FDS9…. condensing until we get to “people who are B9″ or “Benign”? (I
too like both… well like some of one and all but the pilot of the other.)

Subj: Re:everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/4/96 7:46:39 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>I’m sure there are one dimensional characters in B5, too. Unfortunately, I can’t think of
any…..<<

Are you joking or did you just prove Ridak’s point?

Subj: Re:everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/4/96 8:29:07 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

*slight* sarcasm perhaps. It was late.

However, I do think that B5 has fewer problems in the one-dimensionality than Trek. I
guess there are those who think that Sheridan or Londo are one-dimensional, but I don’t.
Even supporting characters like Lennier and Vir have *lives*.
Janeway, for example is IMO, a wonderful character. But she needs a life. She needs
to see joy, pain, sorrow, etc, etc, in order to be a fully rounded person. I don’t believe the
writers have given her the depth she deserves.
Of *course* there are wonderfully developed Trek Characters. I’ve already mentioned
Tuvok, Chakotay, and the Doctor. Not to mention Data (my favorite).
And there are B5 characters that IMO need to develop more. I think Marcus is a good
example. I think he is and will develop. The ongoing storyline is a big boost to character
development, and I’m impressed with JMS casting of B5 also.

So *yes* I was joking and *yes* I was trying to prove a point.

Are you confused yet?
I am!

–Luna (Who likes Trek too)
Subj: The Fantabulous Frantrabtion
Date: 10/7/96 8:45:59 PM
From: I Vorlon I
Posted on: America Online

…Of Sir Horatio Huffnaegel. Anyway, This whole B5 vs. Trek thing sure sounds a lot
like the whole Mac vs. PC debate(I am a Mac user and I don’t even want to hear it from
you PC users out there!). I’m not sure why, but it does. My brain just turned off so could
someone else finish this post for….me….Aaaahhhh!!!!!! My heart just stopped help call
911!!!

Vorlon
Keeping the metric system down

Subj: Re:everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/7/96 9:35:14 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Of *course* there are wonderfully developed Trek Characters. I’ve already mentioned
Tuvok, Chakotay, and the Doctor. >>

You are joking right? Tuvok and Chakotay…two of the most anemically developed
characters in the Trek universe….

Subj: Star Trek Tribute
Date: 10/8/96 2:08:46 AM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

Did anyone catch this last night (Sunday)? Some of it was bad — like the chick who sang
Imagine or Kenny Putrid G. But when they called up all the cast members, it made me cry
to see all those people who mean so much to me in one place. By the way, Bester
inflitrated the proceedings — pretty cool, unh? Where was Majel?

Subj: Re:everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/8/96 2:14:25 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

Well, Tuvok and Chakotay both seem to have some semblance of lives. Chakotay
especially. We’ve dealt with his heritage, his feelings, and gotten to know him pretty well
(IMO). As for Tuvok, I think his relationships with Kes and Suder tell a lot about him.

I don’t deny further character development could happen here. I just don’t find these
characters flat (again, its only IMO)

–Luna

Subj: Bab5 vs. Trek
Date: 10/9/96 11:04:39 PM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online
Well….

I’ve watched all the new eps of Voyager and the first ep of DS9 for the new season….

I’ll give the Trek producers credit – they’re both better shows this season (at this point).
However, the characters are still pretty flat on Voyager. The character of Sueter was pretty
good, but it appears that having a serial killer on the ship long term was too offensive to
Jeri Taylor. Too bad….they could have added some real depth to the show by examining
Sueters internal struggles. At the same time they could have made the after effects of
Tuvoks mind-meld more lasting and Tuvok and Sueter could have fought the same internal
struggles together. It seems that the Trek producers always manage to miss the big picture.
It’s that damn ‘Reset Button’ problem again! But at least now I find it watchable!

As for DS9…I really liked Sisko as a Klingon. He does it better than Worf! It kinda
bothered me that they resolved Odo’s internal struggle in the first episode of the season.
Reset! I’m hoping they will take the un-easy peace between the Klingons and the
Federation in a somewhat subversive direction – as in trying to convine the Founders that
their little plan worked and the Klingons and the Federation are still at war for real. DS9
could use a somewhat darker atmosphere. I think that if the producers want to demonstrate
the ‘rightness’ of the federation way of life they need to subject the characters to a situation
that calls for them to make a sacrifice (possibly the ultimate sacrifice) to preserve their way
of life. We saw a momentary example of that on TNG when the Enterprise crew, while
trying to stop the Borg at Earth, were ready to ram the Borg vessel at warp speed. But they
need to do it over the span of a season or so to make it believable. That’s why Bab5
works…they take the time to build up the tension before the sh*t hits the fan! It makes the
resolution of the conflict more meaningful, and believable.

Subj: Re:Bab5 vs. Trek
Date: 10/10/96 3:29:49 AM
From: MS12982
Posted on: America Online

<<That’s why Bab5 works…they take the time to build up the tension before the sh*t hits
the fan! It makes the resolution of the conflict more meaningful, and believable.>>

I’ll use this comment from Ridak as my starting point. This is one of the reasons I like B5
and also one of the reasons I don’t want to miss it each week (especially now that my VCR
is broken). Unlike Trek (with its reset button), B5 has a continuing story line.

Tonight is a good example. I’ll probably skip watching Voyager because I have other
things to do. If I also miss it on Sunday, I’ll get to see that missed episode during summer
re-runs (oops, I mean *encore presentations*) and it doesn’t matter whether I’ll see the
episode out of order.

But I’ll make sure to see the next episode of B5. I want to see whether the new Kosh will
become more interested in Sheridan. And I’ll want to know what will happen as a result of
the Shadows’ learning of the new tactic of using telepaths. And I’ll also want to know what
will become of Franklin after his walkabout.

JMS is using the technique of serials that used to play in movie house. When I was a kid, I
used to go to the Saturday matinee because of the serials that the theater showed before the
feature film. I got hooked on the characters and the story line, and the only way to find out
what happens next was to come back for next Saturday’s matinee. It’s an old trick, but it
works well.

Subj: Re:Bab5 vs. Trek
Date: 10/10/96 5:40:14 PM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

Boy does it work!

It seems totaly unfair that I should have to wait a WEEK between each episode. Since they
have already aired in the UK, I think they should just do a Bab5 marathon and play all the
rest one after the other!

Aaaaaarggghhhh!!!

I wanna see ‘Shadows Danacing’ and ‘Za’ha’dum’ so bad I can TASTE it!
Subj: Re:Bab5 vs. Trek
Date: 10/10/96 6:37:15 PM
From: Holzbach
Posted on: America Online

Hi guys,
I just had some tapes from the UK fed exed to me. No spoilers, but ….
even if you HAVE spoiled yourself, Shadow Dancing and Zha’ha’dum are better
than
anything you could possibly imagine. It’s well worth the wait. Suffer.
Holzbach@aol.com

Subj: Re:Bab5 vs. Trek
Date: 10/10/96 7:44:18 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<even if you HAVE spoiled yourself, Shadow Dancing and Zha’ha’dum are better than
anything you could possibly imagine. It’s well worth the wait. Suffer.>>

Call Zathras. I want Draal to open up a new temporal rift. I want to go two week into the
future. Now.

Subj: Re:everlasting gobstoppers
Date: 10/10/96 8:26:48 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Chakotay especially. We’ve dealt with his heritage, his feelings, and gotten to know
him pretty well (IMO).<<

Except for Torres, Chakotay has gotten the worst of the Voyagers’ writer’s (there’s an
oxymoron) attentions. This proud-injun-mystical-warrior crap is so trite and generic it
makes me sick. What happened to the man who was the leader of the Maquis? How does
he feel about the fact that everyone who dies on Voyager is a Maquis? Let’s explore these
human issues. Not more stories about that damn muppet or the EMH or spirit guides or,
well, you get the picture…

Subj: DS69
Date: 10/10/96 11:44:34 PM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

More sex on Trek and B5, signed, Mr. Maturity.

Subj: Re:DS69
Date: 10/11/96 1:07:13 AM
From: GWRepBobby
Posted on: America Online

Let me add my full support to the suggestion by Mr. Maturity.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/11/96 5:01:54 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Ridak,

The problem is that ST is not constructed to delve into the personel lives of it’s characters,
It’s design has always been the stories and their underlying message and what the story is
trying to say about society and it’s problems. So, It’s not so surprising that the characters
in ST never have any residue of emotion carried from esp to esp of any great weight(
Though that is changing) because for ST the most inportant thing has always been the
stories. Even though these stories are mostly single esp stories that conclude at the end of
the hour, They are still able to engage in character interaction and show a downside or a
personel aspect to these characters from time to time without compromising on the story
they are telling for that esp. In this way I think ST works best by doing their story while
mingling personel character studies into more or less a private moment here or there with
the respective characters. DS9 is doing this very well lately, Starting off with characters
pursuits, problems or hobbies and then diving into that esp’s story in such a way as we see
the characters work around whatever situations come up and in so doing see more of what
makes them tick then we might in some other instance.

JJC III

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 10/11/96 5:08:28 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Ridak,

I would like to see DS9 try a serialized approach, Because I think it would tighten up the
writing and tie up some loose ends that they sometimes forget from esp to esp. But I still
love DS9 for what it is despite it’s minor flaws.

JJC III

Subj: Re:Bab5 vs. Trek
Date: 10/11/96 6:59:29 AM
From: Muadib0004
Posted on: America Online

Ri, then you would be disappointed. Becuase you’ll wish you waited and saw them when
they aired. its like reading a good book, you can’t wait to finish. Your darn, now what.

Subj: serializing DS9
Date: 10/11/96 3:01:10 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<I would like to see DS9 try a serialized approach, Because I think it would tighten up the
writing and tie up some loose ends that they sometimes forget from esp to esp. But I still
love DS9 for what it is despite it’s minor flaws.>>

I agree that DS9 would benefit from a more serialized approach, and I think it’s moving in
that direction. However, serializing DS9 would be a different animal than the way B5 is
serialized.
B5 has a beginning, middle and end. It was designed for a five year run, period. OTOH,
DS9 is ongoing for as long as the ratings will allow. It’s hard, IMO, to write threads for a
story when you don’t know the end. I think you can do a lot more intricate thread-weaving
when you know the end. ( I’ll bet in the last B5 ep we’ll see something that started as early
as season 1 or 2 ).
I’m all for serializing DS9. But it will be *different*. Which seems to reiterate the point
I’ve tried to make before. Trek is *not* B5. B5 is *not* Trek. I do like them both,
however.

My 2 cents,

–Luna (who doesn’t want to think about B5’s last ep…)

Subj: GW Bobby
Date: 10/11/96 8:48:27 PM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

I knew that you would, after your performance in the Eclipse the other night.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/11/96 11:51:27 PM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

>>??? You who complained about a comment even you admitted was dull and stupid are
not talking about being thin skinned? It takes sensitivity of an order yet to me unknown to
be insulted by an ill-mannered opponent’s less-than-striking insult to a third party when
involvement was kept clean off your hands.
>>

I wasn’t insulted. Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that aren’t there. I didn’t take
it personally; I just marveled at the aforementioned person’s (I hate to use the term
“opponent”) lack of sensitivity and respect.
>> Your preoccupation with respect, on the gripping hand, must be classified beyond my
grasp. We gave you all the respect you’ve righteously demanded (well, most of us) and
stayed out of the ST area,
>>

Who’s “we”? And, contrary to what you believe, there are fans of both shows. So no, B5
fans are not staying out of the Trek area en masse; some of them happen to be Trek fans as
well. OTOH, you get some folks, like Archer and Ford, who see fit to pester their so-
called “rivals.” The competition bit is totally dumb and totally pointless and serves no
purpose.
>>yet here you are because of one schmuck who feels it is his duty to avenge B5’s
viewership of its meeting and vile parting with some other onliner.
>>

I was lurking. I can lurk, can’t I?

>>Or do you want our respect for your abrupt appearance in our realm crying vengeance
for Archer’s infiltrating your domain and taunting the Hugo? Is that how one earns respect
these days? Or is it a matter of the B5 Man oppressing you indirectly by daring to voice an
opinion you find offensive?
>>

Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that are not and were never there. I’m simply
questioning the “us vs. them” attitudes.

Please count to ten, take a deep breath, and avoid making assumptions that aren’t true.

 

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/12/96 1:48:51 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>I wasn’t insulted. Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that aren’t there. I didn’t
take it personally;<<

Then why did you bother to post it at all? What extraordinary feature of the event jabbed
you into posting about it? If you weren’t insulted or offended, why did you bring it up?

>> I just marveled at the aforementioned person’s (I hate to use the term “opponent”) lack
of sensitivity and respect.<<

…That is what I would call “*taking offense* at the lack of respect and sensitivity of the
individual.” This is exactly what I meant when I said it “offended” you. The only way
you can have a reaction so great that you are mustered into sharing it with us is if it either
“offended” you or “pleased” you. I assume you did enjoy it, so you must be here for the
primary reason.
And, BTW, how long have you been online (or even *alive* for that matter) that such a
trifle incident can raise a sense of injustice against disrespect this great? You must live in
one nice corner of the country…

>> Your preoccupation with respect, on the gripping hand, must be classified beyond my
grasp. We gave you all the respect you’ve righteously demanded (well, most of us) and
stayed out of the ST area, >>
Who’s “we”?<<

Everyone who agreed with you that the insensitive B5 fan was a jerk, including me.
Everyone who never invaded a ST board, again including me.

>> And, contrary to what you believe, there are fans of both shows. So no, B5 fans are
not staying out of the Trek area en masse; some of them happen to be Trek fans as well.<<

…. Hello! I’ve said many times that I watch both shows and enjoy ST and B5. I want to
believe you know exactly what I meant; if you didn’t write this as some sarcastic, wiseguy
response, then I’d be insulted that you could misunderstand and disrespect me so much.

>> OTOH, you get some folks, like Archer and Ford, who see fit to pester their so-called
“rivals.” The competition bit is totally dumb and totally pointless and serves no
purpose.<<

Yes, you do. I have not strayed into your areas, though, so please leave me out of your
argument here.

>>yet here you are because of one schmuck who feels it is his duty to avenge B5’s
viewership of its meeting and vile parting with some other onliner.
>>
I was lurking. I can lurk, can’t I?<<

No, it’s disrespectful. 😉 Yes, but lurking and posting about some of your musings(?) to
get a response which you somehow could not see coming (though how you could not
know that the reaction would be “So what? What does this have to do with us?” is a
mystery to me) are not the same thing. I hate to ever be this blunt, and I’ll explain later
what drives me to this end, but: If you have a point to make, make it; otherwise, just be
quiet and abandon this purposeless exercise!
Now, why I said this: You have been complaining a lot about disrespect and words in
your mouth, but you constantly refuse to define the terms of your statement, so we can
never argue *any* of your points withoult you falling back and crying unfair play. This
technique is an old tradition of B5 vs St boards, and it is one that royally… er, “gets my
goat.” This is the most immature form of debate their is. We can never make any progress
if you don’t allow us to even know what you’re arguing for. So again, if I’ve been reading
too much into your posts, WHAT THE HECK **WERE** YOU POSTING THEM
ABOUT???? If there was no problem, then you wouldn’t be in our faces pestering us
about it.

 

>>Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that are not and were never there. I’m simply
questioning the “us vs. them” attitudes. <<

If these are the only words your mouth has intended to utter, then my response is:
What is your fraggin’ problem here? You could bring up the point just as easily in a ST
board, and you certainly could have mentioned this without the “B5’s fans are insensitive
monsters who taunt the Hugo” text. To debate that debating is bad is just plain Gumpish.

 

 

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/12/96 2:04:55 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that are not and were never there. I’m simply
questioning the “us vs. them” attitudes. <<

To address the competition with such a slanderous introduction (“Jerks who taunt us with
the Hugo, etc.”) is not at all the kind of thing I’d attribute to a “Can’t we all just get along”
advocate. So, if you’re here to start a debate over a debate about B5 vs ST, then why don’t
you take your own advice. Jeez–It’s just a debate about a TV show!!!!!

>>Please count to ten, take a deep breath, and avoid making assumptions that aren’t true.
<<

Usually one considers it a given that you have something to settle about B5 fans when
you put so much work into recounting horror stories of B5 fans not giving respect to
innocent pedestrians. Funny how that is, linear thought being what it is. Consider this:
“Star Sumeria’s fans suck toad’s waste disposal systems! One of them said that another
person who ignored the conversation was ‘just not paying attention!’ To disrespect the
citizen’s attention span so evilly nominates this bastard for eternal torture! All Star Sumeria
fans are like this–a club of jerks! They taunt us Theta-Bureau fans with the Pinto award
and they act irrationally, getting excited over a TV show! When will this injustice end??
Why do you have to debate over which TV show is better? If you think I’m debating
anything but the stupid competition, you’re putting BS in my keyboard.”
True, it is much less subtle than yours, but all the implications are exactly the same. How
would you react? Why should we react any differently to you?

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/12/96 2:07:34 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>> I assume you did enjoy it<<
I meant “I assume you did *not* enjoy it.”
Hey, don’t put intentions in my words!

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/12/96 4:27:46 PM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

 

>>I wasn’t insulted. Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that aren’t
there. I didn’t take it personally;<<

>Then why did you bother to post it at all? What extraordinary feature of
the event jabbed you into posting about it? If you weren’t insulted or
offended, why did you bring it up?
>
I was not *personally* insulted or offended; I simply found the poster’s post to be
insulting and offensive.

Got it?

>
And, BTW, how long have you been online (or even *alive* for that matter)
that such a trifle incident can raise a sense of injustice against disrespect
this great? You must live in one nice corner of the country…
>

Uhhhhhm…I have been online for a while. I’ve been in the feminism newsgroups (which
should be retitled the *antifeminism* newsgroups for all the hatred they attract). So yes,
I’ve run into some wackos online. I also live in New York City. Enough said.

But feminism at least, attracts all kinds of debate–both sane and irrational. Frankly, sci-fi
television shows aren’t as significant as feminism, however, so the heated debates and
Thaxton-esque name-calling makes no sense. Neither does the implication that one is a
total boob for not enjoying a certain show. It’s like saying you have no taste just because
you don’t like olives, for example.
>> And, contrary to what you believe, there are fans of both shows. So no,
B5 fans are not staying out of the Trek area en masse; some of them happen to
be Trek fans as well.<<
>
…. Hello! I’ve said many times that I watch both shows and enjoy ST and
B5. I want to believe you know exactly what I meant; if you didn’t write this
as some sarcastic, wiseguy response, then I’d be insulted that you could
misunderstand and disrespect me so much.
>

The “us vs. them attitude kind of threw me off; this is the first time I’ve seen you say you
like Trek, actually.

No, I’m not disrespecting you. Take it easy.

>> OTOH, you get some folks, like Archer and Ford, who see fit to pester
their so-called “rivals.” The competition bit is totally dumb and totally
pointless and serves no purpose.<<

> Yes, you do. I have not strayed into your areas, though, so please leave
me out of your argument here.
>

Fine. You’re out of the argument. Again, for the gumpteenth time, I didn’t make a
statement about *all* fans of certain shows…just some fans.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/12/96 4:32:07 PM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

>>Again, you’re putting words in my mouth that are not and were never there. I’m simply
questioning the “us vs. them” attitudes. <<
>
To address the competition with such a slanderous introduction (“Jerks who taunt us with
the Hugo, etc.”) is not at all the kind of thing I’d attribute to a “Can’t we all just get along”
advocate. So, if you’re here to start a debate over a debate about B5 vs ST, then why don’t
you take your own advice. Jeez–It’s just a debate about a TV show!!!!!
>
I’m not starting a debate about one show versus the other. You keep bringing up the same
points over and over again, and getting hopelessly tangled up in your own words.

Let’s get some perspective here:

*You* are the one bringing up “the competition,” not me. *You* are the one taking certain
comments personally, not me. *You* are the one who finds it fulfilling to engage in
vitriolic debates about a television show, not me.

Again, I am not talking about *all* B5 fans. Is this clear? I hope so…because I won’t say
it again.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/12/96 7:41:53 PM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

>Yes, but lurking and posting about some of your musings(?) to get a response which you
somehow could not see coming (though how you could not know that the reaction would
be “So what? What does this have to do with us?” is a mystery to me) are not the same
thing. I hate to ever be this blunt, and I’ll explain later what drives me to this end, but: If
you have a point to make, make it; otherwise, just be quiet and abandon this purposeless
exercise!
>

Very well then. Here goes:

Browsing the newsgroups (though this isn’t as much of a problem on AOL) I have noticed
that quite a few B5 fans in said newsgroups look upon Trek fans (and non-Bt fans in
general) with disdain.

I’m not just talking about the dolt who said that a woman had “let herself down” by
deciding she didn’t like B5. I’m also talking about the poster who couldn’t understand
why Trekkers didn’t appreciate true greatness (i.e., B5) as well as the lovely chap who
commented “While you were watching Voyager, I was watching reruns of B5. Which of
us enjoyed ourselves more, hmmmmmmmmm?” I’m talking about guys who make Ford
Thaxton look like a model of tolerance and acceptance.

*This* is what I’m talking about. Again, it’s more prevalent on the Usenet groups than on
the AOL boards, but it’s there.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/13/96 6:49:00 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

Gee and I’ll I tried to do was point out at Star Trek fandom seemed to be at a low ebb.

Subj: Re:serializing DS9
Date: 10/15/96 1:08:50 AM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

I think they could semi-serialize DS9 without much difficulty. I don’t think they need to
change they’re story telling approach all that much…they just need to carry stories over
from episode to episode and resolve the plot in it’s natural course. Too many of the good
episodes that thye have could have been soooo much better if they could have taken more
time to develop the premise.

It appears that this season may already be adopting a slightly more serialized style. It the
long run it can only help the show. DS9 is different from the ather Treks because the
station stands still for the most part and so they would most certainly have to be affected by
ongoing events in that sector. I mean…with the war with the Klingons, the war with the
Dominion, the conflict with the Maque, the turmoil in the Cardassian empire, the problems
of the Bajorans, and so forth all going on around them at once it seems pretty clear to me
that these events HAVE to play a more pivitol role in the show. Since none of the above
mentioned plots could be believably resolved in a single episode, I think it makes sense for
them to spend some time exploring each plot device…all at one time. This is the kind of
new identity that Trek shows need in order to sperate themselves from what’s been done
before. One of the biggest problems I have with Voyager is that the show is really just
TNG with a new cast and ship…but the same old story lines and plot devices.

And I’ll say again….I LIKE DS9 even as it is now. I just think they have an opportunity to
make it alot better. I don’t want it to be more like Bab5 in any other way than the serialized
approach to story telling. I like shows that are event driven…but I think a show that is both
event AND character driven is a much better show. The real point of the events is how they
impact the characters, and in turn how the characters deal with the situations that arise. If I
can identify with what the character is going through it adds a whole lot more depth and
meaning to the events. It can even spill over into my own life and get me thinking along
new lines. That’s the power of any form of artistic creation – it’s ability to move people.

Ridak

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/15/96 1:21:09 AM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

Songokuten,

Why do you keep bantering with Kewpie? Kewpie is obviously one of those people who
takes great pleasure in being offended so that he/she can heap his/her rightious indignation
on us. It’s pointless to argue with people who have such a narrowly focused view. You
have a keen intelligence and can cut to the heart of the matter rather quickly. You’re wasting
it on Kewpie.
Kewpie,

What, exactly, is your POINT? You keep going on about Bab5 fans posting negative
comments about Trek in the Trek boards. You complain that they are rude and
insensitive…SO WHAT!?!?!?

Nobody ever said that you have some god-given right to not be offended. These boards are
here for people to post their OPINIONS. You are not required to like it. If you don’t agree
with their assesment, then say so…your entitled to your opinion too. But arguing over the
rightness or wrongness of making the posts in the first place is infantile. Just because a few
fans lack a sense of perspective when it come to their favorite show doesn’t mean that all
the other fans are that way too.

-Ridak

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/15/96 11:05:34 PM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

 

>
Nobody ever said that you have some god-given right to not be offended. These boards are
here for people to post their OPINIONS. You are not required to like it. If you don’t agree
with their assesment, then say so…your entitled to your opinion too. But arguing over the
rightness or wrongness of making the posts in the first place is infantile. Just because a few
fans lack a sense of perspective when it come to their favorite show doesn’t mean that all
the other fans are that way too.
>

Expressing opinions is one thing; making personal attacks on someone just because he/she
doesn’t like what you like is another. I’m not making personal attacks on anyone. If it
came out that way, I’m sorry.

I simply look at it this way: I hate pickles. Just about everyone I know loves pickles.
Would I assume that half the world is brain-dead for liking pickles? No! I like the Beatles.
My boss does not like the Beatles. Does his dislike for the Beatles make him a bad person?
Is he someone with no taste and no sense of greatness? No! My brother loves the Yankees
and my boss is a Mets fan. I could not care less about baseball. Is that a basis for personal
attacks? Of course not!

Hopefully, this puts things in perspective.
Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/16/96 4:18:29 AM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

Uhhh…Your missing my point.

If someone made a personal attack on you because they didn’t agree with you then the
appropriate response is to address you’re respose TO THAT PERSON. You’ve come here
to the Bab5 board to take us all to task for the behavior of a few individuals who lack any
sense of proportion. I think that that is insensitive and inappropriate (and, yes, I’m using
those words facetiously)

-Ridak

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/16/96 11:57:38 AM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

Okay, Ridak, point well taken.

Thinking about it, we’re all fans of sci-fi television, just different shows. I guess that the
IDIC rule applies here, no? :)

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/16/96 8:35:51 PM
From: I Vorlon I
Posted on: America Online

<<Kewpie is obviously one of those people who takes great pleasure in being offended so
that he/she can heap his/her rightious indignation on us.>>

Cool, we have a sadomasochist in our midst!

Vorlon
I {heart} Buckyballs

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/18/96 3:03:35 AM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

Personally, I’m a big fan of most sci-fi in general. I’ve seen every episode of all four Treks
and Bab5. I liked Space: Above and Beyond, Alien Nation, Robocop, Max Headroom, etc.
Unfortunately, those shows were cancelled. That’s a big problem with sci-fi on TV….it
usually doesn’t last. I’ve been to the Trek boards, as well as these boards and I find far too
many people who like Trek but hate Bab5 and the only reason seems to be that it isn’t Trek.
I’ve also found people who like Bab5 and hate Trek for basicly the same reason. I don’t
think that any sci-fi show can be judged soley from a few episodes, and certainly not in it’s
first season. It seems to take a bit more time for the actors to flesh out their characters.

That said, I do like to go to the Trek boards to point out what I see as the weak points of
Trek. When Trek was the only game in town I was able to overlook some of the
inconsistencies and lame plot devices. But since Bab5 came on, it seems to throw Trek into
contrast. The Trek producers have livend up the shows a bit this season and I believe that
this is a reaction to Bab5. That’s the kind of thing we need more of…cross fertilization of
ideas. The more quality sci-fi shows there are, the more we will see in the future. Too
many of the sci-fi shows of the 70’s and 80’s were cheesy and lame. TNG pushed the
envelope, but only to a point. It still suffered from some of the same event-driven mind set.
Bab5 has pushed the envelope a bit further by introducing a more dramatic element. The
stories on Bab5 are more character driven. The events are more of a back-drop. It makes
for a more grown-up style of sci-fi on TV. However, Bab5 never would have been a reality
if it wasn’t for TNG. It took the success of TNG to prove that sci-fi can draw viewers. I
will always have a special fondness for all Trek, if for no other reason then the fact that it
helped to legitimize sci-fi TV.

Ridak

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/18/96 2:35:12 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<However, Bab5 never would have been a reality if it wasn’t for TNG. It took the
success of TNG to prove that sci-fi can draw viewers. I will always have a special
fondness for all Trek, if for no other reason then the fact that it helped to legitimize sci-fi
TV.

Ridak>>

My thoughts exactly. Are you a telepath?

–Luna

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/19/96 2:05:53 AM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

<<However, Bab5 never would have been a reality if it wasn’t for TNG. It took the
success of TNG to prove that sci-fi can draw viewers. I will always have a special
fondness for all Trek, if for no other reason then the fact that it helped to legitimize sci-fi
TV.

Ridak>>

<<My thoughts exactly. Are you a telepath?

–Luna>>

I wish!

I think that we are probobly looking for the same thing from TV sci-fi though. I may take
Star Trek to task for what I see as it’s weak points, but the only reason I do is because I
like the show. If I didn’t like it, it wouldn’t be worth my time. I want Star Trek to evelove
so that it will still be around into the 21st Century. For the most part, I find that most of the
fans posting to these boards seem to feel the same. I’m sure that at some point in the future
a show will come along that out does Bab5, and then I will be comparing and contrasting
those two shows as well. Every time a show raises the bar, I want to see the competition
jump a bit higher and push the bar up again!

-Ridak

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/19/96 4:05:46 AM
From: Kewpie3829
Posted on: America Online

>>
That said, I do like to go to the Trek boards to point out what I see as the weak points of
Trek.
>>

No problem there. My biggest criticism of TNG was its sexism (see Counselor Troi for
details). Come on, people. What kind of military officer would walk around in skin-tight,
multicolored bodysuits? That’s just *stupid*. Don’t get me started on Wes. At least Jake
Sisko seems to be reasonably normal.

>>
When Trek was the only game in town I was able to overlook some of the inconsistencies
and lame plot devices.
>>

I’ve always noticed a few silly things about Trek (the outer space babes in TOS; the wild
hairdos, Shatner’s overacting). Some of it gives Trek a sort of charm, actually.

>>
But since Bab5 came on, it seems to throw Trek into contrast. The Trek producers have
livend up the shows a bit this season and I believe that this is a reaction to Bab5. That’s the
kind of thing we need more of…cross fertilization of ideas. The more quality sci-fi shows
there are, the more we will see in the future. Too many of the sci-fi shows of the 70’s and
80’s were cheesy and lame. TNG pushed the envelope, but only to a point. It still suffered
from some of the same event-driven mind set. Bab5 has pushed the envelope a bit further
by introducing a more dramatic element. The stories on Bab5 are more character driven.
The events are more of a back-drop. It makes for a more grown-up style of sci-fi on TV.
However, Bab5 never would have been a reality if it wasn’t for TNG. It took the success
of TNG to prove that sci-fi can draw viewers. I will always have a special fondness for all
Trek, if for no other reason then the fact that it helped to legitimize sci-fi TV.
>>

May the days of Battlestar Galactica never return!

Subj: Neither is better
Date: 10/21/96 7:35:30 PM
From: GregLauren
Posted on: America Online

Its not a question of being better,the two shows are simply built around different
visions.Star Trek is the optimistic,
with humans as advanced and peaceful beings out exploring the galaxy.B5 more of an
adventure,with a titanic battle between the forces of light and darkness.I personally like
them both – I think B5 would be a lot better is they just finallised some of the details – like
Earthforce Command Structure,Ships,Rank etc.

Subj: Re:Neither is better
Date: 10/21/96 9:29:29 PM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<I think B5 would be a lot better is they just finallised some of the details – like Earthforce
Command Structure,Ships,Rank etc>>

Finalized like how?

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/22/96 1:43:48 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Vorlon
I {heart} Buckyballs<<

They’re slippery little devils sometimes, but those little carbon balls have a lot of
character.

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/22/96 1:49:29 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

Kewpie,

I am letting the debate go. I don’t think you understand *why* it happened in the first
place, but if you do, you did a good job of bluffing. Feel free to post anytime, but, please,
state your point in a thesis sentence at the beginning of each paragraph so we can clearly
discuss your points next time, please. Other than that, just remember to laugh when life is
funny, and try to be apathetic when life becomes twistedly, perversely funny. (I fear you
may not have the necessary ability to block your empathy instincts that most urbanites and
onliners learn or are flamed trying.)

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/22/96 1:58:20 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>No problem there. My biggest criticism of TNG was its sexism (see Counselor Troi for
details). Come on, people. What kind of military officer would walk around in skin-tight,
multicolored bodysuits?<<

The morale officer? No, wait–Neelix is a morale officer! Oh no! I’m getting an awful
image now… NO! It’s unthinkable!
Maybe Troi started life as a trapeze act on Arrakis?

>> That’s just *stupid*. Don’t get me started on Wes. At least Jake Sisko seems to be
reasonably normal.<<

Has Wes ever gone through puberty? I bet he was beaten up daily at Starfleet Academy
(Motto: “My job is to preserve freedom of political and social correctness and kill all those
primitive savages who disagree.”).

Subj: Re:The WorldCon and Hugos
Date: 10/22/96 6:30:04 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< Maybe Troi started life as a trapeze act on Arrakis? >>

I thought it was Picard who was on Arrakis. Or was that Al, from “Quantum Leap”? No,
no. I remember, it was Agent Cooper. He was on Arrakis. With that weird guy. Brother
what’s his name, the serial killer. And the replicant from “Blade Runner,” Rachel. Yeah,
now I’ve figured it out. It’s all actually “Dune,” all of it. There’s really only one TV
show, one movie.

So there’s nothing to compare, after all!
Subj: I’m both a Trek and B5 fan
Date: 10/25/96 5:10:28 PM
From: Kevin1701G
Posted on: America Online

One could be both a Trek and B5 fan.. The reason why I like B5 cause it has more action in
it than Star Trek.. Like this weeks episode very very excellent(the sene(sp) with battle
going on was really good!)… Can’t wait for Season 4!!!!!!!

Kevin

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/25/96 8:19:26 PM
From: Gen Veers
Posted on: America Online

I am a B5 and a DS9 fan, but the two shows are quite different. Who’s to say which tech
would prevail. I wish Sherridan had gotten his hand on some new experimental Earth
Force ship. To me that sounds better, but seeing that the Vorlons and Mimbari are years
ahead it only make sense that he gets the Vor/Mim hybread. Has anyone out there ever
noticed that some of those Earth Force ships kind of look like the Sulocco form Aliens?
Second dumb question of the day, what is the difference between photon, Quantum, and
proton torpedos?

thanx

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fan
Date: 10/25/96 9:44:15 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

Kevin wrote:
<<The reason why I like B5 cause it has more action in it than Star Trek.. >>

I too am a fan of both shows. However, it’s not the “action” that draws me to B5. To me
the story (theres only *one* story here) is mostly character-driven as opposed to some of
the plot-driven eps of Trek. DS9 is the most character-driven Trek yet, but still has more
plot devices than B5 (space anomalies, time distortion,computer errors, etc).

Having said that, I still love DS9 and Star Trek. If it weren’t for trek setting the precident
30 years ago, JMS’s epic could never be told…

–Luna

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/26/96 1:54:58 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< DS9 is the most character-driven Trek yet, but still has more plot devices than B5
(space anomalies, time distortion,computer errors, etc).>>

I can’t recall the last time DS9 had a “space distortion” episode, and the time travel episode
was one of the strongest charater shows in Trek history “The Visitor”. Computer errors? If
you mean holodeck malfunctions they have only had one (“Our Man Bashir”) and that was
because they wanted to do a bond homage (Ron Moore is a big bond fan). Maybe you are
thinking of Voyager, who’s writers don’t even know the definition of “charater”. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/26/96 2:43:39 AM
From: Sheridan98
Posted on: America Online

uhhh space time distortion used SEVERAL times by DS9 (ex : was flinging sisko itnto
alternate timelines) als there was one instance of something eminating from the wormhole
that cause time conflicts on the station … been used by ds9 — mainly cause they ran out of
original ideas long ago and can’t figure out who to have the war with.

Computer errors — DS9 had an entire episode of problems caused by the computer codes
installed by the builders .. remember sisko, jake and obrien crawling through ore
processing tubes?????

I was an original Trekkie —-have letters from Gene Roddenberry where my older brother
and I had the audacity to “NITPICK” the show… Star Trek is due it’s homage, but so is
B5.
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/27/96 12:18:49 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<uhhh space time distortion used SEVERAL times by DS9 (ex : was flinging sisko itnto
alternate timelines) als there was one instance of something eminating from the wormhole
that cause time conflicts on the station … been used by ds9 — mainly cause they ran out of
original ideas long ago and can’t figure out who to have the war with.>>

That alternate-timeline was started in TOS, and only takes up ONE episode a season (out of
26), and only the first time did they go through on accident, the others were on purpose.

<< Computer errors — DS9 had an entire episode of problems caused by the computer
codes installed by the builders .. remember sisko, jake and obrien crawling through ore
processing tubes?????>>

I guess you are refering to “Civil Defence” and it was a logical episode considering they are
on an ALIEN station. As for those types of episodes you object too, only four last year
(out of 26) fit into those catagories (“The Visitor”, “Shattered Mirrior”, “Little Green Men”,
and “Our Man Bashir”) all of these episodes recieved better than average reviews, with
“The Visitor” beating out “The City On the Edge of Forever” for best all-time Trek episode.
At least they did not have King Aurther show up on the station, or a Zarg. :) Of course they
did have “The Muse” which was as bad as that cute little Zarg. :)

–AcDec (resident “Trekylonian”)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/27/96 1:54:09 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<At least they did not have King Aurther show up on the station>>

Michael York can show up on my station any time he wants….And he can be anyone he
wants to…

–Luna

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/27/96 3:53:20 AM
From: KE6LBM
Posted on: America Online

<Second dumb question of the day, what is the difference between photon, Quantum, and
proton torpedos>

Phonton torpedoes (Photons) were the torpedos used in the original series, TNG, first
couple of seasons of DS9, and Voyager

Quantums are the new big brothers seen on the Defiant.
Never heard of proton torpedoes. Any help?

Bill

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/27/96 3:56:27 AM
From: Lyndisty
Posted on: America Online

Only place I’ve ever heard of PROTON torpedoes was in Star Wars…
Paula

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/28/96 7:07:42 AM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

>><Second dumb question of the day, what is the difference between photon, Quantum,
and proton torpedos><<

Just for reference’s sake, you’ll see more about quantum torpedoes during the First Contact
movie.

Randy

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/28/96 9:03:58 PM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<>><Second dumb question of the day, what is the difference between photon,
Quantum, and proton torpedos><<

Just for reference’s sake, you’ll see more about quantum torpedoes during the First Contact
movie.

Randy>>

You mean, like they’ll actually say something about what they are? Or just use them alot?

One thing’s for certain: Quantum Torpeados are quiet a bit more powerful than Photorps.
In “Paradise Lost”(or “Home Front”, whichever one was second), the Excelsior-class ship
in orbit is ordered to use Qtorps against the Defiant, and the captain expresses her concern
that she thought she was only to disable the Defiant, not *destroy* it.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/28/96 9:21:06 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Never heard of proton torpedoes. Any help?>>

Proton torpedoes blew up the Death Star… Nuff Said.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/29/96 7:28:35 PM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

>><<>><Second dumb question of the day, what is the difference between photon,
Quantum, and proton torpedos><<

Just for reference’s sake, you’ll see more about quantum torpedoes during the First Contact
movie.

Randy>>

You mean, like they’ll actually say something about what they are? Or just use them
alot?<<

Both.

Randy

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/30/96 1:46:13 AM
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>> photon, Quantum, and proton torpedos?<<

Photon and Quantum, I can’t say, but a proton torpedo has mass and is horribly obsolete
(being mainly used a long time agao, in a galaxy far far away).

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 10/31/96 7:37:51 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< Photon and Quantum, I can’t say, but a proton torpedo has mass and is horribly
obsolete (being mainly used a long time agao, in a galaxy far far away). >>

Yeah, but you’ve got to take into account the differences in physics. Judging by the fact
that you could get between solar systems without a hyperdrive, and the rebel fleet
apparently regrouped OUTSIDE the galaxy (as seen from the window of the medical
frigate), I’d say the universe was a LOT smaller “long, long ago.” And judging by the fact
that you can SEE the blasts from blasters moving across a room, I’d say the speed of light
was a lot slower — say about 25 mph.

Instead of “a long time ago,” perhaps we should say, “when the big bang was only a
distant memory for a few very ancient living beings.”
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/3/96 4:51:20 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Interesting… anyone see this week’s Deep Space Nine, where Miles’ wife returns from
a long journey possessed by an evil force which is really the cosmic enemy of the show’s
cosmic good guys?
Pure coincidence, I’m sure…

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/3/96 9:09:52 AM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

>> Interesting… anyone see this week’s Deep Space Nine, where Miles’ wife returns
from a long journey possessed by an evil force which is really the cosmic enemy of the
show’s cosmic good guys?
Pure coincidence, I’m sure…<<
Probably the same pure coincidence that had this year’s opening credits for B5 go over the
exterior of that station not unlike what DS9 has been doing in its opening credits all
along….

Randy

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/3/96 6:10:34 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

Hi Randy, Welcome to the B5 Boards….

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/3/96 10:28:00 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Probably the same pure coincidence that had this year’s opening credits for B5 go over
the exterior of that station not unlike what DS9 has been doing in its opening credits all
along….>>

You’re reachin’ my friend. I mean you are REALLY reaching!

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 12:27:19 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Probably the same pure coincidence that had this year’s opening credits for B5 go over
the exterior of that station not unlike what DS9 has been doing in its opening credits all
along….>>
Oh please. You’d put those two on a par with one another? The name of the show is
B5 – what is more natural than to show the station, even if DS9 did it first? (I suppose DS9
stole it from Space 1999 then… HEY! Even the “9”!) But when I was watching that
otherwise-decent DS9 ep (I liked Keiko better this way!), all I could think was, “People are
gonna think B5 is ripping this idea off DS9… even though B5 was filmed more than half a
year ago when DS9 was still hinting at a big Klingon War.”
BTW, did anyone else think that Keiko (and possibly the whole staff) was faking, that
the whole thing was a bizarre birthday-present hoax for Miles? I kept waiting for a twist
that never came – that would’ve been a much better ending.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 12:31:21 AM
From: WMorris163
Posted on: America Online

Yes, I noticed a similarity between the last two DS9 episodes and B5 episodes. The
DS9 episode where Jake had to come to terms with what he felt was being a coward.
And then on B5 Dr. Franklin had to come to terms with himself, stop running away and
be resposible. Yes there seems to be almost a similarity there. As well as the DS9
episode where Chief O’Briens wife is possessed on top of B5’s Z’Ha’Dum. Not to
say that I don’t like DS9 or Star Trek itself, but sometimes I feel like the story writers
get lazy. They really need to tighten up the stories and events on DS9 and quit
getting sidetracked. I really felt like that was what was happening with TNG during
the end of its last season, they had a string of episodes that just had something to do
with the unexplainable and so forth. Though at the same time they used it as a door
for the other Star Trek shows. Voyager was OK when it started but I feel like they’ve
gotten slack with it. OK, well this week, according to the promos, they’re going to
venture back to 1996 Earth. That makes for an interesting situation, but it is unrealistic
to the story line of the show itself. That’s a good example of the story writers getting
sidetracked. They had something going when the Kais-on (SP?) took control of
Voyager, but instead of streching that on for a few episodes (it should’ve really been
a 3 part episode) they wrapped it up very quickly. I though it was really lame about
the way that they got the ship back. What the Kais-on didn’t put up a fight to the death,
geez. I kinda figured them to be the Klingon types of that sector.

Subj: Suggested Voyager Script
Date: 11/4/96 1:12:28 AM
From: WMorris163
Posted on: America Online

Ok. I’ve though it out, and here is what should happen in an upcoming Voyager
episode. This should tie in with the upcomming 2 part episode where they travel
back to 1996.

Well instead of returning to their normal time they somehow wind up in the year
2260. They find themselves in front of a seeminglessly dead world. Then all of a
sudden a Shadow ship four times as large as Voyager de-cloaks right on top of it.
Janeway turns to Tuvok and says, (kermit voice) “What is that?” Tuvok says,
“It appears to be….” Blammo! He never finishes his sentence. The next thing you
see is the Shadow ship chopping up Voyager. Hoooraaayyy!!!!! The End!

I just love happy endings!

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 1:33:55 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<>> Interesting… anyone see this week’s Deep Space Nine, where Miles’ wife returns
from a long journey possessed by an evil force which is really the cosmic enemy of the
show’s cosmic good guys?
Pure coincidence, I’m sure…<<
Probably the same pure coincidence that had this year’s opening credits for B5 go over the
exterior of that station not unlike what DS9 has been doing in its opening credits all
along….

Randy>>

And the same coincidence that had DS9’s opening credits add a little guy in a vacuum suit
welding on the outside of the station after B5 had been doing it for two years…

 

(isn’t this fun?)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 5:36:51 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Hey, I can play this game too.

The “a peice of Kosh”, can anyone say “Spock”.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 7:05:23 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< anyone see this week’s Deep Space Nine, where Miles’ wife returns from a long
journey possessed by an evil force which is really the cosmic enemy of the show’s cosmic
good guys? >>

I thought the show would be dreadful (I’ve seen a LOT of “aliens take over the telepath”
shows on various series, and it can get really OLD), but I actually enjoyed it a lot. They
managed to put a lot of nice twists into the characterization, and had me guessing a couple
of times whether Keiko was just putting Miles on for some reason related to his birthday.
Rosalind Chao really must have had a wonderful time with this part, which let her chew the
scenery and yell and scream when the alien was being killed. They mixed in a lot of humor
along with the horror, which is a hard thing to do. If they got this by stealing from B5,
then I say: LET ‘EM STEAL!
Subj: try again loser
Date: 11/4/96 7:35:06 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Probably the same pure coincidence that had this year’s opening credits for B5 go over
the exterior of that station not unlike what DS9 has been doing in its opening credits all
along….<<

Yeah, that’s pretty conclusive…
>>Hey, I can play this game too.

The “a peice of Kosh”, can anyone say “Spock”. <<

Remember when you asked, “How come the Shadows don’t just attack B5?”, well, I
responded that we would probably find out in time and we did. As to that piece of flame-
bait you just posted, well…besides, Spock wasn’t “interactive” in McCoy’s mind.

You know what was really cool this week? Voyager airs after B5. What a joke, my friends
and I spent the whole hour talking about B5. Add yet another “nose-prothsetic-alien-du-
jour” to the list.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 9:53:37 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<OK, well this week, according to the promos, they’re going to
venture back to 1996 Earth.>>
Let the plothole attacks begin!
(1) “Gee, shouldn’t a guy named Khan rule half the world these days? And where’s all
that deep-space and cryogenic tech he uses to escape with? Maybe the Klingons succeeded
in killing Kirk in that tribble episode and consequently Gary and Terri never stopped that
rocket in the 60’s and so all earth history is different.”
(2) “Gee, the Federation’s in the delta quadrant by the 29th century. So even after for
some reason we can’t slingshot around the sun from 1996 to get home, we could slingshot
around some DQ sun and ask the 29th century Federation to send us home. Using
wormholes, obviously, because we all know warp doesn’t get any faster and if it did we’d
just turn into salamaders that can’t be reversed without some sort of holographic medical
program. But I guess Voyager isn’t really a good enough ship to time travel – not like
some 80 year old bird of prey or Quark’s rustbucket shuttle.”
(3) What the heck was Chakotay smoking last week? He shoud’ve been the only one
who *did* believe all that stuff about the spirit quest and be on Janeway’s side for her
decision. And Janeway was an awful rigorous materialist for someone who was talking to
her lizard guide awhile back.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 9:55:24 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<The “a peice of Kosh”, can anyone say “Spock”. >>
No, but I can say “Obi-Wan.”
(Don’t get me started – I *really* hate that Kosh-1 thing…)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/4/96 7:51:24 PM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

I always have to laugh that it’s OK to insinuate the Trek took something from B5, but if
someone suggests the other way around…….

MytoPhile had a couple of points worth discussing:
>> (1) “Gee, shouldn’t a guy named Khan rule half the world these days? And where’s
all that deep-space and cryogenic tech he uses to escape with? Maybe the Klingons
succeeded in killing Kirk in that tribble episode and consequently Gary and Terri never
stopped that rocket in the 60’s and so all earth history is different.”<<
Not having seen the episodes yet, I can’t say for sure that’s not addressed. Even if it isn’t,
the Voyager people may be too busy to come across it. Even if they did, they already
know about it from studying history and may not make a big thing out of it.

>> (2) “Gee, the Federation’s in the delta quadrant by the 29th century. So even after for
some reason we can’t slingshot around the sun from 1996 to get home, we could slingshot
around some DQ sun and ask the 29th century Federation to send us home. Using
wormholes, obviously, because we all know warp doesn’t get any faster and if it did we’d
just turn into salamaders that can’t be reversed without some sort of holographic medical
program. But I guess Voyager isn’t really a good enough ship to time travel – not like
some 80 year old bird of prey or Quark’s rustbucket shuttle.”<<
One of the big holes in Voyager’s premise. Some of the Trek novels and comics have set
forth the idea that the slingshot effect is so dangerous that only Kirk and his crew were
willing and able to do it and that others who tried got fried, lending credence to the concept
that Kirk and company were the best Starfleet crew ever, a notion I have no difficulty with.

>> (3) What the heck was Chakotay smoking last week? He shoud’ve been the only one
who *did* believe all that stuff about the spirit quest and be on Janeway’s side for her
decision. And Janeway was an awful rigorous materialist for someone who was talking to
her lizard guide awhile back.<<
Janeway’s obviously been a bad influence on Chakotay! <G> Actually, it was more out
of character for Janeway to check out the spirit guide thing, which she hasn’t done since.
Sadly, Voyager doesn’t have the high standards of DS9…..

Randy

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 2:02:13 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Not having seen the episodes yet, I can’t say for sure that’s not addressed. Even if it
isn’t, the Voyager people may be too busy to come across it. Even if they did, they already
know about it from studying history and may not make a big thing out of it.>>
Actually, the skuttlebutt is that the episode *will* mention something about the Eugenics
Wars. Don’t see how they can pull it off myself, but there are probably ways. Trust the
Voyager authors to screw it up. (Also looking forward to that old-Klingons-and-Worf
explanation)
<<Some of the Trek novels and comics have set forth the idea that the slingshot effect is
so dangerous that only Kirk and his crew were willing and able to do it and that others who
tried got fried, lending credence to the concept that Kirk and company were the best
Starfleet crew ever, a notion I have no difficulty with.>>
Actually, I would be willing to concede that Spock is the only one in the Federation with
the brains to get the calculations right. We never *will* hear an explanation about why
they just don’t go Warp 10 and have the doctor cure them. (Or they could go Warp 13
from “All Good Things” – but that’s *so much slower* than Warp 10 Ultimate Speed that it
probably wouldn’t save much time anyway)
However – there’s always a however – the very frivolous use of time travel in the Terri
Garr pilot-spinoff-attempt would seem to poke holes in the “It’s really dangerous” theory.
They’d come back to get some historical info, as I recall? And that Roswell thing with the
Ferengi rustbucket was kinda the straw that broke the camel’s back for “time travel’s *real*
hard” stories. See also the new movie and the next DS9. I think we’re getting good at this
science.
On the subject of why Janeway and crew don’t make a cloaking device, now…

Subj: Re:try again loser
Date: 11/5/96 6:18:47 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< As to that piece of flame-bait you just posted, well…besides, Spock wasn’t
“interactive” in McCoy’s mind.>>

I did not start it bucko. And the scene w/ Leeta and Kosh v2.0 was right out of STIII. The
end of Z’Ha’Dum was right out of Star Wars. “Run Luke run.”

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 6:21:32 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< (Also looking forward to that old-Klingons-and-Worf explanation)>>

“We don’t discuss it with outsiders”
–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 6:23:42 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I always have to laugh that it’s OK to insinuate the Trek took something from B5, but if
someone suggests the other way around……>>

Tell me about it. Don’t even make me bring up those parasite things from last year.
“Conspiricy” and “The Host” rolled into one. (FYI I don’t think JMS is ripping off Trek,
just like I don’t think Trek rips off B5)
–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 6:35:13 AM
From: Lord VJAC
Posted on: America Online

<< (2) “Gee, the Federation’s in the delta quadrant by the 29th century. So even after for
some reason we can’t slingshot around the sun from 1996 to get home, we could slingshot
around some DQ sun and ask the 29th century Federation to send us home. Using
wormholes, obviously, because we all know warp doesn’t get any faster and if it did we’d
just turn into salamaders that can’t be reversed without some sort of holographic medical
program. But I guess Voyager isn’t really a good enough ship to time travel – not like
some 80 year old bird of prey or Quark’s rustbucket shuttle.”>>

Really. I can’t count on 1 hand how many different ways there are to travel through time in
the Star Trek Universe. Heck, probably not even on both hands. Ya gota wonder too…
Voyager isn’t exactly that inconspicuous. Yet they landn it somewhere in California.
WHERE? Oh wait…. I know…. Voyager somehow “Magically” got transported to a
DIFFERENT universe from the one they e3xist in. That’s why there’s no Kahn, and why
they can’t slingshot. But “Luckily” they’ll be able to blend in by stunning actors from a
UPN show called star Trek: voyager and taking there places. (Actually, up until that
stunning Voyager actors part , it’s quite plausible that’s what they’ll do. Quite predictable)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 7:01:32 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< (Also looking forward to that old-Klingons-and-Worf explanation)>>
<<“We don’t discuss it with outsiders”>>

Gads, I thought that was an online *joke*! That’s the lamest explanation I’ve ever
heard. Oh, the mileage we bashers are gonna get outta that line… hee hee…

 

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 8:03:11 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Gads, I thought that was an online *joke*! That’s the lamest explanation I’ve ever
heard. Oh, the mileage we bashers are gonna get outta that line… hee hee…>>

It is not an explanation, all it is is a recognition that the change did happen, but it is not
something Klingons like to talk about. My guess is that the surgically altered themselves to
hide their true identity. I don’t think Valen went around telling everyone about that tri-
luminary thingamabob.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 12:57:50 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<The “a peice of Kosh”, can anyone say “Spock”.>>

I can, I can!!!
Spock
Ain’t I special?

Subj: Re:try again loser
Date: 11/5/96 1:00:56 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<And the scene w/ Leeta and Kosh v2.0>>

Lyta. Boy do I need a vacation

Capt. Luna (to serve and to spellcheck)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/5/96 4:11:08 PM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

>><< Gads, I thought that was an online *joke*! That’s the lamest explanation I’ve ever
heard. Oh, the mileage we bashers are gonna get outta that line… hee hee…>>

It is not an explanation, all it is is a recognition that the change did happen, but it is not
something Klingons like to talk about. My guess is that the surgically altered themselves to
hide their true identity. I don’t think Valen went around telling everyone about that tri-
luminary thingamabob.<<

Right now it’s anybody’s guess, AcDec. The people who are currently in charge of Trek
don’t want to have to explain the change in the Klingons. Sooner or later, someone will do
it, though recent episodes of Voyager and DS9 are making it more difficult since we’ve
seen Kang both younger and older with the turtle-shell forehead when he was one of the
“Genghis Khan” Klingons in CST. This addressing of the difference is as far as the folks
are willing to go right now.

(Actually, a friend of mine submitted a script that explained the differences and it was,
sadly, rejected because it was sent in during TNG’s final year and they took very few
outside scripts or ideas. It featured a war between the old and new Klingons and was quite
good, IMHO. Maybe someday…..)

Randy

Subj: hmmm…
Date: 11/5/96 11:02:01 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online
>>(3) What the heck was Chakotay smoking last week? He shoud’ve been the only one
who *did* believe all that stuff about the spirit quest and be on Janeway’s side for her
decision. And Janeway was an awful rigorous materialist for someone who was talking to
her lizard guide awhile back.<<

Are you accusing Taylor and co. of throwing all past “character development”(and I use
that term very loosely) out the window?

>> Even if it isn’t, the Voyager people may be too busy to come across it. Even if they
did, they already know about it from studying history and may not make a big thing out of
it.<<

Oh, well I guess that’s okay then…

>>Janeway’s obviously been a bad influence on Chakotay! <G> Actually, it was more
out of character for Janeway to check out the spirit guide thing, which she hasn’t done
since. Sadly, Voyager doesn’t have the high standards of DS9…..<<

Congratulations Mr. Hall! Unlike certain relatives(?) of yours you can ditinguish good
from bad cinema.

>>(Actually, a friend of mine submitted a script that explained the differences and it was,
sadly, rejected because it was sent in during TNG’s final year and they took very few
outside scripts or ideas. It featured a war between the old and new Klingons and was quite
good, IMHO. Maybe someday…..)<<

A “civil war” would be the only explanation I could stomach. But why even try?
I have never understood why this was a big deal anyway. TOS often showed monkey-
wrenches and othe 1960s looking props but they disappeared in subsequent series. Why?
Because of an INCREASED PRODUCTION BUDGET!! Not exactly rocket science, is it?
I thought “Blood Oath” from DS9 handled it well enough. It had Klingons from TOS and
unapologetically showed them as “new” Klingons.

 

Subj: Re:try again loser
Date: 11/5/96 11:03:03 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>And the scene w/ Leeta and Kosh v2.0 was right out of STIII.<<

Could you explain please?

>>The end of Z’Ha’Dum was right out of Star Wars. “Run Luke run.”<<

Oh yeah, you mean when the Millenium Falcon was hurtling down onto the capital city of
the Emperor’s Homeworld. Remember it well…uh, maybe not…

<< (Also looking forward to that old-Klingons-and-Worf explanation)>>
<<“We don’t discuss it with outsiders”>>

<<I always have to laugh that it’s OK to insinuate the Trek took something from B5, but if
someone suggests the other way around……>>

Just for the record, I neither care about the Klingon issue or have ever accused Berman and
Co. of ripping off B5. But it does steam me when Trekkies accuse jms of stealing from B5
so I can see you point on this issue.

 

 

Subj: Re:try again loser
Date: 11/6/96 12:33:07 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Oh yeah, you mean when the Millenium Falcon was hurtling down onto the capital city
of the Emperor’s Homeworld. Remember it well…uh, maybe not…>>
Nah. That was in “Jedi.”
(Let’s be fair – JMS is doing a little rehashing – but it’s well done with an epic feel.)

Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/6/96 1:39:45 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<A “civil war” would be the only explanation I could stomach. But why even try?
I have never understood why this was a big deal anyway. TOS often showed monkey-
wrenches and othe 1960s looking props but they disappeared in subsequent series. Why?
Because of an INCREASED PRODUCTION BUDGET!! Not exactly rocket science, is it?
I thought “Blood Oath” from DS9 handled it well enough. It had Klingons from TOS and
unapologetically showed them as “new” Klingons.>>

That have to mention something because they are putting Worf into the old footage with the
old Klingons. I think it would have been cool if Worf just ended up in TOS makeup when
they went back in time and no one noticed. :)

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:try again loser
Date: 11/6/96 1:42:43 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Could you explain please?>>

Look at the scene bewteen Lyta and Kosh v2.0 and the scene bewteen Sarek and Kirk in
ST3. Quite a few similarities.

<<Oh yeah, you mean when the Millenium Falcon was hurtling down onto the capital city
of the Emperor’s Homeworld. Remember it well…uh, maybe not..>>

I was talking about Kosh (Obi-Wan) talking too Sheridan telling him too jump.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/6/96 10:20:55 PM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

>>Are you accusing Taylor and co. of throwing all past “character development”(and I use
that term very loosely) out the window?<<
Not entirely. There are times when a character can act “out of character” given the proper
motivations. I just never understood it with Janeway’s spirit guide thing unless she was
just trying to put Chakotay at ease since he had just come from the Maquis.

>> >> Even if it isn’t, the Voyager people may be too busy to come across it. Even if they
did, they already know about it from studying history and may not make a big thing out of
it.<<

Oh, well I guess that’s okay then…<<
Glad you agree……. <G>

>>Congratulations Mr. Hall! Unlike certain relatives(?) of yours you can ditinguish good
from bad cinema.<<
Wayne has his problems with Voyager, too.

>>A “civil war” would be the only explanation I could stomach. But why even try?<<
Well, it seems a major change that many folk (myself included) think should be explained
at some point. And it will, whether or not the current Trek powers that be want to do it
now or not.

Randy
Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/7/96 4:52:52 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, it seems a major change that many folk (myself included) think should be
explained at some point. And it will, whether or not the current Trek powers that be want
to do it now or not.>>

Since Darvin was surgically altered, then we can assume the others were also. The reson
they were altered is probally what “we don’t discuss with outsiders”. Probally a sight to
their honor.
–AcDec
Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/7/96 6:36:59 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

It seems to me that the Star Trek producers (ALL of ’em) are taking the “historical
revisionist” tack that Klingons have always looked the way they do now.

In a way, that fits best with the use of different makeup because the budget got bigger.
Kind of like remaking a movie 30 years later with spiffier special effects. Maybe we’re just
asking too much, expecting the Star Trek series to maintain continuity.

Next you’ll be telling me that Dick Sargent wasn’t the only Darwood Stevens. Uh,
Durwood. Um, well, you know.
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/7/96 6:37:43 PM
From: VoxLumania
Posted on: America Online

<< just like I don’t think Trek rips off B5>>

Where do you think DS9 came from???

Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/7/96 6:41:58 PM
From: VoxLumania
Posted on: America Online

<<<<Well, it seems a major change that many folk (myself included) think should be
explained at some point. And it will, whether or not the current Trek powers that be want
to do it now or not.>>>>

Can we drop this? This is NOT a major change..just a case of better makeup effects…and
that’s all. It does not interfere with the character or the plot, and i am willing to accept this.
I feel that an explanation is unnecessary. And, as AcDec stated, I think it would also be
cool if Worf’s makeup was changed when they went back to TOS-land. And it would be
cooler if it was ignored by Sisko and crew.

-biLL

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #3
Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/8/96 3:39:33 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

If the explanation was one of surgerical alteration, wouldn’t Koloth or Darvin or
someone double-take on seeing Worf and say, “What are you *doing*? You’ll spoil
everything!!!!”
More likely some great anomoly swept through the empire and altered their genes (yeah,
that wouldn’t change the existing generations, but this *is* Trek science).
When in doubt, Q.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/8/96 7:05:18 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Where do you think DS9 came from???>>

Another person with no facts. For one DS9 was origianlly going to be a Planet based show
on Bajor, but it would have cost to much, and limited the “space feel” of Trek. Second,
JMS did not pitch B5 to Berman and Piller te creators of DS9. Third, JMS does not even
say (as far as I know) that DS9 is a rip-off of B5. Fourth, the only thing these shows have
in common is that they take place on a space station, and they are to completely diffrent
kind of stations; B5 a UN in space, and DS9 a rustbucked abandoned alien station.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/8/96 7:08:13 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< If the explanation was one of surgerical alteration, wouldn’t Koloth or Darvin or
someone double-take on seeing Worf and say, “What are you *doing*? You’ll spoil
everything!!!!”>>

Worf hid his head ridges, and Koloth and young Darvin never talked to him. And the
anomly thing would not wash because Khaless had ridges.

–AcDec

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #3
Subj: Re:hmmm…
Date: 11/8/96 10:57:04 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Worf hid his head ridges, and Koloth and young Darvin never talked to him.>>
Fair enough; haven’t seen it yet, but am looking forward to it. I’ve heard nothing but
praise from those who’ve seen it so far (unlike Sulu).

<<And the anomly thing would not wash because Khaless had ridges.>>
This had occurred to me, but Khaless’ preserved DNA would have been altered along
with everyone else’s. Those Q don’t miss a trick. (I notice halfbreeds, once verboten,
seem to be flavor of the year in the continuum now. Anyone else think Amanda took over
and instituted a new, iron-fisted regime?)

 

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/8/96 6:18:06 PM
From: VoxLumania
Posted on: America Online

<<For one DS9 was origianlly going to be a Planet based show on Bajor, but it would
have cost to much, and limited the “space feel” of Trek.>>

Sounds like a reasonable cover-up story.

<< Second, JMS did not pitch B5 to Berman and Piller te creators of DS9.>>

He pitched it to Paramount. Berman and Piller work for Paramount. Do the math.

<< Third, JMS does not even say (as far as I know) that DS9 is a rip-off of B5.>>

He doesn’t have to.

<< Fourth, the only thing these shows have in common is that they take place on a space
station, and they are to completely diffrent kind of stations; B5 a UN in space, and DS9 a
rustbucked abandoned alien station.>>

Another difference: B5 is better.

=)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/9/96 6:14:45 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Sounds like a reasonable cover-up story.>>

Why don’t you grow up, the X-Files are not reality.

<<He pitched it to Paramount. Berman and Piller work for Paramount. Do the math.>>

Thousands of shows are probaly pitched to Paramount and rejected, not to mention that the
big P only told Berman and Piller to come up with a new show, they worked out all of the
details. JMS does not have a copyright on space stations, Trek has had many over the
years.

<<He doesn’t have to.>>

Yeah, paranoids like you do all of the work, you probally think the UN is out to get you.

<<Another difference: B5 is better.>>

Typical of paranoids, don’t even try to respond to what I said.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/9/96 9:17:58 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

On a totally unrelated note, what did everyone think of part one of the time travel thing.
I mean, the Voyager one, not the DS9 one or the movie? (skipping a couple lines here)

 
Well, there were holes in the premise you could drive a truck through. (I’ll buy that
Sheridan never read Oedipus the King, but you’d think a time-cop would be smart enough
to plan for the possibility that his actions brought about the prophecy he was trying to
prevent) And the PC stuff, of course – the evil big businessman and – from what I hear –
they have a go at militias next week. But on the whole, considering this is Voyager we’re
talking about and the dang think of course should never have been made, I think it’s been
excellently executed so far. Not the science, etc – but on the human level. A lot of great
characterization and one-liners. What got me thinking about this from the last post was the
similarity to Paris’ line – which had me on the floor – “That’s what they WANT you to
think!” It was also nice to see a competent female character crumple a bit in the pinch for a
change rather than always having to come off tough-as-nails. And Neelix and Kes
watching the soap operas was infinitely better than Trek standard, where they would’ve got
on their high-horses about how can any civilized culture watch such stuff, etc. They
seemed to have pretty much laid off the usual, “Make fun of the barbarians” angle that we
tend to get in these stories. That alone is a major plus.
Predictions? Why, *gosh* none of it ever really happened – like “All Good Things” and
that “DEFY… THE… PRIME… DIRECTIVE…!” one. Almost goes without saying.
Otherwise even Janeway would be bright enough to figure out a way of getting home this
time. The computer-progress as-a-result thing was a nice twist, but I’m betting they’ll
ultimately go with, “It would’ve happened anyway…”

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 3:11:24 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Vox,

Never let the facts bother you do you Vox? DS9 couldn’t be more different from B5 and no
matter how good B5 is it’s not ever going to be as good as DS9. You seem to think that
Rick Berman is the only person at Paramount with the power to steal the premise of your
dear B5 and make DS9 before B5 got off the ground. It’s pure garbage jms doesn’t say
Parmount ripped him off because he knows it’s not true and has no facts to support your
biased assumptions.

What is more likely is that each camp was working indepentantly on the premise of both of
their shows, And by chance they both took place on a space station. It’s most likely as
simple as that, What’s more it’s logical for ST to take place next on a space station
considering it’s the next step considering the previous shows have been set on starships.

It’s to bad to see people try to bad mouth a great show like DS9 when both shows are so
great and need all the support they can get from the fans, It’s to bad some like to throw
mud on a great show like DS9 without facts so they can prop up their show to the
exclusion of all else.
JJC III

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 4:42:12 AM
From: VoxLumania
Posted on: America Online

<<Why don’t you grow up, the X-Files are not reality.>>
<<Yeah, paranoids like you do all of the work, you probally think the UN is out to get
you.>>
<<Typical of paranoids, don’t even try to respond to what I said.>>
<<DS9 couldn’t be more different from B5 and no matter how good B5 is it’s not ever
going to be as good as DS9. You seem to think that Rick Berman is the only person at
Paramount with the power to steal the premise of your dear B5 and make DS9 before B5
got off the ground.>>
<<It’s to bad to see people try to bad mouth a great show like DS9>>

The X-files aren’t reality? Thanks for the tip…all this time I have been searching for
Cancerman..
I will say it once, and won’t say it again. The Star Trek franchise has fallen straight down
the tubes. DS9 USED to be a decent show, but contrary to what you buttheads think,
seasons 4 (overall) and season 5 (so far) are just plain junk. More mirror universe episodes
(yawn), pointless time travel drivel (Past tense, Little green men), tiresome Dominion
storyline (ripoff of B5) that has degenerated into the “Jem-hadar battle of the week”
routine, and the totally unnecessary (and plotless) Trials and Tribble-ations. Im not even
going to discuss “Looking for par-whatever”. And Voyager? Possibly the worst sci-fi
series (and i use that term loosely) of all time, much less the worst trek series. BBT
(Berman,Bragga, Taylor) are very, very bad. They have treated the franchise like an
adolescent taking the Porsche out and totalling it. Its too bad you don’t see that. But some
people like to have their characters unchanging or ones that do things totally contrary to
their personalities. Some people like big explosions and pointless action with minimal plot
(which is why they will probably flock to ST: First Contact). Some people like their Trek
to have no direction. Fine. At least I know where to look for good sci-fi, good characters,
and a good story – at B5.
As for me being paranoid, I really don’t care what you think, AcDec. I will lose no sleep
over it. So be a good boy and eat what BBT feeds you.

Let the flaming begin!
:)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 6:25:52 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<the totally unnecessary (and plotless) Trials and Tribble-ations.>>
Hey, Vox! Don’t diss the tribbles! 😉 Even a die-hard Trek-basher like me has to
concede that that episode was far and away the best the Trek franchise has put out in
*years*, if ever. You probably have to go back into season 6 of TNG to come even close.
Great start to finish – the jaded time cops (hmm… I think I know one of their
descendants…) “Why do they all say that?” “17 temporal violations…” The *celebration*
of Kirk, a nice change from Janeway’s bashing (she has so much to be superior about).
The *seamless* special effects. And – who’d have thought it! – the absolutely great
characterization of the part of the cast in general. Why, we could have that kind of stuff
every week if the writers made an effort.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 6:43:41 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< And Neelix and Kes watching the soap operas was infinitely better than Trek standard,
where they would’ve got on their high-horses about how can any civilized culture watch
such stuff, etc. >>

Actually, what I found interesting was the attitude of: “What’s the point of WATCHING a
story unfold, if you’re not part OF it?” As Kes said, too much holodeck. Doesn’t anyone
in the 24-1/2 century READ BOOKS anymore? (Oh, yeah. That Picard fellow. Odd
duck, that one.) And for that matter, I distinctly recall several episodes of the Next
Generation where the Enterprise crew was putting on plays. (Usually Shakespeare —
interesting choice for a Frenchman, that. Definitely an odd duck.) The audiences seemed
content to watch those, without being a part of the story. Are we seriously expected to
believe that all books, magazines, comics, pre-recorded music, TV shows, news
programs, etc. have disappeared in favor of the holodeck as the only form of
entertainment?

I was pleasantly surprised to see B5 present things like posters on peoples’ walls,
background music, video tapes (whatever their actual recording mechanism might be), and
newspapers. This makes the whole show seem much more real, much more connected to
MY future than the sterile world Next Generation became.
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 10:05:22 AM
From: Lord VJAC
Posted on: America Online

One Question I had about that episode – Why did Chakotay have to change his hair style to
go to Earth? Is there something inherintly 24th century about his on-ship hairstyle?
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 11:09:29 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Actually, what I found interesting was the attitude of: “What’s the point of
WATCHING a story unfold, if you’re not part OF it?” As Kes said, too much holodeck.
Doesn’t anyone in the 24-1/2 century READ BOOKS anymore?>>
I thought of the same thing. Kinda reminds me of Sam Cogley (sp?), Kirk’s lawyer.
Or Picard, that renouned mathematician, trying to prove Fermat’s Last Theorem. (I don’t
have the heart to tell him…)

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/10/96 11:11:45 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Are we seriously expected to believe that all books, magazines, comics, pre-recorded
music, TV shows, news programs, etc. have disappeared in favor of the holodeck as the
only form of entertainment?>>
It would kinda make impossible that “Let’s trade all our literature for a device to get
home and then break it and then not go back for another one because we’re too proud”
episode, wouldn’t it?
On a related note, I *hope* the writers know what they’re doing with this “Orb of
Time.” This is one of those dangerous “Why couldn’t they just” devices in the making.
The instantaneous travel… Hmm… If Janeway leaves a message in 1996 with Western
Union and…

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/11/96 12:19:24 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I will say it once, and won’t say it again. The Star Trek franchise has fallen straight
down the tubes. DS9 USED to be a decent show, but contrary to what you buttheads think,
seasons 4 (overall) and season 5 (so far) are just plain junk. More mirror universe episodes
(yawn), pointless time travel drivel (Past tense, Little green men), tiresome Dominion
storyline (ripoff of B5) that has degenerated into the “Jem-hadar battle of the week”
routine, and the totally unnecessary (and plotless) Trials and Tribble-ations. >>

Well, It just shows you have as little taste for good sci-fi (how in the world did you get into
B5, luck) as you have for the facts.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/11/96 1:54:28 AM
From: Tenebrarum
Posted on: America Online

>
<< Second, JMS did not pitch B5 to Berman and Piller te creators of DS9.>>

He pitched it to Paramount. Berman and Piller work for Paramount. Do the math.
>

Hmm.

Paranoia + fan boy + conspiracy = zero???

T

Subj: Re:serializing DS9
Date: 11/11/96 12:43:16 PM
From: Drowsbane
Posted on: America Online

I have to agree with Ridak about the simularities between Voyager and TNG. But it seems
that a large number of episodes in each of the series can be tied back to an earlier series of
Trek. It would be nice if they could learn something good from B5, like the continuity
between episodes and continuing plot lines. That is what I like about B5 so much.

Drowsbane

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/11/96 3:14:21 PM
From: VoxLumania
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, It just shows you have as little taste for good sci-fi >>

You consider Star Trek good sci-fi?
I am curious AcDec, what else do you consider good sci-fi? Do you watch/read other forms
of sci-fi? I just want to know where you are coming from.

-biLL

Subj: Re:Tribbles
Date: 11/11/96 10:01:36 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

>> Hey, Vox! Don’t diss the tribbles! 😉 Even a die-hard Trek-basher like me has to
concede that that episode was far and away the best the Trek franchise has put out in
*years*, if ever. >>

Gee Myth..I was somewhat disappointed in the episode. I MUCH prefered the Sci Fi
Channel’s special on the CREATION of the episode than the actual episode. It was about
AVERAGE for a DS9 ep in my book.

Mark-
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/11/96 10:06:39 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

>>>
It’s to bad to see people try to bad mouth a great show like DS9 when both shows are so
great and need all the support they can get from the fans, It’s to bad some like to throw
mud on a great show like DS9 without facts so they can prop up their show to the
exclusion of all else.
JJC III<<<

Uhmm…JJC?

In most instances OUTSIDE the B5 area, it’s often been the OTHER way around.. ST fans
putting down ALL other SciFi saying it’s a rip-off of ST, or that NOTHING CAN EVER
be as good as ST…like you yourself said in the very same post I clipped the above text
from.

Please don’t go PREACHING to the folks here in THIS forum, when the very same things
you criticize about B5 fans are done by ST fans with MUCH more regularity and much
LESS commonsense in the comments.

Mark-

Me personally…I like DS9 and B5…but B5 is more my PERSONAL preference than DS9.
And Voyager doesn’t even deserve mentioning…

 

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/11/96 10:07:16 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

Myth:

>> On a totally unrelated note, what did everyone think of part one of the time travel
thing. I mean, the Voyager one, not the DS9 one or the movie? (skipping a couple lines
here)<<

In a word:

DISAPPOINTING

Mark-
Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/11/96 11:27:29 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<You consider Star Trek good sci-fi?
I am curious AcDec, what else do you consider good sci-fi? Do you watch/read other forms
of sci-fi? I just want to know where you are coming from.>>

Some Trek episodes are very good SF, others are not. Just like many of B5’s episodes are
good SF while others are not. Af for my reading habits, I like the classics, Isaac Asimov,
and RAH. But I also like some contemporary ones, C.J. Cheyyra (I can never spell that
name), Card, Weber, sometimes Drake, and Niven. The “Red Mars” books are also pretty
good.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/12/96 5:27:02 AM
From: Randy Hall
Posted on: America Online

AcDec, it comforts some B5 fans to think that Paramount gives every pitch for a sci-fi
series to Rick Berman or Michael Piller, when they probably long ago put it in the circular
file. And the interesting thing is that none of them actually knows what was actually in the
original five-year plan because none of them have actually read it. Nevertheless, it seems
that B5ers will go through this time loop of accusing Trek or ripping off JMS until the
show finishes either this year or next.

Gotta admit, this situation is a perfect opportunity for a scam. If DS9 or Voyager uses
something that JMS likes, he could insert it in B5 and claim that he had it in his plan first
and that Trek hurried to use it before he could. And who could say otherwise because of
the very few people who have actually read it?

Randy

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 11/12/96 8:28:51 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Gotta admit, this situation is a perfect opportunity for a scam. If DS9 or Voyager uses
something that JMS likes, he could insert it in B5 and claim that he had it in his plan first
and that Trek hurried to use it before he could. And who could say otherwise because of
the very few people who have actually read it?>>

JMS would never do that, he has one heck of an imagination and would not need to do
something like that. Even though I don’t agree with everything he says, I think JMS is
really a good guy.

–AcDec

 

Subj: B5 vs Star Trek ?
Date: 11/13/96 4:27:55 AM
From: MET System
Posted on: America Online

I must admit that I have not read all of the inserts in this folder, but I have to admit that I am
a big fan of Babylon 5 AND Star Trek. BUT, I must say one thing . . . I think I am a big
fan of the memory of what Star Trek was. It is like your first car, it is always a fond
memory even though it was worn out you still have it as a memory, a fond one. You hope
that the old car is still on the road but if it is, it has to be tired. Thus is the status of Star
Trek on TV.

Babylon 5 seems to be that new car with all the bells and whistles that you have always
wanted. It gives you a sense of belonging and fascination as you discover new things.

I think there is room in the universe for both of the series. But I look forward every week
to Babylon 5 and catch Star Trek when I can.

MET

Subj: Re:B5 vs Star Trek ?
Date: 11/13/96 8:05:21 AM
From: Lord VJAC
Posted on: America Online

If Sheriden returns to B5 in a SuperShip clled the Defiance, which has a cloaking device,
and Quantum Torpedo’s , then MAYBE I’ll believe that he’s stealing from DS9. But not
before!
Subj: Re:B5 vs Star Trek ?
Date: 11/14/96 11:47:56 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

>>If Sheriden returns to B5 in a SuperShip clled the Defiance, which has a cloaking
device, and Quantum Torpedo’s , then MAYBE I’ll believe that he’s stealing from DS9.
But not before!<<

ROFL!!

Mark-
Subj: Re:B5 vs Star Trek ?
Date: 11/15/96 7:20:01 PM
From: PinkyDVM
Posted on: America Online

MET- I agree with everything you said. BTW-Your comparison to your 1st car reminds me
of how I explained my deep attachment to my worn-out 86 Mustang, which I replaced with
a 240SX. I reminded him of the TNG episode “Relics”, when Picard is telling Scotty about
the Stargazer. “In every measurable sense, my Enterprise is far superior. But there are
nights when I think I would give anything to stand on the bridge of the Stargazer one last
time.”
:-)

Subj: Re:B5 vs Star Trek ?
Date: 11/15/96 7:54:32 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

MET:
I agree with you that there is room for Both ST and B5. The problem is that the spinoffs of
ST (except for STNG which had a lot of compelling stories) just don’t excite my
imagination they are no brainers based on formula (most of the time) that even when they
are giving an important message sound to preachy and high handed. The characters of b5 I
can understand because they have major faults. They aren’t pearly white and perfect like
the characters of ST universe. I find myself caring more about them because of that. I do
hope that ST improves and I’m looking forward to First Contact, but I am a B5 fan first
and foremost.
Tryel
Subj: Re:B5 vs Star Trek ?
Date: 11/16/96 12:42:03 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

After being on both the Trek and B5 boards, I have cometo think that the B5 board is a
kinder gentler one. Thanks, guys!

–Luna(who wonders why Mira never comes to the East Coast)

Subj: Re Bab 5 vs Start Trek
Date: 11/17/96 4:27:15 AM
From: SBrooks103
Posted on: America Online

Why does it have to be one versus the other?

As a devoted Trek fan who is if anything an even more devoted B5 fan, I love BOTH
universes, and wouldn’t want to sacrifice one for the other!

Is there that much quality sci-fi around that we have to take pot shots at each other?

Subj: Re:Re Bab 5 vs Start Trek
Date: 11/17/96 2:37:31 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<Why does it have to be one versus the other?>

It doesn’t. And thank you.

–Luna (fan of quality sf)
Subj: Re:Re Bab 5 vs Start Trek
Date: 11/18/96 12:54:30 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Yeah, can’t this folder be about something else other than B5 vs. Star Trek? That’s not
why people come here…

Subj: Re:Bab 5 vs Star Trek
Date: 11/22/96 7:09:04 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< can’t this folder be about something else other than B5 vs. Star Trek? That’s not why
people come here >>

There are now HUNDREDS of other folders in this bulletin board. Feel free to look at
them and avoid this one.

This folder, on the other hand, is named B5 vs Star Trek for a reason. And people come
here (meaning THIS folder) to discuss contrasts, shortcomings, one-upmanship, story
“borrowing,” similarities, differences, good intentions unrealized, good storytelling, bad
storytelling, good and bad characterization, etc. — all using B5 and Star Trek as archetypes
of television science fiction.

Yeah, little flame wars flare up from time to time. But the discussion is a legitimate one.
Live with it — or go someplace else where you’ll have a better time!
Subj: Re:Bab 5 vs Star Trek
Date: 11/22/96 7:17:21 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< can’t this folder be about something else other than B5 vs. Star Trek? That’s not why
people come here >>
<<There are now HUNDREDS of other folders in this bulletin board. Feel free to look at
them and avoid this one.
This folder, on the other hand, is named B5 vs Star Trek for a reason….>>

I think someone has a problem detecting sarcasm…

Subj: ST8-First Contact
Date: 11/23/96 2:02:25 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

I was pleasantly surprised. The trend of odd numbered ST movies being bad and even
being good has continued. Though when I saw Braga listed under Story and Screenplay, I
did use profane language and consider requesting a refund. Fortunately, I didn’t. The
most annoying thing about the movie was the opening credits which started blurry and then
focused. I had a headache after about the first three names.
The movie itself was very enjoyable. There were plenty of inconsistencies with ST
history, but that is well covered ground and the new movie only adds to the list. But it was
ENJOYABLE !
Now if Braga can remember what he did on ST8 and tryyyyyyy to bring a little of that
humor and excitement to STVoy.
Enough said. Go see it. It is worth the ticket price.
Tomorrow I finally get to see this weeks B5. I hate having to wait until Saturday.
Arrggghh.
Robert

Subj: Re:ST8-First Contact
Date: 11/23/96 7:45:07 PM
From: Rushylon 5
Posted on: America Online

I agree.

(I really hate posts like this, but everything was said)

Rushylon 5

Subj: Re:ST8-First Contact
Date: 11/23/96 9:12:57 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

I saw it on opening night and while it was enjoyable, James Cameron should have gotten
an Executive Producer credit. The movie borrowed heavily from “Aliens” and especially
“The Terminator”. Also, the deus ex machina ending was very pedestrian. Otherwise, I
consider it the best ST movie since STII.

Subj: Some fair Fights
Date: 11/24/96 2:06:58 AM
From: Yado M
Posted on: America Online

In the White Star forum, there is a argument over White Star vs. Defiant. Its not a fair
fight. The Defiant is a Heavy Crusier, a floating gun platform. The White Star is a
scout/light attack ship. So, I’ve come up with some fights that are fair:

Defiant vs. Narn Heavy crusier
Worf vs G’Kar
Borg Cube vs Full-size Shadow Ship
Q vs THE first one
DS9 vs B5
Jemhadar(spelling?) ship vs. Centauri Warship
Lyta Alexander vs Dianna Troi ( might not be that fair)
Voyager vs White Star
Dr. Franklin vs. Bones (who can heal a radiation burn faster)
Starfury Flight group vs. Runabout
Vorlon Warship (the really big one) vs. Enterprise-E
Neelix vs Garibaldi (Cookoff)
Odo vs. Garibaldi (not a cookoff)
Picard vs. Sheriden (insperational Speeches, Picards “the line must be drawn here” vs.
Sheridens The Summoning speech)
Ivanova vs. Ryker
Marcus vs Worf or Odo
The Marquis vs. Human Resistance

thats all for now.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/24/96 2:09:23 AM
From: Yado M
Posted on: America Online

one more:
President Clark vs. hat shape shifter who tried to take over the Federation

Subj: Re:Some (not so) fair Fights
Date: 11/24/96 2:45:28 AM
From: DocForce
Posted on: America Online

Hmmm. Interesting post.

Worf vs. G’kar…I see a battle royal.

Lyta would kick Troi’s pansy empathic ass.

Bones is arguably the best doctor (with mucho more years experience) though both have a
cranky bedside manner.

Odo vs. Garibaldi — well, would depend on whether we’re talking about Odo with his
Changeling powers or without. Without, it could be close. With, and Garibaldi would be in
serious trouble.

Picard vs. Sheridan– No contest here. I like BB just fine, but Patrick Stewart could out act
him in a body cast. Stewart rules!

Ivanova vs. Riker…Well, Riker could beat her up, but he’d probably prefer engaging her
in another kind of battle…

Odo, and particularly Worf, would mop the floor with that sissy Brit Marcus.

B5 vs. DS9…Like DS9 just fine, but B5 has the scope, sweep, moral ambiguity and
superior story arc to emerge the victor.

My 2 cents.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/24/96 12:41:06 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

Yado wrote:
<<So, I’ve come up with some fights that are fair:>>
(wonderful list snipped)

I notice Delenn is not on this list. In trying to think of a rival for her, I could only think of
Kira, and that doesn’t make sense, Kira is *nothing* like Delenn. Dax, perhaps? Nah.
Okay, I give up. Delenn has no rival (but then I knew that)
–Luna

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/24/96 6:10:26 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Deanna is probably the closest analogue to Delenn… an annoying self-righteous female
character. Okay, Delenn’s not as bad as Deanna… but it *would* be more interesting to
see her drunk. (Hmm… a psychotic Delenn episode has possibilities…)

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/24/96 8:22:30 PM
From: Yado M
Posted on: America Online

I tryed, but couldn’t find a fair opponent for Delenn

Had the same problem finding one for data….Maybe Lennier

Marcus is one of the best hand-to-hand fighters in the Rangers. I think he could hold his
own against Odo (the way he is now), but Worf would still kick his ass.

Any predictions about the ship-to-ship fights? Could the White Star take Voyager?
I’d like to see the Enterprise vs Vorlons and Borg vs Shadows myself…

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/25/96 1:27:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Could the White Star take Voyager?>>

In about a second. One of Voyager’s shuttles could take out Voyager

<<I’d like to see the Enterprise vs Vorlons>>
That woud be cool!!!!

<< and Borg vs Shadows myself…>>

Borg, easy, now maybe 15 Shadow battle-crabs would do it.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/26/96 8:16:20 AM
From: DBogan3220
Posted on: America Online

The Borg could easily assimulate the Shadows, No I don’t think that would be a good
idea.

How about Q paying a visit to the B5 universe, he could do something like make the
Vorlons not be able to fit in their encounter suits so everyone would be able to see what
they look like

The Enterprise E, with Q’s help, paying a visit to the B5 universe would kick butt.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/26/96 10:07:34 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online
I was thinking that Kai paki(sp), That small woman who is some kind of religous icon
from Bajor would make a good rival for Delenn, Though she currently stuck on a planet
she can’t leave. I don’t mean a physical battle mind you but more a metaphysical one.
JJC III

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/26/96 2:33:39 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

<<I was thinking that Kai paki(sp), That small woman who is some kind of religous icon
from Bajor would make a good rival for Delenn>>

Since your idea is so cool, Capt. Luna will let you off easy on this one (and also because
I’m not sure about this spelling either . I had forgotten about Kai Opaka.
Something tells me that contrary to being rivals, Delenn and the Kai would be allies and
friends. I’ve always wished that Kai Opaka could come back, she was my favorite DS9
character. In retrospect, maybe that’s one reason I love Delenn so much.
Thanks dear, for walking me down Memory Lane.

–Luna

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 11/30/96 9:36:52 AM
From: TKE KH 416
Posted on: America Online

I’d personally like to see the Swatzkopf against the Defiant. Two oversized gunships
slugging it out… The idea has merit. As for a fair fight with Data… Try dropping him on
Epsilon 3 and see how the machine would handle it.

I think Worf would match up quite well with the Minbari warrior that kick Marcus’ butt
across B5. Worf can bring that two sided 4′ long blade and give the Minbari warrior that
really nifty staff.

The ‘Borg could also provide an interesting match for Epsilon 3. Just have them try an
orbital assault of the planet. The thought of watching a bunch of mindless sellout drones
being ripped apart by the Machine is worth seeing.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 12/9/96 12:44:45 AM
From: Yado M
Posted on: America Online

this folder is kind of getting slow

Anyway, i htought of a couple B5 vs SW ones

Death star vs. Vorlon planet killer (’nuff said)

Star destroyer vs. Shadow ship

Marcus vs. Luke skywalker (without lightsaber)

Han Solo vs. Garibaldi

Sheriden vs Admril Akbar (you know, the Salmon-headed guy)

Mon Mothma (rebel leader) vs. Delenn

Lyta or Ivanova vs Leia

Millenium Falcon vs White star

x-wing vs Starfury

Mon Calamari Crusier vs Minbari Warship

A bunch of stormtroppers vs. those nightwatch guys who kidnapped Deleen

Some of my predictions:

Star furys vs. Runabout:
Star fury squad breaks aparet, attacking runabout on three sides. Runabout tries to turn to
fire its forward-facing Phasor at any of the star furies, it leaves its warp engines vulnerable,
and, as Ivanova says, “boom”

White Star vs. Voyager
White Star flies up from the rear of Voyager, Janeway, not wishing to start a confrontation,
does not raise her shields. White star fires, peels off one of Voyagers VERY vulnerable
warp engines, and then goes full reverse as the Matter/anti-matter containment feild in the
other one breaks down , anhiliates the ship.

Borg vs Shadows
Borg: We are borg. Surrender your vessels. We wil ladd your Biological and technological
uniqueness to our own. Resistance is futile.
Morden:What do you want?
Borg: Desire is irrelevant. Resistance is futile.
Shadow ships fire once, Borg cube adapts. Borg fires, shadow ships evolve a resistance.
Stalemate.

Jemhadar vs Centauri
well, given usual political motives, every house wants to be the house that saves the
Centaurum. Thus each house sends a ship to intercept, and you can take it from there.

Q vs Kosh (did I post this one? if not, I should have.)
Q has fun changing kosh into all sorts of things, Kosh becomes annoyed and tries to fry
him. Q makes him into a X-mas ornament.

A long post I know. If you read it all, let’s discuss.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 12/12/96 4:23:05 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

Regarding the Borg:

All I know is, that every morning I step on the Borg scale in my bathroom, and it tells me
how much I “assimilated” the day before. I try to control it, but find that “resistance is
futile.”

Just ONE of the reasons I’ve always had trouble taking the Borg seriously.
Subj: Back to Business
Date: 12/15/96 9:35:33 PM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

Things have slowed down in here lately, so here’s another topic:

Best Scenes of B5 that trek could not or would not ever do:

My choices:
1) Sheridian’s jump/nuke of the Shadow city
2) The de-eyeing of G’kar
3) The last five seconds of the Shadowdancing battle, where the terrible price of victory
was shown in all of its horror.

Ideas? Comments? Lets hear them.

—Strahd

Subj: Re:Back to Business
Date: 12/15/96 9:53:10 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Yeah.

Along the same lines, how about the end of GROPOS? Or when the EarthGov forces tried
to board B5 and all those Narns charged into battle? I thought that these were powerful
scenes.

I rember only one of the ST/STtNG/DS9/V’Gr episodes that even came close. When Jake
was running from a firefight and tripped over the Federation soldier who was dying from
battle wounds. But even then the battle aftermath was too clean, and I didn’t feel the
tension and uncertainty that a real fight produces. But at least DS9 comes closer than the
others.

Subj: Re:Back to Business
Date: 12/15/96 10:16:58 PM
From: StarshipII
Posted on: America Online

<<3) The last five seconds of the Shadowdancing battle, where the terrible price of
victory was shown in all of its horror.>>

The closest they ever came to anything like that was the aftermath of The Borg battle in
“Best of Both Worlds” Of course, we didn’t even get the battle (until DS9 came along), so
I suppose the aftermath lost a bit of its punch…

I dont think we even got one of their infamous Dot fights ( a term my brother and I use to
describe most of the early NextGen battles that took place with dueling dots on a computer
screen and Worf describing the action.)

Subj: Concurrent timelines
Date: 12/16/96 4:38:59 AM
From: Knightwach
Posted on: America Online

I like to compare the histories of the ST and B5 timelines…… Consider that B5 started in
2257.. and that the original U.S.S. Enterprise was launched in 2245….

Cute, eh?

That suggests a bit higher technological advancement on the part of the Federation….
Starfleet had Transporters, Shields, warp drive, and artificial gravity was standard.
(Phasers hadn’t yet been invented when Enterprise was first built)

But I think that in a way, all these convenient techno-goodies sometimes detract from the
drama, and writers in ST frequently have to go to extraordinary measures to build drama in
a universe where safety is often just a beamout away…..

 

Subj: Hairstyle
Date: 12/17/96 3:32:22 AM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

The Centauri have the same hairstyle, but it is somewhat different for everyone. Does
anyone think that Trek would have gone this way or have every last Centauri in existence
have the exact same cut and shape.

Rick

Subj: Re:Hairstyle
Date: 12/17/96 10:46:28 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<The Centauri have the same hairstyle, but it is somewhat different for everyone. Does
anyone think that Trek would have gone this way or have every last Centauri in existence
have the exact same cut and shape.>>

If it had been up to Star Trek, the Centauri, the Narn and the Minbari would just have had
bumpy noses and foreheads….

Subj: Re:Hairstyle
Date: 12/17/96 11:08:22 PM
From: OgreMag DG
Posted on: America Online

I agree. B5 has much better Aliens than ANY of the Treks

Subj: Aliens
Date: 12/18/96 3:09:09 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

Another thing B5 does that Trek cant is its aliens.
Vorlons, Shadows, Nakaleen Feeders, all made thru CGI and 100% realistic.

How many has trek had? One slow-moving space worm in Basics II and Non-moving-
part viruses in Macrocosm. And guess who did both of them for the trek people?

FOUNDATION IMAGING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (B5’s company
BTW)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 12/21/96 3:23:45 PM
From: RRABULL
Posted on: America Online

>Londo was a pathetic buffoon
I disagree, if you watch closely you can see the wolf in sheeps clothing. Although he
might have bemoaned the loss of the “glory days” of the Republic, you have to remember
that his ambassadorship was basicly a joke that early in the series.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 12/21/96 3:42:05 PM
From: RRABULL
Posted on: America Online

>… have the Federation face a threat that causes them to turn their backs on their cherished
ideology…
They have. That threat was called the Borg. Whose desire to assimilate all other races,
and seeming ability to do so should have been incredibly motivating. Instead, the
Federation just kinda sat there and hoped they wouldn’t come a-calling. Whoopee.
Similar threat in B5, the Vorlon fleet, Sheridan motivates everyone to do something about
it.

Different shows, different results.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 12/21/96 4:25:41 PM
From: RRABULL
Posted on: America Online

Hey! Both shows got the guy in the spacesuit from the opening to Red Dwarf. Come to
think of it the basic premise of Voyager not being able to get home within the crews lifetime
sounds similar to Red Dwarf as well.
Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 12/21/96 5:24:02 PM
From: RRABULL
Posted on: America Online

I think that anyone who takes on the changeling Odo would get their butt royally
whipped. Worf vs. Marcus is a harder question because no one knows just how much
martial arts knowledge and experience either one has. Shadow ship vs. Anyone: forget it.
no telepath, no battle. Star Fury vs. Runabout: Oh boy, the runabout can go to warp and
run away!

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 12/24/96 6:34:15 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< Come to think of it the basic premise of Voyager not being able to get home within the
crews lifetime sounds similar to Red Dwarf as well. >>

Except in Red Dwarf, the ENTIRE crew has already died in the first episode (except for
Lister).
Subj: Re:ST:Voyager vs. Red Dwarf
Date: 12/24/96 1:29:40 PM
From: Mantisking
Posted on: America Online

Yeah, so the entire crew is dead( except for Lister). Sometimes I wish the entire crew of
Voyager was kaput as well. Hmmnn, we keep the doctor( we need a hologram), Paris can
be Lister. So who do we get to be Cat?

P.S.: Sorry for jumping shows, but there has to be a way to improve ST:Voyager.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 12/24/96 11:48:02 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Except in Red Dwarf, the ENTIRE crew has already died in the first episode (except for
Lister).>>
Hmm… does that make Harry Lister and Ensign Frenchtwist’s baby the cat?

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 12/26/96 7:02:17 AM
From: Niggie666
Posted on: America Online

 

Really… I watch ST: DS9, St: Voyager and B5. All of them are great. My favorite is
B5, Voyager would be if it werent for such a crappy production staff. Their — In my
opinion — is absolutly nothing wrong with Captain Janeway or her crew. The writers have
tweaked them way to much is all. plus the fact that theyve been warping for two seasons
and still meet up with the same “Technologically weak people” is quite boring, even though
theyve started to solve it. DS9 is great. I really dont see a problem with it other than now it
seems everyones an enemy. (The Klingons, dominion, Cardassians, Romulans..ect) Their
isnt alot that i have a problem with when it comes to B5. Here The writers have it down.
JMS has everything going smooth… and i like that. B5 is geared however to a one story
kinda thing, and as time goes on its basically been one story throughout the season — not
that thats a problem — I also would like to see some honest to god live location shots…
TNG almost never did it… DS9 occasionally does it… Voyager seems to love it… B5
almost never. Im being petty but one can only take so much of the same sets, and them
being inside.
Voyager has some problems… — Paramount admitted it — Janeway is only a small
problem, that we cant fix. Kate Mulgrew was selected in a kind of emergency. their first
choice of captain hit the high road… and Kate was the next qaulified actor. Ive heard
enough bullshit about her voice to last a lifetime… I personally think that she was the right
choice.
The writers are what bugs me. Jeri taylor was involved from the beggining on this
project. She did an outstanding job on TNG… especially on Data. In my opinion… she
over engineered Voyager. To many people with the same typical “im the best at it” attitude.
Voyager needs the “Deanna Troy’s” who basically do nothing, but you know were they
come from. Ks makes me kinda upset… what does she do other than take the doctors job
away. I love the doctor… screw humankind because the doctor could replace everyone..
thats kinda cheap but everything else is great about him. Why wont they let him roam the
ship?!?!?! You could have a holographic data.

Im babbling… so ill keep watching all three shows because i think theyre all great and
have alot of potential.

Subj: Re:I’m both a Trek and B5 fa
Date: 12/31/96 11:52:46 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Babble yeah, but I agree!!!

Subj: B5 Rules
Date: 1/11/97 5:40:56 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

The show is better than Trek.
If you want to know why, post here and I’ll tell you.
Nuff said

Strahd

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 1/11/97 9:19:15 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<< The Enterprise E, with Q’s help, paying a visit to the B5 universe would kick butt.>>
Not sure about this…The E doesn’t have a defense against one man fighters so when such
a fighter gets in close( which is possible before raising shields) the fighter could do
damage. Add also that say the White Star, for example can just pop out ot hyperspace hit
the E and jump again without the E being able to follow.
Personally I just say we throw Riker, Marcus, and Han together….R,C,&S explorations
We got were even IPX is afraid to.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 1/11/97 9:37:53 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Not sure about this…The E doesn’t have a defense against one man fighters so when
such a fighter gets in close( which is possible before raising shields) the fighter could do
damage. Add also that say the White Star, for example can just pop out ot hyperspace hit
the E and jump again without the E being able to follow. >>

I like both ST and B5. But assuming that an evil Q being pitted the Enterprise-E against
B5, then I suggest the following:

One strategy to maximize the chances of victory for the Enterprise would be to have it
decelerate into normal space to a range just outside the range of the B5 starfighters.
Instantly, upon deceleration, a full spread of photon or quantum torpedoes would be
launched and would probably severely damage or destroy B5, since it would be nearly
impossible for either the stationside lasers or the starfighters to intercept all of the
torpedoes. The Enterprise would then immediately accelerate at maximum warp, with full
shields and with all phasers firing against and probably destroying any patrolling
starfighters; within a fraction of a second the Enterprise would be beyond the returnable
range of any starfighters (assuming that there were surviving starfighters or (against
probability) ones that managed to scramble and escape B5 before the torpedoes hit).

Assuming that only one full spread of torpedoes was required, the above would take no
more than five to ten seconds from the point of deceleration to the point of re-engagement
into warp, thereby leaving almost no time for reaction by the B5 command staff, officers,
or crew. Assuming that a second spread was required, not more than 30 to 60 seconds
would be required.

In my opinion, B5 probably would not survive a confrontation with the Enterprise-E, or
even a ship such as the Voyager, without assistance from the Minbari and the Great
Machine.

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 1/11/97 9:40:48 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<just outside the range of the B5 starfighters.>> should be “just outside the patrol range
of the B5’s starfighters.”

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/11/97 9:48:30 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<They have. That threat was called the Borg. Whose desire to assimilate all other races,
and seeming ability to do so should have been incredibly motivating. Instead, the
Federation just kinda sat there and hoped they wouldn’t come a-calling. Whoopee. >>

Untrue. The Enterprise-E, for example, was built to new design parameters and
specifications, and to possess improved capabilities, premised specifically on the idea that
the Borg constitute a major threat that has required the Federation to modify its defense and
ship procurement policies.

Subj: Re:Concurrent timelines
Date: 1/11/97 9:52:29 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<That suggests a bit higher technological advancement on the part of the Federation….
Starfleet had Transporters, Shields, warp drive, and artificial gravity was standard.
(Phasers hadn’t yet been invented when Enterprise was first built)>>

Remember, however, that the Federation benefited from an early association with the
Vulcans, whose technological inventions, knowledge and sophistication as well as
intellectual achievements were eventually shared, as well as, in later years, presumably
cooperatively developed, with the Earth.

 

Subj: Re:Some fair Fights
Date: 1/11/97 9:57:01 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<The Defiant is a Heavy Crusier, a floating gun platform. The White Star is a scout/light
attack ship.>>

Untrue. The Defiant is a prototype ship comparable to a highly advanced escort vessel.
The original (television) Enterprise was a heavy cruiser, displacing approximately 100,000
metric tons. Voyager is smaller than the original (television) Enterprise, and the Defiant is
smaller than the Voyager.

Subj: Let’s change the subject
Date: 1/11/97 3:30:41 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

I’m sorry, but I’m kinda sick of the My Ship Can Beat Up Your Ship thread. It seems a bit
juvenile to me. Not to offend, but just IMO. I’m not into the whole ship power thing
anyway. There’s a lot of that on the SW board, and frankly it bores me. But please keep
on going if that’s your thing. It’s just not mine.

And now, for something completely different: Does anyone think it interesting that B5 and
DS9 both have a character with the same name? I’m speaking of Gul Dukat and the Minbari
leader Dukot. Differences in spelling (that is, if I’ve spelled them right!), but not in
pronounciation. We haven’t seen Dukot yet (probably because he died before the B5 arc
begins), but I think we will, in flashbacks, if not in “Atonement”, then certainly in one of
the B5 movies.
Just one of those things that make you go “hmm”….

Luna
Subj: Re:Let’s change the subject
Date: 1/11/97 9:47:22 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<But please keep on going if that’s your thing. It’s just not mine.>>

Why, thank you for the permission.

 

Subj: Re:Let’s change the subject
Date: 1/11/97 9:48:21 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Just one of those things that make you go “hmm”….>>

Hi Luna. I’m going, “hmm” right now, but nothing seems to be happening….

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/11/97 10:44:34 PM
From: Mantisking
Posted on: America Online

<…on the idea that the Borg constitute a major threat that has required the Federation to
modify it’s defense and ship procurement policies.>
What I meant was, the fact that the Borg existed should have shock-prodded the
Federation into a hunting expidition to wipe the Borg out for the good of the universe.
Didn’t happen. The Federation waited for the Borg to come to them and got thier butt’s
whipped.
In contrast Sheridan is assembling a force to actively oppose the Vorlons on B5. He’s
taking the fight to them.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/12/97 1:17:52 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<What I meant was, the fact that the Borg existed should have shock-prodded the
Federation into a hunting expidition to wipe the Borg out for the good of the universe.
Didn’t happen. The Federation waited for the Borg to come to them and got thier butt’s
whipped. >>

Considering that the Borg are based in the Delta Quadrent, the Federation would have to:
1. Travel about 30 years if able to go in a straight line course. It would take even longer if
the had to go “around” the Romulan Empire.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/12/97 5:12:34 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<<…on the idea that the Borg constitute a major threat that has required the Federation to
modify it’s defense and ship procurement policies.>
What I meant was, the fact that the Borg existed should have shock-prodded the
Federation into a hunting expidition to wipe the Borg out for the good of the universe.
Didn’t happen. The Federation waited for the Borg to come to them and got thier butt’s
whipped. >>

Hi, Mantisking. (By the way, please use the cut-and-paste method of quoting me, since to
do otherwise is to introduce the possibility of error. For example, you’ve inserted a
spelling error in your excerpt of my post — “it’s” was never “it’s”, in the original.) I have
to say I can’t blame the Federation for preparing for defense before rushing headlong into
Borg space. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread, I always say.

And see also the excellent reply to your post by AcDec.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/12/97 4:02:18 PM
From: Miles1005
Posted on: America Online

<<<What I meant was, the fact that the Borg existed should have shock-prodded the
Federation into a hunting expidition to wipe the Borg out for the good of the universe.
Didn’t happen. The Federation waited for the Borg to come to them and got thier butt’s
whipped. >>

Considering that the Borg are based in the Delta Quadrent, the Federation would have to:
1. Travel about 30 years if able to go in a straight line course. It would take even longer if
the had to go “around” the Romulan Empire.>

Also considering that ONE Borg ship can pretty much lay waste to the entire Federation
fleet, why don’t the always adapting Borg just send, say, TWO ships to get the job done!

Miles

 

Subj: Re:Let’s change the subject
Date: 1/12/97 5:26:43 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

>><<But please keep on going if that’s your thing. It’s just not mine.>>

Why, thank you for the permission.<<

Youre quite welcome! {:-)

Luna (Department of Diplomacy and Spelling)

Subj: Re:Let’s change the subject
Date: 1/12/97 5:29:10 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

>>Hi Luna. I’m going, “hmm” right now, but nothing seems to be happening….<<

That’s because you’re in the key of F. Try the key of B flat and you’ll probably do better>

Luna (Maestra of the B5 vs. Trek ensemble)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/12/97 6:10:09 PM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< considering that ONE Borg ship can pretty much lay waste to the entire Federation fleet,
why don’t the always adapting Borg just send, say, TWO ships to get the job done! >>

Exactly why I find the Borg so boring. They are trumped up as this “ultimate danger” to
the Federation, not to mention everybody else, and yet whenever an actual story about them
appears they are hamstrung by artificial constraints. Remember, these are the baddies who
wiped out (that is, assimilated) Guinan’s entire civilization — a people that was travelling
the galaxy when we were still taming the “Old West.” Presumably, they were at least as
advanced technologically and culturally as Earth and the Federation are supposed to be in
the 2200’s or 2300’s — but the Borg swept through and assimilated them all. So they
show up at Earth’s doorstep, and in a matter of a day or two, our intrepid heros come up
with an attack at the Borg’s Achilles heel that nobody else thought of — and NOT always
because Picard knows “the right things” from having been Locutus.

The Borg are all too easy to defeat for me to get very excited over the fact that they show
up, or might show up. Great story idea, bad execution.
Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/12/97 8:20:15 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

>>Considering that the Borg are based in the Delta Quadrent, the Federation would have to:
1. Travel about 30 years if able to go in a straight line course. It would take even longer if
the had to go “around” the Romulan Empire.<<

Which poses the question.. Why hasn’t Voyager come across the BORG? Are the BORG
located on the other side of that cloud/barrier wasteland thingie from the last episode of
STV?

hmmm…
Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/12/97 8:59:21 PM
From: LizSiddall
Posted on: America Online

>Which poses the question.. Why hasn’t Voyager come across the BORG? Are the BORG
>located on the other side of that cloud/barrier wasteland thingie from the last episode of
STV?

Hmmm. That’s a good question. Perhaps the crew of Voyager is so pitiful that even the
Borg don’t want to assimilate them. Sorry, I just couldn’t resist. <G>

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/13/97 12:57:24 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Also considering that ONE Borg ship can pretty much lay waste to the entire Federation
fleet, why don’t the always adapting Borg just send, say, TWO ships to get the job
done!>>

Plot reasons. Frankly they made the Borg way too powerful. JMS had the same problem
with the Shadows untill their wonderful “telepathic weakness” (they need to invest in some
manual controll for their ships). I wonder what their going to pull out of their hat to stop
the Vorlons?
–AcDec
–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/13/97 12:59:24 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Which poses the question.. Why hasn’t Voyager come across the BORG? Are the
BORG located on the other side of that cloud/barrier wasteland thingie from the last episode
of STV?>>

A Borg episode for Voyager has already been written (can’t wait to see how they screw it
up), it’s called “Unity”.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/13/97 4:44:35 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

AcDec Wrote:
<<I wonder what their going to pull out of their hat to stop the Vorlons?>>

I can’t wait to find out!!
Luna

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/13/97 4:45:46 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

AcDec Wrote:
<<I wonder what their going to pull out of their hat to stop the Vorlons?>>

I can’t wait to find out!!
Luna

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/13/97 5:51:36 PM
From: Mantisking
Posted on: America Online

I don’t consider the Borg way too powerful, I just consider the writers too shortsighted. I
mean you have warp engines and transporters, two incredibly deadly weapons if you think
about using them as such. But, being harnessed to Roddenberry’s “vision” of a kinder,
gentler world has blunted the teeth of any warrior on the show.
Compare this to B5 which shows how deadly and brutal war can be.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/13/97 10:29:59 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I don’t consider the Borg way too powerful, I just consider the writers too shortsighted.
I mean you have warp engines and transporters, two incredibly deadly weapons if you
think about using them as such. But, being harnessed to Roddenberry’s “vision” of a
kinder, gentler world has blunted the teeth of any warrior on the show.
Compare this to B5 which shows how deadly and brutal war can be.>>

No, the original premise of the Borg was WAY too powerful, they could adapt to anything.
Fortuneatly Piller came up with the Picard kidnapping idea, therefore leaving them an
“out”. Just like telepathy left JMS an “out” against the Shadows.

As for war not being brutal in Trek, tell that too Ben and Jake Sisko, or anyone else who
had loved ones at Wolf 359. Or watch “Nor the Battle To the Strong”. Or look at the
Bajorian occupation.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/14/97 12:44:31 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<No, the original premise of the Borg was WAY too powerful, they could adapt to
anything. Fortuneatly Piller came up with the Picard kidnapping idea, therefore leaving
them an “out”. Just like telepathy left JMS an “out” against the Shadows. >

Well, since the borg have never bothered to block the transporter beams, why didn’t they
just beam some anti-matter onto the cube in a magnectic containment unit with a timer?

Don

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/14/97 2:32:46 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

The Borg followed the usual Trek pattern, a pattern repeated notably with the Dominion,
Jem’ha’dar, Q, and others. Create an ultimate menace, with technology (or what have you)
far beyond our own, an unstoppable threat. Use it a couple times, and then “humanize” the
baddies (Jem’s, Q’s, and even Borg became, either linearly orretroactively, infected by
superior human values like some kind of cheap anime ripoff), and then have someone on
the ship/station switch a couple circuits around, putting our tech on a level with theirs. End
of cosmic baddie. Bring on the next. Trek writing, ever since the premiere of TNG, has
been the master of the anticlimax, of the giant letdown upon a return or a season premiere.
They are, to give them credit, very good at setting up interesting and even dramatically
powerful situations… and then, wham, the magic answer and the reset button.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/14/97 2:45:42 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Fortuneatly Piller came up with the Picard kidnapping idea, therefore leaving them an
“out”. Just like telepathy left JMS an “out” against the Shadows.>>
Major difference. The kidnapping was an afterthought, a story idea created in due
course, as is perfectly ok (and it only became a cheap deus ex machina later on). Wheras
anyone who really believes that JMS came up with the idea of tying together the telepathy
and shadows plots only in “Ship of Tears” has not been paying attention. There were clues
enough in season one alone. It’s called good writing, starting out with different plot
threads intending to bring them together. The sort of thing you can’t do when you change
direction of your series three times a season (“Let’s kill this boring Bajoran so we can do a
Kira-Odo romance story, no wait, bad idea, let’s give her another boring Bajoran.” And
then never mention Kira’s boyfriend from her old resistance cell, the leader of Bajor, when
someone is going around killing off members of that cell. Guess no one considered his
potential assassination important. Or maybe the whole character is embarrassing during
Kira’s 21 month pregnancy.) (“Let’s make the baddies the Cardassians; I’m bored with
this, the Dominion; hey, the Maquis would be a nice set up for another series that won’t get
bored with them for about half a season; ratings, people! Klingons sell as baddies! What
about the Cardassians? Oh, they can be defeated off camera. What about the Maquis?
Well, they can still be fighting. But fighting who? And what about all Thomas Riker and
Garrack if the police state’s fallen? We have to deal with that. We do? Have you been
paying attention, Rene?”).

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/14/97 8:06:23 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Plot reasons. Frankly they made the Borg way too powerful. JMS had the same
problem with the Shadows untill their wonderful “telepathic weakness” (they need to invest
in some manual controll for their ships). I wonder what their going to pull out of their hat
to stop the Vorlons?<<

I hope you are not trying to spot plot inconsistencies in B5. The TP weakness of the
Shadows is not the deus ex machina you are trying to make it out to be. As for the Vorlons,
remember over the summer when you kept whining about how the Shadow “battlecrabs”
didn’t just show up on B5’s doorstep and blow them away? Well, that was answered
reasonably, I have faith that jms will handle the Vorlons with the same style.

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/14/97 9:28:09 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I hope you are not trying to spot plot inconsistencies in B5. The TP weakness of the
Shadows is not the deus ex machina you are trying to make it out to be.>>

Sorry but it is, just like the Borg weakness.

<< As for the Vorlons, remember over the summer when you kept whining about how the
Shadow “battlecrabs” didn’t just show up on B5’s doorstep and blow them away? Well,
that was answered reasonably, I have faith that jms will handle the Vorlons with the same
style.>>

That explanation was far from satisfactory, but I forgive JMS.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/14/97 2:26:29 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

Ac,

References were made in the B5 pilot movie to the fact that there used to be Narn telepaths
but that they were all wiped out a thousand years earlier. The references did virtually
nothing for the story of the pilot movie itself, but JMS has stated that they were put in
specifically to lay the groundword for the link between the Shadows/Telepaths.

How can you say that the telepath thing was a last-minute solution to a too-powerful enemy
when hints were being sporadically dropped for over 2 years before it was presented as
‘the solution.’

Probably the biggest hole in your argument is that the Shadow/Telepath links were made so
far before the strength of the Shadows was ever revealed that, if anything, the solution was
presented before there was ever a ‘too powerful’ problem.

Admittedly, the frequent references were often subtle, but they were undeniably there–not
as ‘this is their weakness,’ but instead as ‘there’s a relationship between
Shadows/Telepaths, but what is it?’

Was it too subtle for you?

–Seth

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/14/97 10:44:06 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>><<I hope you are not trying to spot plot inconsistencies in B5. The TP weakness of the
Shadows is not the deus ex machina you are trying to make it out to be.>>

Sorry but it is, just like the Borg weakness.<<

Okay, let’s go over this. One shot from the Ent-E took out the Borg cube. End of Borg
cube. The TPs in B5 can cripple SOME of the shadowships so that several Forces of
Light(God, that is corny…) ships can tag team it. That still leaves a lot of other Shadow
ships running around blowing things up.

>>That explanation was far from satisfactory, but I forgive JMS.<<

What are you talking about? The Shadows’ motives wasn’t a conquering one and they
wanted to recruit Sheridan to their cause. That sounds like a good reason not to attack B5.

 

 

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/14/97 11:05:34 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

I’m new to this particular folder, but it was good to finally see someone –MegaUser-
– point out that the Teeps weren’t just a “rabbit pulled out of a hat” by JMS. We now know
the significance of telepaths and why we’ve been hearing about them since the very
beginning of B5, and their relation to the Shadows, as well as their significance.
Now, if you want to talk about the Borg, when the heck are they gonna wake up to
the fact that they can’t just have anyone beam onto their ships without it being perceived as
a potential enemy threat? This is one of the reasons why “First Contact” was so weak and
didn’t work for me. I wasn’t at all sitting at the end of my seat when Picard and others
went walking passed the Borg on Enterprise E because I knew the writers were sticking by
their old stand by of, “the Borg must perceive a threat first”. We know that by the time they
do perceive a threat it’s usually too late anyway because the enemy has pulled off what they
must do in order to accomplish a victory! When the heck are the Borg and their
programming gonna wake up to this fact?
Talk about a silly loophole! In the beginning, all right, but to have it
continue to exist like this is just plain ridiculous!!

Subj: Help???
Date: 1/15/97 12:47:13 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Could some of you guys pop over to the Star Trek message board on DS9/DS9’s FINAL
SEASON??? and give me a hand, they seem to think that B5 effects look like cartoons ie
Shadow Dancing and Severed Dreams…Please

BLOBBB

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/15/97 1:26:48 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I hope you are not trying to spot plot inconsistencies in B5. >>

In this interest of fairness, Nec… 😉

(1) “The Minbari have two castes…”
(2) “He just materialized in the conference room…”
(3) “In this alternate present, the shadows have most of their fleet intact”
(a) so they can blow up B5. If only they had that kind of power in our timeline. No,
wait, there’s another reason they haven’t…
(b) “This is earth alliance station B5. What’s this black uniform I’m wearing? And
who gave it to me, since the whole history of the past thousand years is different and we
never teamed up with the Minbari, said teamup being based on the prophecies of a prophet
who never existed in my history?”
(c) Oh, heck, the whole B4 storyline. The “alternate present”, based on one thousand
years of different history, was a ludicrous concept. (The dirty little secret being that it all
just reeks of last minute change because of having to dump MO’H)
(4) “Take the triluminary, Delenn. It won’t be missed because there are two others. JMS
says there aren’t? Gee, I could’ve sworn we had two more..”
(5) “When we first conquered Narn they were a primitive people. And now they have the
nerve to try to reclaim all their space colonies.”
(6) “We Minbari used to have sequins on our faces and be really ugly…” Ok, anything
from the pilot is nitpicking.
(7) “Hi, my name is Vir Cotto, and when talking to a technomage I always pronounce my
name differently.” Ok, more nitpicking. Just trying to be thorough.
(8) “Draal, my old teacher… shouldn’t my hand be going through you?”
(9) “All the other first ones have been fighting the Shadows since the dawn of time. No,
wait, it’s only a Vorlon-Shadow feud about the best way to manipulate the younger races.”
Ok, I still hold out hope for this one.
(10) “His English is too contemporary to be Arthur. The real Arthur would either be
talking Celtic or really stilted 17th century English.”
(11) “B4 was receding into the past SOOO fast, it made Delenn’s sleeve look red.” Ok,
covered in (3c)
(12) “Unless the ring is returned to the Rhine, the gods will be destroyed. So throw it back
so they can be destroyed, already.” No, wait, that one’s from Der Ring Des Niebelung
(13) “You have all been programmed to see us Vorlons as angels. Or squids. Whichever.”
(14) “Only a First One can kill a First One. Or a PPG.”
(15) “Captain Sheridan, you just fell three miles. Even though you’re walking around and
look unharmed, you don’t really expect to have a pulse, do you? Trust me, you died.
Whaddya mean, of what? You just died. But I can bring you back if you die even more.
It’s not supposed to make sense, I’m a First One. No, I haven’t started yet – you’re just
one of those really lucky people who can walk around after you’re dead. Oh, and we’re
trapped here. Unless I can find that spaceship.”
There are bound to be others. Mind you, if we open the Trek door (even, to be halfway
fair, restricting to the modern series), we’re still talking speck in the eye to plank, Gingrich
to Clinton, what have you. But I would like a few answers on some of these. Not that I
can’t formulate a few of my own, but I’d rather hear it from JMS.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/15/97 1:29:11 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I hope you are not trying to spot plot inconsistencies in B5. The TP weakness of the
Shadows is not the deus ex machina you are trying to make it out to be.>>

<<Sorry but it is, just like the Borg weakness.>>
FYI, the TP weakness is a weakness of the way the spider ships work. It is not a
weakness in the actual Shadows (insects) themselves. And we’ve seen that they have other
resources at their disposal (Eye of Sauron, Eye of Harmony, Eye of Daddy, Eye of Newt,
whatever that thing was.) Frankly, the PPG weakness bothers me a lot more than the TP
one.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/15/97 1:32:22 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Okay, let’s go over this. One shot from the Ent-E took out the Borg cube. End of Borg
cube.>>
I’m still trying to figure out “I can hear them in my head.” Actually, I’m still trying to
figure out “Whenever we go to sleep, we blow up,” from their first big appearance. (#344
in ways Voyager could come home – get Borg tech from Hugh’s guys to cross the galaxy
in seconds. Without Kira or Darvin to work this Bajoran Orb, it’s the easiest way.)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/15/97 1:36:45 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<What are you talking about? The Shadows’ motives wasn’t a conquering one and they
wanted to recruit Sheridan to their cause. That sounds like a good reason not to attack
B5>>
Actually, I’m with Ac on this one. I’m still waiting on a reasonable motive for the
Shadows not to have taken out B5 with one spider. (Still trying to figure out that “we’d
need more ships than we have to take out this metal can” explanation from WWE, see
previous) B5 is, given their highly disappointing motives (which third of you was it that
agrees with them, again? Typical liberal elitism from JMS), the most logical target of all –
the place where the other races gather “to work out their differences and get to know each
other.” Should’ve been the first to go, not some dinky mining colony that was never
missed by ISN ( (14) – anything to do with Marcus’ origin or timeframe for joining the
Rangers).

Subj: Re:Help???: to Blobbb
Date: 1/15/97 1:39:23 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Blobbb
Could some of you guys pop over to the Star Trek message board on DS9/DS9’s FINAL
SEASON??? and give me a hand, they seem to think that B5 effects look like cartoons ie
Shadow Dancing and Severed Dreams…Please<<

They’re nothing more than all too typical sleazy Trekkers doing what they like to do
best, Blobbb, and that is ridicule B5. Just tell them that their own franchise is headed down
the tubes and you’re sure to stir them into even more of a rage because they know it’s true,
and that’s also a good part of the reason why they feel the need to bash B5. 😉

Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/15/97 2:14:09 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

Re: Fair Fight
Remember the Pre-Prime Directive: All Federation Starships must allow the enemy to take
the first shot… maybe a second… sometimes a third… B5 can possibly take Enterprise-E
even without Minbari help.
Regarding Enterprise resistance to “only lasers” or fusion bombs, etc. Then why do they
have so much trouble with a star’s corona (eg: Relics) or the atomic bomb used as a self-
destruct by the Romulans (eg: Balance of Terror).
Ergo: B5 Weapons can harm/destroy the Enterprise if used in sufficient quantities.
JRD

Subj: Re:Help???: to Blobbb
Date: 1/15/97 2:15:04 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

Ask them why Paramount hired Foundation Imaging to do the ST FX?
JRD

Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/15/97 5:38:57 AM
From: JGreen8224
Posted on: America Online

Just out of curosity, how long could a Galaxy class ship last against B5?

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/15/97 8:41:35 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Admittedly, the frequent references were often subtle, but they were undeniably there–
not as ‘this is their weakness,’ but instead as ‘there’s a relationship between
Shadows/Telepaths, but what is it?’>>

I have never disputed that he alluded to it before. But it is still a copout as bad as Trek’s
“tune the poloron emmiters” techno-babble. The Shadow’s weakness is just way to
convient to the “heroes” of B5. But as I said, it is would normally be IMPOSSIBLE for a
race BILLIONS of years older to lose to the younger races. The diffrences in Technology
is just way to far apart.
A much more realistic solution would be if the Army of Light was equiped with solely old-
one tech (like the White Star-class), and then used those ships to beat the Shadows in a
more realistic fashion. A single current Nimitz-class Aircraft Carrier could wipe out all of
the naval vessels that existed during WWII. And that is only a fifty year diffrence!
–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/15/97 8:50:04 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Okay, let’s go over this. One shot from the Ent-E took out the Borg cube. End of Borg
cube. The TPs in B5 can cripple SOME of the shadowships so that several Forces of
Light(God, that is corny…) ships can tag team it. That still leaves a lot of other Shadow
ships running around blowing things up.>>

Actually if you would have watched the movie a little more carefully you would know that
the cube was already damaged when the E-E arrived, All she did was help finish her off
(Along with the fire from many more ships). Of course, First Contact was full of
inconsistancies about the Borg, but I expected it, and it was a fun movie to watch, with
some great acting. So I forgive them. Just like I forgive JMS when he messes up, because
he still entertains me with some of the best TV ever.

<<What are you talking about? The Shadows’ motives wasn’t a conquering one and they
wanted to recruit Sheridan to their cause. That sounds like a good reason not to attack
B5.>>

As I said before, I don’t know why they have wasted all of these resources on the younger
races. To the old-ones the younger races should have no more effect on the battle bewteen
the Vorlons and Shadows, than ants have on my car as I drive down the highway.

–AcDec
Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/15/97 8:53:40 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Then why do they have so much trouble with a star’s corona (eg: Relics) or the atomic
bomb used as a self-destruct by the Romulans (eg: Balance of Terror).>>

That was hundred-year old technology, JR. The Enterprise shields protected the ship in the
end, even so.

It was “explained” to me that the oldest version of the Enterprise utilized segmented
shielding (hence references to the “aft shields”, etc.). The newer ships, with improved
technology, feature an integrated system and are many times stronger than those the old
ships.

It would be as you compared the armor on Civil War ships with armor on (now-retired)
ships like the New Jersey.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/15/97 8:54:36 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< FYI, the TP weakness is a weakness of the way the spider ships work. It is not a
weakness in the actual Shadows (insects) themselves.>>

Which begs the queston, why don’t they install a manual override?

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/16/97 4:12:32 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<it is would normally be IMPOSSIBLE for a race BILLIONS of years older to lose to the
younger races. The diffrences in Technology is just way to far apart.>>
This statement implicitly assumes the Star Trek/Shadows ideology that progress is a
constant – the sort of thing that gives us “This planet is classified stage 3 in the social
evolutionary scale.” A more sophisticated approach concedes the possibility that there
*are* universal constants that can’t be overcome, that technology can only progress so far.
Or, if you have to be progressionist about it, that most races’ minds work in such a way
that they will follow some “usual” line of development that leads to a technological dead
end… whereas there exist rare races whose minds work differently and they’ve pursued
lateral technological development. This sort of thing does happen. The Greeks turned
away from calculation, discreet mathematics, to geometry, continuous mathematics,
because of Zeno’s paradox and the irrationality of the square root of two. So even a
thousand years later, Greek tradition hadn’t given us any of that useful algebra that the
Arabs developed practically overnight. And the Greeks were, not to be politically incorrect
or anything, perish the thought, a trifle brighter than the Arabs.
Another reason we can’t make these assumptions: anyone who thinks that the Shadow
and Vorlon races live and breathe solely to help the younger races evolve has not been
paying attention. It is Star Trek races that have one definable characteristic that only a
select one or two ever rise above. These guys are powers in and of themselves. We know
nothing of their technology and virtually nothing of their private principles and rules for
guiding the younger races. It is entirely plausible that both sides have kept the lion’s share
of their technology out of this conflict. In terms of their own cultures and complex
civilizations, the “better way to guide the younger races” is simply not that big a deal to
them. It can’t be.
(Okay, it was in Der Ring Des Niebelung, but you already know how little sense I think
that opera makes)
There are countless possibilities here, and all we have is a snippet of info from Kosh (a
known liar, notably what the war is all about) to go on. We know the Vorlons and
Shadows respected rules of engagement from of old – they could well still honor the lion’s
share of these rules. Or there could be breeches so large that other First One races would
come back and give them both a good spanking. Logically, the Shadows and Vorlons
should be the among the least developed of First One races… despite Shadow comparative
longevity or claims to it.
Lastly, we’ve seen already that the Shadows ain’t the brightest crayons in the box.
Their tremendous longevity may compensate hugely for that to give them even the tech they
have.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 4:17:07 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< FYI, the TP weakness is a weakness of the way the spider ships work. It is not a
weakness in the actual Shadows (insects) themselves.>>

<<Which begs the queston, why don’t they install a manual override?>>

Because there are no Shadows in the ships, only zombies. This too may be a factor of
level of concern/commitment to this cause and/or respect for rules of engagement. The
answer to many Shadow questions could very well be the same as Kirk’s reason for not
giving the one side phasers in “A Private Little War.” This is still just a backwater little
conflict to them, despite the involvement of greater powers. Like Vietnam. Or even the
Arabian question at the Treaty of Versailles conference.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/16/97 5:05:31 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Lastly, we’ve seen already that the Shadows ain’t the brightest crayons in the box.
Their tremendous longevity may compensate hugely for that to give them even the tech they
have.>>

I will be the first one to concede that the Shadows are morons when it comes to military
tactics, there as bad as the typical Trek military.[Have you noticed that everyone in trek
(except for “Balance of Terror”) is a military moron].

But that is still no excuse to lose to people billions of years less advanced than you. In
todays world a diffrence of 15 years can be decisive, and as time goes on that time limit
grows smaller. This is one thing on Trek that was consistant with reality (ie the Defiant).
Just three years of advancements in weapons technologymade that ship the best in space.
Then they started retro-fitting the other ships with those new weapons. The Starfleet now
would have no trouble wiping out the one of just 5 years ago.

The battle bewteen the Shadows and the younger races should be like the current US armed
forces taking on stone-throwing barbarians.
–AcDec

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 5:08:39 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Because there are no Shadows in the ships, only zombies. This too may be a factor of
level of concern/commitment to this cause and/or respect for rules of engagement. The
answer to many Shadow questions could very well be the same as Kirk’s reason for not
giving the one side phasers in “A Private Little War.” This is still just a backwater little
conflict to them, despite the involvement of greater powers. Like Vietnam. Or even the
Arabian question at the Treaty of Versailles conference.>>

I don’t see how you can say it is only a “backwater” conflict. The Vorlons are trying to
EXTERMINATE the Shadows for crying out loud.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 5:11:55 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Because there are no Shadows in the ships, only zombies.>>

They may be brainwashed but they are far from Zombies. Anyhow, why not just give the
“Zombies” manual controll?
At least the Vorlons seem to be smarter than intrusting such powerful warships to a single
individual.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 5:26:56 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Of course, First Contact was full of inconsistancies about the Borg, but I expected it, and it
was a fun movie to watch, with some great acting.<<

Great acting???? What movie were you watching??????
The movie stunk! It was one of the worst Trek movies of the Bunch!!

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/16/97 7:32:33 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<But that is still no excuse to lose to people billions of years less advanced than you. In
todays world a diffrence of 15 years can be decisive, and as time goes on that time limit
grows smaller. This is one thing on Trek that was consistant with reality…The battle
bewteen the Shadows and the younger races should be like the current US armed forces
taking on stone-throwing barbarians.>>

No. You didn’t read what I said. Just because Trek thinks so, it does not follow that
“the acceleration of progress” is a universal law for all times and places. The Shadows
could well have been stagnant for most of those billions of years. We already know that
they sleep through most of the eons and only wake up for a few years every thousand or
ten thousand. So why should those huge time figures intimidate us? Buck Rogers wasn’t
100 times as bright as his friends. And let’s talk “Red Dwarf”, shall we?
As for your last sentence, why not substitute, “The battle between the Shadows and the
younger races should be like the 19th century American Indians taking on the British”, the
latter being at best the product of equal time (evolutionarily speaking) or far less (culturally
speaking). My ancestors were living in huts with roofs made of mud when the Assyrians
were dressing up in armor and conquering people who’d built gigantic pyramids. But mine
did pretty well against them in the Gulf War. The idea of equating time with progress, and
lots of time with geometrically increasing lots of progress is naive, the product of tedious,
unimaginative Trek humanism.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 7:34:02 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I don’t see how you can say it is only a “backwater” conflict. The Vorlons are trying to
EXTERMINATE the Shadows for crying out loud.>>
And we were trying to exterminate the Communists, ideologically and politically
speaking. That did not give your average Vietnamese peasant any idea of the cutting edge
technology of the cold war.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/16/97 3:10:26 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< (Okay, it was in Der Ring Des Niebelung, but you already know how little sense I think
that opera makes)>>

Sidenote: This is the first time I’ve seen a work of Wagner cited on AOL. This online
service is doing something right if it can attract the kind of people who don’t think opera is
the exclusive province of an effete elite.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 3:14:28 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Great acting???? What movie were you watching??????
The movie stunk! It was one of the worst Trek movies of the
Bunch!!??>>

Gary,

I just came in from the Trek boards, and was just about to compliment you for your fair-
mindedness in your defense of your own Trekker status. (I support your idea that to be a
Trekker doesn’t mean you gotta support every single dam* thing that Paramount throws at
the world.) HOWEVER, I am now struck to the quick — you *didn’t* like FC? I thought
FC was pretty cool, for any number of reasons. Even though it had some inconsistencies.
Give me an FC any year, rather than (a gratuitous hit at George Lucas) a SW film once a
decade, or any number of other sci-fi shows and movies that really don’t have the cache of
ST behind them.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/16/97 3:16:53 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<The idea of equating time with progress, and lots of time with geometrically increasing
lots of progress is naive, the product of tedious, unimaginative Trek humanism.>.

Well, now, Mytho, let’s not be over-hasty. A lot of us follow Trek because the real world
offers too damn little large-scale examplars of humanism, let alone inspiration. If the
humanism is crappy or imaginative, it ain’t gotta be that way, just so long as they put on
the old thinking caps. There’s life in that old horse (humanism) yet.

Subj: Re:MythoPhile’s points 1-3
Date: 1/16/97 7:46:14 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

::: sigh ::: I REALLY hate this sort of thing, but here goes…

Addressing MythoPhile’s points:

<<(1) “The Minbari have two castes…”>>
Who said this, and when?

<<(2) “He just materialized in the conference room…”>>
This was addressed in depth by JMS before the show even aired–it was an intrusion of
reality (not enough time for that scene in the episode, even though the scene was all worked
out)…

<<(3) “In this alternate present, the shadows have most of their fleet intact”
(a) so they can blow up B5. If only they had that kind of power in our timeline. No,
wait, there’s another reason they haven’t…>>
It was never about power. Strategically, they didn’t want/need to attack B5 YET in the
present, whereas in the alternate present, there was no reason whatsoever not to.
<< (b) “This is earth alliance station B5. What’s this black uniform I’m wearing? And
who gave it to me, since the whole history of the past thousand years is different and we
never teamed up with the Minbari, said teamup being based on the prophecies of a prophet
who never existed in my history?”>>
We have no way of knowing what happened in the alternate timeline–maybe events which
lead up to Sinclair going back creating the new timeline. From a previous argument: Don’t
confuse coincidence/unexplained details with outright stupidity or inconsistencies. As for
referring to “Earth Alliance,” JMS has also addressed this (I think he said that it was still
the ‘proper name’ of the station or something like that. Personally, I think Ivanova was just
stressed out and reverted to thoughtless rote action since she expected to die any second.)

<< (c) Oh, heck, the whole B4 storyline. The “alternate present”, based on one
thousand years of different history, was a ludicrous concept. (The dirty little secret being
that it all just reeks of last minute change because of having to dump MO’H)>>
If you want to complain about the B4 storyline, give a reason–I didn’t find it that
ludicrous. For example, I assume that the Shadows don’t mess with non space-faring races
(Darwin handles them pretty well enough in perfect accordance with Shadow philosophy).
So presumably, even if the Shadows dominated the universe, they wouldn’t have messed
with humanity and most B5 aliens a thousand years earlier anyway. History wouldn’t be
that different–especially since the Shadows only seem to come out every millennium or
so… The BIG difference would be that the Shadows would have come out much stronger
this time.

Subj: MythoPhile Points 4-13
Date: 1/16/97 7:59:39 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

<<(4) “Take the triluminary, Delenn. It won’t be missed because there are two others.
JMS says there aren’t? Gee, I could’ve sworn we had two more..”>>
And what is the problem with this?

<<(5) “When we first conquered Narn they were a primitive people. And now they have
the nerve to try to reclaim all their space colonies.”>>
The Narn advanced by learning/stealing Centauri tech. Again, what’s the problem?

<<(6) “We Minbari used to have sequins on our faces and be really ugly…”
Ok, anything from the pilot is nitpicking.>>
Nitpicker 😉

<<(7) “Hi, my name is Vir Cotto, and when talking to a technomage I always pronounce
my name differently.” Ok, more nitpicking. Just trying to be thorough.>>
Differences in pronunciation? Sounds more like desperation than thoroughness. I’d give
you this one if I hadn’t pronounced my own name differently on rare occasions…

<<(8) “Draal, my old teacher… shouldn’t my hand be going through you?”>>
MAYBE I’ll give you this one… ::: sigh ::: When/where was this? On the other hand, we
don’t know just what Draal’s holographic tech is capable of–just the fact that it can project
anywhere means that it can do some nifty tricks…

<<(9) “All the other first ones have been fighting the Shadows since the dawn of time.
No, wait, it’s only a Vorlon-Shadow feud about the best way to manipulate the younger
races.” Ok, I still hold out hope for this one.>>
Isn’t this from Delenn or other Minbari? Sounds like it. We’ve already seen that the
Minbari don’t know what’s REALLY going on–they’ve been pretty well manipulated by
the Vorlons/Valenn… My take: The Shadows have fought with other first ones for eons,
’til the others got sick of it and left–except for the Vorlons… Agreed, though, let’s wait
and see…

<<(10) “His English is too contemporary to be Arthur. The real Arthur would either be
talking Celtic or really stilted 17th century English.”>>
And in the episode, it turned out that he wasn’t Arthur. Seems to track to me! (If you’re
referring to why the other characters didn’t realize this, it’s because they’re idiots–that’s
not a problem, just depressing).

<<(11) “B4 was receding into the past SOOO fast, it made Delenn’s sleeve look red.” Ok,
covered in (3c)>>
Even JMS admits they just didn’t match the sleeve… I agree that they should have–maybe
go back in and digitally alter the episode so it matches. They seem to redub vocal flubs all
the time for consistency… Just curious–has ST EVER edited an episode AFTER airing to
fix inconsistencies?

<<(12) “Unless the ring is returned to the Rhine, the gods will be destroyed. So throw it
back so they can be destroyed, already.” No, wait, that one’s from Der Ring Des
Niebelung>>
Sure, try and blame JMS for this one 😉

<<(13) “You have all been programmed to see us Vorlons as angels. Or squids.
Whichever.”>>
My understanding (possibly wrong) is that it takes effort from the Vorlon to make us see
them as angels (or as anything else for that matter). In the fight to the death, we saw them
in their true form–they were too preoccupied in their death struggle to bother with a false
image…

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 8:04:48 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

<<(14) “Only a First One can kill a First One. Or a PPG.”>>
We’ve never seen a PPG kill a first one. If you’re referring to Sheridan vs. the Shadow, I
assume that Sheridan only injured (if even that) the Shadow. More likely, he just caught
everyone off-guard enough to make a run for it before they realized what was going on…
Maybe used the PPG to blast the door behind him to slow down their pursuit?
Give JMS some credit–he knew we’d seen enough “guy busts out of room where he’s
being held hostage thanks to smuggled weapon” scenes in our lives that we didn’t have to
see this one blow-by-blow…

<<(15) “Captain Sheridan, you just fell three miles. Even though you’re walking around
and look unharmed, you don’t really expect to have a pulse, do you? Trust me, you died.
Whaddya mean, of what? You just died. But I can bring you back if you die even more.
It’s not supposed to make sense, I’m a First One. No, I haven’t started yet – you’re just
one of those really lucky people who can walk around after you’re dead. Oh, and we’re
trapped here. Unless I can find that spaceship.”>>
Lorien never said they were trapped… I agree, it hasn’t all been explained yet–and maybe
it won’t be–but at least wait until we see the rest of the Lorien episodes (I think there are 2-
3 more) before passing judgement… I agree, this part’s been kinda wild…

<< There are bound to be others. Mind you, if we open the Trek door (even, to be
halfway fair, restricting to the modern series), we’re still talking speck in the eye to plank,
Gingrich to Clinton, what have you. But I would like a few answers on some of these.
Not that I can’t formulate a few of my own, but I’d rather hear it from JMS.>>
At least we agree that you have to REACH to find things like this in B5 as opposed to ST’s
smacking you in the face with problems….

–Seth

Subj: Telepaths vs. Shadow tech
Date: 1/16/97 8:08:12 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

My $0.02: Telepathy is based on extremes of physics and science. It doesn’t need to
advance like technology.

In fact, as technology advances and works at a lower and lower physical/scientific level,
I’d actually not be surprised if the technology became MORE AND MORE susceptible to
telepathy!

–Seth

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 8:19:46 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

<<I hope you are not trying to spot plot inconsistencies in B5. >>

In this interest of fairness, Nec… ;)<<

Fair enough, Mytho. Most of those you listed are minor nits. Some I have wondered
about. But in comparison to ST, they pale to insignifigance. My point was a kettle/pot dark
pigmentation kind of thang.

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 8:36:00 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>I’m still waiting on a reasonable motive for the Shadows not to have taken out B5 with
one spider.<<

Because Sheridan and B5 were coveted by Justin.

>>To the old-ones the younger races should have no more effect on the battle bewteen the
Vorlons and Shadows, than ants have on my car as I drive down the highway.<<

But the Vorlons and Shadows weren’t directly at war. They were “guiding” the younger
races along and the Shadows wanted to recruit B5 to their side. So they held off on
destroying B5.

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 8:36:21 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>At least we agree that you have to REACH to find things like this in B5 as opposed to
ST’s smacking you in the face with problems….<<

Your response to Mytho’s nits was well done. I can’t believe you took the time to respond
to all of them. The only one I really concede is the “two castes” thing. It was in a first
season ep or the pilot, but Delenn did say that…

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/16/97 11:38:15 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

I don’t agree that advanced technology *always* means victory.

It is obvious in our own world that there are a lot of examples of the “higher” beings being
taken out by the “lower”.

People are killed (and sometimes eaten) by everything from ants to bears. Even people
who are armed with high power rifles.

We also see riot police complete with body armor and machine guns overpowered by angry
mobs carrying little more than bricks and Molotov cocktails.

So just why should I believe that just because the Vorlons and Shadows are so far ahead of
us, we cannot do *anything* to them?

Or maybe I can just freely go for a walk in the woods, safe in the assumption that I am so
far advanced above cougars, bears, hornets, etc. that none of them can harm me.

Subj: Re:This argument: toA5398457
Date: 1/17/97 1:48:45 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
Gary, I just came in from the Trek boards, and was just about to compliment you for your
fair-mindedness in your defense of your own Trekker status. (I support your idea that to
be a Trekker doesn’t mean you gotta support every single dam* thing that Paramount
throws at the world.)<<

Thank you.

>>HOWEVER, I am now struck to the quick — you *didn’t* like FC? I thought FC was
pretty cool, for any number of reasons. Even though it had some inconsistencies. Give
me an FC any year, rather than (a gratuitous hit at George Lucas) a SW film once a decade,
or any number of other sci-fi shows and movies that really don’t have the cache of ST
behind them.<<

Well, I think it says something that I found “The Best of Both Worlds” and
“Yesterday’s Enterprise” much more engrossing than I did “First Contact”. I thought they
broke with too many things we’ve come to know about the Borg and how they operate,
and I wasn’t at all creeped out when they were moving through the decks of Enterprise E
where the Borg were located because I knew the enemy was again looking at them as a
‘non-threat,’ while at the same time leading other crew members off to be ‘Borgified’. In
truth, I rate FC somewhere around ST V, and since I view the character interaction among
the three principles in ST V as one of the film’s strong points and really enjoyed that aspect
of the film, I’d probably have to say that I prefer it. “Generations” was a deeply flawed
movie in terms of plot and story, but it was more visually striking to look at in certain
scenes, and the action moved better. The first half an hour of “Generations” is pretty
awesome –I never felt that psyched during FC, and I think that says something important
about why I don’t particularly care for this latest Trek film. There was one battle, it didn’t
last long, then they went back in time. I don’t know –it just didn’t work for me is all I can
tell ya.
But just because I didn’t like this movie doesn’t mean that I’m somehow not a Trek
fan. I just got the Interactive PC Game “Star Trek Borg” in the mail today –I ordered it
through AOL on 12\25, and they had only gotten to shipping it out to me on 1\11. How do
ya like that? Have you played this game? If not, I’ll let you know what I think when I get
around to it in a few days.

Subj: Re:Humanism & Inspiration
Date: 1/17/97 2:01:44 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: Mythophile
The idea of equating time with progress, and lots of time with geometrically increasing lots
of progress is naive, the product of tedious, unimaginative Trek humanism.>>

>>>From: A5398457
Well, now, Mytho, let’s not be over-hasty. A lot of us follow Trek because the real world
offers too damn little large-scale examplars of humanism, let alone inspiration. If the
humanism is crappy or imaginative, it ain’t gotta be that way, just so long as they put on
the old thinking caps. There’s life in that old horse (humanism) yet.<<<

I happen to agree with you in terms of what’s gotten most Trekkers there because
that’s what did it for me –a long, long time ago I must add though. The Trek genre has
been a see-saw for me since TNG made its debut. For almost three years there on that
show there was mostly drek, then by season three they showed they knew what they had to
do and had found their place. This seems to be the pattern among Trek shows following
TOS because DS9 was also primarily poor during its first three years. Oh, there were of
course exceptions, such as “Duet,” which was a second season episode if I’m not
mistaken, but for the most part I could have taken or left the show. Now Voyager has
proven to be the weakest incarnation of all thus far, its writing the poorest, its character
developments the silliest, its plots and episodes rip-offs of material done previously in
other Trek incarnations, namely TNG and DS9. Thus, a lot of the kind of magic you
alluded to(I mean you, A5398457) in your cited comments is sparse and far between lately.
DS9 has proven to be the only place I can get a fresh Trek fix, and I’m pleasantly surprised
by this and glad or else I’d find myself out in the cold right now, save for B5. <g> There
was a time when I didn’t hold out much hope for DS9, but now they’ve found their place
in the Sci Fi universe in my opinion.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/17/97 2:49:07 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Sidenote: This is the first time I’ve seen a work of Wagner cited on AOL. This online
service is doing something right if it can attract the kind of people who don’t think opera is
the exclusive province of an effete elite.>>
Gee, I almost hate to say this then…
But one of the reasons I think The Ring Cycle doesn’t make any sense is because it’s
one of the earlier literary examples of that unimaginative, Trek, humanistic “worship of
progress” motif. On a dramatic level, Wotan’s actions simply make no sense. Musically
speaking, Wagner, Bach, and Beethoven divide the classical music scene between them,
but you have to subscribe to “the great intellectual myth of modern times” (Wellsianity is a
good name for it) to understand it.
This all does tie back to Trek and B5 because, as I’ve said, I find the “worship of
progress” an unimaginative sci-fi device (“As you are now, we once were; as we are now,
you will become”). Trek of course takes it for granted, but even B5 hasn’t been entirely
immune. But B5 has at least parodied it nicely in the beliefs of the Lumati (sic; just in case
that Queen Victoria guy’s still hanging around) and the Shadows and, I’d argue, even the
Vorlons. The idea that the future is more important than the present, that our needs must be
sacrificed to securing the future, has become a sci-fi cliche, taken for granted by writers
who’ve inherited it parrotlike from the likes of Wells and Shaw, who in turn inherited it
from the likes of Darwin, Keats, and Wagner.
Yes, we science fiction fans do owe a huge debt to Wagner. His legacy is the one that
untaught us how to think.
But it’s still fantastic music.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/17/97 3:07:47 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<If the humanism is crappy or imaginative, it ain’t gotta be that way, just so long as they
put on the old thinking caps. There’s life in that old horse (humanism) yet.>>
A5, I’d argue that humanism is by definition unimaginative (I think you mean?) and
crappy precisely because it *isn’t* the product of thinking. Humanism is the product of
feeling. To be a humanist, one (charitably) doesn’t have to look at any evidence about
human nature, about what real people value and what they want and why they do what they
do, or (uncharitably) positively ignore all such evidence. This is the reason why humanists
tend to be liberals and vice versa: both are the product of that mind that doesn’t
introspectively examine what makes us human, only “hopes” that mankind will “get
better”, will “evolve” (in some very unDarwinian sense of the word to be sure, since
natural selection is no longer operating in western civilization, owing to how far we’ve
“evolved” already) into some “better society.” Humanism is, by definition, that which is
embodied in the chorus in Antigone (“Wonders are many, but none is more wonderful than
man”), or, as Picard so aptly put it, the speech in Hamlet stated “with conviction instead of
irony” (which is to give Shakespeare an artificial personality and let him be rescued by his
friends to use against them), the belief that “man is the measure of all things.” It is
therefore by definition the most irrational, emotional, and egocentric of all possible
philosophies. There is no rational basis for assuming that man is the measure of all things,
and no rational way of concluding that societies tend to get better and human nature
magically change.
It also, as well-embodied on Trek, betrays the typical liberal hypocrisy. IDIC, yet
humanity has a special destiny, has an ineffable quality that none of these other one-
dimensional races can ever hope for. Why, we’ll put the Q to shame one day! And why
not? In only four hundred years we’re no longer even using money, and people work at
their jobs for the sheer joy of bettering oneself and the world (yeah, right). Man lives
about half as long as all the other major races and has achieved remarkable things in the two
or three hundred years he’s been in space, while Klingons, Romulans, and the like have all
been spacefaring for ages and stagnated. Because they don’t have our special destiny. But
we’re not patronizing about that. IDIC.

Subj: Re:MythoPhile’s points 1-3
Date: 1/17/97 3:24:40 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Mega:
Thanks for rising to the challenge. I do agree with some of your points (did say I could
resolve them myself, but wanted to hear JMS’s, and of course I knew that production
problems account for many – was playing devil’s advocate throughout the post).
(1) Delenn said the Minbari have two castes in some season one episode, in those words.
It was implied throughout season one. It’s no biggie, since the workers are not a policy-
dicatating class. Still a bizarre thing to say. I didn’t get into all the season one references
to the Gray Council being “holy men from the religious caste” because a lot of it was
hearsay from characters like G’Kar.
(3) The B4 thing. I agree (and had come to the same conclusion) that 1000 years is
enough time for us to have no idea what did and didn’t happen, and we can assume (for the
sake of dramatic convenience) that 2260 was the same in all the ways we want it to be and
different in all the ways we don’t. It’s still a hokey plot-device and I expected better from
JMS.
I don’t buy, specifically, that things wouldn’t have been that different. B5 was founded
as a direct consequence of the Minbari and Valen’s prophecies. The Minbari gave earth
another chance (instead of genocide) because of those prophecies. They came to B5
because of them. They were there to save Sheidan’s coccyx in “Severed Dreams” because
of them. The new uniforms would otherwise have had a nice zebra-motif. A gigantic
portion of the whole premise of the ways things are in 2260 is based upon Minbari
decisions made because of Valen’s prophecies. If things were at all similar up to the
Minbari War, they’d have to be incredibly different afterwards. There are, of course,
answers. “The resilience of the timestream”, etc.
The whole premise of WWE does proceed unashamedly on the assumption that the
message from Ivanova is from “our future in six days”, a future in which Sinclair is on the
station for his “cutting through” scene with Garibaldi because he’s just arrived, etc. That
notion that those things were going to happen in six days if they didn’t go through the rift
is purely and simply illogical b.s. It was not their future, not even their present. It was an
alternate timeline with 1000 years of difference, a point that was stretched to the breaking
point.
As I say, I cut WWE because I know the back story. Michael O’Hare had to go for
other reasons. I just wish JMS had done a better patch job with 2 years to think about it.
Let’s not even talk about the inconsistencies of the way those “time-flashes” work.
More to come, assuming your post is continued.

Subj: Re:MythoPhile Points 4-13
Date: 1/17/97 3:43:26 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<(4) “Take the triluminary, Delenn. It won’t be missed because there are two others.
JMS says there aren’t? Gee, I could’ve sworn we had two more..”
And what is the problem with this?>>
Delenn’s friend on the GC said there were three triluminaries. JMS said there was only
one. Okay, there are again ways out I could make up. I fancy I could explain any of my
points by going through enough hoops, even that confererence room one (which is,
incidentally, symptomatic of a bigger, non-production-centered problem – in “Babylon
Squared” the events of the disapperance clearly took a lot longer; they were missing for at
least days, their time, not hours). Two of the trilumaries were ceremonial, made later, and
this fact had been forgotten, since they always use the one on the front of the shelf and then
put it back there. JMS needed a vacation when he said that. It’s not an internal problem.
Zathras brought back three triluminaries, and JMS was simply wrong.
<<(5) “When we first conquered Narn they were a primitive people. And now they have
the nerve to try to reclaim all their space colonies.”
The Narn advanced by learning/stealing Centauri tech. Again, what’s the problem? >>
Londo said that the Narn were a primitive agricultural people and that the Centauri
“brought them with us to the stars.” Elsewhere it’s very clear that the Narn had space
colonies before that original consequence (Ragesh III, etc.) It isn’t plausible that Londo
would try to get away with lying about this, since it’s too easily verified. Londo is a
confessed “Republican”, so he is the sort of person the media always checks their facts
with, not the sort they take at their word. 😉

<< I’d give you this one if I hadn’t pronounced my own name differently on rare
occasions…>>
Ditto. I’ve done the same. I hate the way my name is supposed to be pronounced. I’m
also an ancient at heart, and the ancients worried a lot less about pronounciation, etc, even
freely using translations of those names depending on the circles they were in. (Did
“Jesus” really call himself by the Greek version of his name used by eyewitnesses when
they wrote in Greek? Maybe.)
<<MAYBE I’ll give you this one… ::: sigh ::: When/where was this? On the other hand,
we don’t know just what Draal’s holographic tech is capable of–just the fact that it can
project anywhere means that it can do some nifty tricks…>>
It was in TLTS, a directorial mistake. JMS has owned up on this one. Otherwise I’d
be the first to admit it. Especially after what Star Trek “holograms” can do. (BTW, isn’t it
so perverted of Harry, Barclay, etc to fall for “holographic simulations”, and don’t we have
such a deep obligation to accept Data and the Holodoc as real people?)
<<Just curious–has ST EVER edited an episode AFTER airing to fix inconsistencies?>>
Are you kidding? I suppose it beats out the “opposite” sin, which we can dub lucasian:
fixing what ain’t broke. And PC-ifying it because Han would be such a meanie if Greedo
hadn’t fired first.
<<My understanding (possibly wrong) is that it takes effort from the Vorlon to make us see
them as angels (or as anything else for that matter). In the fight to the death, we saw them
in their true form–they were too preoccupied in their death struggle to bother with a false
image…>>
I tend to agree. But this point has really been glossed over (in JMS’ rushing of the plot
this year). Kosh said that being seen by so many was a real effort. But how much of an
effort was he making while unconscious in the pilot when Lobotodoc (glad we lost that
actor) saw him, presumably, as an angel. And Kosh also said that he couldn’t leave his
encounter suit because he’d be recognized by everyone. Couldn’t. Oh, lookit the squid –
reminds me of Gabriel. My overall impression until this last was that humans, etc have
been programmed to see a specific form whenever they look at Vorlons, incapable of
seeing any other, whenever they see one.

Subj: Re:MythoPhile’s points 1-3
Date: 1/17/97 3:52:25 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<A gigantic portion of the whole premise of the ways things are in 2260 is based upon
Minbari decisions made because of Valen’s prophecies. If things were at all similar up to
the Minbari War, they’d have to be incredibly different afterwards. There are, of course,
answers. >>

While I will agree with this statement, Mytho(BTW, I’m just adding my .02 credits here), I
can’t agree with you that they meant Minbar and B5(or earth) would never get together.
If it weren’t for Valen, after all, there wouldn’t have been a Grey Council, and
perhaps the Minbari would have been a sectionalized as the earthers still are. If a third or
even half of the Minbari saw Dukat’s death as “not such a bad thing after all…”, then I
have doubts that Earth would have been facing Genocide. He wouldn’t have been, after all,
a Great Leader of the Grey Council.
Heck, even *with* the prophecies, not exactly all of the Minbari are gung-ho with
the situation. How can any of us reliably say what would and wouldn’t be different?

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 4:01:49 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<We’ve never seen a PPG kill a first one. If you’re referring to Sheridan vs. the Shadow,
I assume that Sheridan only injured (if even that) the Shadow. More likely, he just caught
everyone off-guard enough to make a run for it before they realized what was going on…
Maybe used the PPG to blast the door behind him to slow down their pursuit?
Give JMS some credit–he knew we’d seen enough “guy busts out of room where he’s
being held hostage thanks to smuggled weapon” scenes in our lives that we didn’t have to
see this one blow-by-blow…>>
Agreed, for the most part. That sequence in ZHD was done with an eye to the
intelligence of its audience. (My only beef is that the Shadows look like morons in their
philosophy and not even painting a friggin’ smile on Anna’s face) But it’s still very
confusing. One gets the impression that if an angry Vorlon had entered the room, Sheridan
would be instant toast, PPG or no. JMS has not succeeded in my mind, with his easily-
jammed ships and bulky, easily killed or startled insects, in creating the notion that the
Shadows are on a par with the Vorlons.

<<Lorien never said they were trapped… I agree, it hasn’t all been explained yet–and
maybe it won’t be–but at least wait until we see the rest of the Lorien episodes (I think
there are 2-3 more) before passing judgement… I agree, this part’s been kinda wild…>>
I believe Lorien did say that they were trapped. Okay, he lied. Just like a First One –
gibberish or lies. My impression from JMS’ comments was that he was going to let that
whole sequence stand as is as simply a wierd-out. But we got more than I expected in that
last new one on the subject, so maybe I read him wrong.
I do not, in case you haven’t realized it yet, like new-age babble. It is the last refuge of
the intellectual scoundrel. If something doesn’t make sense, it’s because of creative
laziness. It’s the written equivalent of modern art. A plethora of intellectual meaning
behind the gibberish covers a multitude of sins, like much of the series “The Prisoner.” I
love the final episode. Sure, it makes no sense on a literal level. But you can get a lot out
of it. It’s not simply hokey stuff like “I’ve come full circle/don’t we all.” And the series
was written on that symbolic level (actually, was the product of a McGoohan/Markstein
power-struggle for a literal versus symbolic show), whereas B5 is supposed to be a
dramatically literal series.
The only thing in that sequence that made me think was the “If one is a prisoner of
love/joy, one must escape…?” etc bit. Sure, it’s playing with words, love isn’t a prison by
definition because you don’t want to escape, but then you take a step back and realize that
he’s saying, “Stop thinking about escape. There are other matters to think about.” But he
might have just said that in the first place. All the First One/Kosh/Lorien babble seems to
me just a contrived way of conveying that a First One’s thought-processes work very
differently from ours, and a little goes a long way. If they’re so intellectually superior,
they should be able to think down to our level, and if they can’t, they at least ought to be
smart enough to just shut up.
<<At least we agree that you have to REACH to find things like this in B5 as opposed
to ST’s smacking you in the face with problems….>>
Agreed. They’ve mainly been a curiosity on B5 rather than an annoyance. At least till
this season; I’m losing a *little* patience as character development and explanations get
sacrificed to the rush to squeeze everything in (shoulda done a LOT more in season one).

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 4:16:55 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<But in comparison to ST, they pale to insignifigance. My point was a kettle/pot dark
pigmentation kind of thang.>>
My point exactly. Hence my analogies. AcDec’s refutations remind me increasingly of
the media’s “Gingrich misunderstood the tax laws, so stop pointing out Clinton’s bodies,
sexual harrassment, selling of favors, discrediting enemies by charging them with crimes,
declaring coal deposits environmentally protected so that his campaign contributors can get
more for their deposits, etc – they’re all equally crooks. We in the media can nail any of
them if we try hard enough, so why should we go after the really corrupt ones, when we
voted for them?”
In case I haven’t mentioned it yet, arguments that ignore, to a near-cosmic level, the
significance of *degree* not only do not impress me, but positively disgust me. The speck
in B5’s eye certainly does not equate in any way, shape, or form to the plank in Trek’s.
Bottom line, one gets the impression that B5 is conscientious, against obstacles to get made
at all, while Trek is sloppy, assembly-line, rubber-stamp renewal, franchise, where the
show has to stay on the air to keep up toy sales. (That being said, I’ve said and continue to
say that JMS has shot himself in the foot with his fighting the franchising of B5; that’s
where the real money is. And we certainly could have had a season five if he’d been a little
less sensitive about “B5 underoos”; no one is asking him to wear the things. As it is,
season five is, I fear, fooling ourselves. WB is not going to renew B5 in February instead
of May simply because JMS really, really wants it. WB is far more interested in a fluffy,
“can be shown in any order in syndication” sequel than in finishing the arc and he’s
walking right into the trap.)

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 4:29:23 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

>>I’m still waiting on a reasonable motive for the Shadows not to have taken out B5 with
one spider.<<
<<Because Sheridan and B5 were coveted by Justin.>>
So why did the “the times more powerful” Shadow fleet blow it up in WWE?
Okay, maybe I do begin to see the logic here. Sheridan was coveted as a “nexus”; his
conversion would cause the whole “alien races working together” philosophy of B5 to lose
its heart, since he was the chief organizer. But if they were three times more powerful,
they’d be less concerned about winning Sheridan over? No, on second thought,
Sheridan’s conversion was supposed to be a psychological blow to the organizers, and the
Shadows’ military strength ought to be irrelevant to that end.
Then again, maybe the B5 of the alternate present was simply and solely an earth
military base, no alliance with the Minbari, no diplomacy, no aliens on it at all, and
Sheridan simply a soldier, and hence he had none of that “nexus”, “needs converting”
appeal. Yeah, and maybe Valen went forward in time and gave the rebel-uniform design to
alternate-earthgov as their new design. Nah, it’d be rejected. We’ve already seen how
impossible it is to get more than four of them made.
I agree, in principle, that a thousand years of a totally different history yields a present
that we can’t guess at: we can have no idea why the Shadows were destroying B5, why
Susan was wearing the rebel colors and how, etc. (For that matter who was cutting
through the walls if the ships were just arriving and blowing up the place from a distance.)
But my point is that that whole sequence was dismissed to easily as “our (OUR) future if
we don’t go through the rift”, which is meaningless, and, in particular, that I would have
liked to see a bit more of the political lay of the land of alternate-present, what was going
on and why. Well, as Aslan says, “No one is told what would have happened.”

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 5:09:57 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>> No, on second thought, Sheridan’s conversion was supposed to be a psychological
blow to the organizers, and the Shadows’ military strength ought to be irrelevant to that
end.<<

That is what I was thinking. Maybe(and this may be reading too much into it) an Orwellian
bullet was waiting for Sheridan once he “converted”?

>> I would have liked to see a bit more of the political lay of the land of alternate-present<<

So would have I. *sigh*

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/17/97 5:18:13 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>from: Mythophile
I’d argue that humanism is by definition unimaginative (I think you mean?) and crappy
precisely because it *isn’t* the product of thinking. Humanism is the product of feeling.
To be a humanist, one (charitably) doesn’t have to look at any evidence about human
nature, about what real people value and what they want and why they do what they do, or
(uncharitably) positively ignore all such evidence. This is the reason why humanists tend
to be liberals and vice versa: both are the product of that mind that doesn’t introspectively
examine what makes us human, only “hopes” that mankind will “get better”, will “evolve”
(in some very unDarwinian sense of the word to be sure, since natural selection is no
longer operating in western civilization, owing to how far we’ve “evolved” already) into
some “better society.”<< …etc. BTW <g>

I don’t think that can be used as a blanket statement to describe the sentiment
behind ‘humanism’ within this particular franchise. Of course it applies in many places,
especially in post-TOS, but I think one of the things Trek has done well from time to time,
particularly in TOS, is in focusing on our ‘humanity,’ and what it *means* to be human.
That doesn’t necessarily have to translate into your typical liberal ‘touchy-feely’ way of
looking at things, or at an attempted propaganda approach aimed at indoctrinating the
audience into subscribing to such viewpoints. Just take a look at TOS in particular and
you’ll notice that it’s the focus on “being human” and what that means as opposed to a
liberal stereotype relating to “humanism,” which is far different by contrast. I could
probably come up with endless examples without thinking very hard, but to illustrate my
point some I’d like to point to a line Kirk uttered at the very end of “ST II”:

“Of all the souls I’ve encountered in my travels, his was the most …*human*”.
Kirk was talking about a non-human, an alien, but the remark brought so many
things to mind about Spock and who he was throughout the course of thirty years that
we’ve gotten to watch him. It was a cause for deep individual retrospection in my opinion
because it took in so much territory and gave a person cause to once again think about just
what it means to be human, and it did so in a powerful, profound way. This is rare enough
films, but especially for television by en large.
Additionally, let’s take another example from TOS which largely transcends the
way in which you’ve carefully boxed the definition of ‘humanism’ with respect to what it
was meant to describe within this thread. Let’s look at, “City on the Edge of Forever,” and
Kirk’s having to face watching a woman he’s fallen deeply in love with for the sake of the
future. Edith Keeler was a pacifist, your definition of a ‘liberal’ if ever there was one, but
the story itself recognized her to be a person ‘with the right ideas’ who had come to express
those ideas ‘at the wrong time’. A staunch liberal would argue that there is *never* a
“wrong time” for applying such logic even in the face of having to defend the likes of
Neville Chamberlain!
There’s no doubt that Trek has a liberal bent and always had one, but the are areas
which should be confused with that philosophy and what it means to be human, politics
aside. Data was introduced as a character in TNG who gave the viewers many reasons to
wonder about artificial intelligence, and just where the line to individual rights should or
should not be drawn. Often times it was handled quite well, and I find the character
intriguing.
“Humanism” CAN mean “flaming liberal,” but it doesn’t necessarily. I think
you’ve boxed the word into an all to convenient niche that might not always be applicable.

Subj: Re:MythoPhile’s points 1-3
Date: 1/17/97 5:26:11 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>(3) The B4 thing. I agree (and had come to the same conclusion) that 1000 years is
enough time for us to have no idea what did and didn’t happen, and we can assume (for the
sake of dramatic convenience) that 2260 was the same in all the ways we want it to be and
different in all the ways we don’t. It’s still a hokey plot-device and I expected better from
JMS.<<

What bothered me about it is that I saw no technological advancement on the side
of the Minbari! A thousand years is a long time, and yet their ships still looked exactly the
same as they do a thousand years later!! We know the Shadows went to sleep for a
thousand years, so that at least lets them off the hook, but one also has to think that the
Minbari would have developed some new sort of ‘combined’ technology by integrating
human technology from the future with their own as it existed a thousand years in the past
once the B4 Station ‘fell’ into their laps, but apparently not even this occurred, which I find
hard to believe.
Quite frankly, I was surprised that JMS didn’t handle a good deal of this better
myself.

Subj: Re:This argument: to Mytho
Date: 1/17/97 5:36:29 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: MythoPhile
(That being said, I’ve said and continue to say that JMS has shot himself in the foot with
his fighting the franchising of B5; that’s where the real money is. And we certainly could
have had a season five if he’d been a little less sensitive about “B5 underoos”; no one is
asking him to wear the things. As it is, season five is, I fear, fooling ourselves. WB is not
going to renew B5 in February instead of May simply because JMS really, really wants it.
WB is far more interested in a fluffy, “can be shown in any order in syndication” sequel
than in finishing the arc and he’s walking right into the trap.)<<

I wouldn’t be so ready to buy into that line of reasoning lock, stock and barrel if
I were you. I think WB has its eye on the future with B5 more than you tend to
think(obviously). The show has won a great deal of critical acclaim in the last year, TNT
went out of their way to option and sign for two B5 movies, and there’s a very possible
spin-off series just on the horizon. Also, five seasons are worth more than four in the
syndicated market, so WB may consider it worth the investment based on that fact alone.
Don’t be so ready to sound the death trumpet just yet. I think there will indeed be
a season five. 😉

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/17/97 8:51:38 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< I think one of the things Trek has done well from time to time, particularly in TOS, is in
focusing on our ‘humanity,’ and what it *means* to be human. That doesn’t necessarily
have to translate into your typical liberal ‘touchy-feely’ way of looking at things, or at an
attempted propaganda approach aimed at indoctrinating the audience into subscribing to
such viewpoints.>>

Gary7sevn and MythoPhile have both made points in the last 24 hours in this folder that
greatly impress me with their level of profundity. I just wish I had the time to address each
post with equal depth. Failing that, I will use the above-exerpted quote as a jumping-off
point.

I think liberal humanism has run its course in this country on a political level, and now it is
increasingly fashionable to turn away from either term (“humanism” or “liberalism”) in
some academic circles as well. One of my professors at Berkeley, a long time ago,
impressed me because he was precisely who I thought he wouldn’t be.

Let me explain. A professor of English, the man struck me at first as someone who would
be a prime candidate for the classic, straw-man liberal — the type that is so often pilloried as
progressivist granola-eating tree-hugging longhairs in Doc Martens (trdmrk). But, as I
soon realized from his native Irish lilt, and without meaning to stereotype, the man was far
less sanguine that I ever imagined; indeed, he was rather morose, or at least I thought. One
of his lessons was on Pope’s *The Rape of the Lock*, which is standardly seen as a self-
deprecating piece satirizing the basso profundo of many literary endeavors. But the angle
he took was that of Pope’s tragic and pained existence — tragic and pained not merely from
personal circumstances and physical infirmities, but from a way of looking at the world that
reeked of deep pessimism.

Thinking upon such a teacher, I wonder whether our ideas about humanistic ideals can be
fairly described as merely progressivist, the humanities being closely allied with
humanism. I think I would have to agree with Gary7sevn, that there are many currents of
humanistic thought, and that the only consistent thread we have throughout humanism
would be that of concern for the place of man in the universe in which there is not a reliable
father/God figure after all.

I am also reminded of Baudelaire and his *Les Fleures Mal*. Could he be said to be part
of the humanistic tradition?

Isn’t humanism simply a focused attempt to draw upon the infinite and exquisite strands of
human thought, feelings, and aspirations, in the context of the larger whole of which no
one being can control? I maintain that it is, and I maintain that Roddenberry, perhaps
despite himself, marketed a popular brand of humanism, for which many are grateful, but
perhaps not the only brand that befits the Trek universe.

Many thanks to both Gary7sevn and MythoPhile for their contributions.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 8:53:17 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<That is what I was thinking. Maybe(and this may be reading too much into it) an
Orwellian bullet was waiting for Sheridan once he “converted”?>>
Hmm… not to start a new debate or anything, Nec, but are you one of those people
who think that Winston dies at the end? Ie, bang, dies? I used to think so, until I began to
suspect from watching and reading other things that it’s a British idiom for simply a nasty
fate.

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/17/97 8:53:55 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<the larger whole of which no one being can control?>> Delete the “of”.

Subj: Re:This argument: toA5398457
Date: 1/17/97 9:13:01 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< But just because I didn’t like this movie doesn’t mean that I’m somehow not a Trek fan.
I just got the Interactive PC Game “Star Trek Borg” in the mail today –I ordered it through
AOL on 12\25, and they had only gotten to shipping it out to me on 1\11. How do ya like
that? Have you played this game? If not, I’ll let you know what I think when I get around
to it in a few days.>>

I’d very much like to know how you like the game, in particular because I’ve got so much
stuff loading down my PC, I don’t have room for any kind of game. However, ST:B
seems like a fun diversion, and if I can clear enough junk off my hard-drive (and that’s a
big “if”), I’ll consider buying it, depending on your recommendation. (Btw, I have a
Pentium PC, compressed drive, and limited RAM. If you’re running yours on a
PowerPC, and it runs well, that by itself doesn’t mean it’ll work equally well on mine;
another complication (sigh).)

Subj: Re:This argument: toA5398457
Date: 1/17/97 9:14:22 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<doesn’t mean it’ll work equally well on mine>> should be “doesn’t mean it’ll work
equally well on my computer”.

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/17/97 9:24:11 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Gary, I think we may be victims of our terminology. By humanism, we don’t
necessarily mean “thinking about what makes us human” (anything but, at times). I agree
that Trek had a more sophisticated side to it at times (your ST2 line, etc)… but usually the
episodes with great insight into human nature are the non-Roddenberry ones, the ones
totally at odds with Roddenberry’s philosophy. “The Drumhead” was an all-time classic
Trek episode, but it would’ve/must’ve had Gene foaming at the mouth. Humanism is a
specific philosophy admittedly and unashamedly espoused by Gene and others (it seems to
go together with sci-fi) that mankind is the measure of all things, that society can be
perfected, and that, to that end, human nature and society are to be subjugated to that end.
Hence it is inseparable from liberal philosophy of gov’t, which presupposes that gov’t can
and should alter the values of the common man to bring about a better world.
You don’t have to be an athiest to study human nature and appreciate its subtleties. But
you do have to be an athiest to be a humanist… or at least an agnostic, deist, anyone who
thinks that God is essentially irrelevant to our everyday life. Humanism is the
philosophy/religion which worships humanity instead of God, Nature, the Life Force, the
Way of Things, the Goddess, or the gods. Humanity is the “ultimate”, what counts in the
long run. This is what GR contributed to Trek, and that side of it was unbearable in TOS.
Fortunately Gene didn’t have the control over that series that he had over TNG, and
another side showed itself, a more sophisticated view of human nature that was rooted in
“the old west” and its values rather than Utopia. Uhura is shopping in the Trouble with
Tribbles. The girl had money! My favorite is when Pike said he was thinking about
quitting to become a slave-trader (though I always suspected that those green “animal-
women” were non-sentient, at least until Batgirl’s appearance). This other side of Trek
brings us to:

<<Let’s look at, “City on the Edge of Forever,” and Kirk’s having to face watching a
woman he’s fallen deeply in love with for the sake of the future. Edith Keeler was a
pacifist, your definition of a ‘liberal’ if ever there was one, but the story itself recognized
her to be a person ‘with the right ideas’ who had come to express those ideas ‘at the wrong
time’. A staunch liberal would argue that there is *never* a “wrong time” for applying such
logic even in the face of having to defend the likes of Neville Chamberlain!>>
Edith Keeler was the victim of over-editing. Poor Harlan winces at that speech of hers
about “spaceships feeding the hungry” someday. She was a much more realistic person in
the original script; it’s only in the abomination (with affection; still one of Trek’s best in
spite of all) that aired that she’s like that.
Liberalism and pacificism do not necessarily go together. Remember, liberalism is
about feeling. Liberals get involved with wars because “people are dying; we have to do
something.” Look at all of Clinton’s little masterpieces: no American interest, just emotion
drummed up by the press for the trouble spot of the week. I have infinitely more respect
for a consistent pacificist (tho I’m not one) than I do for what liberalism means today.
(Even Peter, Paul, and Mary think simply we fought the *wrong* Latin-american gov’ts in
the 80’s)
Consider the philosophy that Edith was meant to be espousing: “Shadow and reality,
my friends. That’s the secret of getting through these bad times. Know what is, and what
only seems to be. Hunger is real, and so is cold. But sadness is not. And it is the sadness
that will kill you, that will ruin you. We all go to bed a little hungry every night, but it is
possible to find peace in sleep knowing that you have lived another day, and hurt no one
doing it.” Nothing humanistic or sappy about that. Wisdom for the ages. *That* was an
Edith worth throwing away your starship for.
(con’d)

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/17/97 9:46:50 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Bear in mind also that in the original script Kirk and Spock had to *speculate* about
how exactly her living changed everything. Kirk also, in the aired version, is the exact
opposite not only of Harlan’s version, but of everything Kirk stands for. Kirk was a man
who would say, “D*mn the timestream, I’m not sacrificing one individual to the needs of
the many.” In Harlan’s version there was also no assurance that the altered future was any
worse or less valid, there being no Whoopi to mediate such cosmic decisions.
Kirk was a humanist in the aired version because he did sacrifice one woman to secure
the Utopian future of earth. I think I see where you’re getting confused; “humanism” as a
philosophy has no respect, in spite of its claims or name, for the rights of the individual;
they are to be sacrificed to the needs of the Collective. (Which is why it goes together with
socialism, liberalism, and Wellsianity) In Harlan’s script, Kirk is Kirk and Spock is
Spock, the former valuing the needs of the one over those of the many, the other, vice
versa. Not bad for a season one TOS Trek episode predating that explicit character
differentiation by some 15-20 years. In the aired version, Kirk may look noble and all, but
he is Spock, he is Roddenberry, he is Unselfish. But in Harlan’s it isn’t simply about
what Kirk wants versus what society wants, it’s about Edith’s inalienable right to exist,
and d- the consequences.
Gene’s philosophy also reflects itself, interestingly, in the creative process. McCoy’s
competence as a surgeon is sacrificed to the needs of the larger story. I think all of us in
this folder would be agreed that sacrificing the frail little detail to the larger considerations
of Airing This Story is a problem that now plagues Trek more than ever. Even Harlan
himself was sacrificed to this story. I don’t want to argue semantics, but what’s commonly
meant by humanism is this view that mankind is fodder to be shaped for its Own Great
Destiny. Wotan must rise to the tragic selflessness of willing his own destruction. John
Tanner in Shaw’s work must marry the woman he detests so that they can breed the
Superman. And Wells… *sigh*
C.S.Lewis’ “Out of the Silent Planet”, incidentally, presents a wonderful parody of this
view. “If it is neither man’s mind, which is the mind of all other (sentient beings) nor his
body, which will change – if you care for neither of these, what do you mean by man?
Strange! You do not love any one of your race – you would have let me kill Ransom. You
do not love the mind of your race, nor the body. And kind of creature will please you if
only it is begotten by your kind as they now are. It seems to me that what you really love
is no completed creature but the very seed itself: for that is all that is left.”

Subj: Re:MythoPhile’s points 1-3
Date: 1/17/97 9:58:06 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<What bothered me about it is that I saw no technological advancement on the side of the
Minbari! A thousand years is a long time, and yet their ships still looked exactly the same
as they do a thousand years later!!>>
If you look closely, you’ll see that the past ships, shown in both episodes, were fatter, a
slightly different shape. But I get your point, and that may be nitpicking. I don’t think the
humans had a lot to offer even Minbari techonology even a thousand years ago. B4 was
valued more for its existence and no doubt with time and resources the Minbari could have
built a much better starbase. B4’s value was that it came out of nowhere at a time when
such a place was desperately needed and no resources could be spared to build it.
One Shadow ship could still have taken even B4 out without breaking a sweat, though.
(The episode is wonderful in some ways, a mess in others)
As for Minbari stagnation, I think we can go a little way in excusing that. The Minbari
we’ve seen, the culture based on Valen, seems to be a very eastern, pantheistic one –
oriental, in our terms. It’s western society and western values that gives us our advancing
technological pace. Your average Buddhist has no interest in technological advancement,
and while that’s only one third (or one half, depending on what day you ask Delenn) of
their culture, we’ve seen from earthly precedents that pantheistic religions and cultural
stability/stagnation (depending on your own values) go together. This all tracks back to my
point about the non-inevitability of progress.
A more interesting question would be, why didn’t the Vorlons go handing out their
technology to the Minbari in the last war like they did in this one? Who knows; maybe they
did, to a lesser degree. We only saw the end of the war, and Minbari tech does have that
nice streamlined vaguely organic effect. For all we know, the Minbari may have been at
the start of the war a recent space power themselves, with clunkers like the EA ships.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 7:28:20 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Great acting???? What movie were you watching??????
The movie stunk! It was one of the worst Trek movies of the
Bunch!!>>

Well, your in the minority opinion. First Contact got better reviews than any other Trek
movie.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/17/97 7:38:20 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< As for your last sentence, why not substitute, “The battle between the Shadows and the
younger races should be like the 19th century American Indians taking on the British”, the
latter being at best the product of equal time (evolutionarily speaking) or far less (culturally
speaking). My ancestors were living in huts with roofs made of mud when the Assyrians
were dressing up in armor and conquering people who’d built gigantic pyramids. But mine
did pretty well against them in the Gulf War. The idea of equating time with progress, and
lots of time with geometrically increasing lots of progress is naive, the product of tedious,
unimaginative Trek humanism.>>

I think your underestimating just how long a billion years is. And your point would be
more valid if the Shadows were shown to be stagnent, unfortuneatly for your position they
have been shown to be much more advanced than any other race (untill the plot needs them
not to be). And if the Shadows have been stagent for millions of years then the other first
ones would have advanced beyond them and their would be no point for them even waking
up! Unless you want to hold to the position that all of the firstones have become stagent
your position just doesn’t ring true. If act versus the younger races the Shadows would not
even need to be billions of years more advanced, 100 would do just fine for a more than
decisive edge.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 7:40:55 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< And we were trying to exterminate the Communists, ideologically and politically
speaking. That did not give your average Vietnamese peasant any idea of the cutting edge
technology of the cold war.>>

Are you watching the same show? The Vorlon’s are DESTROYING every planet touched
by the shadows. They are trying to commit genocide! This is the equivalent of Nuclear
War. You amaze me sometimes.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadow tech
Date: 1/17/97 7:46:38 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<My $0.02: Telepathy is based on extremes of physics and science. It doesn’t need to
advance like technology.>>

Actually telepathy is pased on fantasy.
–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 7:49:33 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<But the Vorlons and Shadows weren’t directly at war. They were “guiding” the younger
races along and the Shadows wanted to recruit B5 to their side. So they held off on
destroying B5.>>

The shadows want to premote chaos, the best way to do that would have been to waste B5.
Look how the “alliance of light” fell apart when they thought Sheridan was dead.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 8:07:17 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<People are killed (and sometimes eaten) by everything from ants to bears. Even people
who are armed with high power rifles.>>

It depends on if the right peice of technology is being used, and if it is used correctly.

<<We also see riot police complete with body armor and machine guns overpowered by
angry mobs carrying little more than bricks and Molotov cocktails.>>

Restriant on the part of that governmemt. throw 4 Apache’s into that situation and no more
crowd.
Remember Tiannaman Square?

<<So just why should I believe that just because the Vorlons and Shadows are so far ahead
of us, we cannot do *anything* to them?>>

How about recent history.

<<Or maybe I can just freely go for a walk in the woods, safe in the assumption that I am
so far advanced above cougars, bears, hornets, etc. that none of them can harm me.>>

An unarmed human is no match for any of those. But drive down the woods in a M-1 Tank
and you will have no trouble whatsoever. :)

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/17/97 8:25:27 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< It also, as well-embodied on Trek, betrays the typical liberal hypocrisy. IDIC, yet
humanity has a special destiny, has an ineffable quality that none of these other one-
dimensional races can ever hope for. Why, we’ll put the Q to shame one day! And why
not?>>

In case you have not noticed, “humanity” has included just about every other race since
TOS.

<< In only four hundred years we’re no longer even using money, and people work at
their jobs for the sheer joy of bettering oneself and the world (yeah, right).>>

Actually this is Trek’s biggest inconsistancy. During TOS they had money (credits). Then
came STIV with that stupid “we don’t use money quote”, and Roddenberry caught on to
that idea. Then came TNG, when they had money in some episodes and no money in
others. Then comes DS9 where everyone has money!

<< Man lives about half as long as all the other major races and has achieved remarkable
things in the two or three hundred years he’s been in space>>

In cae you have not noticed, the Federation is made up of more than humans (140 worlds).
It seems that the Vulcans (“the intellictual puppets” :) ) are responsible for most of the tech.
The Federations greatest science insitute is Vulcan.

<< while Klingons>>

Klingons have not been spacefaring for “ages”.

<< Romulans, and the like have all been spacefaring for ages and stagnated. Because they
don’t have our special destiny. But we’re not patronizing about that. IDIC.>>

How are the Romulans stagnent? In many ways they are more advanced (espeacily in
weaponry) than the Federation and they have had to do it all on their own.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 8:31:53 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Hmm… not to start a new debate or anything, Nec, but are you one of those people
who think that Winston dies at the end? Ie, bang, dies? I used to think so, until I began to
suspect from watching and reading other things that it’s a British idiom for simply a nasty
fate.<<

Well, that Winston died really didn’t matter, it was the breaking of his spirit and embracing
Big Bro/Justin is what I think the Shadows MAY have been after. Then again, I may be
reading too much into Justin’s motives. But I think it speaks volumes that we can even
postulate about this while right now on Voyager they are applying a nose prothsetic to Brad
Douriff. BTW, I think Winston was shot dead-bang.
Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 8:41:44 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< No, on second thought, Sheridan’s conversion was supposed to be a psychological
blow to the organizers, and the Shadows’ military strength ought to be irrelevant to that
end.>>

However, as the events after Z’Ha’Dum showed, simply “killing” him was sufficient to
break the alliance. Think how much more effective not only killing him, but destroying all
who supported him would be. BTW there is no excuse for the Shadows letting the White
Star survive after he left it. They should have known that Sheridan had a backup plan.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 8:43:03 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online
>>The shadows want to premote chaos, the best way to do that would have been to waste
B5. Look how the “alliance of light” fell apart when they thought Sheridan was dead.<<

Well, that is your opinion. Forgive Justin if he thought it would better serve the cause to
recruit Sheridan(remember, Justin said humans had a lot of potential) than destroy him and
B5 and possibly make him a martyr(did you read Orwell’s “1984”?).

 

Subj: Re:MythoPhile’s points 1-3
Date: 1/17/97 8:45:23 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<What bothered me about it is that I saw no technological advancement on the side of the
Minbari! A thousand years is a long time, and yet their ships still looked exactly the same
as they do a thousand years later!!>>

Actually the Minbari ships were diffrent.

–AcDec

Subj: Two Minbari castes
Date: 1/17/97 8:55:14 PM
From: MSTSchramm
Posted on: America Online

The first-season episode in which Delenn states that there are two Minbari castes is “Grail.”

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 9:14:33 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, that is your opinion. Forgive Justin if he thought it would better serve the cause to
recruit Sheridan(remember, Justin said humans had a lot of potential) than destroy him and
B5 and possibly make him a martyr(did you read Orwell’s “1984”?).>>

Yea, I read it. However, when people did think he was dead, he was not made a martyr,
they fell apart. Just a fatal tactical mistake I guess. Not to mention that they were stupid to
think they could convert him. And doubly stupid not to expect him to pull something.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/17/97 11:28:27 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: G7
Great acting???? What movie were you watching??????
The movie stunk! It was one of the worst Trek movies of the
Bunch!!>>

>>>From: AcDec
Well, your in the minority opinion. First Contact got better reviews than any other Trek
movie.<<<

I may be in the minority, but I view the reviews you’re talking about as nothing
more than hype, more than likely promoted strongly by Paramount because Berman and
company knew they couldn’t afford to have another TNG bomb hit the theaters. FC was
one of the dullest Trek movies I’ve ever seen, as well as one of the most predictable. I was
never exhilarated while watching it, and all the false praise heaped upon this film detracts
from past Trek films and the accomplishments made by Nimoy and Meyer. I think that’s
wrong. “First Contact” was certainly NOT better than ST II, but as you point out, it’s been
hailed as the best Trek flick yet. On what basis? The battle at the beginning was all too
brief, the threat posed by the Borg typical and just more of the same, and the dialogue was
just plain formulaic.
If Trekkers really think that this was the “Best” Trek film yet they should think
again if you ask me. Otherwise we’re just in for more of the same.

 
Subj: Re: WWE – Minbari Ships
Date: 1/17/97 11:31:23 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Actually the Minbari ships were diffrent.<<

Just barely –not enough to reflect a thousand years of advancement in the year
2260.

 

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/18/97 1:38:05 AM
From: Sobelgirl
Posted on: America Online

Hey Gary!
Excellent example of good thought-wrong time STOS- “City on the Edge of Tomorrow”
Edith Keeler-pacifism and the time of the Nazi. The human species from the beginning of
time does not “get along” with itself, Ever thought that is why “GOD” put us out in the low
rent district of the MilkyWay?? Human beings have the deadly sins,and only by real
effoort do we try to over come them. My 2 cents worth!!
Lora

Subj: Re:MythoPhile Points 4-13
Date: 1/18/97 1:52:34 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

[The Narn advanced by learning/stealing Centauri tech. Again, what’s the problem? >>
Londo said that the Narn were a primitive agricultural people and that the Centauri
“brought them with us to the stars.” Elsewhere it’s very clear that the Narn had space
colonies before that original consequence (Ragesh III, etc.) It isn’t plausible that Londo
would try to get away with lying about this, since it’s too easily verified. ] Does that mean that Earthers really are a long lost Centauri colony?
I didn’t think so…
JRD

Subj: Re:Minbari using Earth-tech
Date: 1/18/97 2:01:35 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

[…one also has to think that the Minbari would have developed some new sort of
‘combined’ technology by integrating human technology from the future with their own as
it existed a thousand years in the past once the B4 Station ‘fell’ into their laps, but
apparently not even this occurred, which I find hard to believe.] Except the Minbari were fighting for their lives. We know the B4 appeared near the end of
the war, but not how close to the end. Maybe just long enough for Valen to show them
how to operate the controls and throw everything they had against the Shadows.
I know I’ve read somewhere that B4 didn’t survive after the war. There may not have been
an opportunity for the Minbari to learn much.
Whaddayathink?
JRD

Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/18/97 2:17:05 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

[ << Then why do they have so much trouble with a star’s corona (eg: Relics) or the atomic
bomb used as a self-destruct by the Romulans (eg: Balance of Terror).>>

That was hundred-year old technology, JR. The Enterprise shields protected the ship in the
end, even so.]

The Enterprise-D (Relics) was not 100 year old tech. And the shields held out for a long
enough “time.” There were other episode, like the research into metaphasic shields, etc. If
solar radiation at a sufficient intensity can penetrate the shields, so could other forms of
radiation. An x-ray or gamma laser might do just fine if you could pack enough power
behind it. We are close to having that tech right now (but not the kW).

And you can bet your bottom dollar that any Fed captain from TNG or later would allow
you to have the first shot, and the second, etc.

Sorry, I am not convinced.

JRD

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/18/97 3:55:31 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<And if the Shadows have been stagent for millions of years then the other first ones
would have advanced beyond them and their would be no point for them even waking up!
Unless you want to hold to the position that all of the firstones have become stagent your
position just doesn’t ring true.>>
First off, I see no problem with both the First One races being stagnant. These are the
two that hung around, remember, when the others went off to explore new pastures. Why
wouldn’t that decision be a reflection of their overall cultural values as a whole?
In case I haven’t made the point yet: not all societies value social/technological progress.
That is a Eurocentric (never thought *I’d* use that word) view. It happens to be the one
Eurocentric view often missed by those who find so many others.
Secondly, “the Shadows were old when the ancients were young.” Leaving Lorien out
of it and assuming that we can believe any of Delenn’s info at this point, Shadow tech had
eons to develop before there were any other First Ones. Why shouldn’t they be as
advanced as the Vorlons and stagnant now? Why shouldn’t they have been technologically
stagnant from before there even *were* Vorlons?
This is not Trek where one half-brained Pakled can spread any technological discovey
to all our favorite races in a matter of days. These races guard their secrets.
We cannot necessarily equate all these First One races. It seems implied that the Zogs
are more advanced than either. It may well be that the Shadows and Vorlons have not yet
reached that stage, reached by the others, at which they’ve lost interest in “this little corner
of the universe.” If we must, again, nail every race that doesn’t extinct itself into some
linear pattern of inevitable progression.

<<the Shadows would not even need to be billions of years more advanced, 100 would do
just fine for a more than decisive edge.>>
HOW DO YOU KNOW? I’m beginning to think that I’m wasting my breath.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:02:22 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Are you watching the same show? The Vorlon’s are DESTROYING every planet
touched by the shadows. They are trying to commit genocide! This is the equivalent of
Nuclear War. You amaze me sometimes.>>
Sometimes I amaze even myself, as the man who wasn’t nasty enough to fire first at
Greedo said.
Once again you have (by choice) entirely missed my point of equating it to the cold war.
Even if we had nuked Moscow, it would not have given every third world country
involved in a local battle of that war nuclear weaponry. Likewise, until Sheridan and the
Minbari make their own “planet killer” I fail to see how your point is relevant to the original
argument.
Obviously the direction of the show would indicate that the our lowly heroes do develop
an ace or two, EVENTUALLY, as in “haven’t yet”, to deal with the Shadows and Vorlons.
But we have no idea what it will be. It may be a stirring speech on Sheridan’s part.
Meager human and Minbari progress in their part of the war may convince both races that
the time has come to “pass beyond the vale/veil” and let us develop at our own pace. Just
like two conscientious powers (not suggesting the cold war analogy works here) fighting
over the best war to “liberate” some backwater country could be impressed enough by
locals efforts to agree to pull out. Or maybe Lorien is to the First Ones as they are to us,
and they’re treating us as they were treated, and when all this sinks in they’ll all rise above
their petty spites and go away. We don’t know yet. But it doesn’t necessarily have to be
about who’s got the best phasers.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:08:25 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<But I think it speaks volumes that we can even postulate about this while right now on
Voyager they are applying a nose prothsetic to Brad Douriff.>>
LOL, and agreed.
I think I may have misunderstood your Orwellian comment. It’s entirely possible that
the Shadows’ true motives were the breaking of Sheridan’s spirit. They’re either a lot
brighter than they look or just plain 5-watters. My money’s on the latter. JMS, otherwise
excellent at inter-character depth and conflicts, has an annoying tendency to paint this
particular “subspecies” of character known as the “fanatic” as simply a one-dimensional
villain with one straightforward motive and no depth whatsoever. It’s the liberal in him. 😉
Another reason I think not: it was a pretty haphazard way to go about breaking his spirit.
“Come on, don’t you really wanna kill everyone like your zombie wife? No? Die then.”

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:12:46 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<They should have known that Sheridan had a backup plan.>>
They should have known a lot of things. As I say, the Shadows are either infinitely
anti-climactic in their motives (have YET to hear from ANY of you who agree with them,
let alone a third of you) or up to something incredibly sneaky. A little of my respect for the
show died when the major theme turned out to be the “Can’t we all just get along”ers
versus the evil, one dimensional discord-spreaders, who have as their justification the most
unconvicing summarization of Nietsche since Otto in “A Fish Called Wanda.” But it’s still
leagues better than another holodec malfunction creating yet another lifeform that we must
respect as human even though it would be so perverted to make love to “unthinking
mannikins.”

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:16:17 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< However, when people did think he was dead, he was not made a martyr, they fell
apart.>>
Hindsight is 20-20. In all fairness to Justin, his expectation was a lot more realistic
than what actually happened. Delenn’s “my love is dead you can all burn” attitude caused
me to lose what little respect remained for her.

<<Not to mention that they were stupid to think they could convert him.>>
Agreed. My main beef is that they didn’t even really try. “Come on, kill with us” was
pretty pathetic.

<<And doubly stupid not to expect him to pull something.>>
MAJOR agreed.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:28:39 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Gary, gotta get my two cents in on this “First Contact” thing, since the folder was dead
when it came out.
It was a good even-numbered movie. Yeah, there were logical plot problems, notably
the Borg’s “if we’re still alive you must not be a threat” attitude. But, like all evens, and
unlike all odds, it had none of the “Trek pretension.” I can forgive a lot with that. What
made the movie for me was that we saw with Picard something not seen on Trek since a
couple times with Kirk on the old series – the mega-set-up of a main character being 100%
completely wrong. All the usual “we don’t use money and have no greed or ambition we
perfect people we” atttitude of Picard’s was great set-up for Lily’s fantastic, two-syllable
retort “b- s- !” The whole Picard plot had real human drama and characterization, and this
theme of shattering Trek pretension was nicely mirrored in the Zefram Cochrane plot:
“Your great hero made this thing to get laid in Tahati. And, by the way, *I* still use
money! Gimmie gimmie gimmie!” Yeah, it wasn’t the kind of guy that Elinor Donihue
would go starry-eyed (cloudy-eyed?) over, but consistencies with TOS are WAAAYY too
much to expect. I would’ve been happy with no internal consistencies and the movie
ALMOST delivered (gotta love those virtually subsequent scenes where Picard says the
ship has X decks and then someone says they’ve assimilated up to deck X+2. As Ivanova
might say, “This to me is not a problem. When they get to deck X, I’ll start worrying.”).
The Picard magically-linked-to-the-Borg thing gets tiresome, of course, and that “shoot
there” bit shouldn’t have worked on a ship that had “no technological differentiation” from
area to area, but the only sequence I thought was a real snoozer was the scene outside the
ship. It was simply too long given the pace of the movie.
The holodec thing made no sense, of course. Why not just program 200 Borg of your
own? It was a very haphazard solution. But of course Picard wasn’t thinking clearly.
Time travel does get easier and easier, though. The pathetically easy way they got home
will, of course, never return to haunt us.

Subj: Re:MythoPhile Points 4-13
Date: 1/18/97 4:30:46 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Does that mean that Earthers really are a long lost Centauri colony?
I didn’t think so…>>
Actually, earth was founded by an outcast group of 83% eunuch Centauri. It was a
genetic experiment gone wrong…

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:40:08 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<. I think that’s wrong. “First Contact” was certainly NOT better than ST II, but as you
point out, it’s been hailed as the best Trek flick yet. On what basis? The battle at the
beginning was all too brief, the threat posed by the Borg typical and just more of the same,
and the dialogue was just plain formulaic.>>

Actually, for story I give First Contact as the third best film.

ST IV
ST II
ST FC
ST TMP
ST VI
ST III
ST GEN
ST V

As for acting , I’d give FC the edge, Patrick Stewert, Alfre Woodard, James Cromwell,
Alice Krige, and Brent Spiner all had wonderful performances. And it’s not often that a
Trek movie gets good reviews. And do you really think the big P has that much pull with
the reviewers? Considering the usual bad reviews, I don’t think so.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: WWE – Minbari Ships
Date: 1/18/97 4:41:42 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Just barely –not enough to reflect a thousand years of advancement in the year >>

All you saw was the outside. How do you know what advancements they made in
weaponry, engines, sensors, etc……. There was simply not enough info given.

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/18/97 4:43:45 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<And you can bet your bottom dollar that any Fed captain from TNG or later would allow
you to have the first shot, and the second, etc.>>

Not Sisko.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/18/97 4:50:44 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< HOW DO YOU KNOW? I’m beginning to think that I’m wasting my breath.>>

Becuase their enemies are not much more advanced then humans. In human terms, 100
years would be more than decisive (in a high tech era). As for your “eurocentric”
arguement. The very fact that the first ones are space born shows some cultural need for
expansion. It is very unlikely that any race could reach space travel if they care nothing of
progress. Not to mention a natural selection pressure. The Shadows should know that if
they let anyone get a technological edge on them, their days are numbered. They seem to
have underestimated the Vorlons, and look were it has gotten them!

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 4:58:17 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Once again you have (by choice) entirely missed my point of equating it to the cold war.
Even if we had nuked Moscow, it would not have given every third world country
involved in a local battle of that war nuclear weaponry. Likewise, until Sheridan and the
Minbari make their own “planet killer” I fail to see how your point is relevant to the original
argument.>>
My point is that the Shadows have gotten thei behinds wipped, first by Sheridan’s fleet
(thanks to telepathy), and then by the White Star’s suicide run. It is ludicrous for you to
say that the Shadows are not commiting their resources to this fight, they are fighting for
their lives! They are hiding on Centauri Prime for cryin out loud.

As for you possiable “solutions” to this conflict, we shall see.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 5:01:42 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Hindsight is 20-20. In all fairness to Justin, his expectation was a lot more realistic than
what actually happened. Delenn’s “my love is dead you can all burn” attitude caused me to
lose what little respect remained for her.>>

Agreed
<<Agreed. My main beef is that they didn’t even really try. “Come on, kill with us”
was pretty pathetic.>>

LOL, Agreed again.
<< MAJOR agreed.>>

Uh oh, one whole post without an argument, what is the world coming too?

–AcDec

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/18/97 7:07:05 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Know what is, and what only seems to be. Hunger is real, and so is cold. But
sadness is not. And it is the sadness that will kill you, that will ruin you. >>

Is this Edith, the one worth throwing away a starship for, an existentialist, in the end?

Btw, I agree that Roddenberry may have simplied humanism to his liking. In fact, I think
he marketed it, so to speak. What’s more interesting to me is whether humanism is
separable from progressivism, which I note that MythoPhile again has tended to meld
together.

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/18/97 7:13:54 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I don’t want to argue semantics, but what’s commonly meant by humanism is this view
that mankind is fodder to be shaped for its Own Great Destiny. >>

I think this is unnecessarily narrow as a definition of humanism. It is true that humanism
carries within the seeds of its own destruction (to use the Hegelian phrase), since the needs
of humanity cannot be, within the confines of the doctrine, clearly distinguished from the
needs of the individual. Needs are often physical things. Yet, from the subjective
viewpoint, it is the individual, after all, that experiences the feelings which you
(MythosPhile) have said are the motivating factors behind humanistic thinking. It is
perfectly viable to argue that humanism cannot sacrifice the individual to the collective,
because the collective, *qua* the collective, has no feelings at all. I would prefer to see it
that way.

Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/18/97 10:07:53 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<And you can bet your bottom dollar that any Fed captain from TNG or later would allow
you to have the first shot, and the second, etc.>>

<<Not Sisko.>>

True enough. Sisko is a different breed from your typical Starfleet officer. Now, his
and Kira’s boring taste in zombie significant others…

 

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/18/97 10:12:33 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< The very fact that the first ones are space born shows some cultural need for expansion.
It is very unlikely that any race could reach space travel if they care nothing of progress. >>

Cultures change. It happens. Hence the word “stagnation.”

<<Not to mention a natural selection pressure. The Shadows should know that if they let
anyone get a technological edge on them, their days are numbered. They seem to have
underestimated the Vorlons, and look were it has gotten them!>>
This is a good argument and I was waiting for someone to raise it. But just because the
Shadows and Vorlons want the younger races to “evolve” does not mean that they’re
rapidly evolving themselves. We know nothing of their religions or philosophies. The
Vorlons could very plausibly worship the perfection of their own society as is and want
humans, etc to become more like them. The Shadows, even more plausibly so; it would
explain why they go to sleep.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 10:23:07 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<It is ludicrous for you to say that the Shadows are not commiting their resources to this
fight, they are fighting for their lives! >>
They were not until this season. When we were fighting them last season, I think it was
still mainly a joke. I have already agreed about the implausibility of two nuclear warheads
they didn’t foresee drastically changing the situation (the Vorlons could have used that
planet killer on ZHD in 2257 and saved us all the trouble), but dramatically I think that’s
what’s going on.

<<They are hiding on Centauri Prime for cryin out loud. >>
They are hiding the resources dedicated to the younger-races project on places like CP.
We have no indication that the Shadows themselves, as a race, are seriously threatened by
the efforts of the younger races, which was the point. They “returned” to ZHD from
somewhere, and maybe only a few did. I agree that militarily that ought to be very
implausible, but unlike you I think there may be more going on.

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/18/97 10:26:42 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< Know what is, and what only seems to be. Hunger is real, and so is cold. But
sadness is not. And it is the sadness that will kill you, that will ruin you. >>

<<Is this Edith, the one worth throwing away a starship for, an existentialist, in the
end?>>
Nah. More like a Vulcan. Actually, it’s very Platonic. Get control of your emotions,
ignore pleasure and pain, etc. An existentialist would say that none of that stuff is real.
(Never did understand the basic creed of existentialism: “All is relative except this
statement.”)

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #3
Subj: Re:Weak job on Sheridan
Date: 1/18/97 4:34:44 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

Several of you have referenced the weak job that Justin and friends did in their attempt to
convert Sheridan, but it seemed to me that we only got the first couple of minutes of what
could have been hours or days of arguments/reasoning/convincing. The only reason it got
cut so short (and therefore seemed pitifully weak) was because Sheridan (stupidly, in my
opinion) revealed that he knew that his wife had been altered and that he would be, too, if
he didn’t come to the dark side (oops, that Greedo reference has me thinking of Star Wars,
too).

As a matter of fact, my take on the whole thing was:
1) Sheridan reveals his knowledge.
2) Humans freak out (“oh &*@!, he knows”) How did you figure it out? (“Now our
Shadow masters are gonna be ticked…”). Humans get uneasy, but know they can’t give
up, so they keep talking…
3) Shadow who was listening in, says “ah, screw it, let’s just implant him,” and starts
walking in.
4) Justin, seeing Shadow walking in, goes on offensive again to preserve image the
Shadows have of him. “You’ll do as you’re told…”

And the rest, as they say, is history…or future…or alternate future…or alternate past…or
whatever…

–me

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/18/97 6:37:23 PM
From: ZenGEOS
Posted on: America Online

>>Actually, for story I give First Contact as the third best film.

ST IV
ST II
ST FC
ST TMP
ST VI
ST III
ST GEN
ST V <<

I agree with the above rankings, except I have not yet seen FC, so remove it from the
whole ranking and there ya have it …especially TVH (IV) That was by far my fave of them
all thus far.
Subj: Re:Basics
Date: 1/19/97 12:54:35 AM
From: JayBees
Posted on: America Online

I noticed that too
Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 3:56:23 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>(have YET to hear from ANY of you who agree with them, let alone a third of you)<<

I am a strict Darwinist but think the Shadows’ actions hurt their own cause.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 4:46:18 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

>><<People are killed (and sometimes eaten) by everything from ants to bears. Even
people who are armed with high power rifles.>>

>>It depends on if the right peice of technology is being used, and if it is used correctly.<<

Usually. Not always. The Allies won the Battle of the Bulge and N. Africa in WWII even
though we were ‘out-technologied’ by the Nazis. We won because 1. We could out-
produce them numerically, 2. Tacical blunders by the other side (poor supply lines & lack
of spare parts), and 3. a little luck.

>><<We also see riot police complete with body armor and machine guns overpowered by
angry mobs carrying little more than bricks and Molotov cocktails.>><<

>>Restriant on the part of that governmemt. throw 4 Apache’s into that situation and no
more crowd. <<
Remember Tiannaman Square?

Yeah. Just like the jungles of Viet Nam. We sure cleaned THEIR clocks, didn’t we?

>><<So just why should I believe that just because the Vorlons and Shadows are so far
ahead of us, we cannot do *anything* to them?>>

How about recent history.<<

Which recent history? Afganistan? Cambodia?

>><<Or maybe I can just freely go for a walk in the woods, safe in the assumption that I
am so far advanced above cougars, bears, hornets, etc. that none of them can harm me.>>

An unarmed human is no match for any of those. But drive down the woods in a M-1 Tank
and you will have no trouble whatsoever. :)<<

Yeah. Give you one M-1, and I’ll take 25 old Shermans and a bunch of WW2 bazookas.
Sure, it may be tough, but the answer isn’t so certain.

I think your faith in technology is a tad unrealistic.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 4:52:53 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online
Okay, I couldn’t resist.

ST II
FC
ST III
ST V
ST IV
ST VI
Oh yeah…
Generations.

Subj: *MY* Trek film ratings list
Date: 1/19/97 5:07:48 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

ZenGEOS,

I don’t know who you were quoting with respect to one person’s view of Trek
film classification, best to worst, but here are my choices:

ST II – How can one not love the return of Kahn even if they hadn’t seen the original TOS
episode?
<g>
ST IV – A nice change of pace, quite refreshing and entertaining without the need of
Klingons or battle.
ST VI – Meyer back at the helm; some very good scenes and I enjoyed the story. The final
battle was a bit clipped, but I have no doubt that this was the result of budget
limitations, and even so, the climax was enough to satisfy me. I actually went to
see it a second time while it was still in theaters.
ST III – A weak movie in certain respects, but strong enough to be effective and
entertaining. Christopher Lloyd was quite a hoot as the Klingon villian out to steal
Genesis and take down Kirk at any cost.
ST GEN –Listed above #5 because of its visually striking, action oriented moments. The
story was one huge pothole however, but there were some good moments –the
death of Kirk not being one of them.
ST V & ST FC: Tie; I enjoyed the character interaction between the three principle players
in ST V very much, and I found certain aspects of the storyline both
‘fascinating’ and ‘intriguing’ despite the movie being flawed in a number
of ways. Nevertheless, these factors give it a considerable edge over FC
in my opinion. I was not at all impressed with “First Contact”.
ST TMP – A cure for the desperate insomniac is all I can say about this one. It almost
singlehandedly destroyed any possibility for future Trek of any form!

 

Subj: *MY* Trek film ratings list
Date: 1/19/97 5:14:01 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Well, since that turned out to be one big jumbled mess for some reason, I’m posting it
again so people can make sense out of what I wrote.
Sorry about that gang. :\

ZenGEOS,

I don’t know who you were quoting with respect to one person’s view of Trek
film classification, best to worst, but here are my choices:

ST II – How can one not love the return of Kahn even if they hadn’t seen the original TOS
episode?
<g>
ST IV – A nice change of pace, quite refreshing and entertaining without the need of
Klingons or battle.

ST VI – Meyer back at the helm; some very good scenes and I enjoyed the story. The final
battle was a bit clipped, but I have no doubt that this was the result of budget limitations,
and even so, the climax was enough to satisfy me. I actually went to see it a second time
while it was still in theaters.

ST III – A weak movie in certain respects, but strong enough to be effective and
entertaining. Christopher Lloyd was quite a hoot as the Klingon villian out to steal
Genesis and take down Kirk at any cost.

ST GEN –Listed above #5 because of its visually striking, action oriented moments. The
story was one huge pothole however, but there were some good moments –the death of
Kirk not being one of them.

ST V & ST FC: Tie; I enjoyed the character interaction between the three principle players
in ST V very much, and I found certain aspects of the storyline both ‘fascinating’ and
‘intriguing’ despite the movie being flawed in a number of ways. Nevertheless, these
factors give it a considerable edge over FC in my opinion. I was not at all impressed with
“First Contact”.

ST TMP – A cure for the desperate insomniac is all I can say about this one. It almost
singlehandedly destroyed any possibility for future Trek of any form!

 

Subj: Re: This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 5:56:09 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Mega, this first recent post of yours seems to have been censored or “AOL-
competence’d” out of existence… just thought I’d point out that whatever you were saying
has been lost.

Subj: Re:Weak job on Sheridan
Date: 1/19/97 5:57:45 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<“Now our Shadow masters are gonna be ticked…”>>
Just out of curiosity, is this is a pun?

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 5:59:12 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I am a strict Darwinist but think the Shadows’ actions hurt their own cause.>>
Well, “natural” selection and artificial conflict to help the process along really don’t go
together…

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 6:02:18 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<<Or maybe I can just freely go for a walk in the woods, safe in the assumption that I am
so far advanced above cougars, bears, hornets, etc. that none of them can harm me.>>

<<An unarmed human is no match for any of those. But drive down the woods in a M-1
Tank and you will have no trouble whatsoever. >>

AcDec, I think your response misses the point. The original complaint was, as I recall, that
the “puny humans” shouldn’t have been able to kill a Vorlon because the Vorlons are so
much advanced, technologically. But Kosh II wasn’t doing the equivalent of driving
through a forest in an M-1 Tank. He had his encounter suit and whatever other personal
defenses might have been on (or in) him. This is more like walking through the forest or a
bad part of town in protective clothing — say, armor or a bullet-proof vest. If a bear jumps
out and bites your neck, the bullet-proof vest isn’t going to help you much. The humans
pumped lots of electricity, PPGs and what-not into Kosh II in an attempt to kill or weaken
him — and still, the actual deed was done by some combination of Kosh I, Sheridan, and
Lorien working on an “old ones” level.

As to what defense the “puny humans” dig up against the Vorlon destructor fleet — well, I
am content to wait to see what they come up with before categorically saying they couldn’t
have come up with it.
Subj: Re: Fair Fight
Date: 1/19/97 7:50:53 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< True enough. Sisko is a different breed from your typical Starfleet officer. Now, his
and Kira’s boring taste in zombie significant others…>>

Hey, you know what they say, oppisates attract!
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/19/97 7:53:54 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< This is a good argument and I was waiting for someone to raise it. But just because the
Shadows and Vorlons want the younger races to “evolve” does not mean that they’re
rapidly evolving themselves. We know nothing of their religions or philosophies. The
Vorlons could very plausibly worship the perfection of their own society as is and want
humans, etc to become more like them. The Shadows, even more plausibly so; it would
explain why they go to sleep.>>

I agree that JMS has yet to flesh out Vorlon and Shadow society, but I find it hard to
beleive that a race that risks their own lives to force evolution would be against evolution
for themselves. That would be a recipe for disaster. Come on JMS, more input!

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 7:55:16 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< They are hiding the resources dedicated to the younger-races project on places like CP.
We have no indication that the Shadows themselves, as a race, are seriously threatened by
the efforts of the younger races, which was the point. They “returned” to ZHD from
somewhere, and maybe only a few did. I agree that militarily that ought to be very
implausible, but unlike you I think there may be more going on.>>

Well, hopefully JMS will clear this up. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 8:05:17 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Usually. Not always. The Allies won the Battle of the Bulge and N. Africa in WWII
even though we were ‘out-technologied’ by the Nazis. We won because 1. We could out-
produce them numerically, 2. Tacical blunders by the other side (poor supply lines & lack
of spare parts), and 3. a little luck.>>

As I have said before, technological diffrences become more pronounced the more
advanced a society becomes. And remember I said they had to use that technology the right
way, that includes the right tactics.

<<Yeah. Just like the jungles of Viet Nam. We sure cleaned THEIR clocks, didn’t we?>>

We could have if we really wanted to and didn’t care of the political consequences.

<<Which recent history? Afganistan? Cambodia?>>

Again, your forgeting the political intervention.

<<Yeah. Give you one M-1, and I’ll take 25 old Shermans and a bunch of WW2
bazookas. Sure, it may be tough, but the answer isn’t so certain.>>

Gimme a break, an M-1 could stay out of range and pelt them all at night. :)

<<I think your faith in technology is a tad unrealistic.>>

Tell that to Sadaam.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 8:06:30 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Nec, I’m ashamed, ST V before IV and VI, are you nuts? :)

 

 
–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 8:09:47 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<AcDec, I think your response misses the point. The original complaint was, as I recall,
that the “puny humans” shouldn’t have been able to kill a Vorlon because the Vorlons are
so much advanced, technologically.>>

Nope, not what I was complaining about. I was complaing about the Shadow’s lack of
sucess in battle. :)
–AcDec

Subj: The Shadows & their motives
Date: 1/19/97 8:25:41 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

The Shadows have always been ready to kill Molari in an instant, as in
“Interludes and Examinations,” and they would also likewise kill Morden in a flash if he
didn’t meet their requirements at every turn. Remember, “Flesh does what it’s told!” <g>
Londo recognized that the Shadows were using the Centauri as “shields” so that they could
be on the front lines in taking the Fall!
And remember that the Shadows have other races working with them that we
have yet to learn about. They are not working by themselves –the race that operates on
humans to make them central processing units for their ships, the “keepers,” whatever the
heck they are! There’s still a great deal we’ve yet to learn about, so take a breath, relax, and
just let the story unfold in its due time …okay? <g>

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/19/97 8:46:33 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Mythophile
Humanism is a specific philosophy admittedly and unashamedly espoused by Gene and
others (it seems to go together with sci-fi) that mankind is the measure of all things, that
society can be perfected, and that, to that end, human nature and society are to be
subjugated to that end. Hence it is inseparable from liberal philosophy of gov’t, which
presupposes that gov’t can and should alter the values of the common man to bring about a
better world.<<

I agree on this point, and it’s a prominent aspect of the Trek phenomena\universe
which ‘disturbs’ me because it is liberalism taken to its ultimate conclusion. Trust me, I’ve
written many messages throughout the years speaking out against this. The two-part DS9
episode from last season where Sisko takes on the role of Gabriel Belle had me up in
arms.(What was the name of that one anyway? I’ve forgotten.) The Trekkers praised that
episode –highly I might add, but all I saw in it was utter propaganda.

>>You don’t have to be an athiest to study human nature and appreciate its subtleties. But
you do have to be an athiest to be a humanist… or at least an agnostic, deist, anyone who
thinks that God is essentially irrelevant to our everyday life. Humanism is the
philosophy/religion which worships humanity instead of God, Nature, the Life Force, the
Way of Things, the Goddess, or the gods. Humanity is the “ultimate”, what counts in the
long run. This is what GR contributed to Trek, and that side of it was unbearable in TOS.
<<

I’m an agnostic, but I appreciate, naturally as we all must, what it means to be
human. In fact, there are a number of definitions that one would find were they to look up
the word in a dictionary. In essence, “humanism” can simply mean “an attitude or way of
life centered around human interests and values”. Hmmm, that could take in a lot of
territory. <g> However, the definition you’re pointing to is *a >philosophy< that rejects
supernaturalism and stresses an individual’s dignity and worth and capacity for self-
realization through _reason_*. –Not necessarily a bad thing either, unless it’s formed into
some sort of political ideology, which in itself can be skewed ie. “liberalism” <g> “We’re
doing this for you because we’re ‘compassionate’ creatures in our very souls.” <vbg>
Oh gee, can’t ya just feel the ‘warmth’ and ‘glow’ form all that nonsense? :) But what
you’re speaking out about is putting man before God, which is sort of the flip side to the
second definition for humanism that I gave you. I also agree that can lead to some serious
problems. True enough, God issues are sparse in the history of Trek, seen more in TOS
than anywhere else unless the episode in question focused on another race, another society.
I liked it where things were in TOS because there was at least some affirmation of not only
the existence of a God, but in the belief in the existence of “One” God –Monotheism! You
won’t hear any of that in Voyager, not by a long shot –it was avoided in TNG, and DS9
has only focused on it from a primarily Bajoran perspective, which Sisko doesn’t believe
in, even though he’s “The Emissary,” so what does that say? <g> Sisko is an atheist, he
does not believe in the existence of a Supreme Being and he has all but said so in the past;
push Picard on the question and you’ll get the same sort of answer; and the same with
Janeway! However, at least we got to see in Janeway the realization in the utter ’emptiness’
of such personal beliefs and convictions.

Subj: Re: This whole argument
Date: 1/19/97 2:57:58 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

<<<< Mega, this first recent post of yours seems to have been censored or “AOL-
competence’d” out of existence… just thought I’d point out that whatever you were saying
has been lost.

<<“Now our Shadow masters are gonna be ticked…”>>
Just out of curiosity, is this is a pun?>>>>

Myth,
I’d ask why, but the last time I got a reprimand from the staff of this forum and asked for
an explanation of what I’d done to justify it, I never received an answer… Having been on
AOL for about 10 years now (including being staff in multiple areas), I’m intimately
familiar with TOS and suspect that I would notice if I violated it. I don’t remember the
content of that particular post, so I’m not going to bother trying to replace it or figure out
what the problem was…

As for the pun, no it wasn’t intended, but then again, my best lines never are!

–me

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/19/97 10:37:48 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<push Picard on the question and you’ll get the same sort of answer>>

Maybe you better re-watch “Where Silance Has Lease” Picard is no Atheist.

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/19/97 10:38:58 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< However, at least we got to see in Janeway the realization in the utter ’emptiness’ of
such personal beliefs and convictions.>>

I wouldn’t go there bub. In actuallity it was the religious in that episode that were hiding
the truth.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/20/97 1:41:30 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

[ In human terms, 100 years would be more than decisive (in a high tech era)]

I am in awe of your extrapolitive abilities, considering that Earth could only barely qualify
for having had 100 years in a “high tech era.”

Consider two armies from Earth history of only five hundred years ago. Say Columbus vs
the settlers at Jamestown. The tech is not that dissimilar.

In fact the historical progress of “high tech” has been amazingly flat up until about a
hundred and fifty years ago. Personally, I think it ties directly to the abundant freedoms
won by the masses in this Democratic Experiment, as it was once called.

Since the Shadows, and possibly even the Vorlons, don’t seem that dedicated to freedom
and independence of individuals (not that different from what we see coming from our own
government), it is not inconceivable that technological progress has grown at drastically
different rates.

JRD

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 1:53:06 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

[ <<I think your faith in technology is a tad unrealistic.>>

Tell that to Sadaam. ]

I guess that the training and talents of the pilots and soldiers were completely irrelevant due
to our superior tech. But I wouldn’t go telling any veterans that if I were you.

But maybe that explains the Shadows using zombies in their ships. They have so much
faith in their superior tech that They think a monkey can run the show.

JRD

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 2:46:15 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Nec, I’m ashamed, ST V before IV and VI, are you nuts? :)<<

For the longest time I ranked 5 below 4 and 6. However, while debating this with JonBoc
over in the ST boards he convinced me to give it a second chance, and I did. I suggest the
same for anyone who is interested. The strength of the movie was the interaction between
Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, which I found to be the best in the movie series(which is even
more impressive considering there was a writer’s strike at the time). Now, there were
problems with the story, but that can be said with every Trek movie. 6 easily had the most
glaring plotholes and 4(eventhough filmed in my backyard) was a mess. I notice I forgot to
list TMP. That was a mistake, it goes well ahead of Generations.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/20/97 3:31:31 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<The Vorlons could very plausibly worship the perfection of their own society as is and
want humans, etc to become more like them.>>
<<I find it hard to beleive that a race that risks their own lives to force evolution would be
against evolution for themselves. That would be a recipe for disaster. Come on JMS, more
input!>>
Actually, I was drawing upon (in part) an old quote of JMS’ to the effect that the
Vorlons don’t worship anything but themselves. They are *highly* arrogant, there’s no
doubt. All their actions and attitudes point to a race that thinks it’s gotten where it wants to
go.
However, I think JMS is deliberately leaving the Vorlons and Shadows (and Lorien)
vague in an effort to make them seem “incredibly different”. Yes, it’s an authorial cop-out,
but he’s taken plenty of those before. I will be very (and pleasantly) surprised if we get a
lot more out of the Vorlons and Shadows as to what they’re actually all about (JMS may
actually have said that we’ve more or less heard it all), and this for me is the fundamental
disappointment in the series this season.
But it sure makes a heck of a lot more sense than the Dominion’s Motive of the Week.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 3:51:42 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<As I have said before, technological diffrences become more pronounced the more
advanced a society becomes.>>

As *I* have said about a thousand times before, this is simply and solely a blanket
assumption based on about 300 hundred years (out of 10,000) in the history of one chosen
culture on earth. Technological progress may turn out to be a cul-de-sac tomorrow.
There’s certainly as much evidence of that (the rationalistic bottom falling out of science
this century into randomness, unknowability, and probability) as there is of the 19th
century Progressionist myth that you seem unable of even questioning.
Technological progress depends heavily on the social climate of the time. Hence the
highly exagerrated but having a grain of truth) “stagnant” middle ages when Things of This
World were not worth examining. Or Buddhist cultures, as I’ve pointed out.
Mesoamerican cultures like the Aztecs are a great example of how highly developed
learning does not necessarily feed itself or branch out into other fields.
Our own social climate would, far from indicating a future filled with ever-growing
scientific achievement, indicate just the opposite. Scientific integrity is dead (the fact that
some people still believe in Global Warming proves this alone). The decay of the whole
Greek-Newtonian rationalistic “everything is explainable” mind-set which gave birth to
modern science into “everything is relative, there is no truth, science is only probability if
you go deep enough” proves that. Where are the Edisons of the modern world? All we’ve
done lately is improve upon existing technology in very linear ways. The whole modern “a
democracy does not want great men” attitude toward education that we have today, like the
Greek tyrant Thrasyballus instructing a peer by cutting off the stalks of corn that rise higher
than the heard, anti-promotes it. Political correctness, the villifying of all people who think
a little differently (on whom progress depends in any age), discourages it. There is far
more evidence that “progressive” ages may simply run their course than the vague,
Trekkian, blindly-held ideology that technological differences must/tend to forever build on
themselves.
In any case, the interconnected social-technological workings of a society is a much
more complicated question than will admit to one unsubstantiated, blindly-held answer to
the great pattern of history. I can understand you having a view about this, certainly. But
what amazes me is your total inability, it seems, even to entertain the suggestion that a
different notion is possible, and your inability to defend this statement that tech must lead to
tech in geometric fashion simply because it has for two centuries now.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 3:54:16 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<We could have if we really wanted to and didn’t care of the political consequences.>>
The whole point is that these political consequences and technological progress are both
so finely interwoven with the fabric of a society as to be inseparable from it. For most of
the show, it’s been obvious, for instance, the Vorlons haven’t interfered in the flow of
events not because they lacked the power, but because they lacked the will, which I believe
was the original question. This is not a show about how greater technology is always the
answer.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 3:56:56 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Nec, I’m ashamed, ST V before IV and VI, are you nuts?>>
I totally agree. The odds are basically a one-shot watch at best, the evens have mass
appeal and can be viewed again and again. III was far and away the best of the odds,
though too short and too anti-climactic, with a story that couldn’t be watched without
dwelling on the realization, “They’re simply undoing all those changes they didn’t like in
ST2.” (A better subtitle for ST3 would have been Star Trek III: The Cast’s Revenge)

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/20/97 4:04:34 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<push Picard on the question and you’ll get the same sort of answer>>
In all fairness to Picard, I think a lot of his Federation Zombiehood was burned out of
him in the Borg incident. If you asked him, I think he’d probably say something like,
“Yes, I believe in God… but not the sort of God who makes demands upon his creatures…
a God who is pleased with our human efforts to better ourselves and the world around us.”
In short, the sort of tripe that was intellectually popular in the first half of the century
and now is instead popularly popular. A God who makes no judgments on his subjects
apart from things like “hatred” or “intolerance.”
It’s cheap, it’s easy, but, sad as it sounds, Picard is the closest thing on any of the Trek
shows to a true intellectual.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 7:17:23 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

>>Nope, not what I was complaining about. I was complaing about the Shadow’s lack of
sucess in battle. :)
–AcDec<<

I wouldn’t exactly call the battle w/ the Shadows a rousing success. All they did was to
hurt them, and at great cost. But it was a starting point.

Subj: Re:Telepaths vs. Shadows
Date: 1/20/97 10:44:38 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I am in awe of your extrapolitive abilities, considering that Earth could only barely
qualify for having had 100 years in a “high tech era.”>>

I was being very conservative with the 100 year timeframe. Nowadays 15 years is enough.

As for the “freedom” queston. What evvidince do you have of Shadow and Vorlon society
not being free?

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 10:50:17 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I guess that the training and talents of the pilots and soldiers were completely irrelevant
due to our superior tech. But I wouldn’t go telling any veterans that if I were you.>>

You are going to really tick me off by putting words into my mouth. If your so stupid that
you have to do things like this, don’t even bother.
To point out to the mentally incompatent among is. I STATED THAT THE
TECHNOLOGY MUST BE USED THE RIGHT WAY. That means well trained
operators. And I can tell you than none of those verterans (many of whom I call friend)
would have wanted to be in their opponants machines.
–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 11:21:56 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< As *I* have said about a thousand times before, this is simply and solely a blanket
assumption based on about 300 hundred years (out of 10,000) in the history of one chosen
culture on earth.>>

The reason that technological progress was so slow untill recently was that the technology
needed for that advancement was not invented untill about 300 years ago. (Specificlly
communication and modern war technology)

<<Technological progress may turn out to be a cul-de-sac tomorrow. There’s certainly as
much evidence of that (the rationalistic bottom falling out of science this century into
randomness, unknowability, and probability) as there is of the 19th century Progressionist
myth that you seem unable of even questioning.>>

I don’t buy this “bottom falling out” of science you seem to indicate, but I’ll adress this
later in this post.

<<Technological progress depends heavily on the social climate of the time. Hence the
highly exagerrated but having a grain of truth) “stagnant” middle ages when Things of This
World were not worth examining. Or Buddhist cultures, as I’ve pointed out.
Mesoamerican cultures like the Aztecs are a great example of how highly developed
learning does not necessarily feed itself or branch out into other fields.>>

No culture that does not aggresively try to advance will survive long against those that do.
Using your own example the Mesoamericans. I’m not an expert in Buddhist history, but I
know that today, Buddhist culture is not anti-advancement. (You should see the number of
Buddhist scientists at my college).

<<Our own social climate would, far from indicating a future filled with ever-growing
scientific achievement, indicate just the opposite.>>

I’d beg to differ.

<<Scientific integrity is dead (the fact that some people still believe in Global Warming
proves this alone).>>

You really are pushing it with this one. Exactly were do you get this idea? And who pray
tell told you Global Warming was a hoax? Visited Venus lately?

<<The decay of the whole Greek-Newtonian rationalistic “everything is explainable” mind-
set which gave birth to modern science into “everything is relative, there is no truth, science
is only probability if you go deep enough” proves that. Where are the Edisons of the
modern world?>>

Whoa, never heard of this one before. You sure your not mistakeing wannabe philosophers
with scientists?

<<All we’ve done lately is improve upon existing technology in very linear ways.>>

Take a look at the advancements in medicine to know this statement is false.

<<The whole modern “a democracy does not want great men” attitude toward education
that we have today, like the Greek tyrant Thrasyballus instructing a peer by cutting off the
stalks of corn that rise higher than the heard, anti-promotes it.>>

Don’t get this statement either. BTW, last I heard, we are not a democracy.

<< Political correctness, the villifying of all people who think a little differently (on whom
progress depends in any age), discourages it.>>

Talk about a vauge statement. As much as I hate PC, I don’t see people who “think a little
diffrently” being villified anymore than they have in all of human history.

<<There is far more evidence that “progressive” ages may simply run their course than the
vague, Trekkian, blindly-held ideology that technological differences must/tend to forever
build on themselves.>>

I would think that evolution itself has proven my point.

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/20/97 11:27:05 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<The whole point is that these political consequences and technological progress are both
so finely interwoven with the fabric of a society as to be inseparable from it.>>

I don’t really see what this has to do with my original point about Vietnam. We could have
wiped the out if we wanted too. As I have been saying for a long time. The proper use of
technology must be taken into account.

<< For most of the show, it’s been obvious, for instance, the Vorlons haven’t interfered in
the flow of events not because they lacked the power, but because they lacked the will,
which I believe was the original question. This is not a show about how greater
technology is always the answer.>>

Actually it appears now that the Vorlons were just biding their time waiting for the right
moment to strike. It just goes back to my “the correct use of technology”.
–AcDec

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/20/97 11:30:39 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<In all fairness to Picard, I think a lot of his Federation Zombiehood was burned out of
him in the Borg incident. If you asked him, I think he’d probably say something like,
“Yes, I believe in God… but not the sort of God who makes demands upon his creatures…
a God who is pleased with our human efforts to better ourselves and the world around
us.”>>

Hmmm, equating an prodominatly atheist society as “zombiehood”? If I wanted to be a jerk
I could just as easily argue the exact oppisate. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/21/97 3:33:49 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Hmmm, equating an prodominatly atheist society as “zombiehood”? If I wanted to be a
jerk I could just as easily argue the exact oppisate.>>
I am equating an exclusively anything society as “zombiehood.” With a few exceptions
(mostly now hounded out into disputed space), all Federation members think alike and act
alike, and (despite a pretense of IDIC) look down their noses on all who think differently.
My point was that Picard was at least a trifle contemplative, was about as different as they
come. He was likable after the Borg incident. He was a little more philosophically open to
the pessimistic vision of human nature after the Cardassian incident.
Please do not proceed to rattle off the a list of exceptions from a thirty-year old series of
shows with hundreds of episodes. Eddington had it nailed completely in his speech
condemning the single-minded intrusive mental assimilative attitude of the Federation. He
did no more than articulate what most of us who are more critical of Trek (and I trust you
won’t dare say at this point that I’m not equally critical of B5) have been saying for years.
It is rooted in a flat philosophy that is seldom gone behind. Hence the TNG crew’s
positively obnoxious attitudes to the three 20th sleepers and to Barclay in his first
appearance, all of whom I’d rather have as friends than any of them (later Picard possibly
excepted). Their snooty attitudes upon dealing with anyone who “isn’t as enlightened or
perfect” as themselves, people who still have character flaws, that nasty 20th century
disease, are unbearable. Georgi’s remarks that he could “barely stand to be in the same
room with Barclay” and the general regarding of the sleepers as savages (“How’d we ever
survive being like that? We outgrew it” or something like that) are very telling indeed.
This tolerance of all differences, except in those you regard as savage, fanatical, or
unenlightened, is the classical liberal, humanist arrogance which is the central hypocrisy of
the Trek view of humanity and of all political correctness. And the fact that you don’t see
any greater “silencing” of those who think differently than in previous times is very telling
indeed.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/21/97 3:54:02 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Scientific integrity is dead (the fact that some people still believe in Global Warming
proves this alone).>>
<<You really are pushing it with this one. Exactly were do you get this idea? And who
pray tell told you Global Warming was a hoax? Visited Venus lately?>>
Global warming has been discredited by the scientific community for two or three years
now. I really don’t want to get into this again, but it’s only the newspapers that haven’t
figured it out yet. No, I have not visited Venus lately, not since the old days when they
were a really cold planet and had lots of automobiles. Oy. The latest theory is that weather
goes through a 20 year cycle. It didn’t get a lot of publicity for some reason, though
widely accepted.
The fact that scientific integrity is dying is more or less unarguable. This is because we
live in an age of sophistication, not of inquiry, an age when publishing is more important
than truth.

<<The decay of the whole Greek-Newtonian rationalistic “everything is explainable” mind-
set which gave birth to modern science into “everything is relative, there is no truth, science
is only probability if you go deep enough” proves that.>>
<<Whoa, never heard of this one before. You sure your not mistakeing wannabe
philosophers with scientists?>>
Ever hear of Heisenberg? Einstein? Quantum theory? DeBroglie? All of these people
(Einstein less than the others) waxed philosophical on the implications of their
deconstructionist physics discoveries.

<<The whole modern “a democracy does not want great men” attitude toward education
that we have today, like the Greek tyrant Thrasyballus instructing a peer by cutting off the
stalks of corn that rise higher than the heard, anti-promotes it.>>
<<Don’t get this statement either. BTW, last I heard, we are not a democracy.>>
I didn’t say that we were. If you were clever, you might have asked whether “want”
means “need” or “like.” In any case, someone who doesn’t see that the whole social trend
of the twentieth century is toward the levelling all people to know the same, think the same,
get the same on tests, equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity, isn’t worth
arguing with any longer.
As to whether we’re a democracy, that depends on your definition. History has shown
us that democracy only functions when the people are educated and accurately informed.
Unless our culture changes its ways, we’ll be finish up about as democratic as your
average “People’s democratic republic.” Which is entirely my point. Communism works
on the theory of a tiny elite claiming to know what most people want and then stepping
ruthlessly on the rights of the “minorities.” We’re as dem. as we are protective of the
rights of those we disagree with. These days, not very, and not for long.

<< Political correctness, the villifying of all people who think a little differently (on whom
progress depends in any age), discourages it.>>
<<Talk about a vauge statement. As much as I hate PC, I don’t see people who “think a
little diffrently” being villified anymore than they have in all of human history.>>
Oy. Have you read “Peanuts” lately? Show me when in Roman civilization a little boy
who flirts with a little girl is put on trial.

<<There is far more evidence that “progressive” ages may simply run their course than the
vague, Trekkian, blindly-held ideology that technological differences must/tend to forever
build on themselves.>>
<<I would think that evolution itself has proven my point.>>
This is simply, as near as I can see, meaningless. Maybe when you’re a little older you
won’t be so enchanted by incantatory words like “evolution” and “progress”… start
thinking a little about what you mean by them. Might be a good beginning.
I’m not trying to be rude here, but I am really losing patience with this argument.
Gainsaying, “I don’t see it”, “you’re wrong” are really not good enough replies. Until I
get something more, I think I’ll drop this.

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/21/97 3:57:57 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<The whole point is that these political consequences and technological progress are both
so finely interwoven with the fabric of a society as to be inseparable from it.>>
<<I don’t really see what this has to do with my original point about Vietnam. We could
have wiped the out if we wanted too. As I have been saying for a long time. The proper use
of technology must be taken into account.>>
Oy^n. We could have taken out Vietnam without raising a sweat. That’s the point:
political and societal considerations are inseparable from “level of tech.” Your whole
attitude just seems to be “If we ignore politics and societal considerations and the will of a
culture and all the things we’re likely to be fighting about it the first place, and both sides
have the same numbers of well-trained people and the same resources, if in fact all other
things are equal, then the side with the greater technology will win.” Well, duh. Welcome
to “Voltron.” I’d rather watch “Babylon 5.”

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/21/97 4:36:53 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< This tolerance of all differences, except in those you regard as savage, fanatical, or
unenlightened, is the classical liberal, humanist arrogance which is the central hypocrisy of
the Trek view of humanity and of all political correctness.>>

I think your problem is that you lump all of Trek into one nice package. Unlike B5 there is
really no one guiding force, even GR didn’t have complete controll when he was in charge.
In fact the only two seasons (not including Voyager) of Trek that really had this problem
was !st and 2nd season TNG (Roddenberry run). Lumping it all togother as “the trek
philosophy” is a worthless attempt. No matter what Roddenberry worshipers might think,
the Trek universe is made up of the ideas of the likes of Justman, Coon, Fontana, Berman,
Behr, Moore, etc. more than those of Roddenberry. Gene’s “perfect” future only existed in
seasons one and two of TNG. And you seem to have forgoten the entire point of Barclay in
the first place, in the end they did take their noses out of the air and admit to themselves that
they were in the wrong and that he was really a nice guy.

<<And the fact that you don’t see any greater “silencing” of those who think differently
than in previous times is very telling indeed.>>

And if you really think people with unpopular ideas are really silanced, I suggest you zip
on down to Texas some time. However, never assume that even though most people
respect your RIGHT to say whatever you want, it does not follow that they won’t use their
RIGHT to call you every name in the book. If thats what you consider PC, than I’m all for
it. At least nowadays you don’t have to worry about the church burning you at the stake for
voicing unpopular opinions.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/21/97 5:00:30 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Global warming has been discredited by the scientific community for two or three years
now. I really don’t want to get into this again, but it’s only the newspapers that haven’t
figured it out yet. No, I have not visited Venus lately, not since the old days when they
were a really cold planet and had lots of automobiles. Oy. The latest theory is that weather
goes through a 20 year cycle. It didn’t get a lot of publicity for some reason, though
widely accepted.>>

Well, my area of study is life sciences, not physical sciences but I do have a lot of the
journals, I’ll get back to you on this one.

<<The fact that scientific integrity is dying is more or less unarguable. This is because
we live in an age of sophistication, not of inquiry, an age when publishing is more
important than truth.>>

Bull, a published paper that is bogus does not last long, I’m sure you have heard of peer
review.
Remember the cold fusion guys? There has always been bad apples in science, but they
usally don’t last long.

<<Ever hear of Heisenberg? Einstein? Quantum theory? DeBroglie? All of these
people (Einstein less than the others) waxed philosophical on the implications of their
deconstructionist physics discoveries.>>

As I said, scientists should stick to science. I wouldn’t take philisophical advise from one
of them any more than I would take martial arts advice from a prefessional cook.

<<I didn’t say that we were. If you were clever, you might have asked whether “want”
means “need” or “like.” In any case, someone who doesn’t see that the whole social trend
of the twentieth century is toward the levelling all people to know the same, think the same,
get the same on tests, equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity, isn’t worth
arguing with any longer.>>

I have no doubt that people would try that, but it will not and does not work. In case you
have not noticed, this country is in no danger of having everyone equal in outcome.

<<As to whether we’re a democracy, that depends on your definition. History has shown
us that democracy only functions when the people are educated and accurately informed.
Unless our culture changes its ways, we’ll be finish up about as democratic as your
average “People’s democratic republic.” Which is entirely my point. Communism works
on the theory of a tiny elite claiming to know what most people want and then stepping
ruthlessly on the rights of the “minorities.” We’re as dem. as we are protective of the
rights of those we disagree with. These days, not very, and not for long.>>

This country was founded to keep even the majority from having it’s way. There is no
greater evil than tyranny of the majority. And as for our country not better protecting the
rights of those we disagree with. We are a heck of a lot better at protecting the oppreseed
now than ever before. Remember McCarthyism, segregation, not allowing women to vote,
slavery, rabid censorship, prohibition, etc…. Yea, the “good” times are all behind us.
Heck, just last year the CDA was cucessfuly challanged, for the first time homosexuals can
get married, and sick people in California can now smoke pot. Hell, Dr. Kavorkian’s
“bussiness” might even be legalized?

<<Oy. Have you read “Peanuts” lately? Show me when in Roman civilization a little
boy who flirts with a little girl is put on trial.>>

That kid got put on trial? If i’m not mistaken he was just suspended and the principal took a
lot of flack for doing it. There are always going to be boneheads in the world.

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/21/97 5:04:32 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<This is simply, as near as I can see, meaningless. Maybe when you’re a little older you
won’t be so enchanted by incantatory words like “evolution” and “progress”… start
thinking a little about what you mean by them. Might be a good beginning.>>

And I thought I made myself clear. One of the greatest lessons of evolution is that if a
species does not adapt to new conditions they become extinct. Humans, (and I would
guess other technological beings) adapt through their use of technology. Those that refuse
to adapt WILL die out earlyier that those that do adapt.

<< I’m not trying to be rude here, but I am really losing patience with this argument.
Gainsaying, “I don’t see it”, “you’re wrong” are really not good enough replies. Until I
get something more, I think I’ll drop this.>>

Then I expect more than, “every one knows that scientific intergrity is dead” from you.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/21/97 5:09:05 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Oy^n. We could have taken out Vietnam without raising a sweat. That’s the point:
political and societal considerations are inseparable from “level of tech.” Your whole
attitude just seems to be “If we ignore politics and societal considerations and the will of a
culture and all the things we’re likely to be fighting about it the first place, and both sides
have the same numbers of well-trained people and the same resources, if in fact all other
things are equal, then the side with the greater technology will win.” Well, duh. Welcome
to “Voltron.” I’d rather watch “Babylon 5.”>>

Untill JMS actually shows us something more about old-one society, politics, and
motivation all that we can look at are the purely military factors. And looking at those
factors, there is no way in hades that the Shadows should loose to the younger races. IF
JMS can find some clever way to make the Shadows’ and Vorlons’ actions beleiveable, I
can always change my mind.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:This whole argument
Date: 1/21/97 5:13:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Remember McCarthyism, segregation, not allowing women to vote, slavery, rabid
censorship, prohibition, etc….>>

Darn, I forget the greatest example of “old fashioned American values” TM. We were really
moral towards those native americans back in the “good old days” weren’t we?
–AcDec <<——– Trying not to laugh at how “great” things were back then.
Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to AcDec
Date: 1/21/97 5:35:47 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: G7
…push Picard on the question and you’ll get the same sort of answer<<

<<<From: AcDec
Maybe you better re-watch “Where Silance Has Lease” Picard is no Atheist.>>>

Care to clarify that some? No doubt he gave an ambiguous answer pertaining to
believing in “the universe” or some such thing, correct?

 

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to AcDec
Date: 1/21/97 5:43:00 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: G7
However, at least we got to see in Janeway the realization in the utter ’emptiness’ of such
personal beliefs and convictions.>>

>>>From: AcDec
I wouldn’t go there bub. In actuallity it was the religious in that episode that were hiding
the truth.<<<

I don’t even know why I bother wasting my time with you Ac, as you’ve
obviously *completely* missed the point. Did Janeway feel an emptiness upon realizing
that there was a scientific answer to her being able to pass through the energy barrier or
didn’t she? Answer: She did! Why? Because it made her realize that her belief in science
without the ability to believe in something greater and beyond it made life and existence
somehow “hollow”. I suggest you go back and watch the episode. Also, the religious
people in that particular ep may not have been hiding anything. They may really have
believed that faith gave them the ability to transcend the barrier that Janeway crossed
because they simply didn’t know any better themselves. The only reason why Holodoc
found out was because Janeway crossed it. If you remember, he advised her strongly
against it, insisting that she would be killed along with Kes if she dared try.

Subj: Re: “Humanism”:to Mythophile
Date: 1/21/97 5:52:34 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: MythoPhile
In all fairness to Picard, I think a lot of his Federation Zombiehood was burned out of him
in the Borg incident. If you asked him, I think he’d probably say something like, “Yes, I
believe in God… but not the sort of God who makes demands upon his creatures…<<

Come to think of it, didn’t he say something close to the latter part of your
speculative quote for him somewhere?

>>Picard is the closest thing on any of the Trek shows to a true intellectual.<<

Agreed, although I get the feeling you’re deliberately omitting Spock for some
specific reason, ie. his being a Vulcan or some such thing. I’d have to say, however, that
he was definitely a “true intellectual” despite his not being human(if that counts in your
assertion).

Subj: Re: Other Observations
Date: 1/21/97 6:47:15 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Does it seem to anyone that the characters in the ST universe never seem to learn their
lessons or rember what happened last week? I haven’t done a serious study, but it always
seems like they are doing things over and over again. They don’t progress from week to
week.

To me, DS9 is the best of the lot, but there is no progress. People do grow older, kids are
born, Odo becomes a ‘solid’, etc. But they seem to be learning the same things over and
over again.

Not to mention, I do get bugged by how the ‘technobable of the week’ never appears
again.
“I’m sending out a reverse, polyharmonic poloron pulse” “No, No, No! We tried that last
week, and it didn’t work then!” “How about realigning the technitium phase inverters to
feed the holo-emitters through the subspace phaser array?” “Don’t you rember, that works
only on the Cardassians food processors. On alternating Thursdays.”

At least on B5, these things are tied together.

Man. I guess we DO need the new shows….

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>