B5 vs Star Trek #4

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #4
Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/7/97 7:35:36 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Clarification:

I stated,

<<I would hope that my asking for analysis or at least exploration, rather than
overgeneralized emotive responses, in describing the various series accordingly would not
itself be mistaken for political correctness.>>

And, having said that, I would have to also add that I cannot, with certainty, accuse anyone
here of having leveled the charge of political correctness against me. I was elaborating on a
point out of an overabundance of caution.

The idea that Trek has become too overtly politically correct, however, is current among
some circles. I believe I will need some more time to think about this issue before
adequately addressing this criticism of the current series.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/7/97 10:17:54 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<To quote O’Brian ” I hate temporal mechanics”.>>
A good line – if a neat way of getting out of explaining why future O’Brien didn’t know
everything that past O’Brien already knew. “I know why you’ve come, of course. Let’s
find out and get you back,” would’ve made more sense. What we got was more on the
level of “Who dressed you in that ridiculous getup, Marty?” “Your younger self.”

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/7/97 10:22:29 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< If Erickson and any of his crew survive, the mission fails.>>
Oh, I don’t know… they could be taken prisoner by the Shadows, in blatant defiance of
the fact that the Shadows don’t take prisoners, because one of the zombie-women running
a shadow-ship was enamoured with Erikson, and he could be taken back to ZHD, and then
in Babylon: Crusades his rapidly-grown son, played the same actor, could pop up as a
Shadow-agent to plague our heroes in two unrelated episodes, the second of which will
feature the long-awaited return of Sinclair in a non-plot. Sinclair will choose to say on
ZHD to teach them philosophy.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5:to AcDec
Date: 2/7/97 10:25:25 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<So subtle I missed ’em the first 50 times I watched that episode (yes it is one of my
favorites too).>>
<<LOL Archer. Same here, I still don’t see it. (I just re-watched it).>>

Gotta say, I don’t see it either. What I *do* see is maybe one or two cute meaningless
but dramatic attempts on the director’s part to convey “drama” by giving us a close-up of
Tasha’s face or the like at a critical moment in the conversation.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/7/97 10:46:10 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I, for one, am a fan of Star Trek, and I support most conservative causes, among them a
strong military, freedom from oppression, financial accountability, personal moral
absolutism, and patriotism.>>
Well, let’s see:
(1) strong military? Uh uh. Starfleet is “an exploratory tool armed just in case they run
into trouble from races less enlightened than we.” They’re surrounded by empires of
barbaristic, twentieth-century-like unenlightened fools who don’t know what’s best for
them like we good federation people do, and our *sheer desire for peace* will protect us
from their saber-rattling, invisible ships, etc. These are not conservatives – these are the
people who got rich in the 80’s (nice hypocrisy in itself) by telling us how Reagan’s
attitude toward the Soviets was going to cause WW3. Not to mention how “our
determination not to slide into facism” was going to hold off those Shapeshifters twice
spotted on earth. Nor to mention how the Romulans, Klingons, etc were all such good
sports while the Federation was defenseless after the Borg incident… *after* being
contacted about it, recall.
(2) freedom from oppression? As long as they tow the party-line. Ask Eddington. Ask
any of the Maquis. The mirror universe was a more realistic picture of where this no-teeth
desire to be free gets you. It gets you mining ore. The Federation once again seems to
think that it’s desire not to be oppressed, in and of itself, is enough.
(3) financial accountability? Uh, yeah. But it’s real easy with no money. I suppose
socialists are the ultimate in financial accountability, which makes them very conservative.
(4) personal moral absolutism? Again, as long as it’s in agreement with the Zeitgeist.
Otherwise, they’ll be ridiculed and scorned into silence. Kinda like today.
(5) patriotism? I have seen no evidence of this. Picard is not a “my country right or
wrong” kind of guy. I’ve seen nothing explicitly resembling the earmarks of patriotism – no
sense of a thrill in their hearts at the sight of a federation flag, etc. A federation is typically
not the kind of government one can be very patriotic about.
All of which is beside the point. I think you need a sense of humor. All the evidence on
federation values (let’s not even talk about that 55-saves-the-fabric-of-space episode)
suggests that eating replicated food is something that they should be concerned about. Or
howabout the long-term effects of going through transporters infinitely often? Nothing in
this universe is 100% efficient and molecular errors are bound to creep in after repeated
use.
Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/7/97 10:51:20 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< Isn’t there some way you could make your point without bashing your opposition who
believe in bashing?>>

<<You have hit upon a metadiscursive element in our discussion. The question Lorien
asked could be asked of you as much of myself….(lots of pseudo-philosophical babble)>>

Oy. Has anyone ever told you that you have absolutely no sense of humor? I think all
human beings would recognize the post for what it was – satirical. It was not an attempt to
be philosophically consistent. But honestly, if you don’t like the topic, steer clear. This is
common sense. To come in and tell everyone how wrong they are to be here at all is
simply rude. Not to mention “metadiscursive” since they, themselves, are here telling it.

Either someone’s computer has gotten *waaaay* too automatic or we have an actual
Vulcan out there.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/7/97 6:36:29 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Perhaps his remarks were a bit on the misguided side, but he was tuned into relevant
point about the predominant political correctness that has become so much a part of
Trek.>>

I just “love” these all inclusive statements. I guess you haven’t been watching DS9. Why is
it so hard for some people to understand that all Trek’s are made by diffrent people? DS9,
and VOY have completely diffrent producers and writers.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/7/97 7:48:12 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<However your wrong about Starfleet kamikazies. At least when it comes to the Borg
both Riker (in the E-D) and Worf (In the Defiant) were gonna ram ’em. >>

Still, that’s an individual decision being made in a desperate situation, not a cold blooded
order to knowingly sacrifice oneself for the cause or whatever.

Subj: Re:war
Date: 2/7/97 7:51:30 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<BTW, dealing with “GROPOS” I thought they had a great premise going but I don’t
think the charaters were handled very well. A little too cliched for my taste. I gave it a B
rating.>>

Have to agree, that one sort of fell down on execution of a good concept.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/7/97 8:12:02 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<DS9, and VOY have completely diffrent producers and writers.>>

Sometimes it seems like they are made on entirely different planets….

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5:to MythoP
Date: 2/7/97 10:02:11 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: MythoPhile
Gotta say, I don’t see it either. What I *do* see is maybe one or two cute meaningless but
dramatic attempts on the director’s part to convey “drama” by giving us a close-up of
Tasha’s face or the like at a critical moment in the conversation.<<

You guys are gonna make me rewatch this episode I see.
Perhaps over the weekend, and then I’ll get back to ya ‘all.
However, I will say this before rewatching the episode: Tasha’s reaction in the turbolift did
not look like the director simply trying to “convey drama.” I think there was a self-
realization there on the part of the character, and I do believe that she elaborates on this
more in Picard’s Ready Room, as I’ve previously mentioned.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/7/97 10:10:03 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: Gary7
Perhaps his remarks were a bit on the misguided side, but he was tuned into relevant point
about the predominant political correctness that has become so much a part of Trek.>>

>>>From: AcDec
I just “love” these all inclusive statements. I guess you haven’t been watching DS9. Why is
it so hard for some people to understand that all Trek’s are made by diffrent people? DS9,
and VOY have completely diffrent producers and writers.<<<

Uh huh –and *WHO* is responsible for taking such scripts? Isn’t it *the head
writers* of each show? And don’t they make it a practice of *rewriting* scripts to fall in
line in accordance with their wishes? “all inclusive statements,” eh? You obviously
have NO IDEA of what’s involved in a writer getting his script produced. Often it means
having it butchered, and the Trek writing staffs don’t let anything pass without their
expressed approval, and they love doing rewrites, even if it means making the script
worse!
Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to et al
Date: 2/8/97 12:44:01 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Damn, I am Screwed!!!! I’ve looked everywhere and can’t find my copy of “Yesterday’s
Enterprise,” and furthermore BlockBuster Video doesn’t have it –I just checked!
This stinks! I hate you all. <g> You’ve sent me on a quest to hell simply because
you’ve stirred up my curious enough to want to really know, and now I find I can’t even
find out! <bg> Do you have any idea how maddening this is now?
Oh man, how typical! <g> :\

Subj: deep………space
Date: 2/8/97 12:56:20 AM
From: Katspjs
Posted on: America Online

Is it just me or is it alittle “deep” in here?
Subj: Re:deep………space
Date: 2/8/97 1:43:54 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Katspjs
Is it just me or is it alittle “deep” in here?<<

Well, all I know is that the moment it registered that I wasn’t gonna be able to find
that tape, I knew things had gotten “deeper” than I wanted to them go. <g> I’m annoyed
over this and there’s nothing I can do about it –and all because of a darn discussion on a
damn message board! :) Sick.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/8/97 2:32:17 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
<<Date: 97-02-07 15:12:02 EST
<<From: Archer C1

<<DS9, and VOY have completely diffrent producers and writers.>>

<<Sometimes it seems like they are made on entirely different planets….>>

Thankfully. I do enjoy most of the DS9 episodes, although I occasionally gag on the PC-
ness of their personal values. I remember reading that the production staffs of B5 and DS9
are on friendly terms and even look at each other’s stuff. It seems to me that the DS9
people HAVE been watching B5, and it is rubbing off on them. Here on NW Oregon, B5
is on at 8PM on Thursday, and DS9 at 9PM, so I can see them one after the other.

It seems that I am *always* at work on Wednesday nights, and have to miss V’Gr.
<sigh> (I’m self employed)

Subj: Re:deep………space
Date: 2/8/97 2:33:07 AM
From: Sobelgirl
Posted on: America Online

“Yesterday’s Enterprise” Are you trying to rent it or buy it?? Several companies have it for
sale, I am not sure who rents old STNG tapes. E-mail me and I can give the phone # to
order if Blockbuster is unable to help. Sobelgirl@aol.com

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/8/97 2:35:54 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< All of which is beside the point. I think you need a sense of humor. >>

You gotta be kidding! :-)

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/8/97 2:38:03 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< To come in and tell everyone how wrong they are to be here at all is simply rude. Not
to mention “metadiscursive” since they, themselves, are here telling it.>>

Wow, I had no idea I was telling everyone how wrong they were! What powers of insight
you have, to read things into my messages that aren’t actually there! May it please
Mythophile, of course, this message is submitted for pseudomythological analysis.

— Meant, of course, in satire.

 

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toSTAR K45
Date: 2/8/97 5:00:53 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Garyseven,

I think the thing with Paris and B’ellanna is far from settled, I look forward to seeing more
of their relationship as it progresses. I didn’t have a problem with the fight, I thought it was
staged really well and that Vulcan boy got what he deserved.
JJC III

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5:to STAR K
Date: 2/8/97 5:05:20 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Garyseven,

I put Yesterday’s Enterprise in the same class as the Guardian of Forever eps from TOS. It
is quite simply a classic, In every sense of the word.
JJC III

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toSTAR K45
Date: 2/8/97 5:12:52 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

JVibber,

Regarding Blood Fever, The only reason the fight stopped was because the so called blood
fever had been purged from their systems, The fight could have ended fatally if not for
them coming out of their haze when they did.

JJC III

 

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/8/97 10:38:29 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< To come in and tell everyone how wrong they are to be here at all is simply rude. Not
to mention “metadiscursive” since they, themselves, are here telling it.>>

<<Wow, I had no idea I was telling everyone how wrong they were! What powers of
insight you have, to read things into my messages that aren’t actually there! May it please
Mythophile, of course, this message is submitted for pseudomythological analysis.>>

That was the generic “you”; I was quite aware you weren’t the one who posted the
original. Perhaps you’ve lost the thread of this conversation in your desire to show off.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/8/97 10:39:36 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Still, that’s an individual decision being made in a desperate situation, not a cold
blooded order to knowingly sacrifice oneself for the cause or whatever.>>

Maybe, but Starfleet does not seem to have a problem sending single ships agianst the Borg
(ie suicide) or sending people on nearly hopless and not well planer out missions. Also it
has always been stated that a starship and it’s crew is considered expendable in many
situations (ie Worf in “Redemption”). Actually Picard decideing to sacrifice Worf to keep
the Federation out of the Klingon civil war was rather cold-blooded. Not to mention
watching an entire planet full of people die just to keep from “interfereing” in the episode
w/ Worf’s brother.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/8/97 11:01:45 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Uh huh –and *WHO* is responsible for taking such scripts? Isn’t it *the head writers*
of each show? And don’t they make it a practice of *rewriting* scripts to fall in line in
accordance with their wishes? “all inclusive statements,” eh? You obviously have
NO IDEA of what’s involved in a writer getting his script produced. Often it means having
it butchered, and the Trek writing staffs don’t let anything pass without their expressed
approval, and they love doing rewrites, even if it means making the script worse!>>

In case you have not noticed, the “head writers” in other words producers are completely
diffrent for DS9 than Voy. Judgeing by what Ron D. Moore has said on the Trek board the
staff writers: Behr, Wolfe, Moore, Rene E. (can’t spell the last name), Hans Bleimer and I
think one or two more, do not get extensively re-written (unlike when Roddenberry was in
charge). However people who do not work on the show ARE extensively re-written most
of the time (though it appears that Michel Taylor does not, though he is some. “The
Visitor”, and “Things Past”). The reason this happens is because changes need to be made
in the scripts all of the time for many diffrent reasons up untill the last day of shooting. The
freelanceer is not in the Hart building so someone else needs to do it. You can tell how
much has changed most of the time by looking at the credits. Most freelancers need to be
re-wriiten so much (or just sell a story in the pitch session) that they get only “Story by”
credit.

Now, back to your original all inclusive statement. You said that Trek writers were ever
increseing in their “political correctness” (which has many definitions). I pointed out that
the DS9 writers obviously do not fit that statement and that you making that statement
without including which Trek writers your talking about (DS9 or VOY) makes your
statement nonsense.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/8/97 11:05:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Thankfully. I do enjoy most of the DS9 episodes, although I occasionally gag on the
PC-ness of their personal values. I remember reading that the production staffs of B5 and
DS9 are on friendly terms and even look at each other’s stuff. It seems to me that the DS9
people HAVE been watching B5, and it is rubbing off on them. Here on NW Oregon, B5
is on at 8PM on Thursday, and DS9 at 9PM, so I can see them one after the other.>>

Again, I would like an example of this so-called “pc-ness” of DS9’s writers or charaters.
That “PC” term is used way to much and is becoming a tool of the lazy.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/8/97 3:58:41 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Not to mention watching an entire planet full of people die just to keep from
“interfereing” in the episode w/ Worf’s brother.>>

That was one of my least favorite episodes of TNG. It created false drama by suddenly
making Picard completely anal about the Prime Directive. As if the PD doesn’t have a
loophole for when “pre-warp” cultures are in immediate danger of extinction. Yeah, right.

Of course, at that time, my patience was a little short for *another* malfunctioning
holodeck show.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/8/97 4:03:25 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< That was the generic “you”; I was quite aware you weren’t the one who posted the
original. Perhaps you’ve lost the thread of this conversation in your desire to show off.>>

Okay, okay. The generic “you”. So let’s forget the sniping and go back to talking about
the blasted show. And if you can stop, in your unique and humorless perspective,
accusing me of using pseudophilosophical babble, I can even take you seriously, once
again.

BTW, I have no desire to show off, Myth. My ideas speak for themselves, and if you
consider them for what they say, rather than attribute to them characteristics of the author, it
would be that much more profitable for all concerned.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/8/97 4:16:10 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Maybe, but Starfleet does not seem to have a problem sending single ships agianst the
Borg (ie suicide) or sending people on nearly hopless and not well planer out missions.
Also it has always been stated that a starship and it’s crew is considered expendable in
many situations (ie Worf in “Redemption”). Actually Picard decideing to sacrifice Worf to
keep the Federation out of the Klingon civil war was rather cold-blooded. Not to mention
watching an entire planet full of people die just to keep from “interfereing” in the episode
w/ Worf’s brother.>>

Have you considered that kamikaze missions aren’t necessarily the hallmark of merit in any
show? (Caveat! I mean, the generic “you”!) Most people would consider suicide bombers
fanatics.

But back to the thread: Yes, I realize that in the *context* of B5 and ST kamize missions
are noble and the epitome of altruism (oops, gotta stop impressing Myth). But as I’ve
pointed out before, in both shows, it is true both that the tacit or apparent consent of those
who are about to die is obtained *and* there is a degree of command coercion involved.
(What would Sheridan have done if his commander had refused to sacrifice his ship?
Probably have him court-martialed, if B5 survived, and presuming he had command
authority over the commander. What would Starfleet do if one or more ships refused to
fight the Borg, knowing that the odds of prevailing are minimal? Probably have the
commanders of *those* ships court-martialed.) What we have here is a question of
semantics and, to a much lesser extent, a matter of degree — the B5 suicide mission was
labelled a suicide mission, whereas in many other similar missions, such a label is not
applied.

I can’t help but think the real reason some B5’rs want to promote the suicide mission idea
may be to show that the show is better in some way that ST for that reason. I just don’t see
how this is so. (Is it an appeal to machismo? To the power of command? To the nobility
of the participants? To the bravery of ship and crew? Some possibilities, but not
convincing to me, for the reasons I’ve stated.)

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/8/97 4:17:47 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I can’t help but think the real reason some B5’rs want to promote the suicide mission
idea may be to show that the show is better in some way that ST for that reason.>>

should be,

“I can’t help but think the real reason some B5’rs want to promote the suicide mission idea
may be to show that the show is better in some way than ST for that reason.”

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/8/97 8:22:24 PM
From: Sobelgirl
Posted on: America Online

To MythoPhile et al:
I think you misunderstood me when I said that we should watch any “Sci Fi” good or bad–
The problem is that in television, when one kind of show is a sucess they clone it. Please
note that when medical shows, westerns, whatever are popular that is what we get!! With
any luck some of these will be good shows. Presently,,,, Sliders (brought back), we lost
Space Above & Beyond, VR5, Earth 2,TimeTrack etc. shows that could have been
sucessful if they had been given a good time slot and a little better writing. If we can have
both ER and Chicago Hope, we should be able to have good StarTrek & Babylon 5, and
some other new shows.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/8/97 8:51:43 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Sobelgirl:
<<The problem is that in television, when one kind of show is a sucess they clone it.
Please note that when medical shows, westerns, whatever are popular that is what we
get!!>>
Good point, but the problem is that the clones are nearly always BAD. It’s common
sense; unless you delegate to a very exceptional creative team, the very mentality that says,
“instead of being original, let’s copy X” is going to get very unoriginal writing. What is
Voyager in concept but a TNG clone, and hence what are its scripts in practice but
hopeless, unoriginal retreads? Voyager at its best (episodes like Tuvix) have been
exceptionally good executions of ideas that are reformulations and throwtogethers.
Simply put, the problem with Trek is that it is a huge moneymaker. This franchise
potential has bred all the innocence out of it. The toys will sell no matter what. It would
take phenomenonally low ratings for Trek to leave the airwaves altogether at this point, just
as there will always be a Superman comic no matter how few people are buying it. It’s the
advantage and the curse of the iconic status that Trek has attained. Name recognition;
people who haven’t seen Voyager or DS9 in months consider themselves knowledable
about Trek. When you have that kind of power, there is very little incentive to do things
properly.
The problem is that that kind of iconic status does have waves, but not necessarily good
ones. When Trek begins to flounder, every *other* sci-fi show will inevitably feel the
pinch first. People who might be predisposed to give sci-fi a try turn into Voyager one
week and then never look at sci-fi again. I have acquantances who say, “I used to like sci-
fi, but it’s all beyond me now.” When sci-fi conjures up images of Trek, and Trek of
Voyager, and Voyager of lameness, it’s all sci-fi that suffers.
As for the shows you name: I enjoyed VR5, Timetrax, but S:AAB got boring *real*
fast. You can only watch neurotic characters shooting their way through gray sets before
stopping to rest to utter platitudes they think are profound for so long. Sliders was
unwatchable from the beginning; it makes Trek look politically incorrect, which is no mean
feat. I’m told they’ve dropped the “republicans are always evil overlords” routine this year
in favor of more vacant, straightforward adventuring, but the sheer unoriginality of its first
couple go-rounds, with its “Bewitched” syndrome of having about three basic scripts used
again and again (Voyager to the nth power), tuned me out sometime last fall.
Believe me, I would like nothing better than for Trek to be good. I still watch in hopes
(which is more than I did with S:AAB, Sliders, and Dark Skies eventually), but it seems to
me that at this point, short of a complete change of high-ups (which for power-reasons will
never happen), Trek desperately needs a little humility before it can be good again. There
is no shortage of good Trek scripts. What we get is drek like “The Q and the Gray” by
Piller’s kid or Berman’s kid (whichever it was this time) who, we are assured, “went
through channels.” (So figure out whether the fault is writers per se or TPTB) What we
get is drek like Kira being pregnant because the actress is – the same old tired gimmick that
has killed, in ratings or in quality, every other show that has gotten cocky and out of
control. These kind of stunts scream to me “business as usual” – that Trek is a product, an
industry. Even a show at the start as creative, original, and labor-of-love as
“Moonlighting” was done in by stunts like this.
Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/8/97 10:05:57 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< What we get is drek like Kira being pregnant because the actress is >>

Well, in defence of the DS9 writers, Sid and Nana didn’t give them much choice. And
unlike when Gates was pregnant in TNG they can’t just give Kira a bigger lab coat. Nana’s
pregnancy inconvienced the writers but they made the bast they could out of a bad
situation. How would you handle it?

BTW on your attacks on Trek in that post many times you did not specify what one you
were complainging about. Becuase of this I am forced to conclude that you are attacking
both DS9 and VOY and frankly none of you critisism fit’s DS9, espeacilly charges of
PCness.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/9/97 2:43:41 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
In case you have not noticed, the “head writers” in other words producers are completely
diffrent for DS9 than Voy.<<

And what exactly does this have to do with the point you raised, and my
countering it? So what –two different shows, but both under the Trek umbrella, and each
with their own set of writers who either accept or pass on any given script. And if the script
came from an outsider, don’t kid yourself –it gets an ‘overhaul’ by the so-called teams
before it goes into production.

>>Judgeing by what Ron D. Moore has said on the Trek board the staff writers: Behr,
Wolfe, Moore, Rene E. (can’t spell the last name), Hans Bleimer and I think one or two
more, do not get extensively re-written (unlike when Roddenberry was in charge).<<

And if you truly believe that I’ve got some swamp land for sale in Saudi Arabia
that you might be interested in. <g> They’re full of cr*p!

>>However people who do not work on the show ARE extensively re-written most of the
time (though it appears that Michel Taylor does not, though he is some. “The Visitor”, and
“Things Past”).<<

Now you’ve got me totally confused because I thought it was outside writers you
were referring to in your initial remarks concerning this.

>>Now, back to your original all inclusive statement. You said that Trek writers were ever
increseing in their “political correctness” (which has many definitions). I pointed out that
the DS9 writers obviously do not fit that statement and that you making that statement
without including which Trek writers your talking about (DS9 or VOY) makes your
statement nonsense.<<

Okay, now you’ve clarified things, and DS9 has *more recently* shown more of
a propensity to not fit in line with the PC code, of course, depending on which episode
we’re talking about. “For the Uniform” had Sisko making a very un-PC-like move toward
the end, and one which I myself found questionable. However, my statements were meant
as a reflection pertaining to the obvious PC history of Trek, particularly post-TOS, and I
believe you’ll find that most people would agree with it. DS9 has only *recently* broken
away from that line towing to a certain extent, again I stress, **recently** –and you’re
choosing to disregard the obvious PC mindset we’ve gotten our share of over the last ten
years of television Trek. My guess is that you’ve chosen to ignore it deliberately, but I
won’t.

 

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 2:49:41 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Sobelgirl
If we can have both ER and Chicago Hope, we should be able to have good StarTrek &
Babylon 5, and some other new shows.<<

I think that anyone who looks at it any other way is very likely extremely closed
minded and limiting their sources of entertainment, probably because of some silly bias.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 2:58:57 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<< What we get is drek like Kira being pregnant because the actress is >>

>>From: AcDec
Well, in defence of the DS9 writers, Sid and Nana didn’t give them much choice. And
unlike when Gates was pregnant in TNG they can’t just give Kira a bigger lab coat. Nana’s
pregnancy inconvienced the writers but they made the bast they could out of a bad
situation. How would you handle it?<<

True, I wasn’t too big on the whole theme, but I was aware that the writers
found themselves between a rock and a hard place. The only other alternative would have
been to extremely limit Nana Visitor’s participation in the show, which they obviously did
anyway to a fair extent I’d say, and contractually they were probably not in a position to
consider that as an alternative anyway. I’d hate being a writer on a show and finding
myself suddenly up against an unexpected pregnancy which would force me to change my
plans. Gillian Anderson was actually afraid that she was gonna get fired from The X-Files
once she got pregnant. Really, it can be unfortunate, but what can a writer do other than to
try and find some way to deal with the :::ahem::: ‘problem’ once it arises. Unfortunately it
can adversely affect a show in a variety of ways, even to the extent of making it downright
silly and poor in terms of quality.
Subj: Re:Silly Argument
Date: 2/9/97 6:02:57 AM
From: STAR K4597
Posted on: America Online

Bloob,

Speaking of nothing happening, Besides the great special effects in Into the Fire not much
happened did it? It was to be kind rather boring. What’s it’s been about four years since
they have build up to this great war and battle and at the end they just told the two main
baddies to get out of the galaxy because we don’t need them anymore, Wow can it get more
exciting? It just wasn’t what I was expecting from a eps that was suppose to be so much
more then it turned out to be.
JJC III

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/9/97 9:40:55 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Okay, now you’ve clarified things, and DS9 has *more recently* shown more of a
propensity to not fit in line with the PC code, of course, depending on which episode we’re
talking about. “For the Uniform” had Sisko making a very un-PC-like move toward the
end, and one which I myself found questionable. However, my statements were meant as a
reflection pertaining to the obvious PC history of Trek, particularly post-TOS, and I believe
you’ll find that most people would agree with it. DS9 has only *recently* broken away
from that line towing to a certain extent, again I stress, **recently** –and you’re choosing
to disregard the obvious PC mindset we’ve gotten our share of over the last ten years of
television Trek. My guess is that you’ve chosen to ignore it deliberately, but I won’t.>>

I’m still waiting for examples of this “PC mindset” your so fond of saying Trek has and or
had. Heck, Roddenberry was a flaming liberal but he was in no way PC, in fact he was
often crude, espeaclly towards women.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 9:43:02 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<True, I wasn’t too big on the whole theme, but I was aware that the writers found
themselves between a rock and a hard place. The only other alternative would have been to
extremely limit Nana Visitor’s participation in the show, which they obviously did anyway
to a fair extent I’d say, and contractually they were probably not in a position to consider
that as an alternative anyway. I’d hate being a writer on a show and finding myself
suddenly up against an unexpected pregnancy which would force me to change my plans.
Gillian Anderson was actually afraid that she was gonna get fired from The X-Files once
she got pregnant. Really, it can be unfortunate, but what can a writer do other than to try
and find some way to deal with the :::ahem::: ‘problem’ once it arises. Unfortunately it can
adversely affect a show in a variety of ways, even to the extent of making it downright silly
and poor in terms of quality.>>

Well, it’s nice to see you not blame the writers for the pregnancy like the first poster did.
Maybe there is some hope for you afterall :).

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 2:38:21 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, in defence of the DS9 writers, Sid and Nana didn’t give them much choice. And
unlike when Gates was pregnant in TNG they can’t just give Kira a bigger lab coat. Nana’s
pregnancy inconvienced the writers but they made the bast they could out of a bad
situation. How would you handle it?>>
Kira sides with Sisko instead of sleazy Bajoran interests during some crisis, and is
transferred back to Bajor. Sisko promises to help get her back, but refuses to use his
position as “emissary” to that end, because it would politicize his religious status, about
which Starfleet is already uncomfortable enough. A few months later, Kira makes a splash
when she saves the day in some crisis and the gov’t sends her back. Maybe that splash can
be unmasking her DS9 replacement as a Cardassian agent. Howabout… even dropping
clues over weeks that that replacement is up to something? Actual plotting. You can turn
any situation into a creative plus if you *try*.
Short version: Nana, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Call us when you’re
better.
We’re not talking Dana Scully here. The character of Kira is simply not that essential. I
for one would not miss her. Dax can fill the void by suddenly becoming a sour, bitter
feminist, getting religion, and falling for losers. More often.

<<BTW on your attacks on Trek in that post many times you did not specify what one you
were complainging about. Becuase of this I am forced to conclude that you are attacking
both DS9 and VOY and frankly none of you critisism fit’s DS9, espeacilly charges of
PCness.>>
DS9 is the least PC of all the modern Treks, including most of the movies. I will grant
them that. The charges of unoriginality and creative bankrupcy apply to DS9 as much as
Voyager and the last season of TNG. That one last night, for instance, stank to high
heaven. They start out with a nice premise about Sisko being out of control, in the wrong
(like Kirk several times or Picard in FC) and go instead in some kind of Machiavellian
direction where the “end justifies the means.” It’s okay to be a villain if you’re pursuing
the object of your obsession. Huh? It also made Eddington look like a complete idiot after
making him brilliant for most of it – a common enough Trek device for getting them out of
things at the last minute (“suddenly I’m a fool”) since the early days of TNG. If I were
Worf, I would have killed Sisko where he stood, to coin a phrase.
That being said, DS9 is by no means immune to the ravages of PC. It’s always the
framework and it has made several episodes unwatchable, like that recent Risa one where
the evil Republicans seduce Worf. Or any Ferengi episode. But on the whole, DS9’s
problem is less one of being preechy than of just plain being creatively bankrupt,
wandering from episode to episode, with X or Y being the good guys or bad guys as
needed, past offenses forgotten, relationships started, ended, no questions asked. I for one
wouldn’t have thought the Cardassians in any shape to be waging a war in the DMZ at this
point, but then we couldn’t do that Maquis episode.
One interesting problem that DS9 seems to suffer from even more than Voyager is that
they are totally clueless about human nature. I will say this for Voyager: I like the
characters. They have the best characters of any modern Trek. Even Tuvok, whom I
called originally a “Saturday Night Live” parody of Spock, has grown on me. The DS9
characters are mostly cardboard. Quark is good within his 2-dim framework, but Ferengi
episodes get tiresome. We all know capitalism is evil by now. Sisko has his moments (but
I lost all respect for him this week). Odo is good but underused. The rest are mediocre at
best. Julian could be good with better, more consistent writing. Dax has gotten tiresome.
Kira, Keiko, Jake, Yates, Shakkar, are all deadweight. Worf is a parody of his TNG self
(which is saying a lot) and should be put out of his misery.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/9/97 2:49:07 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I’m still waiting for examples of this “PC mindset” your so fond of saying Trek has and
or had. Heck, Roddenberry was a flaming liberal but he was in no way PC, in fact he was
often crude, espeaclly towards women.>>
So? The battle-cry of liberals has always been “do as I say not as I do.” Ted Kennedy
and Bill Clinton are about as PC as they come. Would anyone dare dispute that?
And it’s because they *are* PC in word that their deeds (unlike some other souls’) get
soft-pedalled. When was the last time NOW complained about Ted or Bill? Anne
Conners, NY NOW president on Paula Jones: “That’s not sexual harrassment. It may be
inappropriate behavior, but he didn’t punish her for refusing him – if in fact that’s what
happened.” A far cry from the definition of sexual harrassment that seemed to apply to
Bob Packwood and Clarence Thomas.

BTW, if you are waiting for someone to point out specific ways in which Trek has been
PC over the last few years, you have not been paying attention. I suggest you go back and
read through these folders. If you still don’t get it, there’s really no point in trying to come
up with more examples. The Ferengi and the Voyager quota-crew alone are indisputable.
As in “not gonna rise to any more gainsaying about these”.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 4:27:07 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Short version: Nana, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Call us when you’re
better.
We’re not talking Dana Scully here. The character of Kira is simply not that essential. I
for one would not miss her. Dax can fill the void by suddenly becoming a sour, bitter
feminist, getting religion, and falling for losers. More often.>>

Yea, that would have been really “smart”. The best thing to do is alienate a lot of your
audiance as well as cause a plublicity nightmare. Glad you don’t work in television.
<< DS9 is the least PC of all the modern Treks, including most of the movies. I will
grant them that. The charges of unoriginality and creative bankrupcy apply to DS9 as much
as Voyager and the last season of TNG. That one last night, for instance, stank to high
heaven. They start out with a nice premise about Sisko being out of control, in the wrong
(like Kirk several times or Picard in FC) and go instead in some kind of Machiavellian
direction where the “end justifies the means.” It’s okay to be a villain if you’re pursuing
the object of your obsession. Huh? It also made Eddington look like a complete idiot after
making him brilliant for most of it – a common enough Trek device for getting them out of
things at the last minute (“suddenly I’m a fool”) since the early days of TNG. If I were
Worf, I would have killed Sisko where he stood, to coin a phrase.>>

That’s funny, while Sisko’s actions outraged many (that was on purpose) most still found
it one of DS9’s best. First Trek is too PC then it is not enough! They just can’t win with
you I guess. Sisko’s actions were the only sure way to stop Eddington from destroying
more Cardassian colonies. As for your charge that Eddington had suddenly “become a
fool”, what episode were you watching? If you mean because he surrendered, that was an
action totally in charater, he was not going to allow Sisko to continue destroying Maquis
colonies, Sisko had given him no choice but too surrender.

<<That being said, DS9 is by no means immune to the ravages of PC. It’s always the
framework and it has made several episodes unwatchable, like that recent Risa one where
the evil Republicans seduce Worf.>>

You find that epiosde PC? (aside from being awful) Hah, that episode poed more of the
traditionaly PC people than any other episode this season. Go over to the DS9 episode
boards and check for yourself.

<<Or any Ferengi episode.>>

I really don’t understand this one, the Feringi are anything but PC.

<<But on the whole, DS9’s problem is less one of being preechy than of just plain being
creatively bankrupt, wandering from episode to episode, with X or Y being the good guys
or bad guys as needed, past offenses forgotten, relationships started, ended, no questions
asked.>>

Its just probaly a problem of you not paying attention, They have been meticulous in setting
up the political situation on DS9, drawing from events in both TNG and TOS. Heck, the
enitre Dominion plotline has been handled near perfectly.
cont…….

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 4:58:17 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I for one wouldn’t have thought the Cardassians in any shape to be waging a war in the
DMZ at this point, but then we couldn’t do that Maquis episode.>>

It’s not like the Cardasian military was completely distroyed in “Way of the Warrior”, and
the Federation has been helping them rebuild since then.

<<One interesting problem that DS9 seems to suffer from even more than Voyager is that
they are totally clueless about human nature. I will say this for Voyager: I like the
characters. They have the best characters of any modern Trek.>>

Hahahahahaha, you almost gave me a heart attack with this one! The Voyager charaters are
as onesided as thoose on the Dukes of Hazzerd. They have the Maquis that really arn’t
Maquis, they have the fairy girl with the magic powers(Kes). They have a Klingon/Human
that has been done by Trek before. They have the supposed scoundrel (Paris) that is
nothing but a cheap wannabe Kirk. They have Janeway, the most moronic captain in Trek
history next to Harriman. Oh, lets not forget Neelix, now that’s a great charater (heavy
sarcasm). The only charater on that whole show that was watchable is the holodoc.

<< The DS9 characters are mostly cardboard.>>

Were not watching the same show I guess.

<<Quark is good within his 2-dim framework, but Ferengi episodes get tiresome. We all
know capitalism is evil by now.>>

Hello, what show have you been watching? While Gene originally invented the Feringi to
bash capitalism, things have changed. The Feringi don’t show that capitalism is bad but
that it CAN be if profit is put over EVERYTHING else. Heck, the Federation (dispite what
Picard might say) is a heavily capitalistic society.

<<Sisko has his moments (but I lost all respect for him this week).>>

Sisko is simply the most realistic lead charater in sci-fi television history. He gets mad, he
has a family, he has too deal with human emotions, he holds grudges, he screws up from
time to time. He is HUMAN.
<<Odo is good but underused.>>

I’ll agree that he is underused.

<<Julian could be good with better, more consistent writing.>>

A great Bashir episode is coming up; “Doctor Bashir, I presume”. And Bashir, is also the
best doctor charater in Trek history next too McCoy. Bashir is another one of thoose
imperfect people. He was arrogent, and snotty when he first showed up, and he has gone
through a great deal of charater devolopment since and has shown himself to be a great
doctor, and a great person in episodes like “The Quickening”.
<<Dax has gotten tiresome.>>
Funny, I don’t think he have seen her enough.

<<Kira, Keiko, Jake, Yates, Shakkar, are all deadweight.>>

Bull, Kira is one of the most interesting charaters. Have you seen “The Darkness and the
Light”, “Nessisary Evil”, “Indescretion”, and “Return to Grace” to name a few? Kira’s
charater has been hurt by the pregnancy, but that’s over now.

Keiko simply has nothing to do, however “The Assignment” shows that the actress has
great ability.

I’ll agree that Yates and Shakaar have not been devoloped enough. However I find it
curious that you didn’t even mention two of the best charaters, Garek and Dukat. They are
clearly the best “villians” in Trek history.

<<Worf is a parody of his TNG self (which is saying a lot) and should be put out of his
misery.>>

Actually Worf is his TNG self, and luckily they have not been focusing on him much.
However I do find him tolerable when interacting with either Dax, Quark or other
Klingons.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/9/97 5:09:23 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< BTW, if you are waiting for someone to point out specific ways in which Trek has
been PC over the last few years, you have not been paying attention. I suggest you go
back and read through these folders. If you still don’t get it, there’s really no point in
trying to come up with more examples. The Ferengi and the Voyager quota-crew alone are
indisputable. As in “not gonna rise to any more gainsaying about these”.>>

Here we go again, the “I’m not going to answer your queston” response when asked for
facts.
Well, since you will not give me specifics (I doubt you have many), I’ll have to shoot
broadly. Maybe you have a weird view of what PC is. Let me explain, Political
Correctness seems to mean that which is likely to offend the least amount of people.
Judgeing from that Trek is less PC then Babylon 5. Heck, Trek’s mainly athiestic view
point is definitely NOT PC, and neither is it’s occasional bashing of the overly greedy
(Feringi episodes). Greed and Religion are two of the most cherished things in American
society. Maybe you have a diffrent view of what “PC” is.
Also, in a small defense of Voyager (and it makes me sick to do it), having 3 main female
charaters is not exactly going overboard you know? Tney are over 50% of the population.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/9/97 11:06:03 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
I’m still waiting for examples of this “PC mindset” your so fond of saying Trek has and or
had. Heck, Roddenberry was a flaming liberal but he was in no way PC, in fact he was
often crude, espeaclly towards women.<<

Ya know, it’s times like these that truly make me feel that you’re just not worth
the time, Ac –really. I believe someone mentioned the infamous TNG episode, the title of
which I don’t know, where Warp Drive suddenly emerged as an “environmental problem.”
If that wasn’t PC-preaching garbage I don’t know what is! There are many other examples,
but I’ve got a nasty cold, my brain’s not working the way it should, and quite frankly I
haven’t watched TNG in years! Nevertheless, I still remember sitting behind the tube on
many occasions watching that show and saying to myself, “Here we go again!” because the
writers were yet again trying to tell me how I should feel about something simply because
they felt like preaching. If you don’t want to acknowledge that it exists and is as much a
part of Trek history as Klingons and Warp Drive that’s just not my problem. Either you
really don’t want to see it, or you’re predominantly liberal from a political standpoint
yourself and have found yourself in overwhelming agreement with the PC mindset we’ve
had dished our way as viewers. True, DS9 has gotten better, but for a good three years it
was singing the same PC tune we were treated to in TNG.
Someone else care to take up the gauntlet here and set him straight? I’m just not up
to it –I feel lousy!
Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 11:07:12 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Well, it’s nice to see you not blame the writers for the pregnancy like the first poster did.
Maybe there is some hope for you afterall :).<<

:::cough!:::
Why Me? :\

 

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 11:19:15 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
That’s funny, while Sisko’s actions outraged many (that was on purpose) most still found
it one of DS9’s best. First Trek is too PC then it is not enough! They just can’t win with
you I guess. Sisko’s actions were the only sure way to stop Eddington from destroying
more Cardassian colonies. As for your charge that Eddington had suddenly “become a
fool”, what episode were you watching? If you mean because he surrendered, that was an
action totally in charater, he was not going to allow Sisko to continue destroying Maquis
colonies, Sisko had given him no choice but too surrender.<<

:::yawn:::: Ac, come off it –it was just too convenient, even you should agree
with that. Sisko doesn’t have to answer for his actions despite not getting official
authorization before making such a bold move, and whatta ya know –how nice, the
Maquis suddenly find themselves in a turmoil because their planets are gonna have their
atmospheres poisoned after all this time! What, and now repercussions, such as terrorist
attacks on the DS9 Station thanks to Sisko’s actions?! Give me a Break! Again, all too
typical, neat and clean Trek, only things are not quite that simple.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 11:32:01 PM
From: Sobelgirl
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec Sid and Nana didn’t give them much choice >>
I think the writers did a super job of handling the “blessed event”, sending Major Kira
down to the planet for a religious retreat would have been worse by far !! I read a posting
by our favorite B5 telepath(Lyta- Pat T.) that while she was pregnant,she thought it would
have been funny to go to G’Kar ‘s room and say to him- “We have something to discuss”
Would that have been a hoot or not!!! ROTFL <<G>>
(Remember the scene in the “Gathering”)

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/9/97 11:53:26 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

Hahahahahaha, you almost gave me a heart attack with this one! The Voyager charaters are
as onesided as thoose on the Dukes of Hazzerd. They have the Maquis that really arn’t
Maquis, they have the fairy girl with the magic powers(Kes). They have a Klingon/Human
that has been done by Trek before. They have the supposed scoundrel (Paris) that is
nothing but a cheap wannabe Kirk. They have Janeway, the most moronic captain in Trek
history next to Harriman. Oh, lets not forget Neelix, now that’s a great charater (heavy
sarcasm). The only charater on that whole show that was watchable is the holodoc.>>

<snip>

<<Sisko is simply the most realistic lead charater in sci-fi television history. He gets mad,
he has a family, he has too deal with human emotions, he holds grudges, he screws up
from time to time. He is HUMAN.>>

<snip>

<<Bull, Kira is one of the most interesting charaters. Have you seen “The Darkness and
the Light”, “Nessisary Evil”, “Indescretion”, and “Return to Grace” to name a few? Kira’s
charater has been hurt by the pregnancy, but that’s over now.

I’ll agree that Yates and Shakaar have not been devoloped enough. However I find it
curious that you didn’t even mention two of the best charaters, Garek and Dukat. They are
clearly the best “villians” in Trek history.>>

I have to side with Ac so far. But I think it may be (partly) the B5 influence. JMS wrote
(over in one of the Lurker’s guide pages) about the interaction between the B5 and DS9
production staff people.

But for the rest, I’m not so sure.

As for the PC aspect of the ST universe, I’ll just pick on just one aspect: The sexual
relationships. They are unrealistic. Very.

Can you imagine a wife not seeing the attraction that was developing between Kira and
O’Brien? And not being bothered *at all* by it? How about the common Hollywood style
depiction of the more casual liasons? It’s like a man and woman can spend time together,
and there is no lasting effect, no impact on their friendships with each other or others, no
penalties (physical or emotional). There is no effect on their work relationship. Bashir
isn’t bothered that Warf ‘scored’ with Dax, when he was moon-eyes over her just last year.
The sexual committments are as lasting as a used Kleenex.

This is not at all like what we see in our day-to-day experiences.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 12:15:39 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

I know this wasn’t addressed to me, but …

>>From: AcDec
Maybe you have a weird view of what PC is. Let me explain, Political Correctness seems
to mean that which is likely to offend the least amount of people. Judgeing from that Trek
is less PC then Babylon 5. Heck, Trek’s mainly athiestic view point is definitely NOT PC,
and neither is it’s occasional bashing of the overly greedy (Feringi episodes). Greed and
Religion are two of the most cherished things in American society. Maybe you have a
diffrent view of what “PC” is.<<

Well, you’ve just proven that you have NO IDEA what “political correctness”
actually is. It most certainly is NOT “that which is likely to offend the least amount of
people” since most of the country is centrist in their thinking, whereas PC is a left wing
ideology. And one of the most famous cases of Trek political correctness just so happens to
be a *DS9* two-parter, the title of which I don’t remember. I’m sure you know the one
I’m talking about though –the episode in which Sisko has to transform himself into Gabriel
Belle, an early 21st century individual, so as not to change the future. Geez, that episode
was so overwhelmingly PC it was downright sickening! It couldn’t have been more anti-
capitalist and pro-government in theme for Heaven’s Sake!
Don’t even try to argue this one with me, Ac –you’ll lose.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 1:27:38 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Ya know, it’s times like these that truly make me feel that you’re just not worth the time,
Ac –really. I believe someone mentioned the infamous TNG episode, the title of which I
don’t know, where Warp Drive suddenly emerged as an “environmental problem.” If that
wasn’t PC-preaching garbage I don’t know what is!>>

And if you have not noticed, they promptly forgot that episode ever happened! Shows
make mistakes, judgering Trek by some of it’s worst episodes is not going to do you any
good. If I followed this mindset I would have quit watching B5 back around “TKO”, and
start saying that B5 was about cheap monsters and idiotic new-age religious wackos after
“Grey 17 is Missing”.

<< There are many other examples, but I’ve got a nasty cold, my brain’s not working the
way it should, and quite frankly I haven’t watched TNG in years! Nevertheless, I still
remember sitting behind the tube on many occasions watching that show and saying to
myself, “Here we go again!” because the writers were yet again trying to tell me how I
should feel about something simply because they felt like preaching. If you don’t want to
acknowledge that it exists and is as much a part of Trek history as Klingons and Warp
Drive that’s just not my problem. Either you really don’t want to see it, or you’re
predominantly liberal from a political standpoint yourself and have found yourself in
overwhelming agreement with the PC mindset we’ve had dished our way as viewers.>>

Geez, the term PC really has chaged it’s definition. Everything Liberal is now considered
PC? Actually many conservative things are PC in the real sense of the word incuding
christianity, “gay bashing”, “anti-porn”, “Family values”; all those things are considered
the “politically correct” thing to believe in or say.

<<True, DS9 has gotten better, but for a good three years it was singing the same PC tune
we were treated to in TNG.>>

I still would like a definition of what you consider PC. I feel like I am in some nightmarish
Orwellian novel were Newspeak is wide spread. And the PC term is the biggest peice of
Newspeak in recent years challenged only by the use of “family values”.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 1:32:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Ac, come off it –it was just too convenient, even you should agree with that. Sisko
doesn’t have to answer for his actions despite not getting official authorization before
making such a bold move, and whatta ya know –how nice, the Maquis suddenly find
themselves in a turmoil because their planets are gonna have their atmospheres poisoned
after all this time! What, and now repercussions, such as terrorist attacks on the DS9
Station thanks to Sisko’s actions?! Give me a Break! Again, all too typical, neat and clean
Trek, only things are not quite that simple.>>

You people just make me laugh sometimes. Maybe Sisko was not in touble because the
Federation council agreed with his decision, ever though of that? Not many govenments are
going to complain if you poison a TRAITOR planet. Does everything have to be spell out
to you? Have you no brain? As for no terrorist attacks on the station, THAT WAS THE
LAST EPISODE TO
AIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, not even the Maquis work that fast.

–AcDec ::shaking head::

 

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 1:38:05 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Can you imagine a wife not seeing the attraction that was developing between Kira and
O’Brien? And not being bothered *at all* by it?>>

Probally because she trusted Miles 100%. She knew that nothing would happen.

<< How about the common Hollywood style depiction of the more casual liasons? It’s like
a man and woman can spend time together, and there is no lasting effect, no impact on their
friendships with each other or others, no penalties (physical or emotional). There is no
effect on their work relationship.>>

Well, Sisko and Kassidy’s relationship has efffected his work, as has Kira and Shakaar’s
and the only other relationship is Worf and Dax’s and we already know Worf is an idiot
and their relationship has already made him even stupider. Dax on the other hand has had
300 years of experince with both men and women, so she seems to be able to controll
herself.

<<Bashir isn’t bothered that Warf ‘scored’ with Dax, when he was moon-eyes over her
just last year. The sexual committments are as lasting as a used Kleenex.>>

Bashir did not have the hots for her last year, did you see “Starship Down”? Bashir was
with Leeta last year.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/10/97 2:46:33 AM
From: Hjordis
Posted on: America Online

<<If there’s one thing about Trek that can often be a problem its being too neat and perfect
around the edges.>>

Well, the ending of the Shadow/Vorlon war in “Into The Fire” seemed awfully neat and
perfect to me! Ten minutes of discussion and a reprimand from Lorien and they quitely
leave the galaxy? Please!

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/10/97 2:50:12 AM
From: Hjordis
Posted on: America Online

<<Indisputable point 2: In “The Long Night,” Erickson’s mission was to DIE, period. It
wasn’t just a mission where the chances of survival were slim to none. If Erickson and
any of his crew survive, the mission fails.>>

But Erickson was in the White star on patrol and his original mission was not to die – it
only became that because his ship was there monitoring Shadow activity. Plus, Sheridan
went to Z’ha’dum and died on his mission – so it would be hard for anyone else to refuse.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 4:11:18 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Yea, that would have been really “smart”. The best thing to do is alienate a lot of your
audiance as well as cause a plublicity nightmare. Glad you don’t work in television.>>
Excuse me? XF dumped Dana and they’re still going strong? Are you seriously
arguing that DS9’s ratings would plummet without Kira?
You don’t even have to get rid of her completely. She can do the weekly “visiphone
from Bajor” thing where we see her from the waist up. There is absolutely no reason to
subject the viewers to her pregnancy, except because they simply have no better ideas, have
nothing better to offer that is going to be messed up by that pregnancy. Which is sort of
the point. That whole Kira thing was surely the lamest thing ever seen on sci-fi tv, and
that’s including Gina’s quiz on President Kennedy in “Otherworld.”

<<Hah, that episode poed more of the traditionaly PC people than any other episode this
season. Go over to the DS9 episode boards and check for yourself.>>
No one ever accused Trek (this year) of not going for T&A during sweeps months, a
trend which is certainly a new low for both DS9 and Voyager. I was over in those boards
and it seemed the evils of women wanting to have sex were all people wanted to talk about.
But the main plot was predictable *precisely* because Trek is so PC. For a bit they gave
the group an actual voice, a hint of even-handedness. But you knew all along they’d have
to turn out to be the one-dimensional, evil fanatics because they were right of center.
Sex is not a topic that falls under the auspices of PC. For every left-wing feminist
objecting to the women on display, there was a right-winger moaning about the open
display of cheap, premarital sex, and vice versa. Seems everybody (but me) hated the
wiggling. I think Trek works best when it has the least pretensions.
As for “For the Uniform”, didn’t I say that DS9 was the least PC of modern Treks?
Does that mean that it can’t be bad in other ways? Honestly, I think you say these things
just for the sake of arguing. There are no political overtones per se to Sisko acting totally
out of character to catch a man who was out of their jurisdiction and simply not worth it, in
a war that shouldn’t be going on in the first place because Cardassia was militarily crippled.
Apart from which, it was *bad drama* – Sisko was undeniably out of control, and this
whole character flaw was simply *dropped.* Whether Eddington had to be caught or not
(he didn’t; they weren’t killing, they were forcing evacuations from planets rightfully
theirs), the point was that Sisko should have walked away. We saw *nothing* to indicate
that the man even thought twice about what he was doing, and all Dax did was smirk and
say, “Have fun.” I kept expecting Worf to be the Worf who stood up to Picard in FC, but
I guess the writers simply didn’t want to go in that direction. Which is the point;
subverting the characters’ reactions to make a plot work is the definition, in my book, of
bad writing. DS9 characters always do whatever they have to do to make whatever script
TPTB want to do this week work. Space powers wax and wane with no logic based on
who we want to be the bad guys this week.

<<They have been meticulous in setting up the political situation on DS9, drawing from
events in both TNG and TOS. Heck, the enitre Dominion plotline has been handled near
perfectly.>>
You have *got* to be kidding. The whole thing reeks of writers who have changed
their mind about direction four or five times since the show started. The major
undercurrent of the first couple seasons was the police state of Cardassia, and *that* was
resolved off-screen when we traded them for the Klingons as baddies. Not exactly a
payoff. The Dominion have been redefined in terms of power and motive again and again.
One week they’re trying to conquer the Federation, then infiltrate it, no just make people
think they’re infiltrating it to get them paranoid, set up a dictator, etc, etc…

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 4:17:45 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
You people just make me laugh sometimes. Maybe Sisko was not in touble because the
Federation council agreed with his decision, ever though of that? Not many govenments are
going to complain if you poison a TRAITOR planet. Does everything have to be spell out
to you? Have you no brain?<<

Obviously you’re the one lacking one here, Ac. Sisko took action without a care
of what his superiors would do after the fact, nor did he sit back to contemplate for so
much as a nanosecond what the ramifications would be to the DS9 Station once he started
poisoning Maquis planets. Did he really think that he’d get away with doing that along with
taking away Eddington, their most effective leader, without reprisals? If you were a Maquis
agent wouldn’t you have your eye on blowing the Station right out of space now because
of what Sisko did? Obviously not. And what about innocent casualties? The guy shot two
missiles into their atmosphere and there were no casualties? Come on!

>>As for no terrorist attacks on the station, THAT WAS THE LAST EPISODE TO
AIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, not even the Maquis work that fast.<<

You’ve totally missed the point –it wasn’t even a _consideration_ for Sisko, and
it darn well should have been!
Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5:to Hjordi
Date: 2/10/97 4:26:06 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

**Potential Spoiler on “Into the Fire” below.**

>>From: Hjordis
Well, the ending of the Shadow/Vorlon war in “Into The Fire” seemed awfully neat and
perfect to me! Ten minutes of discussion and a reprimand from Lorien and they quitely
leave the galaxy? Please!<<

Sadly I’m in agreement with you on this one. I think JMS’ mistake was in trying
to do too much all at once, while having everything boiled down to some very general
conceptualizations between the Vorlons and the Shadows. In fact, it was the Vorlons and
the Shadows that ended up looking like the silly children in the end and not the younger
races.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/10/97 4:26:12 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Uh, not everything has been tied up in a neat little package with the war. Remember this
isn’t the ultimate aim of the series anyway.

<<Well, the ending of the Shadow/Vorlon war in “Into The Fire” seemed awfully neat and
perfect to me! Ten minutes of discussion and a reprimand from Lorien and they quitely
leave the galaxy? Please!>>

The discussion you dismiss so completely is rather important. I don’t know about you but
I’d call it a blow up of awesome proportions. The Shadows and the Vorlons needed to
have proof that their charges *could* take care of themselves. And Lorien didn’t reprimand
them. It was the final nudge to get these two giants to realize that they were no longer
needed.

My 2 creds

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 4:26:14 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I for one wouldn’t have thought the Cardassians in any shape to be waging a war in the
DMZ at this point, but then we couldn’t do that Maquis episode.>>
<<It’s not like the Cardasian military was completely distroyed in “Way of the Warrior”,
and the Federation has been helping them rebuild since then.>>
“After today, the only real threats in the alpha quadrant will be the Federation and the
Klingons.” Yeah, it didn’t make any sense then either, considering that the only forces
committed to the battle were ships that the Cardassians and Romulans didn’t know existed.
But she oughta know.
Speaking of which, you’d think control-freaks like the Changelings would (1) instantly
know Odo can shapeshift again (let’s not even get into the science of that one) and (2)
immediately reinstate the punishment. Unless giving Odo back his powers is all part of
their real master plan, yeah, that’s the ticket.

<<However I find it curious that you didn’t even mention two of the best charaters, Garek
and Dukat.>>
Garak is excellent, but is not a major character (I threw in Keiko, Yates, and Shakkar to
show how DS9 simply cannot show believable romance). He’s also been ruined by
overwriting. He’s always a joy to watch, but his story is incomprehensible at this point –
he reached his logical peak in that episode where he was dying, whatever, and told Julian –
if you read between the lines – his true story. Since then all that has been laid waste in
favor of perpetual mystery.
Dukat is always fun to watch but he’s another example of the writers not being able to
make a decision. One week good, one week bad… at first it showed a nice “well-rounded”
character feel… later it simply began to feel schizophrenic. I understand after all his
wonderful resolutions he changes his mind and goes home soon. Maybe he found out that
his people are still fighting the Maquis and aren’t helpless after all, so he doesn’t need to be
a freedom fighter. Or maybe he found out the Dominion’s *real plan* and has to hurry
home to tell them. Or maybe he found out that Shakkar is dying and wants Julian to give
him a lobotomy so he can be Kira’s next non-boyfriend. Or maybe he found that
Cardassian double of Kira that is a Bajoran secret agent, not to be confused with Kira’s
Bajoran double that her Cardassian double is impersonating – speaking of episodes that
obviously had their ending rewritten… that could have been a very powerful episode and
salvaged Kira’s character if they’d had the guts actually to make her a Cardassian sleeper.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 4:43:20 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Maybe you have a weird view of what PC is. Let me explain, Political Correctness
seems to mean that which is likely to offend the least amount of people…. Maybe you have
a diffrent view of what “PC” is.>>
Me and the rest of the world. You wanna field this one, Gary? I get *very* tired of
these fencing matches with Ac. By your definition, Hillary Clinton would be politically
incorrect and Barbara Bush PC. The mind reels. Political correctness is the codified
values of the elite, the annointed, in our culture. The few who all think alike who tell the
rest of us what to think. If it’s part of their belief system, it’s PC. If it’s not, it’s not. The
def. you give is the one that the politically correct have utilized so that they can redefine
themselves as politically incorrect, because it’s starting to get more “fashionable” to be PI.
Please don’t waste your time telling me that you don’t believe in this “elite”. I already
know that.
As for your cry for “specific examples”, none of mine ever seem to “count” as specific
examples for some reason. Not simply that you think you’ve refuted them… but that for
some reason they weren’t even “specific examples” to begin with. Maybe because I don’t
know all the episode titles. I dunno. Don’t care neither, at this point. Gary is right; after
to a couple rounds with Ac and you just come away cursing yourself for rising to it.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 4:45:00 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< I believe someone mentioned the infamous TNG episode, the title of which I don’t
know, where Warp Drive suddenly emerged as an “environmental problem.”>>
That was me. It didn’t count because it wasn’t a “specific example.”
<<If that wasn’t PC-preaching garbage I don’t know what is!>>
Oh, you were offended? It couldn’t have been PC then.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 4:49:04 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< Well, you’ve just proven that you have NO IDEA what “political correctness” actually
is….>>
Even before I ask! Gary, you’re a godsend. Sorry, an unspecified otherworldly power
should we choose to believe such unenlightened 20th century hogwash send.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 4:50:14 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<And if you have not noticed, they promptly forgot that episode ever happened!>>
“We are authorized to exceed warp limitations for this mission, Captain.”

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 4:51:22 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Actually many conservative things are PC in the real sense of the word incuding
christianity, “gay bashing”, “anti-porn”, “Family values”; all those things are considered
the “politically correct” thing to believe in or say.>>
Only by the politically correct.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 4:52:56 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Not many govenments are going to complain if you poison a TRAITOR planet.>>
Excuse me, the Federation is not a Republic, it is a Federation. Their secession was
presumably quite legal. On the contrary, it is the Federation who have been acting in
accordance with illegal political expediency.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi:To Myth
Date: 2/10/97 7:51:51 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

A very large cheer of support from this section.
The episode which you refer too in which Captain Sisko acts like a raving mad man rather
than a starfleet officer was so totally bogus I shut it off. DS9 has had some wonderful
episodes on its own merit. Such as the one with the older Jake…(something which makes
me tear up everytime I watch it.) But the last episode was just an attempt to get ratings.
Mythophile,
I enjoy reading your posts. Please keep it up. It shows me that there are still those who
love quality in work.
Tryel

Subj: new look
Date: 2/10/97 8:02:36 PM
From: Katspjs
Posted on: America Online

not much to say.

just got tired of all the same subject names and thought a new one would break it up a bit.

although, there have been some interesting comments made and points brought up. I
would say that the B5 watchers are indeed a very intellegent group.

Subj: new
Date: 2/10/97 8:04:10 PM
From: Katspjs
Posted on: America Online

can anyone find the mistake in the last post?
just something to break it up a bit. :)

Subj: Tired of PC Argument!
Date: 2/10/97 8:37:29 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

>> I believe someone mentioned the infamous TNG episode, the title of which I don’t
know, where Warp Drive suddenly emerged as an “environmental problem.” If that wasn’t
PC-preaching garbage I don’t know what is! <<

The discovery that a widely-used technology is causing harm is “garbage”????? Oh, I see.
Then all that stuff about auto emissions causing air pollution, and chemical waste
destroying rivers and lakes, and toxic waste dumps seeping poison into groundwater —
that’s all “garbage”, too?
Talk about political correctness! This is a clear example of how ideology can blind one to
reality. Pollution is real, and if you think it’s all some hideous plot by Liberals to subvert
society then I invite you to visit my part of the world, NW Indiana, home of oil refineries,
steel mills, and chemical plants.
Star Trek shows a pretty nice future — a peaceful, unified human race (horrors!),
apparently well past the good ol’ days of poverty, ethnic hatred, and sexual discrimination.
Yeah, I can see how bad that must look to a conservative.
—Paul

Subj: Something new?
Date: 2/10/97 8:45:56 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

On the subject of this board — sorry, but I love ALL the shows: all the Star Treks,
Babylon 5, Space – Above and Beyond, etc. Although some are better than others (I
particularly like B5, DS9, and STNG) they provide a welcome refuge from the mostly
mindless crap that permeates television these days. Yes, I know the science in the fiction is
often awful, as it is in much written SF, but a good story and interesting characters can
overcome all that.
Frankly, I’ll take 10 bad episodes of “Voyager” over a single one of “Friends”.
Later.
—Paul
Subj: Re:Something new?
Date: 2/10/97 9:56:47 PM
From: Katspjs
Posted on: America Online

“…….they provide a welcome refuge from the mostly mindless crap that permeates
television these days.”
very true. very sad but true.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/10/97 10:13:08 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, you’ve just proven that you have NO IDEA what “political correctness” actually
is. It most certainly is NOT “that which is likely to offend the least amount of people” since
most of the country is centrist in their thinking, whereas PC is a left wing ideology.>>

See my response in a few more posts.
<< And one of the most famous cases of Trek political correctness just so happens to be a
*DS9* two-parter, the title of which I don’t remember. I’m sure you know the one I’m
talking about though –the episode in which Sisko has to transform himself into Gabriel
Belle, an early 21st century individual, so as not to change the future. Geez, that episode
was so overwhelmingly PC it was downright sickening! It couldn’t have been more anti-
capitalist and pro-government in theme for Heaven’s Sake!>>

Geez, Orwellian newspeak is alive and well. As for “Past Tense”, thinking that it was pro-
govenment is compltely ridiculous. They were fighting the government for crying out loud!
That episode WAS anti Lazzie-Faire (sp?) capitalism, but in no way anti-capitalism in
general. Remember, all those people wanted was OUT of the sanctuary districits so they
could get JOBS. How the heck can you interpret that as anti-capitalism? It’s not like they
were asking for welfare or anything.

<<Don’t even try to argue this one with me, Ac –you’ll lose.>>

Loose to you? Not bloody likely.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 10:47:09 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Excuse me? XF dumped Dana and they’re still going strong? Are you seriously
arguing that DS9’s ratings would plummet without Kira?
You don’t even have to get rid of her completely. She can do the weekly “visiphone
from Bajor” thing where we see her from the waist up. There is absolutely no reason to
subject the viewers to her pregnancy, except because they simply have no better ideas, have
nothing better to offer that is going to be messed up by that pregnancy. Which is sort of
the point. That whole Kira thing was surely the lamest thing ever seen on sci-fi tv, and
that’s including Gina’s quiz on President Kennedy in “Otherworld.”>>

I guess it’s just a matter of personal taste, I found the pregnancy bit well handled for what
they had to work with, and we got to see a part of Kira we have never seen before.

 

<<No one ever accused Trek (this year) of not going for T&A during sweeps months, a
trend which is certainly a new low for both DS9 and Voyager.>>

Ohh bull, Trek has been doing the T & A bit since TOS. None have been good episodes
(Except “Captain’s Holiday”), but that hasn’t stoped them from trying. “Let He Who is
Without Sin” was supposed to be a funny show to show off the infamous Risa, it failed,
and R. H. Wolfe admitted it and apoligised (as JMS did with “Grey 17…”). You can
forgive JMS, but not RHW?

<<But you knew all along they’d have to turn out to be the one-dimensional, evil fanatics
because they were right of center.>>

Well, it fits real life, there are a bunch of right wing nuts, and a bunch of left wing nuts.

<<Sex is not a topic that falls under the auspices of PC.>>

Damn, you REALLY don’t know the origins of PC before the likes of Rush changed the
definition. The relationship bewteen the sexes was one of the originators of PC.

<< There are no political overtones per se to Sisko acting totally out of character to catch a
man who was out of their jurisdiction and simply not worth it, >>

Mayne you didn’t catch it, but the Maquis were kind poisoning planets themselves. Let’s
but thin in a modern situation. If Iraq started using weapons of mass destruction, don’t you
think we would respond in kind?

<<in a war that shouldn’t be going on in the first place because Cardassia was militarily
crippled.>>

Hello, were did you get the idea that Cardassia was crippled?

<<Apart from which, it was *bad drama* – Sisko was undeniably out of control, and this
whole character flaw was simply *dropped.*>>

Sisko was completely POed but he was not out of controll. He knew exactly what he was
doing.

<<Whether Eddington had to be caught or not (he didn’t; they weren’t killing, they were
forcing evacuations from planets rightfully theirs)>>

Sisko works for the Federation, and according to the Federation those colonies are
rightfully their Cardassian ALLIES’. No way they are going to complain that Sisko
poisoned a planet of TRAITORS (from the Fed’s POV) to save many of their allies’
planets. Sisko probaly got a medal.

<<You have *got* to be kidding. The whole thing reeks of writers who have changed
their mind about direction four or five times since the show started. The major
undercurrent of the first couple seasons was the police state of Cardassia, and *that* was
resolved off-screen when we traded them for the Klingons as baddies. Not exactly a
payoff.>>

While the Cardassian coup itself was off screen, it’s setup was in MANY episodes. “The
Wire”, “Defiant”, “Improbable Cause”, “The Die is Cast”.
Cont……….

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 10:53:35 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< <<The Dominion have been redefined in terms of power and motive again and again.
One week they’re trying to conquer the Federation, then infiltrate it, no just make people
think they’re infiltrating it to get them paranoid, set up a dictator, etc, etc…>>

I guess you were not paying attention to the setup of the Dominion (not exactly a surprise).
During Odo’s quest to find out about his people he learned that thousands of years before
they were hunted down. In “The Search” the chageligeling explained that since they were
hunted they fled and eventually started the Dominion so that they never had to worry about
being attacked again. Since then all the Founders cared about was CONTROL. They don’t
want conquest, they are only concered about self-preservation. Everything they have done,
from the threatened invasion (That has now happened) too the spys and sabatour’s in the
Federation and Klingon empire has been too cause disorder in the alpha quad, and therefore
insure that they don’t join up agaisnt the Dominion. The chagelings’ motivation is and
always has been self presavation.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/10/97 11:02:08 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Obviously you’re the one lacking one here, Ac. Sisko took action without a care of what
his superiors would do after the fact, nor did he sit back to contemplate for so much as a
nanosecond what the ramifications would be to the DS9 Station once he started poisoning
Maquis planets.>>
Sisko did not have the time do contemplate a buch of “what ifs”. Eddington was poisoning
the Federation’s allies’ planets and he had to act.

<<Did he really think that he’d get away with doing that along with taking away
Eddington, their most effective leader, without reprisals? If you were a Maquis agent
wouldn’t you have your eye on blowing the Station right out of space now because of what
Sisko did?>>

Who knows, maybe the Maquis will attack the station, but if Sisko didn’t act everytime he
might tick someone off he would not get anything done. I’m sure security will be tightened
by Odo.

<< Obviously not. And what about innocent casualties? The guy shot two missiles into
their atmosphere and there were no casualties? Come on!>>

Sisko is a military officer, causilties are to be expected, however unfortuneate it is,
innocents die in battle. And don’t forget, Sisko gave them a chance to surrender, and told
them exactly what he was going to do.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi:To Myth
Date: 2/11/97 2:28:58 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<The episode which you refer too in which Captain Sisko acts like a raving mad man
rather than a starfleet officer was so totally bogus I shut it off.>>
I probably would have if I’d known where they were going, though I only tuned out of
any Trek episode *once* and flash-forwarded through it checking in vain for subplots.
(DS9 – guess which one?) But I have no objection to Sisko showing a little character flaw
(okay, that was a bit much all of a sudden – compare with Picard and Ro’s defection in her
last appearance), as long as they resolve it. But I don’t know which was more disgusting –
the fact that the whole Sisko-obssession thing was just dropped as if to say that it was ok
all along, or Dax’s asinine grinning about how cute the whole thing was while he’s
shrieking about it.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 2:40:59 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Damn, you REALLY don’t know the origins of PC before the likes of Rush changed the
definition. The relationship bewteen the sexes was one of the originators of PC.>>
Ac, there is no way you’re going to drag me into a verbal round of “my definition of PC
can beat up your definition” thing… except to say that PC has nothing to do with Rush and
was popularized by the likes of Buckley.
To clarify the conversation, *yes*, I do use liberal and PC interchangeably. Well,
nearly. There are liberals who aren’t PC (like Cuomo) but there are no PC people who
aren’t liberals. That would be a contradiction in terms.
The concept of PC, if not the term, probably goes back to that wonderful scene in the
final episode of “The Prisoner” where Number Six is shouting in vain to make himself
heard over the cacophony of institution-representing shouters. It has everything to do with
a tiny segment of our population dictating values for the rest of us by sheer repetition and
little competition (hence “political correctness” – having the correct political views, get it?)
and absolutely nothing to do with this Hollywood (ye gods, the worst offenders!)
definition of “don’t offend anyone.”
In any case, there is little point in arguing semantics. If you are an honest debater (fat
chance) you will be content will having been informed in the last few posts by I, Gary, and
others, just what we mean when we lay this particular charge against Trek. If not, you can
define PC to be “having purple starships” and declare Trek innocent if you like.
Please direct any further debate on “PC” to Gary. (This applies to Ac only)

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 2:46:26 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Since then all the Founders cared about was CONTROL. They don’t want conquest,
they are only concered about self-preservation>>
My point exactly. Five Changelings could bring the alpha quadrant under control.
(Anyone who thinks that a population of straw men like the Federation couldn’t fall under a
wiley dicator more easily than the Klingons, Romulans, etc is just plain fooling himself)
Instead what do we get? Little techniques designed to reduce the Federation to chaos…
then *never followed through* but allowing them time to regroup. It is simply not
remotely believable that the Changelings could fail to attain their objective with incredible
ease if it is anything other than military conquest (and why should it be that?). Heck, even
those pathetic worms from season one nearly pulled it off.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 6:22:12 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

I think you are all missing the basis of the PC movement.

If I remember correctly, it came from a combination of several liberal thought streams (one
of which us Jungian) that have one common thread:

If you want to remove the evils of society, remove the terminology that perpetuates the
unwanted stereotypes.

This has lead to the ‘de-genderization’ of the language. Also, the use of “differently abled”
instead of handicapped or retarded. “People of Color” instead of Negro or “colored
person”.

These influences have progressed into some rather bizarre teachings in the [mostly public] schools and universities about the history of mankind.

I have seen the removal of the historical influence of the religious on our national history
that my kids are beeing ‘spoon fed’ in their schools. Even some of the founding
documents (such as the Mayflower Compact) of this country are being ‘sanitized’ to
remove distasteful Christian references.

Yes. B5 has some of this type of stuff, but it is minimal when compared to the ST
universe.

Rich G.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:04:19 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<“After today, the only real threats in the alpha quadrant will be the Federation and the
Klingons.” Yeah, it didn’t make any sense then either, considering that the only forces
committed to the battle were ships that the Cardassians and Romulans didn’t know existed.
But she oughta know.>>

I don’t think you understood what she was getting at. The Dominion did not need to
destroy the military of the Romulans and Cardassians to keep them from being a threat. All
they needed was to destabilize that governments of Romulous and Cardassia so the last
thing they would do is attack the Dominion. And there are not many better ways to
destabilise a dictatorship than buy destrying it’s secret police.

<<Speaking of which, you’d think control-freaks like the Changelings would (1) instantly
know Odo can shapeshift again (let’s not even get into the science of that one) and (2)
immediately reinstate the punishment. Unless giving Odo back his powers is all part of
their real master plan, yeah, that’s the er ticket.>>

For one, we don’t know if they know Odo has his powers back, and they are a little busy
putting together a invasion too worry about Odo’ powers.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/11/97 7:17:25 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Political correctness is the codified values of the elite, the annointed, in our culture.
The few who all think alike who tell the rest of us what to think. If it’s part of their belief
system, it’s PC. If it’s not, it’s not.>>

In case you have not noticed, BOTH the right-wing and left-wing try to tell everyone how
to think.

<<The def. you give is the one that the politically correct have utilized so that they can
redefine themselves as politically incorrect, because it’s starting to get more “fashionable”
to be PI.>>

Both those that say they are PC and thoose that say they are PI, are full of it. Both sides
have the same agenda, to try to force others into their way of life.
<<Please don’t waste your time telling me that you don’t believe in this “elite”. I already
know that>>

Actually, I do believe in an “elite”. The “elite” are the people with both finacial and political
power, and that is the rich male christians.

<< As for your cry for “specific examples”, none of mine ever seem to “count” as specific
examples for some reason. Not simply that you think you’ve refuted them… but that for
some reason they weren’t even “specific examples” to begin with. Maybe because I don’t
know all the episode titles. I dunno. Don’t care neither, at this point. Gary is right; after
to a couple rounds with Ac and you just come away cursing yourself for rising to it.>>

I have seen only three examples (out of 100’s of episodes). Two of those the writer didn’t
even like (“Force of Nature”, and “Let He Who Is Without Sin”) Your third example was
“Past Tense”, and that is because you misinterpreted the episode. If your gonna show that
Trek is overwelmingly “PC” your gonna have to come up with a lot more than that. (I can
think of more than 3 non-pc episodes of DS9 just this season.)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:18:50 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Is *Babylon 5* really so different from *Star Trek*? Granted, B5’s story arcs are
longer. Granted, ST’s stories are more self-contained within a given episode.
However, consider the following points of commonality between the two
franchises. (Note: In the following, the parenthetical phrases contain examples of
each concept listed, with a semicolon separating the ST illustration from the B5
equivalent.)

1. Each believes in the perfectibility of the human or galactic condition
(Federation ideology; the existence of B1 through B5).

2. Each posits a revised, yet vaguely specified, economic system (Federation
credits/latinum; B5 credits) based on trade, commerce, industry, and science and
technology.

3. Each contains a certain diversity (by our standards) of leadership (Sisko;
Santiago).

4. Each seems to believe that humanistic values constitute a leading light of the
galaxy (Federation; Forces of Light).

5. Each contains strong female main characters (Janeway, Ivanova).

6. Pluralism in general (Promenade; B5) is in evidence in both.

7. Human/alien relationships are portrayed in a positive light (Sarek/wife;
Sheridan/Delenn).

8. There is depiction of the universality of religionism (Bajoran and Vulcan
religions; first season — equality of all religions).

9. Ancient races (Metrons; Vorlons) often defer to and/or learn from younger
ones.

10. There is a premium placed on the sacrifice of the few for the many (Spock
in *Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan*; Ericson in “The Long Night”).

Obviously, this covers a broad spectrum of characteristics. Given the foregoing,
are the two series really so different? How, in fact, is it true, if it is, that one series is
more or less “politically correct” than the other, when each has so much in
common with the other?

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/11/97 7:21:57 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< That was me. It didn’t count because it wasn’t a “specific example.”>>

No, I don’t count it because the whole premise was dropped in a year, and even the writers
hated that episode. As I said before, I don’t judge B5 from “TKO”, or “Grey 17 is
Missing.”

As for “pc”. Just look at “Into the Fire”, not only did it seem to be a mixture of
“Emmisarry” and “All Good Things…”, but all that “love” talk made me think I was at
woodstock. “Severed Dreams” still gets my vote for best B5.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/11/97 7:24:53 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< “We are authorized to exceed warp limitations for this mission, Captain.”>>

That was said once or twice. It has never been used on DS9. In fact, pick up a nitpickers
guide and see how many times they stoped paying attention to that rule. Or better yet look
at Ron D. Moore’s response to someones queston about that rule. The current writers have
decided to pretend it never happened.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:27:35 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Excuse me, the Federation is not a Republic, it is a Federation. Their secession was
presumably quite legal. On the contrary, it is the Federation who have been acting in
accordance with illegal political expediency.>>

While I do take the Maquis’ side in the big picture, their secession is not legal, at least
according to the Federation government.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi:To Myth
Date: 2/11/97 7:32:34 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< I probably would have if I’d known where they were going, though I only tuned out of
any Trek episode *once* and flash-forwarded through it checking in vain for subplots.
(DS9 – guess which one?) But I have no objection to Sisko showing a little character flaw
(okay, that was a bit much all of a sudden – compare with Picard and Ro’s defection in her
last appearance), as long as they resolve it.>>

Have you ever thought that Picard and Sisko are two diffrent people. Remember when
Sisko slugged Q. “I’m not Picard”. There personalities are completely diffrent.

<< But I don’t know which was more disgusting – the fact that the whole Sisko-
obssession thing was just dropped as if to say that it was ok all along,>>

To Sisko and his staff it WAS right all along.

<<or Dax’s asinine grinning about how cute the whole thing was while he’s shrieking
about it.>>

I actually agree that Dax’s ending line felt out of place, it was the only let-down in an
otherwise superb episode.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:40:53 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<The concept of PC, if not the term, probably goes back to that wonderful scene in the
final episode of “The Prisoner” where Number Six is shouting in vain to make himself
heard over the cacophony of institution-representing shouters. It has everything to do with
a tiny segment of our population dictating values for the rest of us by sheer repetition and
little competition (hence “political correctness” – having the correct political views, get it?)
and absolutely nothing to do with this Hollywood (ye gods, the worst offenders!)
definition of “don’t offend anyone.”>>

You are proving MY point. Back when this PC nonesense was started it was the Liberals
that were in charge. However in the past 7 years that has chaged and it is NOW the
conservatives that are in charge. The “correct” political view is now conservatism (even
Clinton had to turn conservative to win). Therefore following your criteria it is now the
CONSERVATIVES that are PC!
It is now the “politically correct” thing to preach religious faith (did you see Clinton’s and
Gingrich’s acceptance speaches?), and “family values” (The biggest piece of Orwellian
newspeak).

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:46:06 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Excuse me, the Federation is not a Republic, it is a Federation. Their secession was
presumably quite legal. On the contrary, it is the Federation who have been acting in
accordance with illegal political expediency.>>

OHOH, in the modern American context, a federal form of government implies a relatively
strong central government as compared to that of, for example, a confederation. What is it
about a federation that distinguishes it from a Republic, that makes you so confident that
the Maqui’s rebellion was legal?

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:46:49 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< My point exactly. Five Changelings could bring the alpha quadrant under control.
(Anyone who thinks that a population of straw men like the Federation couldn’t fall under a
wiley dicator more easily than the Klingons, Romulans, etc is just plain fooling himself)>>

No, the checks and balances in the Federation would make it much harder for chanelings to
take controll of the government. Add to that the fact that everyone knows the chagelings are
on Earth and anyone acting suspicious will probally be quickly removed.

<< Instead what do we get? Little techniques designed to reduce the Federation to chaos…
then *never followed through* but allowing them time to regroup. It is simply not
remotely believable that the Changelings could fail to attain their objective with incredible
ease if it is anything other than military conquest (and why should it be that?). Heck, even
those pathetic worms from season one nearly pulled it off.>>

The changelings HAVE been fulfilling their objective. Cardassia has fallen, the Rommies
have turned xenophobe, and the Federation-Klingon treaty has been destroyed. The alpha
quad is now disorganised and no longer a threat to the Dominion.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:49:02 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I have seen the removal of the historical influence of the religious on our national history
that my kids are beeing ‘spoon fed’ in their schools. Even some of the founding
documents (such as the Mayflower Compact) of this country are being ‘sanitized’ to
remove distasteful Christian references.>>

Maybe your kids go to a crappy school. The schools in San Antonio spend a lot of time on
the effects (both good and bad) of religion on society. Fire your school board.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:58:57 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

BTW My own personal political leanings keep getting alluded too, so I guess I’ll get them
into the open. Basiclly I’m a financial conservative and a social libertarian. I’m a card
carrying member of both the ACLU and NRA. I feel that both the Democratic and
Republican parties want to run our personal lives, but in diffrent ways. The Demo’s want
to tell me how to spend my money, and the Republicans want to controll what I read, see
or hear. They want to shove their petty “christian” (The christian coalition doesn’t really
follow the teachings of that jewish preist named Jesus) “values” on me and my family. I am
a huge supporter of free speach rights, no matter if you are Ralph Reed, or Andrea
Dworkin (Two of my least favorite in the world).

–AcDec
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/11/97 8:06:05 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Political correctness is the codified values of the elite, the annointed, in our culture.
The few who all think alike who tell the rest of us what to think. If it’s part of their belief
system, it’s PC. If it’s not, it’s not. The def. you give is the one that the politically correct
have utilized so that they can redefine themselves as politically incorrect, because it’s
starting to get more “fashionable” to be PI. Please don’t waste your time telling me that
you don’t believe in this “elite”. I already know that.>>

Ah, yes. So true. And the right believes in absolutely no values whatsoever, I take it?
Actually, the right believes in values all right — it’s just that they don’t need to be just
“politically” correct — they are “morally” correct, or “absolutely” correct, or, simply,
“correct”.

Your *overal concept* of what is “politically correct”, strangely enough, is close to what I
would accept. However, your pejorative description of it as the imposition of “elite” values
on the common folk can just as well apply to conservative values. After all, for example,
are not corporate businessmen, by and large a true elite of the country, with the money and
the influence and the power beyond the average person? Most corporatists would consider
themselves conservatives, I would think, and not the least because capitalism requires a
substantial measure of stability, predictability, and order to prosper. And most corporatists
would promote, within their ranks and among their workers at large, those values, to the
extent feasible, which best suit the interests of corporate profit — voila, conservatism.

You might object with the “workingman’s conservatism”, or the “middle class
conservativism”, or some construct of that nature that hypothetically swept the Republicans
into power in the 1980s. I would argue that for every conservative tenet of the
workingman, you will also find liberal beliefs, such as the right to a decent living, or to
belong to a union, or to a good education for their children. For every “conservative” tenet
of the middle class you will find “yuppie” values, which aren’t really the same as the
conservative values of yore.

If you were to say that liberal values are more prevalent among certain academics, or the
literati, or Hollywood (as you in fact did emphasize), than conservative values, I would
back you there. Otherwise, in my opinion, it’s an oversimplification to describe PC as
*the* value system of *the* elite. There are many elites. PC is reflective of the value
system of the elite with whom you apparently happen to disagree.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/11/97 8:24:47 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< The Shadows and the Vorlons needed to have proof that their charges *could* take care
of themselves. And Lorien didn’t reprimand them. It was the final nudge to get these two
giants to realize that they were no longer needed.>>

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

[Following are spoilers from “Into the Fire.”]

*

*

Which brings about an interesting question. If the Shadows and the Vorlons were races
that developed after the First Ones, and if Lorien was in existence even before the First
Ones, doesn’t it appear that a generation or two was skipped in the evolution of races?
That is, shouldn’t the First Ones have tried to impress Lorien, much as the “younger races”
have impressed Lorien, the First Ones, and the Vorlons and the Shadows, thus putting
Lorien to the test, aeons ago? (By “impress” I mean to pass the test of independence that
the humans, etc., have apparently done.) Shouldn’t the Shadows and Vorlons have tried to
similarly impress the First Ones? Or is the situation with the younger races unique, in that
it was only their generation that was guided by any stewardship whatsoever? If so, then
where is the resonance in the concept that just as the Shadows and Vorlons were allowed to
have their day, so too they must allow the younger races to have theirs?

Put another way, why did *both* Lorien and the First Ones hang around for billions of
years, only to leave when the Shadows and Vorlons, who are *their* younger races,
decide to take off for beyond the Rim? If Lorien stayed around for the Shadows and the
Vorlons for billions of years, why would he pick this moment (“Into the Fire”) to leave?
Something doesn’t quite make sense here. Quite possibly this is ripe for another backstory
of some kind.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 3:33:38 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

In a recent post, I wrote, <<OHOH, in the modern American context, a federal form of
government implies a relatively strong central government as compared to that of, for
example, a confederation.>> Obviously, the “OHOH” should have been “OTOH”, or “on
the other hand.”

Apologies.

Subj: Re:Uh… to: Dgasque
Date: 2/11/97 4:35:23 PM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>> You’re truly pathetic if you really believe that, Dgasque –which I don’t think
you do. It’s just another all to typical Trekkie cheap shot.<<

Uh, I think he was making a joke…

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/11/97 4:39:30 PM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>>You can’t be serious a ship named Enterprise did exactly what the ship in Long Night
did, And they did it without it being an order. That eps is a TNG classic: Yesterday’s
Enterprise was on of the best eps in any scifi world and it’s yet to be surpassed.<<

So what? If they volunteered, then Picard can rest easy at night knowing that he didn’t
HAVE to give the order. But if they had refused, and he had ORDERED them to return to
the past, that would have been different.
Sheridan *told* one of his ships to go and die for the greater good. That takes far more
guts.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument
Date: 2/11/97 4:44:36 PM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>>Watch Blood Fever (Voyager) and then say Voyager is a cancer on ST. This eps was a
turning point in this series, If this was an example of what is coming up on Voyager then
the future is very bright indeed for ST and it’s fans.<<

I’ll agree it was better. But I don’t see it as a “turning point.”

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 7:10:07 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

<<I have seen the removal of the historical influence of the religious on our national history
that my kids are beeing ‘spoon fed’ in their schools. Even some of the founding
documents (such as the Mayflower Compact) of this country are being ‘sanitized’ to
remove distasteful Christian references.>>

Maybe your kids go to a crappy school. The schools in San Antonio spend a lot of time on
the effects (both good and bad) of religion on society. Fire your school board.

–AcDec>>

Love to. But the almost the whole state is buying into the “Goals 2000″ philosophy.
Those of us who don’t agree are convienently branded as radicals and thus ignored. But
they are using nationally published textbooks.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/11/97 8:41:52 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<OHOH, in the modern American context, a federal form of government implies a
relatively strong central government as compared to that of, for example, a confederation.
What is it about a federation that distinguishes it from a Republic, that makes you so
confident that the Maqui’s rebellion was legal?>>
“A federal form of gov’t” is a change of usage that has come about because our own
beginnings were as a federation of sorts – so that “federal gov’t” referred to the Washington
level of gov’t, and because of historical trends now refers to a strong central authority. But
it is still a misuse of terminology. A Federation is a very weak form of gov’t in which
sovereignty rests partially or completely in the members. We fought a nasty war about an
honest difference of opinion as to whether we were such a gov’t, and the people who
believed we were lost, rightly or wrongly.
There is little doubt in practice that the Federation is a Federation in more than name.
We are told until we’re blue in the face that there’s no down side to joining the federation,
that Bajor has nothing to lose… in a couple old TNG episodes I vaguely recall the
implication that the prime directive (such a clearly-defined thing on the old show – let’s say
instead the “non-intereference directive” here) even applied to Federation members.
Consider also how when Kirk and company fled to Vulcan the central authority couldn’t
simply order them back. They were protected by Vulcan’s sovereign rights and *chose* to
return. The implication was not that there was something unresolved here or any gray legal
area, but that with Vulcan’s permission they could have stayed there the rest of their lives if
they wanted. (It could possibly even be argued that there are Federation members where
slavery is legal.)
As far as I know, except for this Maquis business, there has never been anything
suggesting that Federation members are just plain stuck with it after they join. It would
certainly make the whole Bajoran debate very different. The status of the Maquis planets
could be more complicated, certainly – for instance if they are considered earth, not
Federation, colonies and never actually had membership status. But I think earth’s position
in the Federation would be hopelessly compromised if they refused to recognize the
secession of their colonies, especially considering earth’s “prima donna” status in the
Federation. No earth politician with a brain of common sense would try that; all the
member worlds would get edgy about the Federation becoming an “earth empire” (if they
aren’t already; bottom line is whose population is running the military).
A Republic is essentially gov’t by representation and has little to do with the issue. I
simply couldn’t think of a good word for a gov’t where sovereignty lies in the central
authority… most likely because it’s the norm and doesn’t require a name.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/11/97 8:58:19 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Most corporatists would consider themselves conservatives, I would think>>
Strangely enough (and I agree it isn’t what one would think) you would be wrong. An
overwhelming majority of CEO’s in this country are democrats and voted for Clinton.
In any case, those CEO’s don’t have a heck of a lot of power to influence us. I’m
talking media influence. We get our values these days from movies and tv, where the
creative talent is almost exclusively liberal. (And just try being a CEO who hires only
conservative writers. You’d have a strike on your hands faster than you can say “Equal
Employment Opportunity Council.” That’s if you can find any. There are psychological
reasons why creative people aren’t usually conservative – it’s a left-brain, right-brain
thing.)
Simply put, the right wing has virtually no voice in popular culture. Who has the house
this year has no bearing on that; politicians always talk conservative when they’re worried
because conservatism still wins elections – it’s where the real country is no matter what
people label themselves. But there is a difference between what people believe and what
people are almost exclusively told – and this is the basic difference that governs elections in
our modern times – whether the innate conservatism will win out over the media’s candidate
or not.
I don’t think you understand the tremendous peer pressure of those whose job it is to
portray popular culture. Even a relatively intelligent man like JMS has spouted liberal
drivel simply because he only knows what he’s told (and will admit, I believe, that he
doesn’t follow politics). (That “Rush act” being a good example; Rush would have been
the first ones on their side in “By Any Means Necessary” – they were essential slaves of the
gov’t) Being a conservative in Hollywood is probably like being a black woman in college
was decades ago.
What the opinions of CEO’s or Jerry Falwell has to do with what the almost sole-
dispensers of our values in this day and age, pop culture, I simply do not know. But this
“conspiracy of Christians” thing got tiresome back in the religion folder.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/11/97 9:03:44 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

I think “Into the Fire” stuff is okay as of Monday:

<< If the Shadows and the Vorlons were races that developed after the First Ones, and if
Lorien was in existence even before the First Ones, doesn’t it appear that a generation or
two was skipped in the evolution of races? That is, shouldn’t the First Ones have tried to
impress Lorien, much as the “younger races” have impressed Lorien, the First Ones, and
the Vorlons and the Shadows, thus putting Lorien to the test, aeons ago? (By “impress” I
mean to pass the test of independence that the humans, etc., have apparently done.)
Shouldn’t the Shadows and Vorlons have tried to similarly impress the First Ones?>>

First of all, the Shadows and Vorlons are First Ones – you have one too many levels in
your argument. The Shadows were, we’re told, the oldest of the First Ones (not counting
Lorien’s race as “First Ones”).
Second of all, I believe that they have done exactly what you say. Lorien had “retired”
into ZHD long ago, and by his own admission the Shadows, at least, were doing what they
were doing out of respect for him, perhaps still trying to impress him. The same is
probably true of the Vorlons. In any case, I believe the “torch” was indeed passed to the
First Ones from Lorien eons ago – we simply didn’t see it happening. The only difference
is that Lorien chose to remain. But he had apparently given up influencing the First Ones.

Subj: Re:Tired of PC Argument!
Date: 2/12/97 12:10:01 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: PaulM95237
The discovery that a widely-used technology is causing harm is “garbage”????? Oh, I see.
Then all that stuff about auto emissions causing air pollution, and chemical waste
destroying rivers and lakes, and toxic waste dumps seeping poison into groundwater —
that’s all “garbage”, too?<<

:::ho hum::: You don’t even realize that you answered your own question. The
episode was deliberately designed as a sort of parallel to the exact examples you chose to
mention. It was silly “environmentalist whacko” preaching, and I for one could have done
without it. Further, you’ll notice that they quickly forgot all about that very _pivotal_ event
and the so-called “damage” Warp Drive was supposed to be causing.

>>Yeah, I can see how bad that must look to a conservative.<<

Oh don’t be ridiculous. There again, we conservatives are the villains just for
daring to look at something from a different point of view. Well to that I say “Too Bad!” I
for one think the term “political correctness” coined from those on the left takes a lot of
nerve since it insinuates that their political view is the right one, and that anyone who dares
to disagree with them is “politically incorrect,” or more pointedly, WRONG. My Foot!
What, you think that just because I’m tired of having left wing propaganda shoved down
my throat that I’m for polluting rivers and oceans?
Come Off It, will ya! How Dumb!

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 12:25:07 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Geez, Orwellian newspeak is alive and well. As for “Past Tense”, thinking that it was pro-
govenment is compltely ridiculous. They were fighting the government for crying out loud!
That episode WAS anti Lazzie-Faire (sp?) capitalism, but in no way anti-capitalism in
general. Remember, all those people wanted was OUT of the sanctuary districits so they
could get JOBS. How the heck can you interpret that as anti-capitalism? It’s not like they
were asking for welfare or anything.<<

Alas, the young lad misses the point again. :\ Why were they “fighting the
government,” Ac, Hmmm? They were fighting the government for _failing to do anything_
because they wanted a reinstitution of some sort of Government Jobs Act(I forget the exact
name of the Legislation\Act). So in essence, what they were saying was that the
government wasn’t the source of the problem(ie. people living in these walled prison
ghettos and so forth), capitalism was, but it was the failure of the government to intervene
which had allowed the problem to worsen to the extent shown. In other words, look to
government for JOBS, and look to government for ANSWERS and solutions to all
problems –particularly problems **caused by capitalism.** In case you missed it, that is
Socialist thinking. And don’t tell me that you didn’t see all the pot shots taken at capitalism
in those two episodes because they couldn’t be missed. The people Dax found herself
intermingled with were the “Privileged Class” –the Class with money, whereas those
living in the walled prisons were without money, and therefore shunned, without power, a
decent place to live, or even a loaf of bread to eat. Again, all of this was deliberately meant
to espouse Socialism. It couldn’t have been clearer.

<<From: G7
Don’t even try to argue this one with me, Ac –you’ll lose.>>

>>From: AcDec
Loose to you? Not bloody likely.<<

Sorry, but you just lost. :)

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 12:41:22 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: G7
Obviously you’re the one lacking one here, Ac. Sisko took action without a care of what
his superiors would do after the fact, nor did he sit back to contemplate for so much as a
nanosecond what the ramifications would be to the DS9 Station once he started poisoning
Maquis planets.>>

>>>From: AcDec
Sisko did not have the time do contemplate a buch of “what ifs”. Eddington was poisoning
the Federation’s allies’ planets and he had to act.<<<

That’s boulderdash! Those being affected by Eddington’s actions were the
Cardassians *exclusively,* and therefore not necessarily Sisko’s problem to worry about —
more like StarFleet and the Federation’s. Eddington was right –Sisko betrayed his uniform
and everything he was _supposed to stand for_ by acting the way he did, and if I were
sitting on a Board of Inquiry reviewing the matter and saw *any* innocent casualties as a
result of Sisko’s unapproved actions I’d have hung him out to dry! He had no authority to
do what he did, and I wouldn’t have cared about whether he had caught Eddington or not
in the aftermath because Sisko’s obsession and the lengths he was willing to go to just to
get Eddington was abundantly clear. Further, the situation wasn’t as dire as you’re making
it sound. Sisko could easily have pulled back and waited for a better opportunity to catch
Eddington, which is what I would have done. I would have laid off for a few months and
then came at him again unsuspectingly if possible. That was definitely an option he could
have chosen, and his Station is supposed to come *First* since *he’s the one in Command
of it!*
Like I said, he didn’t even consider potential consequences to DS9 for so much
as a nanosecond, and I find that impossible to condone. The people on that Station _from
where he sits_ are supposed to be his FIRST priority, not the Maquis, and Not Eddington!
In fact, he had been specifically ordered by his superiors not to pursue Eddington any
further.

And what about innocent casualties? The guy shot two missiles into their atmosphere and
there were no casualties? Come on!>>

>>>From: AcDec
Sisko is a military officer, causilties are to be expected, however unfortuneate it is,
innocents die in battle. And don’t forget, Sisko gave them a chance to surrender, and told
them exactly what he was going to do.<<<

Like I said, if I were one of the members sitting on a Board of Inquiry reviewing
the matter I’d have hung him out to dry! Bet on It!

 

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 12:46:19 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: RGitschlag
Yes. B5 has some of this type of stuff, but it is minimal when compared to the ST
universe.<<

You can sure say that again!

 

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 12:51:02 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
In case you have not noticed, BOTH the right-wing and left-wing try to tell everyone how
to think.<<

Perhaps, but only those on the left would be so bold as to come up with a term
which asserts that everyone not abiding with their line of thinking is “wrong.”

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 12:53:13 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Or better yet look at Ron D. Moore’s response to someones queston about that rule. The
current writers have decided to pretend it never happened.<<

Uh huh. So like you told Mytho, that means it doesn’t count, right?
Please!

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 12:57:12 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Maybe your kids go to a crappy school. The schools in San Antonio spend a lot of time on
the effects (both good and bad) of religion on society. Fire your school board.<<

This is a deliberate pervasive movement by liberals throughout the country,
especially in large inner cities. It is also a good part of the reason why people on my side of
the fence find PC so despicable, because it’s designed to reformat society, and even matters
of history by extension. As I said, *pervasive* –deliberately pervasive.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 1:02:36 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
The Demo’s want to tell me how to spend my money, and the Republicans want to controll
what I read, see or hear. They want to shove their petty “christian” (The christian coalition
doesn’t really follow the teachings of that jewish preist named Jesus) “values” on me and
my family.<<

You’re referring to the _extreme right_, which most certainly doesn’t speak for
the whole of the Republican Party. Furthermore, if you don’t think that the Democrats are
trying to “control” what you “read, see or hear,” then I truly feel sorry for you since they’re
far worse than the Republicans could ever hope to be when it comes to that.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/12/97 1:41:37 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<So what? If they volunteered, then Picard can rest easy at night knowing that he didn’t
HAVE to give the order. But if they had refused, and he had ORDERED them to return to
the past, that would have been different. >>

Picard and Garrett were of equal rank and were the respective commanders of their vessels.
Neither could have issued valid orders to the other in the absence of pre-existing orders to
the contrary from a command authority higher than either of them.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 1:57:54 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< “A federal form of gov’t” is a change of usage that has come about because our own
beginnings were as a federation of sorts – so that “federal gov’t” referred to the Washington
level of gov’t, and because of historical trends now refers to a strong central authority.>>

Agreed that in the modern context, a “federal” form of government connotes a strong
central government.

<<But it is still a misuse of terminology. A Federation is a very weak form of gov’t in
which sovereignty rests partially or completely in the members. We fought a nasty war
about an honest difference of opinion as to whether we were such a gov’t, and the people
who believed we were lost, rightly or wrongly.>>

I believe you may be referring to the American Civil War (a.k.a., the War Between the
States). Truly, the issue was decided on the battlefield, that the Union must reign supreme
over the states. As well, issues of states’ rights, which resonated even to the 20th
Century’s Civil Rights Era, have been largely settled by court decisions in favor of the
federal government. *Stare decisis*, hence, is in accord with the idea that the central
authority has ultimate authority when it comes to a contest between the states and the
federal government.

Yet, it remains the case that where the federal government does not occupy the field, the
individual states retain sovereignty as against any other state and, in effect, against any
other authority. The exact limits of where the federal government’s power extends is still
shifting, and to some extent has been curtailed in certain federal decisions over the last two
decades.

Strict constructionists believe that the Commerce Clause, among others, of the U.S.
Constitution has been used to extend federal power beyond its intended bounds. Some of
these believe that the Tenth Amendment is in need of reinvigoration.

To harken back, however, to a time before the modern era, we would look toward the
Articles of Confederation, which were superseded by our present Constitution. In that
light, our federal form of government is, by comparison, centrally based and independent
of the states or their bases of power.

The issue of what the Federation is, and whether its central government is strong or weak,
is thus much more complicated than one would think.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 2:12:57 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< There is little doubt in practice that the Federation is a Federation in more than name.
We are told until we’re blue in the face that there’s no down side to joining the federation,
that Bajor has nothing to lose… in a couple old TNG episodes I vaguely recall the
implication that the prime directive (such a clearly-defined thing on the old show – let’s say
instead the “non-intereference directive” here) even applied to Federation members.
Consider also how when Kirk and company fled to Vulcan the central authority couldn’t
simply order them back. They were protected by Vulcan’s sovereign rights and *chose* to
return. The implication was not that there was something unresolved here or any gray legal
area, but that with Vulcan’s permission they could have stayed there the rest of their lives if
they wanted. (It could possibly even be argued that there are Federation members where
slavery is legal.)>>

I don’t recall the episodes you refer to. It is of course possible that the Federation’s central
authority in relation to its member states is not quite as powerful as the U.S. government in
relation to the states. Suppose that your supposition is correct, and that the Federation is
more like the United Nations than the United States. Suppose that, in the modern world, a
handful of settlers moved onto certain islands under United Nations protection. Suppose
that the settlers, for a few decades, formed an informal government under the sufferance of
the U.N. Suppose that they utilized U.N. facilities and assistance from time to time.
Now, suppose that for internal reasons, the U.N. decided that such islands would be ceded
to a certain member state, or even a nonmember state. Would the U.N. be correct in
resorting to force to relocate such settlers if the settlers refused to leave after repeated
incentives to leave? Without examining the precedents, it would seem plausible that as long
as a substantial majority, and the Security Council, decided in favor of such a move, such
settlers would probably end up having little choice but to move, at the point of a gun if
necessary.

Now, to add to the mix: Suppose the settlers were a constant source of friction (utilizing
violent means to effectuate their goals) in the area. Would the U.N.’s hypothetical case be
strengthened or weakened?

Now compare the settlers in the above example with member states such as the first rank of
states (the industrialized countries, for example), or even lesser nation-states. Would the
settlers’ grievances receive more, or rather less, attention and weight than those of states?
Would the fact that nation-states receive vastly more perquisites, so to speak, than such
settlers be unseemly in this context?

One of the first principles of international law is that individuals have no standing; only
certain recognized entities, such as nation-states, do. I think this is a very useful concept to
remember in our discussion of the grievances of the Maquis.
Subj: Go away
Date: 2/12/97 2:26:20 AM
From: AConway364
Posted on: America Online

Any body who thought Blood Fever was good is a TWIT!……One day when you reach
puberty you’ll understand. especially you Acdec… Go get a life. your the kinda person
Steve Case hate’s. Constantly babbleing about Stupid Star-Trek trick’s……really try to
meet someone of the oppisite sex this time. Shut the damn computer off and go outside
little boy.
Love Andy/President Z’Ha’Dum Biker Gang

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 2:27:43 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Strangely enough (and I agree it isn’t what one would think) you would be wrong. An
overwhelming majority of CEO’s in this country are democrats and voted for Clinton.>>

I am genuinely surprised to hear this. I would have believed that the rich would vote for
the party that is strongly identified with their interests, as the poor would vote for the party
that is identified with theirs. Perhaps I will look into this further.

<<In any case, those CEO’s don’t have a heck of a lot of power to influence us. I’m
talking media influence. We get our values these days from movies and tv, where the
creative talent is almost exclusively liberal. (And just try being a CEO who hires only
conservative writers. You’d have a strike on your hands faster than you can say “Equal
Employment Opportunity Council.” That’s if you can find any. There are psychological
reasons why creative people aren’t usually conservative – it’s a left-brain, right-brain
thing.)>>

Isn’t the power of popular culture something? Yes, it dictates what we where, what jokes
we tell, and to some extent how we deal with strangers. But I believe in the power of the
family and the church, as well, to influence and mold opinions and behavior. Americans
are still one of the most religious people on Earth, by self-identification — far more so, for
example, than Europeans. And, in spite of the fact that we are a restless people, we still
tend to settle within a few hundred miles or less of the place where we were raised,
according to a recent survey. The land, the family, the church, and tradition have a voice
that is quieter, but profounder, than anything Hollywood or Madison Avenue usually has
to say.

<<Simply put, the right wing has virtually no voice in popular culture. Who has the house
this year has no bearing on that; politicians always talk conservative when they’re worried
because conservatism still wins elections – it’s where the real country is no matter what
people label themselves. But there is a difference between what people believe and what
people are almost exclusively told – and this is the basic difference that governs elections in
our modern times – whether the innate conservatism will win out over the media’s candidate
or not.>>

Conservatism is also a cohesive doctrine, and one preached by an elite — certain pastors,
the older generation, and monied interests — in an indirect and comparatively nonvocal
manner. Whether there is a culture war or not, even the vaguest idea of warring cultures
presumes contending leaderships of opposite camps. My point was only that different
elites have different prevailing takes on morality; whether any particular elite has the
monopoly on ultimate truth is quite a different matter altogether.

<<I don’t think you understand the tremendous peer pressure of those whose job it is to
portray popular culture. Even a relatively intelligent man like JMS has spouted liberal
drivel simply because he only knows what he’s told (and will admit, I believe, that he
doesn’t follow politics). [* * *] What the opinions of CEO’s or Jerry Falwell has to do with what the almost sole-
dispensers of our values in this day and age, pop culture, I simply do not know. But this
“conspiracy of Christians” thing got tiresome back in the religion folder.>>

Agreed. There is no conspiracy of Christians. There are different views of morality,
practiced and preached by different groups of individuals. I wonder, however, if there is
any way to bridge the gap between those who accuse others of political correctness, and
those who brand their opponents as reactionaries. The truth may be quite a bit more
complex than simply left and right.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/12/97 2:31:00 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< First of all, the Shadows and Vorlons are First Ones – you have one too many levels in
your argument. The Shadows were, we’re told, the oldest of the First Ones (not counting
Lorien’s race as “First Ones”).>>

You are correct: I did think that the Shadows and Vorlons were somehow third-tier. I must
try to catch the repeats.

<<Second of all, I believe that they have done exactly what you say. Lorien had “retired”
into ZHD long ago, and by his own admission the Shadows, at least, were doing what they
were doing out of respect for him, perhaps still trying to impress him. The same is
probably true of the Vorlons. In any case, I believe the “torch” was indeed passed to the
First Ones from Lorien eons ago – we simply didn’t see it happening. The only difference
is that Lorien chose to remain. But he had apparently given up influencing the First
Ones.>>

Interesting. But why did Lorien choose *this* moment to go beyond the Rim? Was he
*only* waiting for races as worthy as humans and the other younger races, before doing
so? Or is there something more? Hmmm. Have to think about this some more. Thanks
for your input.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 2:34:55 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Correction:

<<Yes, it dictates what we where, what jokes we tell, and to some extent how we deal with
strangers>> — “where” should be “wear”.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/12/97 4:19:36 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
But why did Lorien choose *this* moment to go beyond the Rim? Was he *only* waiting
for races as worthy as humans and the other younger races, before doing so? Or is there
something more? Hmmm. Have to think about this some more. Thanks for your
input.<<

It was just a neat and silly way to tie the whole thing up. I had a lot of problems
with “Into the Fire.” The only thing that was good about that episode was the scenes on
Centauri Prime and watching Londo in action.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/12/97 4:47:38 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Picard and Garrett were of equal rank>>
I suppose technically Garrett did have him on date of rank…

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/12/97 4:50:23 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Tryel Sana
The discussion you dismiss so completely is rather important. I don’t know about you but
I’d call it a blow up of awesome proportions. The Shadows and the Vorlons needed to
have proof that their charges *could* take care of themselves. And Lorien didn’t reprimand
them. It was the final nudge to get these two giants to realize that they were no longer
needed.<<

If Lorien was really so important to the Vorlons and the Shadows why did they try
to destroy the WhiteStar several times? After all, he was also on that ship don’t forget, yet
then at the end of the confrontation the Shadows(and presumably the Vorlons as well) were
suddenly ‘happy’ once Lorien announced that he was going to go with them. I don’t know,
it was all so silly –unfortunately. :\

 

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: to Mytho
Date: 2/12/97 4:53:58 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: A5398457
Picard and Garrett were of equal rank>>

>>From: MythoPhile
I suppose technically Garrett did have him on date of rank…<<

I don’t think seniority makes all that much difference, Mythos. But nice try I
suppose. <g>

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:01:20 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< I would have believed that the rich would vote for the party that is strongly identified
with their interests, as the poor would vote for the party that is identified with theirs.>>
Which is precisely why you have the political views that you do. You are a victim of a
successful strategy of class warfare. (Even Gary Trudeau concedes that beggars did better
in the greedy 80’s. And even poor people were victims of inflation in the 80’s. Economics
is not, contrary to what the dem’s would have us believe, a zero sum game where it’s only
a question of who has the money. On the contrary, we see that everybody can do better or
everybody can do worse. Problem is, nasty old envy sneaks in when the rich are doing
well and then people go and vote for those who will “punish” them, not realizing that these
things do “trickle down”.)

<<But I believe in the power of the family and the church, as well, to influence and mold
opinions and behavior. Americans are still one of the most religious people on Earth, by
self-identification — far more so, for example, than Europeans. And, in spite of the fact
that we are a restless people, we still tend to settle within a few hundred miles or less of the
place where we were raised, according to a recent survey. The land, the family, the
church, and tradition have a voice that is quieter, but profounder, than anything Hollywood
or Madison Avenue usually has to say.>>
True. This is to the credit of the American people. They are very resilient in spite of the
*overwhelming* pressures from a select few to change the basic ways they think and act
and feel. So far. In the long run, if unchallenged, the Big Lie will always win, though.
Already our American identity is fading, and by the way, it’s so evil and narrow-minded to
suggest that we even have one. I find this “social reprogramming” by a select few to
change the values of the many the most insidious force in the history of human civilization,
without hyperbole. It is nothing less in the long run than, to coin a phrase, the abolition of
man.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/12/97 5:03:12 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<So what? If they volunteered, then Picard can rest easy at night knowing that he didn’t
HAVE to give the order. But if they had refused, and he had ORDERED them to return to
the past, that would have been different.
Sheridan *told* one of his ships to go and die for the greater good. That takes far more
guts.>>

Well Picard was the one that suggested to them to do it. He didn’t have the authority to
order them too. But he did have to take the responsisbilty of suggesting it. Also it is not
like Ericson would not have voluteered if go if given the chance. The rangers would do
anything for Sheridan.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 5:04:44 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Love to. But the almost the whole state is buying into the “Goals 2000″ philosophy.
Those of us who don’t agree are convienently branded as radicals and thus ignored. But
they are using nationally published textbooks.>>

May I ask what state?

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:12:40 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Which is precisely why you have the political views that you do. You are a victim of a
successful strategy of class warfare. >>

Well, as for myself, speaking as someone who intends to be filthy rich, perhaps it may be
to your surprise that my views are not so class-warfarish as you think.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 5:13:16 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<We are told until we’re blue in the face that there’s no down side to joining the
federation, that Bajor has nothing to lose… in a couple old TNG episodes I vaguely recall
the implication that the prime directive (such a clearly-defined thing on the old show – let’s
say instead the “non-intereference directive” here) even applied to Federation members.>>

Only in a VERY limited way.

<< Consider also how when Kirk and company fled to Vulcan the central authority
couldn’t simply order them back. They were protected by Vulcan’s sovereign rights and
*chose* to return. The implication was not that there was something unresolved here or
any gray legal area, but that with Vulcan’s permission they could have stayed there the rest
of their lives if they wanted. (It could possibly even be argued that there are Federation
members where slavery is legal.)>>

Vulcan may be a special case, because that does not work for ever planet. (Most likely a
screwup by the writers on STIV) As for slavery, nope. A planet too gain addmittance to the
Federation has to abide by several civil rights rules. (Bajor couldn’t have it’s old class
system)

<<As far as I know, except for this Maquis business, there has never been anything
suggesting that Federation members are just plain stuck with it after they join. It would
certainly make the whole Bajoran debate very different. The status of the Maquis planets
could be more complicated, certainly – for instance if they are considered earth, not
Federation, colonies and never actually had membership status. But I think earth’s position
in the Federation would be hopelessly compromised if they refused to recognize the
secession of their colonies, especially considering earth’s “prima donna” status in the
Federation. No earth politician with a brain of common sense would try that; all the
member worlds would get edgy about the Federation becoming an “earth empire” (if they
aren’t already; bottom line is whose population is running the military).>>

Well, some of the Maquis are Federation citizans (not Earth ones), and others are offically
Cardassian citizans (the ones stuck on the Federation colonies given to Cardassia).
I can post a run-down of the maquis situation if anyone wants it.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:32:21 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Alas, the young lad misses the point again. :\ Why were they “fighting the
government,” Ac, Hmmm? They were fighting the government for _failing to do anything_
because they wanted a reinstitution of some sort of Government Jobs Act(I forget the exact
name of the Legislation\Act). So in essence, what they were saying was that the
government wasn’t the source of the problem(ie. people living in these walled prison
ghettos and so forth), capitalism was, but it was the failure of the government to intervene
which had allowed the problem to worsen to the extent shown.>>

Again, you are missing some important points. While ONE of their demands was the
restitution of the “federal employment act” (is that real or made up, anyone know?). Their
other complaints were that they were not even allowed to LOOK for jobs on their own. The
“sanctuary districts” were the ultimate in a welfare system, and they completely failed! I
thought it was the conservative thing to be for “welfare to work” which is exactly what that
episode was “preaching”. And even most conservatives think that the government should
in time of depression (which was clearly happening) help to create jobs. Also, at the end
Sisko said that “the people” not the Government were responisble for “solving” the social
problems of the time.
<< In other words, look to government for JOBS, and look to government for ANSWERS
and solutions to all problems –particularly problems **caused by capitalism.** In case you
missed it, that is Socialist thinking.>>

In case you did not notice, they were trying to get OUT of a governemnt program. And
yes, they probaly expected the government to help the economy in that time of severe
depression, but that is something most conservatives believe in!

<< And don’t tell me that you didn’t see all the pot shots taken at capitalism in those two
episodes because they couldn’t be missed. The people Dax found herself intermingled with
were the “Privileged Class” –the Class with money, whereas those living in the walled
prisons were without money, and therefore shunned, without power, a decent place to live,
or even a loaf of bread to eat. Again, all of this was deliberately meant to espouse
Socialism. It couldn’t have been clearer.>>

Protraying the truth of the situation is somehow protraying socialism? In case you have not
noticed, socialism has the “privaleged” class too, actually they have a much worse of
general populous than a capitalistic society. That episode was in no way promoteing
socialism.

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:39:19 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<(Even Gary Trudeau concedes that beggars did better in the greedy 80’s. And even poor
people were victims of inflation in the 80’s. Economics is not, contrary to what the dem’s
would have us believe, a zero sum game where it’s only a question of who has the money.
On the contrary, we see that everybody can do better or everybody can do worse. Problem
is, nasty old envy sneaks in when the rich are doing well and then people go and vote for
those who will “punish” them, not realizing that these things do “trickle down”.)>>

MythoPhile, the 1980s were profitable for many, and disastrous for some. I won’t argue
that point. What I will argue is that there is a corporate class and that this class does have
its own interests, because all groups have their own interests. What you ascribe as “class
warfare”, however, is not what a fair reading of my post would yield. American society is
sufficiently complex, of its own nature, such that groups must vociferously fight for their
own interests in order to be heard; this does not equate to class warfare as the term is
commonly used.

To illustrate the complexities of differing interests, let’s take the example of the corporate
world. Even within the world of corporate interests it can be seen that conflict exists
between particular factions or holders of interests. Corporate shareholders have a common
interest in, or expectation of, if you will, the stability of markets and the efficiency of
companies in general. Yet particular corporate factions within corporations have an interest
in preserving their own power within the company, and bondholders may be in opposition
to stockholders. Does this mean that “class warfare”, as in different classes of stock, exist?
Of course not, and no-one would suggest that it does. Yet differences do exist
nevertheless, and so do conflicts. But note, as well, that despite such differences among
themselves, all corporate shareholders have an interest in the production of maximum
return for their investment; despite differences among themselves, corporatists have a
common interest which they must preserve against those who would minimize such returns
— particularly labor.

Let’s explore the idea of the clash of interests further. The cost of labor is an irreducible
element in business. The interests of labor lie with a maximization of wages; the interests
of corporations, often in their minimization. There would appear to be a conflict, here — is
*this* class warfare?

I would argue to the contrary. Class warfare, which is a Marxist term, doesn’t exist in
American society, for the reasons that there is sufficient recognition of the overlap between
the interests of labor and capital in the sustenance of a viable economy, that there are
mediating and ameliorative factors (unspecified here), and that the openness of the market
itself permits much of labor to shop for the best employer. But still, there is no question
that labor and capital have some very important differences and different ways of looking
of the world.

I wouldn’t use the phrase “class warfare” to characterize the accommodation of different
interests in this country. I think a better phrase would be “conflictual dynamic
equilibrium”, which, as apparently self-contradictory and buzz-wordy as it would seem,
probably better describes the system we have in this country today.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 5:44:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<That’s boulderdash! Those being affected by Eddington’s actions were the Cardassians
*exclusively,* and therefore not necessarily Sisko’s problem to worry about –more like
StarFleet and the Federation’s.>>

Sisko was the leading Federation and Starfleet represenative there. It is HIS JOB to protect
the Federation AND it’s allies, and the Cardassians ARE allies.

<< Eddington was right –Sisko betrayed his uniform and everything he was _supposed to
stand for_ by acting the way he did, and if I were sitting on a Board of Inquiry reviewing
the matter and saw *any* innocent casualties as a result of Sisko’s unapproved actions I’d
have hung him out to dry! He had no authority to do what he did, and I wouldn’t have
cared about whether he had caught Eddington or not in the aftermath because Sisko’s
obsession and the lengths he was willing to go to just to get Eddington was abundantly
clear. Further, the situation wasn’t as dire as you’re making it sound. Sisko could easily
have pulled back and waited for a better opportunity to catch Eddington, which is what I
would have done. I would have laid off for a few months and then came at him again
unsuspectingly if possible. That was definitely an option he could have chosen, and his
Station is supposed to come *First* since *he’s the one in Command of it!* >>

If Sisko had waited Eddington would have destryoed every cardassian colony. His inaction
would be seen as betrayl by the Cardassians, and the alliance would be OVER. Comparing
the loss of an alliance and a possable reinstatement of hostilities with the Cardies, to the
poisoning of a planetfull of TRAITORS, is not exactly a hard choice from Sisko’s POV.

<<Like I said, he didn’t even consider potential consequences to DS9 for so much as a
nanosecond, and I find that impossible to condone. The people on that Station _from where
he sits_ are supposed to be his FIRST priority, not the Maquis, and Not Eddington!>>

No, his first duty was to the intrests of the Federation, if those interests demanded the
destructio of both the Defiant and DS9, Sisko would have no choice.
Your argument is like saying that Ericson should have refused Sheridan’s order because it
would cause him to lose his ship.

<< In fact, he had been specifically ordered by his superiors not to pursue Eddington any
further.>>

An order that would have changed once the Maquis’ use of bio weapons and the
Menincie’s disablement was known. This is not the first time a federation captain has
disobayed orders and come out on top (Kirk did it all the time).
<< Like I said, if I were one of the members sitting on a Board of Inquiry
reviewing the matter I’d have hung him out to dry! Bet on It!>>

Well, you were not on the board of inquery. and considering that Sisko stoped the
distruction of the Federation’s allies’ colonies AND he captured a very dangerous traitor,
Sisko probaly got a medal.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:45:28 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Perhaps, but only those on the left would be so bold as to come up with a term which
asserts that everyone not abiding with their line of thinking is “wrong.”>>

The right-wing does not need to, they’ll just say you’ll burn in hell, or call you “immoral”.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:46:25 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Uh huh. So like you told Mytho, that means it doesn’t count, right? >>

Exactly, just like I don’t judge B5 on mistakes JMS wishes he never made.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 5:50:27 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< You’re referring to the _extreme right_, which most certainly doesn’t speak for the
whole of the Republican Party.>>

Umm, have you seen the Rep. party platform, or heard the remarks of the Christain
Coalition (the most powerful force in the REP party) ? Did you see some of the stuff that
passed a Republican congress last year?

<< Furthermore, if you don’t think that the Democrats are trying to “control” what you
“read, see or hear,” then I truly feel sorry for you since they’re far worse than the
Republicans could ever hope to be when it comes to that.>>

No, I find the Demo’s just as guilty, its just not their “main” focus. Actually since they
have pretty much lost in the attempt to completely take my money, they probaly will focus
more on the censorship aspect. Espeacilly with Clinton as pres.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Go away
Date: 2/12/97 5:55:24 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Any body who thought Blood Fever was good is a TWIT!……One day when you reach
puberty you’ll understand. especially you Acdec… Go get a life. your the kinda person
Steve Case hate’s. Constantly babbleing about Stupid Star-Trek trick’s……really try to
meet someone of the oppisite sex this time. Shut the damn computer off and go outside
little boy.>>

Whoa, this must be a member of MENSA. :) In case you have not noticed you “mentally
challanged” (Hey, gotta be PC :-) ) person, I hate Voyager with a passion and have not
even bothered to WATCH “Blood Fever”.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/12/97 5:56:57 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< It was just a neat and silly way to tie the whole thing up. I had a lot of problems with
“Into the Fire.” The only thing that was good about that episode was the scenes on Centauri
Prime and watching Londo in action.>>

Uh oh, we are agreeing again Gary, this must not become a habit. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 5:59:41 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< True. This is to the credit of the American people. They are very resilient in spite of
the *overwhelming* pressures from a select few to change the basic ways they think and
act and feel. So far. In the long run, if unchallenged, the Big Lie will always win, though.
Already our American identity is fading, and by the way, it’s so evil and narrow-minded to
suggest that we even have one. I find this “social reprogramming” by a select few to
change the values of the many the most insidious force in the history of human civilization,
without hyperbole. It is nothing less in the long run than, to coin a phrase, the abolition of
man.>>

We don’t agree very often Mytho, but I have to agree here. But I do hope you accept that
the “big lie” technique is used by BOTH sides.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/12/97 6:02:22 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, as for myself, speaking as someone who intends to be filthy rich, perhaps it may
be to your surprise that my views are not so class-warfarish as you think.>>

I had to ROFL on this one. I’m afriad that many on this board would think the worst of us
just because we don’t agree with them. (I’m not maneing names :) ) That is why I devoted
an entire post to my own political “beliefs”.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 7:44:55 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

<<Love to. But the almost the whole state is buying into the “Goals 2000″ philosophy.
Those of us who don’t agree are convienently branded as radicals and thus ignored. But
they are using nationally published textbooks.>>

May I ask what state?

–AcDec>>

Oregon. I live in Tillamook, a town of 4,000, near the Pacific Coast, in a county of
22,000, that was heavily timber and fishing dependent. There are only 3 mills left and the
fisheries are also in decline. The largest commercial operation is dairy (we have the largest
single cheese factory in the US, maybe the world), but the largest source of income is
‘transfer payments’, like pensions, SSI and welfare. This area is socially conservative,
except they vote 60% liberal Democrat, and keep electing flaming liberals to the school
boards, city councils, county commission and state legislature.

It gets quite frustrating sometimes.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:to JVibber
Date: 2/12/97 7:57:05 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< Bottom line, if a male Vulcan opts for combat to the death with the female of his choice,
and killing her actually ‘purges’ the ‘blood fever’ he’s experiencing, then that’s just plain
silly, a waste, *illogical,* and how could any Vulcan male stand to even look at himself in
a mirror once the deed of having killed the female of his choice is done? Things could not
be that way! Vulcans just would not permit it in my view. >>

Excellent logical point, Gary7sevn. However, as we were repeatedly reminded in “Blood
Fever,” the Vulcan mating instinct is particularly NOT logical. My complaint is that in the
show “Amok Time,” which originally DEFINED the Pon Farr, the battle to the death was
presented as necessary to satisfy the Vulcan instinct. In Voyager’s episode, on the other
hand, we have NO CLEAR INDICATION that the Vulcan ever REALLY availed himself
of the “services” of the holodeck female — perhaps he simply lied to the doctor in order to
give himself the chance to beam down to the planet. We have no explanation of why a
battle to the death was necessary in one case and not in another. For all Trek’s penchant
for technobabble, a simple throwaway line to explain this is conspicuously absent. I just
can’t shake the feeling that continuity has been thrown out the window — AGAIN — and
the writers/producers of Voyager have no clue as to why this should bother anybody.
Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/12/97 8:02:22 AM
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< That “PC” term is used way to much and is becoming a tool of the lazy. >>

I thought it now stood for “Pirates of the Carribean.”
Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/12/97 7:47:08 PM
From: Manglak
Posted on: America Online

I’m totally hooked on B5, as of season 3. Our stations in KC had it in such a cruddy time
slot, I was barely aware of it’s existence. However, with that said, STV cannot be lumped
in with TOS,TNG, or DS9. Remember without Trek, most Sci-Fi as we know it would not
exist. Both are excellent shows, even though Berman and Viacom are destroying Gene’s
dream. We, as fans must make our voices heard. Do not sit idly by and watch the corp.’s
destroy some of the best TV since TV went color!

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/12/97 8:44:02 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Which brings about an interesting question. If the Shadows and the Vorlons were races
that developed after the First Ones, and if Lorien was in existence even before the First
Ones, doesn’t it appear that a generation or two was skipped in the evolution of races? >>

The Vorlons and Shadows are the same generation as the other first ones, and one
generation removed from Lorien…

Subj: Re:Go away
Date: 2/12/97 8:59:00 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<<<Any body who thought Blood Fever was good is a TWIT!……Shut the damn
computer off and go outside little boy.>>

<<Whoa, this must be a member of MENSA. :) >>

We deny any connection with the above poster, Ac 😉

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/12/97 9:28:04 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Oregon. I live in Tillamook, a town of 4,000, near the Pacific Coast, in a county of
22,000, that was heavily timber and fishing dependent. There are only 3 mills left and the
fisheries are also in decline. The largest commercial operation is dairy (we have the largest
single cheese factory in the US, maybe the world), but the largest source of income is
‘transfer payments’, like pensions, SSI and welfare. This area is socially conservative,
except they vote 60% liberal Democrat, and keep electing flaming liberals to the school
boards, city councils, county commission and state legislature.>>

Yikes! Ever thought of moving? South Texas is pretty cool. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/12/97 9:30:01 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I thought it now stood for “Pirates of the Carribean.”>>

LOL, you brought back memories of that movie “Captain Ron”. :)

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/12/97 9:31:53 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<The Vorlons and Shadows are the same generation as the other first ones, and one
generation removed from Lorien…>>

I hate to disagree with you, but didn’t somone say, “The Shadows were old when the First
ones were young?” Or something to that effect.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/13/97 12:08:31 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Gary:
<< If Lorien was really so important to the Vorlons and the Shadows why did they try to
destroy the WhiteStar several times? After all, he was also on that ship don’t forget, yet
then at the end of the confrontation the Shadows(and presumably the Vorlons as well) were
suddenly ‘happy’ once Lorien announced that he was going to go with them. I don’t know,
it was all so silly –unfortunately. :\>>

How do you act aroud *your* parents? I’d be happy if I had a reconcilation with my
parents after such a long time.
The Shadows were the only ones in control of the missles, and I doubt that those missles
would have been enought to kill Lorien. His form isn’t flesh…notice the tranformation in
this ep, and the dream from “Mr Garibaldi”. He was never at risk.

 

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/13/97 12:15:53 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<I hate to disagree with you, but didn’t somone say, “The Shadows were old when the
First ones were young?” Or something to that effect.
–AcDec>

Yes…Delenn did, but she didn’t have the whole story. She only had what the Vorlon’s had
fed her
Sorry

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/13/97 1:15:24 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Even Gary Trudeau concedes that beggars did better in the greedy 80’s. And even poor
people were victims of inflation in the 80’s.>> That last one should have been the 70’s, of
course. Typo.

<<MythoPhile, the 1980s were profitable for many, and disastrous for some. I won’t
argue that point.>>
I’m glad. To spare everyone tedious and endless posts on economics, I’ll just say
check the stats before posting. What you say is the sort of global non-statement that could
be true of anything anywhere. But most people did better in the 80’s than they did in the
70’s. With a finite amount of printed money yet. *gasp*
As for the rest, you seem to have strayed off topic in your eager (and bizarre) efforts to
prove that there is no class warfare in America. My point was that the democratic party and
the media have successfully painted that image of American politics, the poor-loving dems
vs. the rich-loving rep’s and which of them gets to be better off at the expense of the other.
A fantasy land where dems are the embodiment of St. Luke’s Christ and rep’s cast as the
devil. My post was that your description of the two parties in those terms indicates that
you’ve bought into that line of b.s. Or maybe you just meant that most people do but you
don’t. I doubt it but could be wrong.
My point on the class warfare thing concerned the democrat mantra, not any reality of
the situation – that the dem’s are (charitably) watered-down socialists, or (uncharitably)
lying through their teeth to keep their power-base. Either they really do believe that for one
class to do better, the other must suffer (when all the empircal evidence indicates the exact
opposite, that classes rise and fall together), or else they just want the poor voting for
them… and consequently keeping themselves poor.
To debate whether we are or aren’t a society of “class warfare” seems to me to be
wasting a lot of time on something very meaningless. We have less class warfare than we
could (or will, if the likes of Reich and Clinton get their way), but more than we should.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 2/13/97 1:18:57 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< That “PC” term is used way to much and is becoming a tool of the lazy. >>

<<I thought it now stood for “Pirates of the Carribean.”>>

Which ironically, brings us to the recent changing of the exhibit so that the pirates are
chasing women carrying trays of food, because they’re hungry. (Talk about PC^2)

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/13/97 1:32:24 AM
From: Thetunone
Posted on: America Online

********FOOLS AND NAVES, STAR TREK IS LIKE THE PARENT CORPORATION
THAT MAY BE MAGIFICENT BUT SADLY OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE PEONS
THAT ACTUALLY RUN THE COMPANY– AFTER ALL, IT’S 31 YEARS OLD THIS
YEAR. BABYLON5 IS AN ATTEMPT TO BE CREATIVE THAT CLEARLY HAS
CHALLENGED THE MINDS OF IT CREATORS AND ADVERTISERS FAR WORSE
THAN THEY REALLY IMAGINED IT COULD –THEREFORE– THEY SIMPLY FELL
BACK ON CORNBALL ROMANTIC B.S. WITH DELYNN WHO IS SUPPOSED TO
BE THE LEADER OF THE RANGERS-BUT SAYS OH JOHN YOU CAN LEAD ME
ANYTIME…PLEEZE! I AM ILL, NOW JANEWAY OF VOYAGER ON THE OTHER
HAND ALMOST TYPIFIES WHAT A FEMALE LEADER IS SUPPOSED TO BE…..SO
LET’S GOD BLESS UNCLE STAR TREK, APPRICIATE NEXT GENERATIONS
AND DEEP SPACE 5, APPLAUD VOYAGER- ( WE CALL IT VILLAGER) BUT
BABYLON 5 CAN STILL SAVE THE DAY IF THEY WOULD GET THAT OLD
MAGIC BACK—— AND QUIT WORRYING ABOUT “STAYING WITHIN THE LINE
AND BOUNDARIES” AND JUST CREAT SOME NEW ALIENS, MAKE US
HUMANS ALIEN AND GET SOME MORE NEW TYPE SHIPS AND TRADITIONAL
WEAPONRY GOING HERE!!! PLEASE WRITE YOUR THOUGHTS.,….. AND I
LOVE YA BUNCHES!!

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/13/97 1:40:33 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< As for the rest, you seem to have strayed off topic in your eager (and bizarre) efforts to
prove that there is no class warfare in America.>>

How have I strayed, and why is it “bizarre”?

<<My point was that the democratic party and the media have successfully painted that
image of American politics, the poor-loving dems vs. the rich-loving rep’s and which of
them gets to be better off at the expense of the other. A fantasy land where dems are the
embodiment of St. Luke’s Christ and rep’s cast as the devil. My post was that your
description of the two parties in those terms indicates that you’ve bought into that line of
b.s. Or maybe you just meant that most people do but you don’t. I doubt it but could be
wrong.>>

Well, obviously I don’t consider that I’ve bought into any line of B.S., Mytho. I
personally think you are exaggerating the chasm between the parties, but that’s just my
opinion. Reality is a great deal more complex than right versus left, Mytho. I would have
thought that a Manichean version of politics would be beyond both of us.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/13/97 2:00:00 AM
From: Capt Jodan
Posted on: America Online

Listen I dont understand this. Now I agree that the 4th season B5 has gone much
higher on my ranks then ST. But….before that time it was not. Also for the execption of
the Shadow planet killer which I know would kick any ship in Starfleet to peices the
Enterpise could easily destory all others.

Subj: Re:Go away
Date: 2/13/97 4:34:23 AM
From: AConway364
Posted on: America Online

I am officially saying sorry to AcDec, it’s rare when someone get’s me this mad but he
insulted me by saying I should pay closer attention to B5….. As far as B5 fans go I AM
THE FIRST ONE. My girl friend would agree with you about the mentally challenged part,
and yes I do own a PC!!!!!! It’s a twin P6 with 256megs of 168pin SDRAM…There are
no Mac’s that can touch this I WIN
Andy/President,Z’Ha’Dum biker gang

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/13/97 5:44:23 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
While ONE of their demands was the restitution of the “federal employment act” (is that
real or made up, anyone know?).<<

:::ahem::: As much as I’m sure you’d prefer to believe that, NO, it’s not “made
up.”

>>Their other complaints were that they were not even allowed to
LOOK for jobs on their own. The “sanctuary districts” were the ultimate in a
welfare system, and they completely failed! I thought it was the conservative
thing to be for “welfare to work” which is exactly what that episode was
“preaching”.<<

Unfortunately I haven’t since this episode since it first aired, and certain details
are unclear in my mind. And though I’d prefer not to see that lousy episode again, I do
wish I had the specifics on what you assert here so I could make a more informed
comment. However, what I can say is that what was depicted was most certainly not “the
ultimate in a welfare system” as you assert because those people had no income, no
housing, and food rations were shipped into the compound on a very limited basis, which
is why everyone was so hungry. The term “welfare” means just that –to look out for the
_welfare_ of an individual by _providing assistance_, which clearly the government was
not doing. Further, and while as I said, this is vague, I have the distinct impression that it
was the wealthy class who came up with the idea to have those ghettos formed in the first
place. I’m not sure about this, but I think it’s what was asserted.

>>And even most conservatives think that the government should in
time of depression (which was clearly happening) help to create jobs.<<

Careful there. Conservatives look for other alternatives before resorting to such a
radical course of action, such as having the government look for ways to improve the
economy first so that more jobs will come about naturally without having to rely on some
form of government act or legislation that ensures employment of some type under the
aegis of the government. This is because once such a program starts it’s often very difficult
to have it dismantled once it’s no longer necessary.

>>Also, at the end Sisko said that “the people” not the Government were responisble
for “solving” the social problems of the time.<<

Yeah, but the government didn’t care about the problem up until that point, did
they? Yet it was the government which provided the solution in the end because the people
*sought* a government solution, which is always how socialism starts.

>>In case you did not notice, they were trying to get OUT of a governemnt
program.<<

That wasn’t a government program –it was a prison the privileged class had set
into place, and the government, which refused to take any action, was more than willing to
abide by what the people with money wanted. In essence, the government was being
complacent because they were puppets of the ‘capitalist monsters.’ The society itself was
therefore one which had been overly corrupted by capitalism and a government that was
more than willing to look the other way.

>>Protraying the truth of the situation is somehow protraying socialism?<<

What “truth”? It was a *fictional* story tailored in a dubious manner, at least in
my view.

>>In case you have not noticed, socialism has the “privaleged” class too, actually
they have a much worse of general populous than a capitalistic society.<<

No Kidding! Like I don’t know that! However, your getting a Socialist thinker to
actually admit that might be a difficult task, but you don’t have to convince me.

>>That episode was in no way promoteing socialism.<<

Then we’re just gonna have to disagree about this one and move on. It was a
stupid episode anyway in my opinion.
Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/13/97 5:45:24 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Sisko was the leading Federation and Starfleet represenative there. It is HIS
JOB to protect the Federation AND it’s allies, and the Cardassians ARE
allies.<<

He acted beyond his authority without the expressed authorization of his
superiors despite being told that the matter was no longer his concern. He was clearly
“obsessed” with Eddington, not with helping the Cardassians. Did you see that look on his
face when he had to take that Cardassian transport ship in tow to keep it from crashing into
the planet? I swear for a second it looked as though he was ready to let them all die.

>>If Sisko had waited Eddington would have destryoed every cardassian colony.
His inaction would be seen as betrayl by the Cardassians, and the alliance
would be OVER. Comparing the loss of an alliance and a possable reinstatement
of hostilities with the Cardies, to the poisoning of a planetfull of
TRAITORS, is not exactly a hard choice from Sisko’s POV.<<

This is all speculative since the Maquis are as much of a problem for the
Cardassians as they are for StarFleet. The Maquis are renegades –outlaws. They are not
recognized by the Federation or StarFleet, and it’s as much of a Cardassian responsibility
to deal with them as a threat as it is StarFleet’s. Yet we saw NO Cardassian efforts to
counter Maquis actions anywhere in the region even though we saw repeated attempts by
StarFleet to curb the problem. Why? Are the Cardassians really that inept all of a sudden? If
so, perhaps they should flap their jaws only so wide when barking at the Federation since
they made no efforts to deal with what was facing them.

>>No, his first duty was to the intrests of the Federation, if those interests
demanded the destructio of both the Defiant and DS9, Sisko would have no
choice. Your argument is like saying that Ericson should have refused Sheridan’s
order because it would cause him to lose his ship.<<

What?! This has no bearing on the point I made at all and is irrelevant. Sisko
wasn’t backed into any such corner, nor did StarFleet order him to sacrifice the Station or
the Defiant. He had other options open to him!

>>Sisko probaly got a medal.<<

I’m sure you’d like to think so, even though he became the acknowledged
“villain” in the end.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/13/97 5:46:05 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: G7
Perhaps, but only those on the left would be so bold as to come up with a
term which asserts that everyone not abiding with their line of thinking is
“wrong.”>>

>>>From: AcDec
The right-wing does not need to, they’ll just say you’ll burn in hell, or
call you “immoral”.<<<

Yeah, and people would really take that seriously in this day and age. Get Real! I
sure don’t see Republicans branding people racists even when the term has no bearing. Oh
that’s right –that’s because Republicans ARE racists by virtue of the fact that they’re
Republicans. :\

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/13/97 5:46:30 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<< Uh huh. So like you told Mytho, that means it doesn’t count, right? >>

<<<From: AcDec
Exactly, just like I don’t judge B5 on mistakes JMS wishes he never made.>>>

Oh please, Ac –you just didn’t want to acknowledge it as a *valid* example.

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 2/13/97 5:47:10 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<< From: G7
You’re referring to the _extreme right_, which most certainly doesn’t
speak for the whole of the Republican Party.>>

>>>From: AcDec
Umm, have you seen the Rep. party platform, or heard the remarks of the
Christain Coalition (the most powerful force in the REP party) ? Did you see
some of the stuff that passed a Republican congress last year?<<<

Unfortunately the Christian Coalition has more of a hold on the Republican Party
than I’d care to see, but they’re not the entire Republican Party, nor do they speak for the
Party. They do have some muscle to flex, however, unfortunately, but they’re a lot better
than many of the special interest groups aligned with the Democrats.

<<From: G7
Furthermore, if you don’t think that the Democrats are trying to “control”
what you “read, see or hear,” then I truly feel sorry for you since they’re
far worse than the Republicans could ever hope to be when it comes to that.>>

>>>From: AcDec
No, I find the Demo’s just as guilty, its just not their “main” focus.<<<

Uh huh. Are you by chance a watcher of CNN –ya know, the “Clinton News
Network?” Come to think of it, just about any network is guilty of ignoring the many
transgressions of this President and his Administration. That’s why he managed to get re-
elected.
Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: the War
Date: 2/13/97 5:47:56 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Uh oh, we are agreeing again Gary, this must not become a habit. :)<<

Scary, isn’t it? <g>
At least for me it is anyway.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:to JVibber
Date: 2/13/97 5:49:28 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: JVibber
Excellent logical point, Gary7sevn. However, as we were repeatedly reminded
in “Blood Fever,” the Vulcan mating instinct is particularly NOT logical. My
complaint is that in the show “Amok Time,” which originally DEFINED the Pon
Farr, the battle to the death was presented as necessary to satisfy the
Vulcan instinct.<<

All true, and thanks for the compliment. However, you’ll note that Spock did
obey the rules of combat as outlined even while experiencing the Blood Fever in “Amok
Time.” This means that Vulcans do abide by the accepted norms and practices within their
culture even while experiencing the most intense periods of Pon Far –as far as we know
anyway.
Also, I agreed with everything else you said. 😉

Subj: Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/13/97 10:50:45 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

I think the resolution of “Into The Fire” will work better when viewed from the hindsight
of a few episodes. We’ll realize that the point of Babylon Five wasn’t the Shadow war but
the emergence of humanity from being a new-on-scene, inward-looking race to the
guardians of peace and freedom in the Old Republic, er, I mean, the galaxy. Now comes
the real challenge, getting the rest of humanity to live up to the responsibility.

I, for one, liked the sudden “slamming on the brakes” quality of this episode, the sense of
“oh, s***, we’re in charge now.”

I thought the last scene with Sheridan and Delenn might cause tooth decay, though…. Oh
well.

Subj: Re:Go away
Date: 2/13/97 11:46:51 PM
From: Sobelgirl
Posted on: America Online

<<<<Any body who thought Blood Fever was good is a TWIT!…<<Whoa, this must be a
member of MENSA. :) >>
Hey–I am a Mensa member, and I liked it!!! Have you seen the “Borg” one “Unity” on
ST- Voyager, it was good and it gave one of my favorite StarTrek actors (Robert Beltran) a
good ep. Please give all the shows a chance and if you do not like them then Do Not
Watch, that is why we can change channels and/or switch it off. Even “Dark Skies” is
improving, I have no doubt that some of the writers and the powers that-be, do read the
postings of the fans. Lora

Subj: Re:Go away
Date: 2/14/97 1:23:11 AM
From: DalAmroth
Posted on: America Online

I do watch. I grew up on classic trek, watched every episode of Leave it to Wesley, er, I
mean ST:TNG, Voyager, and DS9. (I also watched every episode of Battle Star Galactica).
The only Star Trek series that merits comparison to B5 is TOS. For it’s time it’s effects
were excellent, the story lines were meaningful, and the charactors took the viewer on a
wild ride of emotions, fear, anger and humor, that no series, (sci-fi or not) has matched to
this day.
B5’s strength has been it’s fearless writing and strong charactors. It is clearly superior
to any recent Trek.
As for the rest of Trek, I will continue watch simply because I love science fiction, but it
really is no better than Battle Star. And nothing else on the boob tube is even worth looking
at.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/14/97 2:23:55 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<I thought the last scene with Sheridan and Delenn might cause tooth decay, though….
Oh well.>>
At least they wasn’t burbling on about “starstuff” – now there was a last scene that
caused actual damage to the brain.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/14/97 5:49:00 AM
From: EP2LA
Posted on: America Online

Don’t tell me that JMS isn’t watching Startrek:DS9. The scene where Sheridan and Delenn
are “taken” to another place is a direct steal from the Wormhole scenes from DS9’s
“Emissary”. I kept waiting for Kai Opaka to appear. Of course, like the russians, JMS
invented everything first. “Not get the heck out of my galaxy”? and just where was the
great battle that was hyped, JMS used the universal reset button: like “a jump-point within
an atmosphere”, and “a jump-point within a jump-point” Easy ways out.
But I’ll keep watching because we’ve lost too many SF shows already: Time Trax, Briscoe
County Jr., VR.5, MANTIS, Space Rangers, SpaceA&B, Space Precinct,Strange Luck,
Kindred: The Embraced, American Gothic, Seaquest DSV, Forever Knight, Robocop,
Profit, Earth II, Nowhere Man, & Forever Knight.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/14/97 6:10:02 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<But I’ll keep watching because we’ve lost too many SF shows already: Time Trax,
Briscoe County Jr., VR.5, MANTIS, Space Rangers, SpaceA&B, Space Precinct,Strange
Luck, Kindred: The Embraced, American Gothic, Seaquest DSV, Forever Knight,
Robocop, Profit, Earth II, Nowhere Man, & Forever Knight.>>

I’m afraid I can’t say I’m sorry we lost every single one of these shows. Some weren’t all
that interesting to me. But, I do agree with your general viewpoint in this respect: Science
fiction needs a little support from its fans; if not us, then who?

Of course, support doesn’t rule out criticism, if criticism is what it takes to improve a
lagging show.

Subj: BABYLON 5 LOSES BIG TIME
Date: 2/14/97 6:27:31 PM
From: Martin5424
Posted on: America Online

STAR TREK IS 1,000,000,000,000 TIMES BETTER THAN BABYLON 5. IS
EVERYONE CRAZY!!!

Subj: Re:BABYLON 5 LOSES BIG TIME
Date: 2/14/97 7:28:43 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<STAR TREK IS 1,000,000,000,000 TIMES BETTER THAN BABYLON 5. IS
EVERYONE CRAZY!!!>>

Thank you for contributing such maturity and substance to the discussion. Oh yeah, and
get your daddy to help your turn off the caps lock….

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/14/97 7:33:10 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

A5,

There was *one* show on that list that I am indeed sorry we lost, and our friend
EP2LA saw fit to have it listed _twice_: Forever Knight. And frankly, I’m a little surprised
that this show wasn’t to your liking too since it was well crafted, well written, and well
acted. Its third season was its strongest, but I’m still enjoying the episodes from its first
two seasons being shown right now on the Sci Fi Channel because I’ve never seen them
before. I discovered FK late, and only started watching it at the beginning of its third
season, and I was devastated when I found out it had been cancelled because it was a
superior show. What I thought would be a hokey concept turned out to be something
fascinating because the writers knew what they were doing to make it enjoyable and
plausible.
The rest of the shows on that list were garbage however, and I’m glad that those
are all gone as well. They gave Sci Fi TV a bad name!

Subj: Re:BABYLON 5 LOSES BIG TIME
Date: 2/14/97 7:45:51 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Thank you for contributing such maturity and substance to the discussion. Oh yeah,
and get your daddy to help your turn off the caps lock….>>

Hehehe. Must be a Voyager fan. :)
–AcDec

Subj: Why I prefer B5 #2
Date: 2/14/97 11:46:55 PM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

The last time I posted I stated something for which I didn’t have the correct information.
While I don’t think that Yesterday’s Enterprise is the same as the Erickson scene in The
Long Night it is close enough to somewhat negate my statement. Actually I had totally
forgotten about Yesterday’s Enterprise, which is true about most of the Next Gen episodes.
I did respond to some of the comments made about my original post but then I didn’t have
enough sense to post them in the correct Trek vs B5 folder. In no way was I bashing Trek
I was simply stating something that I think is a plus in B5 and negative in Trek. Many of
you then posted to show me the error of my ways. (g) That is what I always thought these
discussion boards were for, I say why I think something and the other side tries to
convince me why I am wrong or they admit that I have convinced them that I am correct.
Remember that the great majority of what is posted in these folders is just somebody’s
opinion and don’t take it so seriously. I am going to give another reason I prefer B5 to
Trek, remember this is only my opinion.(It only really matters if B5 and DS9 and Voyager
all are shown at the same time and you have no way of taping the ones you don’t watch)

I find that after I watch a Bablyon 5 episode that there is plenty to think about(some much
more than others) but when I think about a Trek episode(both DS9 & Voy) I am much
more likely to pick out the mistakes they have made IMHO.(some episodes much more
than others) For example I have no problem with how the Vorlons/Shadows were dealt
with in Into the Fire because it fit with everything that had been building up from the very
beginning, I’ll admit it was a surprise but it seemed beleivable to me. On the other hand if
DS9 was to do the exact same thing regarding the Dominion and the Founders I wouldn’t
beleive it for a second since it wouldn’t fit with what we have been told in previous
episodes(at least as far as I remember them). Now have at it.

Rick
Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5 #2
Date: 2/15/97 12:11:29 AM
From: DalAmroth
Posted on: America Online

Kudos to you for being able to admit your mistakes. To many people on AOL act as if
they NEVER made a mistake.:)

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/15/97 1:50:48 AM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>>Well Picard was the one that suggested to them to do it. He didn’t have the authority to
order them too. But he did have to take the responsisbilty of suggesting it. Also it is not
like Ericson would not have voluteered if go if given the chance. The rangers would do
anything for Sheridan.<<

Agreed. But Star Trek:TNG dodged the issue by having them volunteer. Erikson probably
would have volunteered, but being TOLD to go out and die is different. It’s definitly harder
on Sheridan.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/15/97 2:00:42 AM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>> Listen I dont understand this. Now I agree that the 4th season B5 has gone much
higher on my ranks then ST. But….before that time it was not. Also for the execption of
the Shadow planet killer which I know would kick any ship in Starfleet to peices the
Enterpise could easily destory all others.<<

Well, the Federation is millions of years more experienced in the science of technobabble
than the Shadows, so it really isn’t a fair fight. Now if the Shadows came up with a inverse
warp particle field emmiter, they’d stand a chance :-).

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 2/15/97 2:03:25 AM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>> Yeah, and people would really take that seriously in this day and age. Get
Real! I sure don’t see Republicans branding people racists even when the term has no
bearing. Oh that’s right –that’s because Republicans ARE racists by virtue of the fact that
they’re Republicans. :\<<

Geez, guys. Are we going to have to send you both to bed without supper? C’mon, this
debate is REALLY getting tiring. AOL has plenty of political boards. This doesn’t have to
be another. Call a truce, OK?

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/15/97 2:04:54 AM
From: FSUMartian
Posted on: America Online

>> We’ll realize that the point of Babylon Five wasn’t the Shadow war but the emergence
of humanity from being a new-on-scene, inward-looking race to the guardians of peace and
freedom in the Old Republic, er, I mean, the galaxy. Now comes the real challenge,
getting the rest of humanity to live up to the responsibility.<<

Now all they have to do is dig up a few Jedi Knights…

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/15/97 2:28:41 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Agreed. But Star Trek:TNG dodged the issue by having them volunteer.>>

Please note that, in “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, neither captain of their respective Enterprise
outranked the other, as I’ve stated before. Therefore, at most, only friendly persuasion
could have been relied upon to effectuate any purpose either of them advocated.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5 #2
Date: 2/15/97 5:27:48 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I find that after I watch a Bablyon 5 episode that there is plenty to think about(some
much more than others) but when I think about a Trek episode(both DS9 & Voy) I am
much more likely to pick out the mistakes they have made IMHO.>>

If you really believe this I suggest you go read over the “Rejoined” (I bet you can guess
what was discussed here, many Trek fans surpised me with their rampant homophobia),
“For the Cause” (Eddington’s speach caused quite a stir), “Nor the Battle To the Strong”
(Discussions of the nature of courage), “Rapture” (Was Sisko right in stopping Bajor’s
admission, and what does the “locus” stuff mean. Not to mention discussions of medical
ethics) ” The Darkness and the Light” (Kira’s actions caused quite a stir), and the big
mother of all ethics discusions in “For the Uniform” (One of the most intensive discussion
of the ethics of war I have ever seen).

TOS, TNG, and espeacilly DS9 have had MANY thought provoking episodes. Sure, we
can nitpick all day, but if you do that you loose some of that you can miss the point of the
episode.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5
Date: 2/15/97 5:30:46 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Agreed. But Star Trek:TNG dodged the issue by having them volunteer. Erikson
probably would have volunteered, but being TOLD to go out and die is different. It’s
definitly harder on Sheridan.>>

I don’t think so, it was made clear in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” that Picard found it very
hard to tell them to go back. And as I pointed out, Picard has orderd his crewmen abadoned
to die before, as in “Redemption” with Worf.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/15/97 6:06:26 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<A5,

There was *one* show on that list that I am indeed sorry we lost, and our friend
EP2LA saw fit to have it listed _twice_: Forever Knight. And frankly, I’m a little surprised
that this show wasn’t to your liking too since it was well crafted, well written, and well
acted.>>

Hello, Gary. Nice to hear from you :) You know, I really can’t say very much about
*Forever Knight*, since I’ve never really watched it. A little too much on the occult side
for me.

I meant by my post that not *all* the shows deserved to continue; it’s still possible that FK
should have continued.

Thanks for the post!
Subj: Re:Silly Argument: toFSUMart
Date: 2/15/97 6:32:30 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: FSUMartian
Geez, guys. Are we going to have to send you both to bed without supper?>>

LOL!!!
Hey, politics can get ugly quick when you disagree. <g>

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/15/97 6:33:43 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>> We’ll realize that the point of Babylon Five wasn’t the Shadow war but the emergence
of humanity from being a new-on-scene, inward-looking race to the guardians of peace and
freedom in the Old Republic, er, I mean, the galaxy. Now comes the real challenge,
getting the rest of humanity to live up to the responsibility.<<

This is B5’s best opportunity at redeeming itself for “Into the Fire” in my
opinion.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: to AcDec
Date: 2/15/97 6:37:44 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
I don’t think so, it was made clear in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” that Picard found it very
hard to tell them to go back.<<

Agreed. It did seem as though he was asking for consent almost from Garrett for
her to go back. He gave her room to make the decision.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/15/97 6:57:55 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Hello, Gary. Nice to hear from you :) You know, I really can’t say very much about
*Forever Knight*, since I’ve never really watched it. A little too much on the occult side
for me.<<

That’s what I thought to a great extent!!!!!
But if you want thought provoking when it comes to morality issues, you
watch “Forever Knight,” especially it’s third season like I mentioned. What really make
that show intriguing is the fascinating tight rope the main character walks in trying to
recapture his humanity and become a moral being instead of one who allows his addiction
to overcome and consume him as it had in the past. The guy is 800 years old, and he’s
killed just for the sake of feeding many times. He knows what it is to be a predator, but he
was always conscious somehow that it was the wrong thing to do, the wrong thing to be.
(Whereas his ‘maker,’ or ‘father’ has a very different view of it, making for conflict
between these two principle characters in profound ways.) Knight wants redemption for all
the evil acts he’s committed over the centuries, which were in a sense beyond his control
because he’s got a physical need to meet in order to sustain himself. Without the “food,” he
dies, so self preservation comes into play. (We saw this in Anne Rice’s, “Interview with
the Vampire” prominently, but FK was already working on it first) <g> However, Knight
also gets an intense rush off of feeding, and the fact that he enjoys killing but also needs to
kill in order to survive presents quite a dilemma as you could likely imagine.
I’m telling you A5, I think you’re depriving yourself of something special. <g>
You should check it out. Right now they’re not even out of season 1, but should be
moving into season 2 shortly. It’s on four nights a week: Monday thru Thursdays on the
Sci Fi Channel –have a look one night when there ain’t nuthin’ else to watch on and you
might be surprised by your reaction because I gotta tell ya that I was. Season three moves
into incredibly deep subject matter, let me also tell ya –in some ways more profound than
what you might tend to see in Trek in many ways.

>>I meant by my post that not *all* the shows deserved to continue; it’s still possible that
FK should have continued.<<

FK was the only one on that list which should have survived!

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/15/97 9:55:17 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< I’m telling you A5, I think you’re depriving yourself of something special. <g> You
should check it out. Right now they’re not even out of season 1, but should be moving into
season 2 shortly. It’s on four nights a week: Monday thru Thursdays on the Sci Fi Channel
–have a look one night when there ain’t nuthin’ else to watch on and you might be
surprised by your reaction because I gotta tell ya that I was.>>

Gary, it may be hard for anyone to believe, but I don’t have cable. It’s a conscious
decision on my part not to *completely* submerge myself in (what is charitably known as,
and these days passes for) entertainment, and, besides, I have great over-the-air reception
(better than that provided by cable — believe me, I know — at one point I tried cable). I
have surround-sound and all the rest, however, and probably at some point I’ll get a
satellite receiver just to see what the big deal is. But as of now, no cable. Not any more.

I’ll scout around for re-runs of FK over the air, though, on your recommendation. Thanks
again!

Subj: Mythic Connections
Date: 2/15/97 11:30:22 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

One of the most interesting features of *Babylon 5* is the resonance it has to mythic heroes
and mythological stories.

G’Kar’s loss of one eye reminds me of Odin, who gave one eye for knowledge, or
Polythemus, who was blinded by Odysseus. One would think he is closer to the king of
the Viking gods than the Cyclops; but one never knows with B5.

Even the ships are interestingly named: Agamemnon, straight from Greek mythology.

It would be interesting if someone were to do a thesis on these connections — one hopes,
and I am confident, that JMS and crew are up to the task of making these connections
work.

Subj: Re:Mythic Connections
Date: 2/15/97 5:19:43 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<G’Kar’s loss of one eye reminds me of Odin, who gave one eye for knowledge, or
Polythemus, who was blinded by Odysseus. One would think he is closer to the king of
the Viking gods than the Cyclops; but one never knows with B5.>>
Point of order: Polyphemus. Not nitpicking, just living up to my name.

<<It would be interesting if someone were to do a thesis on these connections — one
hopes, and I am confident, that JMS and crew are up to the task of making these
connections work.>>
I did one once for the Zocalo – a tongue-in-cheek effort to show that JMS was only
retelling the Illiad with the names changed. It was rejected.
JMS has of course mentioned the Cassandra parallel with G’Kar. In some ways, Zack
is Ismene, sister of Antigone – a not too bright guy just trying to survive while surrounded
by self-destructive people with martyr-complexes. (Good old Zack – nothing suspicious
about Garibaldi’s kidnappers blowing themselves up and kindly seeing that he was safely
returned. I hoped beyond hope they were going in an unexpected direction with that
because there was NO EXCUSE for the gang not to have seen through that one)
Draal is of course Jason – the great hero of the Fleece quest who had tons of power at
his disposal and did virtually nothing himself.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the G’Kar-Oedipus parallel.
Delenn is Creon, an insufferable, self-righteous victim of his/her own pride who is
incapable of seeing that anyone else’s way might be the right one, and consequently brings
about the destruction of his/her loved ones.
Talia is Zeus, because she slept with virtually everyone and it was always a mistake.
Keffer is also Oedipus, who brings about his own destruction because his pride won’t
allow him to follow good advice and put down a mystery.
Susan is Tiresias, a victim of by their respective gods (JMS/Olympian) of sexual
orientation schizophrenia.
Londo is Dionysus – this one is obvious. You never knew whether Dionysus was
going to ask you to join in the orgy or drive you insane and/or have your mother cut your
head off.
Talia is Aphrodite, because she slept -… oh, right.
Sheridan of course is Christ, Dionysus, Balder, Osiris, every corn-king, every dying
yet living god who by his sacrifice brings new life to his people.
Morden is Pentheus. This one you’re gonna have to look up.
Kosh is Hera – will leave you alone provided you know your place, but if starts being
nice to you, look out.
Kat the barmaid and the First Ones are Iolaus, nephew (whatever else you may have
heard) of Hercules, because we barely see them yet have the feeling that they were
supposed to be important somehow.
Athena is Xena, because she’s pretty good at first but then turns into nothing but a male-
basher.
Dr. Franklin Mark 2 is Xena, because neither really exist in their respective mythologies.
Zathras is Hesiod, because he contradicts himself numerously in his two different
appearances.
Brother Edward is Oedipus (see Keffer).

Subj: ST-DS9 Literary Irony
Date: 2/15/97 9:12:31 PM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

I couldn’t believe the episode where Sisko poisons an entire planet to capture Eddington.
The greatest irony was the discussion of Les Miserables and Victor Hugo. The criticism of
Hugo ended my suspension of disbelief like a cold shower. ST writers first admit that
Victor Hugo is widely read, even by non-humans, six hundred years after his death, and
then criticize his work! What next? A dissection of William Shakespeare on Voyager?
Give me a break.
They should also READ what they attempt to emulate. Javerre’s character is defined and
destroyed by his strict ADHERENCE to the LAW. He cannot recognize the change in
Valjean or any of Valjean’s sacrifices. He MUST OBEY THE LAW. He is not a villian
per se. He is trapped by his own inflexibility. So Sisko is cast into the role of Javerre, and
nukes (poetic license) an entire planet, risking the lives of the entire population (I don’t
recall hearing Sisko request transports to aid the Maquis evacuate and a couple of hours
isn’t much for a planetary evacuation) in the relentless pursuit of one man. Hardly what I
would expect from any Federation officer, let alone one who strictly adheres to the law.
Voyager bores and disappoints me, but this episode of DS9 disgusts me. Maybe because I
once held some respect for it.
JRD

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/16/97 4:38:37 AM
From: JUpton2381
Posted on: America Online

THERE IS ONLY ONE STAR TREK. THE REST ARE ONLY COPIES. BABYLON 5
CAN NOT BE COPIED.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/16/97 10:57:03 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

The caps lock can be found on the left of your Key board..

Subj: Re:Tired of PC Argument!
Date: 2/16/97 1:22:12 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

 

Subj: Re:Tired of PC Argument!
Date: 97-02-11 19:10:01 EST
From: Gary7sevn
Gary,

> It was “silly environmentalist whacko” preaching, and I for one could have done without
it.<
Again, you judge the message not by its content but by its perceived source.
Environmentalism is not about politics, but about reality. Liberalism and conservatism are
irrelevant. If we want to sustain life on this planet we have to be responsible for the damage
we do. To deny that we humans damage our environment is to deny the experiences of the
last 30 years. Ever hear of burning rivers, dead lakes, or endangered species? It’s
incredibly arrogant to believe that humans are the ultimate arbitors of the worth of other
species.

> What, you think that just because I’m tired of having left wing propaganda shoved down
my throat that I’m for polluting rivers and oceans? <

YES! What else is the result of your point of view? If conservatives had their way, there’d
be no laws governing pollution, no “pesky government regulations” to control toxic
emissions. Conservatives think we can trust industry to police itself — history tells us
otherwise.

—Paul

Subj: Re:Why I prefer B5: to Mytho
Date: 2/16/97 1:31:58 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

< I don’t think seniority makes all that much difference, Mythos. But nice try I suppose.
<g>
In the military, seniority makes a crucial difference. To decide who’s in charge, one goes
by rank, then seniority (“time in grade”), then age.

—Paul (ex USAF Sergeant)
Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDecS
Date: 2/16/97 1:59:55 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

A5398457 :

>What I will argue is that there is a corporate class and that this class does have its own
interests… American society is sufficiently complex, of its own nature, such that groups
must vociferously fight for their own interests in order to be heard; this does not equate to
class warfare as the term is commonly used.<

What I would argue is that the working class is under incredible pressure by the corporate
class to reduce both their numbers and their compensation, and must “vociferously fight for
their own interests”. How is this NOT class warfare?

< Class warfare, which is a Marxist term, doesn’t exist in American society, for the
reasons that there is sufficient recognition of the overlap between the interests of labor and
capital in the sustenance of a viable economy, that there are mediating and ameliorative
factors (unspecified here), and that the openness of the market itself permits much of labor
to shop for the best employer.<

Again you deny the reality of class warfare even while acknowledging the existence of
conflict between classes! What “mediating and ameliorating factors” exist? The “openess
of the market” actually allows employers to shop for the cheapest labor, which in effect
means that jobs are being transferred to cheap labor markets — Mexico, Taiwan,
Singapore, etc. This destroys the American expectation of high wages, which destroys
purchasing power, which ultimately destroys the American market for goods.

>”conflictual dynamic equilibrium”<

Nice phraseology — equivalent to calling murder “termination with extreme prejudice”! Re-
defining an act doesn’t change its essential nature.

—Paul

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDecS
Date: 2/16/97 2:46:42 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Again you deny the reality of class warfare even while acknowledging the existence of
conflict between classes! What “mediating and ameliorating factors” exist? The “openess
of the market” actually allows employers to shop for the cheapest labor, which in effect
means that jobs are being transferred to cheap labor markets — Mexico, Taiwan,
Singapore, etc. This destroys the American expectation of high wages, which destroys
purchasing power, which ultimately destroys the American market for goods.>>

Thank you for responding.

Paul, by “class warfare” I refer to the Marxist-Hegelian paradigm. The reality of conflict is
undeniable in this society; the question is whether one economic class must “struggle”
against another and ultimately overwhelm it. It is the latter proposition that I dispute.

A large part of the mechanisms I refer to which mediate differences between capital and
labor are instrumentalities of government. Government, in this sense, is simply acting for
the general warfare. As an example, let us look at the American Airlines strike, in which a
Democratic President exercised his lawful authority to intervene. Such examples exist
because government, in realizing the externality-based anomaly of a destructive strike, has
legislated the will of the American people to avoid massive interruptions in the economy at
large.

Further, while I cannot specify whether the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has
any authority in this particular strike, clearly the NLRB’s jurisdiction could apply in similar
strikes.

What are the possible future eventualities of the American Airlines dispute, following the
60-day cooling-off period? The libertarian argument is that another PATCO (air traffic
controller’s union) situation should be allowed to occur — that is, as Pres. Reagan did a
decade and a half ago, so should Pres. Clinton. The liberal argument is that the legitimate
grievances of the union must be accommodated. In reality, however, government,
shareholders, and the flying public will pressure both sides to move toward a compromise.

The complexity of the American polity and economy permit this constant “fudging”, which,
in the British context, would be seen as “muddling through”. Sometimes muddling
through is better than the Marxian “scientific” manicheanism, and I would argue that this
country’s solution to that monistic dialectic is one with which we should be relatively
content.

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDecS
Date: 2/16/97 3:08:35 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< The “openess of the market” actually allows employers to shop for the cheapest labor,
which in effect means that jobs are being transferred to cheap labor markets — Mexico,
Taiwan, Singapore, etc. This destroys the American expectation of high wages, which
destroys purchasing power, which ultimately destroys the American market for goods.>>

I think you may be criticizing the recent tariff reductions as exemplified by NAFTA and the
Uruguay Round of the GATT. If so, there is room for serious dispute as to the merits of
these treaties. Clearly the dislocationary effects of shopping for cheaper labor affect the
working man as never before, and this is a very real conflict.

You will note, however, that the system permits significant dissent to be heard on the
political level even as to this one issue. For example, Buchanan’s campaign ran in large
measure on the platform of a return to economic autarky, with all it entails. When, or if,
the dislocationary effects of shopping for cheaper labor reaches crisis levels, such a
campaign will win — again, an example of the conflictual equilibrium I mentioned in my
original post.

I believe in economic strength, and I think it is very arguable that we have rushed too
quickly toward a dismantling of trade barriers, to the detriment of too many in our
economy. The fact of this unseemly haste alone, however, doesn’t a Marxist theory prove.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/17/97 1:26:01 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
Gary, it may be hard for anyone to believe, but I don’t have cable. It’s a
conscious decision on my part not to *completely* submerge myself in (what is
charitably known as, and these days passes for) entertainment, and, besides,
I have great over-the-air reception (better than that provided by cable —
believe me, I know — at one point I tried cable). I have surround-sound
and all the rest, however, and probably at some point I’ll get a satellite
receiver just to see what the big deal is. But as of now, no cable. Not any
more.<<

The Sci Fi channel is exercising some sort of exclusivity option in which they’re
the only station that can run the show throughout the country for something like a year.
This is because the Sci Fi channel is a subsidiary of the USA channel, and the USA
channel saved FK and allowed it to have a third season before dropping the show.

>>I’ll scout around for re-runs of FK over the air, though, on your
recommendation. Thanks again!<<

It’s nice to know that I have the ability to cause you to reconsider. 😉

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/17/97 3:21:19 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<It’s nice to know that I have the ability to cause you to reconsider. ;-)>>

I take suggestions from seasoned intellects seriously, and you are clearly one of them. :-)

— A5, who doesn’t mean to offend anyone.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/17/97 3:42:49 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< It’s nice to know that I have the ability to cause you to reconsider. ;-)>>

You do, but that’s only because I recognize a seasoned intellect when I see one. Some
other people’s suggestions, I wouldn’t give a plugged credit for. 😀

— A5, who doesn’t mean to offend anyone. Okay?

Subj: Hail the KING
Date: 2/17/97 4:53:00 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Warning Will Robinson- THIS POST IS IN JEST. (No flames ok?)

I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)

On a serious note, was that scene really necessary in such a good episode?

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING
Date: 2/17/97 5:19:47 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Warning Will Robinson- THIS POST IS IN JEST. (No flames ok?)

I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)>>

Oh-oh. No descriptors available, so a I can’t tell: Were your robot arms flailing about
madly when you rendered your warning? It’s very important…. 😉

Seriously: *B5* has a sense of humor. I like that in a show. (I, of course, have no sense
of humor, so I don’t know precisely how I would like humor if I didn’t know what it
was.)

Subj: Re:Hail the KING
Date: 2/17/97 5:20:23 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

Warning Will Robinson- THIS POST IS IN JEST. (No flames ok?)

I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)

On a serious note, was that scene really necessary in such a good episode?

–AcDec>>

I just about fell out of my chair at that point. After Londo, then Bester, there had to be
something. What a hoot!

BTW, I am waiting to see more of Lennier. Remember when Marcus grabbed him and
Lennier whipped around, ane lifted Marcus off the ground with one hand (by the throat, if I
recall)? The fire in his eyes and the ominous tone in his voice were chilling. And
impressive. One of the more memorable moments.

Subj: Re:Hail the KING
Date: 2/17/97 5:27:13 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

Warning Will Robinson- THIS POST IS IN JEST. (No flames ok?)

I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)

On a serious note, was that scene really necessary in such a good episode?

–AcDec>>

I just about fell out of my chair at that point. After Londo, then Bester, there had to be
something. What a hoot!

BTW, I am waiting to see more of Lennier. Remember when Marcus grabbed him and
Lennier whipped around, ane lifted Marcus off the ground with one hand (by the throat, if I
recall)? The fire in his eyes and the ominous tone in his voice were chilling. And
impressive. One of the more memorable moments.

Subj: Re:Hail the KING
Date: 2/17/97 5:51:50 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Warning Will Robinson- THIS POST IS IN JEST. (No flames ok?)

I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)>>

Oh-oh. No descriptors available, so a I can’t tell: Were your robot arms flailing about
madly when you rendered your warning? It’s very important…. 😉

Seriously: *B5* has a sense of humor. I like that in a show. (I, of course, have no sense
of humor, so I don’t know precisely how I would like humor if I didn’t know what it
was.)

Subj: Re:hello again
Date: 2/17/97 7:21:43 AM
From: TeaBee1
Posted on: America Online

i am new to this…but here is my little thought on the B5 vs ST….i love ST…always have
always will.
no matter how bad it gets<oh well:)>…but Babylon 5…just have to say the whole name..is
the best ever. Best written…full stories that last for weeks..even months…better
acting…even humour is added…even in what we think are tense moments…and i have to
say..even though the idea of so many aliens being humonoid in appearance is kinda
sceptical to me…i loooove it..and G’KAR just rules..but i miss KOSH…so yes i would
say without a doubt Babylon 5 is the best…ever.

Subj: Re:hello again
Date: 2/17/97 7:22:55 AM
From: TeaBee1
Posted on: America Online

i am new to this…but here is my little thought on the B5 vs ST….i love ST…always have
always will.
no matter how bad it gets<oh well:)>…but Babylon 5…just have to say the whole name..is
the best ever. Best written…full stories that last for weeks..even months…better
acting…even humour is added…even in what we think are tense moments…and i have to
say..even though the idea of so many aliens being humonoid in appearance is kinda
sceptical to me…i loooove it..and G’KAR just rules..but i miss KOSH…so yes i would
say without a doubt Babylon 5 is the best…ever.

Subj: Re:hello again
Date: 2/17/97 7:23:59 AM
From: TeaBee1
Posted on: America Online

i am new to this…but here is my little thought on the B5 vs ST….i love ST…always have
always will.
no matter how bad it gets<oh well:)>…but Babylon 5…just have to say the whole name..is
the best ever. Best written…full stories that last for weeks..even months…better
acting…even humour is added…even in what we think are tense moments…and i have to
say..even though the idea of so many aliens being humonoid in appearance is kinda
sceptical to me…i loooove it..and G’KAR just rules..but i miss KOSH…so yes i would
say without a doubt Babylon 5 is the best…ever.

Subj: Re:hello again
Date: 2/17/97 7:25:22 AM
From: TeaBee1
Posted on: America Online

i am new to this…but here is my little thought on the B5 vs ST….i love ST…always have
always will.
no matter how bad it gets<oh well:)>…but Babylon 5…just have to say the whole name..is
the best ever. Best written…full stories that last for weeks..even months…better
acting…even humour is added…even in what we think are tense moments…and i have to
say..even though the idea of so many aliens being humonoid in appearance is kinda
sceptical to me…i loooove it..and G’KAR just rules..but i miss KOSH…so yes i would
say without a doubt Babylon 5 is the best…ever.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/17/97 8:09:05 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<Don’t tell me that JMS isn’t watching Startrek:DS9. The scene where Sheridan and
Delenn are “taken” to another place is a direct steal from the Wormhole scenes from DS9’s
“Emissary”>

First of all the man himself has said that he doesn’t watch DS9. I’m more than happy to
take him at his word.
Second the Sheridan and Delenn scene from “Into the Fire” is from a *long* line of literary
conventions used in storytelling to convey abstract concepts in physical form. Let see:
Raymond E. Feist uses it in his RiftWar Saga when Pug and Macros the Black enter
Riftspace. David Eddings uses it in the Belgariad to explain the “game” that’s being
played…Hey I used it in a short story I wrote prior to ever seeing DS9. Does this mean
they stole it from me? No…it doesn’t. Can we *please* stop pointing fingers at who stole
what scene? It really is a waste of time

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/18/97 12:28:39 AM
From: Ridak
Posted on: America Online

JMS himself has lambasted the nit-wits who keep accusing him of ‘stealing’ ideas from
Star Trek and other stories. In doing so he pointed out something that alot of you should
think about. Almost every plot device used in stories today has been used many times
before and originate in some of the oldest of the classic literature. Most of you haven’t read
ANYTHING that older than 100 years and so you are not knowledgable enough to accuse.
JMS’s story telling has used many devices and techniques from various forms of literature.
If you are seeing similarities it’s because the other writers were influenced the the SAME
thing! On the whole, most authors are also avid readers, and they read books that many of
us would find too archaic. But they are writers, and the best way to learn to write well is to
analyze the techniques of the greats. The best writers also have rather diverse literary
interests and influenced by numerous genres. The fact that most of the stories that JMS is
accused of stealing from are sci-fi indicates just how narrowly read the accusers are.

As a note though – I know the history of both shows in detail. the Babylon 5 story was
around for a number of years before DS9 was created. The story already contained the
major elements when JMS pitched it to Paramount. Paramount declined the show, but then
lo-and-behold….they introduce their own show set on a space station next to a worm-
hole/jump-gate. Both stations are ports-of-call for merchants, traders, etc. Both stations are
commanded by officers who were out of favor. In DS9 the Bajorans, a spiritual people,
have fought a long rebellion against the Cardassian occupiers and recently won their
freedom. In Bab5 the Narn, a spiritual people, have fought a long rebellion agains the
Centauri occupiers and recently won their freedom.

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/18/97 12:42:58 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)
On a serious note, was that scene really necessary in such a good episode?<<

I thought it was funny and fitting with the scene given the cast of characters we
saw parade through there just prior to that. First Londo, then Bester, then the four(or was it
five) Elvis’ –I got a kick out of it, and it was something you’d never see on a Trek show
because unfortunately those guys don’t have a sense of humor, and maybe that’s part of the
reason why I liked that scene.

 

Subj: Re:Hail the KING
Date: 2/18/97 2:18:10 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>On a serious note, was that scene really necessary in such a good episode?<

I thought it was pretty funny. Any dead elvis joke makes me laugh. I want to see a Centauri
elvis impersonator.

Thank you, thank you very much…

Subj: return of the King
Date: 2/18/97 2:23:20 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>First Londo, then Bester, then the four(or was it five) Elvis’…<<

The plural of Elvis is Elvi.Thank you, thank you very much. I’ll be here all week, you
people are great! Tip the waitresses and drive safely!! Goodnight!

Subj: Re:return of the King
Date: 2/18/97 3:10:48 AM
From: StarshipII
Posted on: America Online

Speaking of Elvis, now that the Vorlons are gone do you think they finally let him go?
Imagine the King showing up on Earth again after all these years! Or maybe they just left
him in the freezer with Sebastian and forgot about him, so that future generations may one
day discover him…one day, when the universe needs him most.

Subj: Univeriality Of Religion
Date: 2/18/97 7:23:10 AM
From: Lady Tryel
Posted on: America Online

Was:Re: Supporting Sci Fi shows as posted by A5398457

< 8. There is depiction of the universality of religionism (Bajoran and Vulcan
religions; first season — equality of all religions).>

I have to disagree with this. B5 does a much better job dealing with religion in a much less
judgemental way that any modern ST series so far <the only reason I leave out TOS is a
single episode. Can anyone guess which one?>
Anyway it seems to me in the 24th century that the Federation’s human popultion doesn’t
really have much in the way of religion. I mean they never mention the religious
background of anyone, and when Kira starts getting bothered about things concerning the
prophets all the humans seem to look at her in pity…Oh the poor backwards Bajorian type
of thing. It bothers me a lot.
On the other hand B5 deals with faith and uses it as a tool for deepening characters, and
giving them a wider view. “Gethseme” is a great example as is “TKO”.
Well what do you think?
Tryel Sana <Posting under an alias to protect the guilty>
Subj: Re:return of the King
Date: 2/18/97 6:52:38 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Speaking of Elvis, now that the Vorlons are gone do you think they finally let him
go?>>

Unlike Sebastian, they probably just put him on a diet and put him on a tour of some
lonely, far-flung Vorlon outposts (those words on the side of the Vorlon ship in
“Walkabout?” The lyrics to “Heartbreak Hotel”).

Now that the Vorlons have gone beyond the Rim, The King will return to Earth, and stage
a comeback special that will make Christmas of ’68 look like rehearsal.

This will be the sixth season premiere of Babylon 5.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/19/97 5:10:30 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<JMS himself has lambasted the nit-wits who keep accusing him of ‘stealing’ ideas from
Star Trek and other stories. In doing so he pointed out something that alot of you should
think about. Almost every plot device used in stories today has been used many times
before and originate in some of the oldest of the classic literature. Most of you haven’t read
ANYTHING that older than 100 years and so you are not knowledgable enough to accuse.
JMS’s story telling has used many devices and techniques from various forms of literature.
If you are seeing similarities it’s because the other writers were influenced the the SAME
thing! On the whole, most authors are also avid readers, and they read books that many of
us would find too archaic. But they are writers, and the best way to learn to write well is to
analyze the techniques of the greats. The best writers also have rather diverse literary
interests and influenced by numerous genres. The fact that most of the stories that JMS is
accused of stealing from are sci-fi indicates just how narrowly read the accusers are.>>

Maybe some B5 fans should read this part before they start saying that DS9 writers are
ripping of JMS. But nah, double standereds thrive on this board as you yourself
demonstrate later in this post.

<<As a note though – I know the history of both shows in detail. the Babylon 5 story was
around for a number of years before DS9 was created. The story already contained the
major elements when JMS pitched it to Paramount. Paramount declined the show, but then
lo-and-behold….they introduce their own show set on a space station next to a worm-
hole/jump-gate. Both stations are ports-of-call for merchants, traders, etc. Both stations are
commanded by officers who were out of favor. In DS9 the Bajorans, a spiritual people,
have fought a long rebellion against the Cardassian occupiers and recently won their
freedom. In Bab5 the Narn, a spiritual people, have fought a long rebellion agains the
Centauri occupiers and recently won their freedom.>>

Here we go again. Lets exam your “points” in detail.

<< Paramount declined the show,>>

So, they do this all of the time. I’m sure they decline a whole bunch of shows.

<<but then lo-and-behold….they introduce their own show set on a space station next to a
worm-hole/jump-gate.>>

As I have pointed out MANY times a wormhole and jumpgate are completely diffrent
things, with
completely diffrent purposes on their respective shows. If the DS9 people “riped off”
anyone with the wormhole (Many of which have been protrayed on Trek before) it would
be real scientists.

<<Both stations are ports-of-call for merchants, traders, etc.>>

Umm, hate to tell you this but that is the entire point of a space station. And B5’s main
purpose was to act as a “UN in space”, DS9 is in no way that.

<<Both stations are commanded by officers who were out of favor.>>

Get your facts strait, Sisko was not “out of favor” (He never would have been given such
an important job if he was). In fact, originally he didn’t even want the DS9 job.

<<In DS9 the Bajorans, a spiritual people, have fought a long rebellion against the
Cardassian occupiers and recently won their freedom. In Bab5 the Narn, a spiritual people,
have fought a long rebellion agains the Centauri occupiers and recently won their
freedom.>>

Wasn’t it you who earlyier in your post mentioned age old themes? The “spiritual people
that through off opressors” is as old as the bible! In fact if you cared to do any research
before accusing Berman and Piller of plagarism you would know that the inspiration for the
Bajorians was the Jews!

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 5:13:58 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< I thought it was funny and fitting with the scene given the cast of characters we saw
parade through there just prior to that. First Londo, then Bester, then the four(or was it
five) Elvis’ –I got a kick out of it, and it was something you’d never see on a Trek show
because unfortunately those guys don’t have a sense of humor, and maybe that’s part of the
reason why I liked that scene.>>

Trek have no sense of humor? You have GOT to be kidding. DS9 does more comedy
episodes than any other “serious” S.F. show. And no, Trek writers would never put Elvis
impersonators into a scene, it has been WAY overdone and is NOT funny anymore. IMHO
of course.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Univeriality Of Religion
Date: 2/19/97 5:23:20 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Anyway it seems to me in the 24th century that the Federation’s human popultion
doesn’t really have much in the way of religion. I mean they never mention the religious
background of anyone, and when Kira starts getting bothered about things concerning the
prophets all the humans seem to look at her in pity…Oh the poor backwards Bajorian type
of thing. It bothers me a lot.>>

Well, it doesn’t bother me. :) Seriously, while in the Trek universe the planet Earth is
predominately non-religious (as is 1/4 of the world today). They are still pretty much
respectful of others’ religion. ie the Bajorians, and the Klingons.

–AcDec

On the other hand B5 deals with faith and uses it as a tool for deepening characters, and
giving them a wider view. “Gethseme” is a great example as is “TKO”.
Well what do you think?

Subj: Re:Univeriality Of Religion
Date: 2/19/97 8:01:48 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

Well, it doesn’t bother me. :) Seriously, while in the Trek universe the planet Earth is
predominately non-religious (as is 1/4 of the world today). They are still pretty much
respectful of others’ religion. ie the Bajorians, and the Klingons.

–AcDec >>

Only sorta respectful…

Like the Prime Directive. We know better, but we will let you continue on in your
ignorance until you become enlightened enough to see the scientific truth.

Except in V’Gr. I really don’t know what to expect there, even after all this time.

Subj: Re:Univeriality Of Religion
Date: 2/19/97 1:58:08 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Like the Prime Directive. We know better, but we will let you continue on in your
ignorance until you become enlightened enough to see the scientific truth.>>

I don’t know about that. The Prime Directive applies to civilizations that have not achieved
spacefaring status; I don’t know that religiosity, or lack thereof, has anything to do with
that. Once spacefaring capabilities have been in evidence to a certain level, first contact is
initiated.

Given this, would a bit presumptuous in itself to believe that only “primitive”, or
nonspacefaring, cultures believe in a deity, as would be implied in the belief that the PD
protects primarily such civilizations.

On the Bajoran question: While it is true that some cultures may believe that the Bajoran
religion is primitive — we know that the Cardassians, their former conquerors, do — the
existence and references to the Bajoran temple on DS9 itself is testament to the respect
accorded religious belief.

One thing I will say: Star Trek does not dwell on religion, nor does it have a lot of
references to religion in general. (It may be that religious belief, by the 24th Century, has
become such an intensely personal and race-based (as in “species-based”) issue that it is not
customary to have religious sentiment expressed by any particular species.) I think that it is
not unexpected that a television show be limited in the scope of things it can possibly
depict; I don’t know how realistic it would be, for example, for one to expect NBC’s
highly regard *ER* drama to consistently depict the church- or temple-related activities or
thoughts of its characters.

For what it does, Star Trek does a reasonable job of accommodating religious beliefs,
IMO.

Subj: Re:Univeriality Of Religion
Date: 2/19/97 2:52:05 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Correction: << the existence and references to the Bajoran temple on DS9 >> should be,
“the existence of and references to the Bajoran temple on DS9″.

Subj: Folder
Date: 2/19/97 4:03:16 PM
From: BandMan34
Posted on: America Online

What a great folder. It’s name implies two gigantic robots, one named Star Trek and one
named Babylon 5 fighting it out over Tokyo.

I’ve always been a big Trek fan, but Babylon 5 takes us places in the human heart Star
Trek doesn’t. It’s a darker, more dangerous universe, and the triumphs are much more
meaningful because the plots and sub-plots are so thoroughly thought out. The show takes
its time and has an almost David Lynch aesthetic which knocks me out. I’ll never forget
G’Kar’s psychic “rape” of Londo, and Londo’s face as the Centauri warship rained
asteroids down on Narn. This show leaves a mark.

Subj: Re:return of the King
Date: 2/19/97 4:24:21 PM
From: ALYS 10
Posted on: America Online

StarshipII

ROTLandLandL, with tears rolling down my cheeks. And I don’t even like Elvis!

Alys
(Who is glad that this is cyberspace, so will not have to clean up any rotten tomatoes, or
other dead fruits and vegetables, after that statement.)

Subj: Re:Univeriality Of Religion
Date: 2/19/97 4:37:02 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Like the Prime Directive. We know better, but we will let you continue on in your
ignorance until you become enlightened enough to see the scientific truth.>>

Well, I never said that humans were not arrogent. Some things never change. :)

<<Except in V’Gr. I really don’t know what to expect there, even after all this time.>>

V’Gr came out of Gene’s very strange theology (Roddenberry was not an athiest). Pick up
his authorized biography and look in the back for an article called “God and Roddenberry”,
strange stuff.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 5:27:08 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Agreed DS9 has more comedy episodes than any other sci/fi series because it is a joke!!

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 8:43:05 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Trek have no sense of humor? You have GOT to be kidding. DS9 does more comedy
episodes than any other “serious” S.F. show. And no, Trek writers would never put Elvis
impersonators into a scene, it has been WAY overdone and is NOT funny anymore. IMHO
of course.>>

As Picard might say, we have evolved beyond Elvis impersonators.

Seriously, what made the Elvis gag work was not simply that it was Elvis, but that it was
so out-of-the-blue and incongruous. It would have been just as funny with anything else
equally out of place. My alternate suggestion would have been to show a bunch of people
in TOS Trek uniforms, and have one say, “We’re here for the convention.”

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 8:51:35 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<<Trek have no sense of humor? You have GOT to be kidding. DS9 does more comedy
episodes than any other “serious” S.F. show.>>

Trek *attempts* a fair number of comedy shows. Some work (Trials-and-Tribble-ations),
some don’t (Little Green Men).

And speaking of Little Green Men….like the Roswell/Area 51 bandwagon wasn’t as
overused as Elvis.

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 10:09:17 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

DS9 can’t use Elvis as the show is so far removed from anything in the real world. It’s
complete hokum.

Subj: Hokum
Date: 2/19/97 10:11:59 PM
From: BandMan34
Posted on: America Online

Hokum you think that? I think DS9 gud. Gud sho

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 10:16:49 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< My alternate suggestion would have been to show a bunch of people in TOS Trek
uniforms, and have one say, “We’re here for the convention.”>>

Now THAT would have been funny. :) I guess I am just tired of Elvis. He is the most
annoying dead guy in history.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 10:18:57 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Trek *attempts* a fair number of comedy shows. Some work (Trials-and-Tribble-
ations), some don’t (Little Green Men).>>

Hey, “Little Green Men” was a great parody of those 50’s Sci-Fi movies. Same with “Our
Man Bashir” being a great Bond parody.

<<And speaking of Little Green Men….like the Roswell/Area 51 bandwagon wasn’t as
overused as Elvis.>>

Not quite, but it is getting there.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/19/97 10:20:12 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<DS9 can’t use Elvis as the show is so far removed from anything in the real world. It’s
complete hokum.>>

No, DS9 just has more class. :)
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hokum
Date: 2/19/97 10:20:55 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Hokum you think that? I think DS9 gud. Gud sho>>

I think I need a universal translator.
–AcDec

Subj: The Final Word, pt 1
Date: 2/19/97 11:39:03 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

Star Trek vs. Babylon 5: A comparison

This study will compare the Star Trek universe and the
Babylon 5 universe in 7 different categories. These
categories are:
Types of Technology Existent in the Future
Frequency of Plot Holes
State of Humanity in Future
Death and Resurrection
Military Ranks & Services
Alien Makeup
Time Travel
The first category we will discuss is the technology
existent in the future.
In Star Trek, we are lead to believe in the existence of
technology so advanced it almost appears to be magic. This
technology consists of the following:
Transporter-a device which can dematerialize a solid
object, store its molecular structure as electronic data,
transmit this data to another location(which does not even
require another transporter to receive the signal), and
rematerialize the object into its original state at the new
location.
Holodeck/Holosuite-a large room enclosed by electronic
walls which can project into the room holographic images that
have physical substance and can be “touched” by the user.
Matter Replicator-a device which can reproduce any
solid, liquid, or gaseous substance with any atomic,
molecular, or crystalline structure known to exist(with a few
exceptions).
Deflector Shields-technology imbedded in a starship or
shuttlecraft which electronically projects the ship’s armor
at a greater distance around the ship, effectively producing
a second armor around the ship. Deflector shields can be
strengthened or weakened by channeling more power to them or
draining more power from them
Artificial Gravity-technology imbedded in a ship which
exerts a downward(toward the floor) force on all objects on
board the ship to simulate a gravitational field.
Inertial Dampening Field-very seldom mentioned, this
technology is imbedded in a starship and is used whenever a
ship accelerates its velocity. This technology produces a
counter force to the Newtonian reactive force which would
otherwise cause all loose objects aboard the ship to
seemingly fall backward whenever the ship accelerates
forward, and vice versa.
In Babylon 5, the technology is more down-to-earth and
plausible.
There are no transporters or teleportation-type devices-
if you want to go somewhere, you actually have to GO there.
There are no holodecks/holosuites.
There are no matter replicators-You want something, you
got to go BUY one.
There are no deflector shields on the ships-ships
actually have to use the physical armor which constitutes the
hull in order to protect themselves.
There is some artificial gravity technology-Earth
Alliance doesn’t have it, the Narns probably don’t have it,
The Centauri might have it, the Minbari have it, and the
Vorlons have got to have it. Same for the Shadows.
There is some organic technology, among the more
advanced races-The Human/Minbari/Vorlon battleship Whitestar
uses it, and the Vorlons and the Shadows have “living”
ships.(By the way, the Seaquest also had some organic
technology. Its skin was composed of living tissue.)
To me, Babylon 5’s portrayal is more realistic and
plausible.

Subj: The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/19/97 11:42:56 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

The next category is the presence of plot holes in the
two universes.
In Star Trek, there are many fundamental plot holes
which exist inherently due to the nature of their universe.
The writers often fail to account for the logical
consequences of the plot devices they use. Let’s discuss
them one by one:
The most obvious discrepancy of this type is transporter
technology. With Star Trek: The Next Generation, it is
established that using a transporter to “beam” a person or
thing does not require a transporter room or pad to be
present at the departure or arrival site. You can simply
“beam” anything from anywhere to anywhere, without
physically having it at the transporter room. How many times
did Captain Picard order the transporter operator to beam the
casualties from the planet’s surface DIRECTLY to sickbay?
The traveler in question did not even need to be at the
transporter room at all.
The logical question then, is this: why even have a
transporter room? They don’t need it! They only need the
transporter console which is used to operate the transporter.
So why not just have a transporter “panel” on the bridge?
That’s the only part of the transporter which needs to be
accessed anyway.
Also, this ability of transporters to bypass the
“transporter room” presence of the traveler in question
completely removes the need for walking. Why even “walk”
anywhere? You can simply “beam” yourself wherever you want
to go, without even needing to walk to the transporter room!
(Eg. the movie “Spaceballs”)
This capability of the transporters would also allow
people to freely commit acts of theft and extortion without a
trace. What’s to stop that burglar with a transporter from
“beaming” your precious diamond necklace directly out of
that 6-inch steel vault you have? Unless a you had a
deflector shield surrounding ALL your physical possessions,
turned on 24 hours a day, you could never be secure in any of
your valuables.
The next major discrepancy in Star Trek involves
holodecks. Since the holodeck can produce ANY image you
want, and produce it with actual physical substance, what’s
to stop people from using it to live out their fantasies?
People could conceivably use holodecks to act out sexual
scenarios, much like they do when they watch pornographic
movies rented from video stores. After all, the holodeck can
produce any image you want, can it not? People could and
would easily abuse the holodeck for this purpose, and to
fulfill other fantasies, and quickly become addicted to
holodeck use. The holodeck would make crack cocaine look
like caffeine! Eventually, life on the holodeck would become
more desirable than life in reality, and people would eagerly
desire to “live” in the holodeck, perhaps coming out only to
eat, sleep, and work. The example shown in “Hollow
Pursuits”, ST:TNG, was only touching the proverbial tip of
the iceberg!
And now we have our matter replicators-since a matter
replicator can create any type of matter you want; in any
size, shape, or temperature; why not use it to replicate
money? Counterfeiters could simply mass produce bars of gold
press latinum, and become rich. And there would be no way of
stopping them, after all, there is no law outlawing matter
replicators, is there?
The existence of matter replicators would also allow
people not only to acquire money, but any physical possession
they desire. Let’s say I want a new Lamborghini to drive to
work. I’ll just go replicate one. This would completely
destroy free trade, because people with a replicator would no
longer need to buy products. They could just replicate them.
In “The Price”, ST:TNG, when Riker is sent to negotiate with
the wormhole supplier, the problem is that he nothing to
bargain with! Anything he could offer can already be
obtained with a replicator!

Subj: The Final Word, pt 3
Date: 2/19/97 11:44:40 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

And there are more fundamental discrepancies. The whole
Betazoid race, for instance. They have telepathic and
empathic abilities, meaning they can read a person’s thoughts
and emotions at will, freely and unrestrained. So what’s to
stop them from abusing their powers over us non-telepaths?
They could invade our privacy at will, without any resistance
from us. Counselor Troi could easily find out what I’d like
to do to her in the holodeck after hours!
This ability of Betazoids would not only allow them to
invade our privacy, but it would also provide them with a
huge tactical advantage in any military situation. They
could simply scan the enemy at will(with the exception of
Ferengi opponents), and anticipate any possible move they
could make(As mentioned in “The Price”). This would allow
the Betazoid military to become the most powerful military
power in the Star Trek Universe. Yet somehow miraculously,
the Betazoids take a back seat to the Federation! It would
make more sense that they would be ruling us(like how the
Changelings rule the Dominion).
That does it for all the fundamental plot holes in Star
Trek, but there are hundreds more episode-specific plot holes
which exist in Star Trek, and are too numerous to list here
in this study. So now, we will examine the occurrences of
plot discrepancies in Babylon 5.
Babylon 5 avoids plot holes. In Babylon 5, there are no
“magic” devices, such as transporters or matter replicators,
which cause complications from a literary point of view.
In the three seasons it has been on, there have been few
continuity errors in the stories. Of course, this is a point
which is hard to demonstrate, but I’ll just point out that
there has never been a book published about the plot holes in
Babylon 5, unlike Star Trek(The Nitpicker’s Guide for Next
Generation Trekkers, vols. 1 & 2; The Nitpicker’s Guide for
Classic Trekkers, and The Nitpicker’s Guide for Deep Space
Nine Trekkers are all available at your local bookstore).
Instead, I have noticed one principle in Babylon 5 which
seems to be lacking in Star Trek: the writers account for
the consequences of their plot devices. Whenever something
happens in the Babylon 5 universe, there are always
consequences as a result of that event. Nothing happens in a
vacuum, like they often do in Star Trek.
For instance, take the following principle: military
conflict promotes defense building. When the Centauri
Republic started a war with the Narn Regime in “Coming of
Shadows”, the Earth Alliance began massing its defenses at
Babylon 5(“GROPOs”). It also sought more political
alliances with other major powers, in case it would have to
choose sides in the current conflict.(“GROPOs”) This is an
example of how Babylon 5 realistically portrays the action-
reaction principle which governs the nature of their
universe. In Star Trek, however, this principle seems to be
lacking. In “Way of the Warrior”, the season 4 premiere of
Deep Space Nine, the United Federation of Planets had just
gone to battle with their long-time ally, the Klingon
Imperial Empire, over their conquest of the Cardassian
Empire. So why in the next episode, “The Visitor”, is there
no massing of weapons or defenses at Deep Space Nine? You
would think that Starfleet would want to prepare for any more
possible combat situations with the Klingons, but no! It
seemed like nothing had changed at all!
Subj: The Final Word, pt 4
Date: 2/19/97 11:46:19 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

Other examples of Babylon 5’s action-reaction principle:
The humans’ fear of telepaths results in the creation of
the Psi-Corps, an organization built to regulate telepaths so
they would not abuse their powers over the normals.(Unlike in
Star Trek where noone is ever threatened by Betazoids even
though they have a power over them which cannot be regulated)
As a result, Psi-Corps is corrupted by own power,
engaging in acts of harassment, sabotage, and infiltration
of major government agencies.(“Spider in the Web”) This
demonstrates the principle that power corrupts, and absolute
power corrupts, absolutely; leaving no plot holes open.
The next category to be examined is the state of
Humanity in Future.
In Star Trek, we have a Utopian Vision of humanity in
the 24th century. In their universe, there is no greed,
poverty, crime, or racism in the human race. In fact, nobody
ever gets a cold or a headache!(“The Battle”, ST:TNG) The
shipmates never even fight each other, despite the fact that
they’re trapped up in a closed, isolated environment for 10
years at a time. Star Trek assumes that by the 24th century,
mankind will have solved all of society’s problems and Earth
will be paradise.(“Homefront”, Star Trek: Deep Space 9)
In Babylon 5, we have a more pessimistic vision of the
future. In the 23rd century Earth Alliance, we still have
hate groups & racism(“The War Prayer”), poverty(lurkers in
Down Below), corrupt politicians(President Clark), viscious
labor strikes(“By Any Means Necessary”), pirates &
raiders(“Midnight on the Firing Line), and crime
bosses(“Grail”). Babylon 5 assumes that humanity has not
evolved very much in 300 years, and that the problems of
society will still exist, even in the future. I find this
assessment much more realistic, given that in mankind’s
entire presence on this planet, we still posess many of the
problems of society(crime, poverty, disease, corruption,
greed, racism, persecution) which have plagued our existence
for centuries. Earth is nowhere near being paradise, and
willl not be for a long time.

Subj: The Final Word, pt 5
Date: 2/19/97 11:47:17 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

The next category we will discuss is that of death and
resurrection.
In Star Trek, characters die all the time, but they can
easily be brought back to life provided 2 conditions exist:
1. The fans want them back, and
2. Paramount wants to make money.
Suffice it to say, the implausibility of this principle is
highly self-evident. Resurrection is already known to be
scientifically impossbile.
Examples of dead characters returning include the
following:
Star Trek II:TWOK/Star Trek III:TSFS: Captain Spock
died from warp-engine radiation poisoning in ST II: TWOK, but
before he died he executed a Vulcan Mind Meld on Dr. McCoy.
They send his corpse to the newly created & highly
experimental Genesis planet, and in ST III: TSFS, they go to
the Genesis planet, finds Spock’s “reborn” body, and return
his soul from Dr. McCoy’s body to Spock’s body.
“Skin of Evil”/”Yesterday’s
Enterprise”/”Redemption”, ST:TNG: Security Chief Lt. Tasha
Yar dies in “Skin of Evil”, at the hands of a powerful
alien. Then, in “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, the volley of
photon torpedoes which occurred in the past at the Klingon
outpost which was being attacked by the Romulans causes a
temporal rift, which sends the Enterprise-C to the
present(their future), altering history. This altered
history allows Tasha Yar to live, and be sent back in time to
Romulan-Federation-Klingon battle, restoring history. In
“Redemption” we learn that Tasha Yar in the past married a
Romulan general, and had a daughter with him named Sela, who
later becomes a Romulan Starship Commander. This effectively
allows the essence of the dead Tasha Yar character to be
resurrected for the sake of popular demand.
“Relics”, ST:TNG: Prior to “Relics” Captain
Montgomery Scott was in a dangerous situation from which he
needed to escape. He and his crewmate set the transporter to
dematerialize them and store their patterns in the buffer
while running on a continuous diagnostic cycle. This allowed
them to survive in the transporter indefinitely, until
someone else came along and rematerialized them. This
cleverly conceived plot device is yet another example of a
dead character becoming resurrected. Resurrected from the
original series to the Next Generation!
ST: Generations: In ST: Generations, Captain Kirk dies
while repairing the Enterprise-B inside the Nexus ribbon. As
a result, he is pulled into the Nexus dimension. Even though
dead in our universe, Kirk is able to later return by simply
exiting from the Nexus dimension into our dimension ON HIS
OWN FREE WILL! Effectively, he has resurrected himself just
so he can work side by side with Captain Picard.
“Tapestry”, ST:TNG: Captain Picard dies as a result
of a powerful electronic signal which disables his artificial
heart. In the afterlife, the superpowerful alien entity Q
brings Picard back to life in his past. Yet another case in
point.
“Deadlock”, ST: Voyager: Harry Kim got sucked out
into space and died. Yet, later we learn that due to the
bombardment of proton pulses in the antimatter chamber,
another Voyager with another crew was created, thus providing
us with another Harry Kim to replace the first one we lost!
It is apparent to me that Paramount will resurrect any
dead Star Trek character if the fans want it badly enough,
using whatever convenient plot device they can think of, no
matter how faulty or convoluted. This might satisfy the fans
in the short term, but in the long run it damages the show’s
credibility.

Subj: The Final Word, pt 6
Date: 2/19/97 11:48:29 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

On Babylon 5, dead characters generally stay dead(with
one exception). These examples include:
Warmaster Jha’Dur(“Deathwalker”)
Private First Class Dodgers(“GROPOs”)
Talia Winters(“Divided Loyalties”)
Warmaster G’Sten(“The Long, Twilight Struggle”)
Lieutenant Warren Keffer(“The Fall of Night”)
General William Hague(“Severed Dreams”)
Captain Sandra Hiroshi(“Severed Dreams”)
Adira Tyree(“Interludes and Examinations”)
Lord Refa(“And The Rock Cried Out, No Hiding Place”)
Despite the huge fan outcry for the return of Talia Winters,
JMS has no plans to ever bring back that character. The
actress, Andrea Thompson, has quit the show and has no plans
to return. In my opinion, this tendency of dead B5
characters to stay dead gives much more credibility to the
show, and makes each character’s death more meaningful.
The one and only instance of a dead B5 character
returning is Captain Sheridan in “The Summoning”. In the
episodes “Z’Ha’Dum”,”Hour of the Wolf”,and “Whatever
Happened to Mr. Garibaldi?”, from what we can tell, Sheridan
fell down a pit at Z’Ha’Dum and became trapped in limbo with
a another alien named Lorien, who urged him to give up his
life and surrender to death. Sheridan at first refused, and
held out strongly, but eventually gave in to death. Later,
in the next episode, “The Summoning”, Sheridan returns to
Babylon 5, very much alive, and urges the League of Non-
Aligned Worlds to band together and attack the Shadows.
Even this instance of resurrection can be plausibly
explained by theorizing that Lorien has the ability of
flight, and caught Sheridan as he was falling, then brought
him to some “limbo” state where Sheridan was caught in
between. Once Sheridan surrendered to death, Lorien
immediately administred Cardio Pulmonary Rescucitation on him
to revive him, thus bringing our hero back to life again.

Subj: The Final Word, pt 7
Date: 2/19/97 11:49:12 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

The next category which we will discuss is military
ranks & services in the political states in the two
universes. This is the one category where I think Star Trek
actually has the upper hand over B5.
In Star Trek, the United Federation of Planets has one
primary military service with which to defend itself:
Starfleet. Starfleet has clearly defined military ranks.
From what we can tell, they more or less use the same ranking
system as the current US Navy. Very simple and very clear.
The rank pins are also very clearly defined in the Star Trek:
The Next Generation Officer’s Manual.
In Babylon 5 however, we are not sure what kinds of
military services belong to the Earth Alliance. First of
all, there is much mention of an Earthforce, the military
service to which our main characters belonged at the
beginning of the show. At first glance they seem to also use
Navy ranks: Eg. Commander Sinclair, Lieutenant Commander
Ivanova, and Captain Sheridan. Yet, there are other
Earthforce personnel who do not use Navy ranks; instead they
seem to use AF/Army/Marine ranks, like:
Second Lieutenant David Corwin(“And Now for a Word”)
Major Liana Kemmer(“Survivors”)
Major Ed Ryan(“Severed Dreams”)
Colonel Ari Ben Zhane(“Eyes”)
General William Hague(“All Alone in the Night”)
So which ranking system is it? Does EF use Navy ranks,
or Army/AF/Marine ranks? Perhaps EF is a group service,
which consists of smaller services(like the Navy/Marines).
Perhaps these services go like such: EF Fleet, and EF
Infantry. But they don’t say!!!!
Also, the episode GROPOs establishes another military
service, GROPOs(GRound POunders). Apparently these are
infantry troops. In the episode they are frequently referred
to as “Jarheads”, indicating that they are some
reincarnation of the Marines. But, in “Ceremonies of Light
and Dark”, the Nightwatch agent Boggs makes mention of
calling in the “Marines”. Is he referring to GROPOs? Or
are the Marines separate from GROPOs? This type of confusion
does not help the show’s ratings. Perhaps Earthforce is
divided into two sub-services: EarthForce Fleet and
EarthForce GROPOs. This is one category in which Babylon 5
is very unclear and inconsistent with, and is actually
surpassed by Star Trek.

Subj: The Final Word, pt 8
Date: 2/19/97 11:49:57 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

The next category we will discuss is alien makeup.
Star Trek does a poor job of giving its viewers
plausible aliens. In Star Trek, some aliens look
alien(Ferengi, Cardassians, Kazon), but many aliens look
EXACTLY human(Betazoid, Bandi, Angosians), while some aliens
simply look human with a fuzzy piece of latex(Bajoran,
Vulcan, Trabe). To me this indicates a lack of creativity
among the producers. The fact that so many aliens are simply
human look-alikes is how Captain Kirk was able to plausibly
convince the Klingons that he was a nonhuman in “Errand of
Mercy”. This habit of having cheap looking aliens indicates
to me a certain laziness in the producers.
In contrast, Babylon 5 aliens always look different from
humans(with one exception). The Minbari, Narn, Drazi,
Brakiri, and Pak’Ma’Ra, among others, all look very alien,
not just a human with a fuzzy piece of latex. This is the
reason why Babylon 5 won an emmy award in 1994 for
Outstanding Achievement in Makeup. The only alien race which
looks human is the Centauri, whose males stand their hair up
as a sign of social status, and the whose females shave their
heads bald to indicate their status as females. But even in
this instance, the Centauri as a race can be easily
distinguished from humans.
Therefore Babylon 5 does a much better alien makeup job
than Star Trek, and does not cut corners. Star Trek would
have us believe that alien races which had no relation to
humans would look exactly like them? Yeah, right!

Subj: The Final Word, pt 9
Date: 2/19/97 11:51:18 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

The next category we will discuss is time travel, and
its use and abuse as a plot device. One thing to be
logically noted about time travel is that the ability to
travel through time is the power to control the destiny of
the mankind and the universe. Someone could kill Hitler
before birth, and prevent the entire second World War.
Someone could give Iraq an early version of the “Little
Boy”, and allow Iraq to be the first country to have nuclear
weapons. Therefore, time travelers have a tremendous power
over their enemies which can be used to their advantage.
In Star Trek, time travel occurs frequently, and can be
seemingly done at will. There were 6 instances of time
travel in the 3-year classic Star Trek:
“The Naked Time”
“Tommorrow is Yesterday”
“City on the Edge of Forever”
“Assignment: Earth”
“The Savage Curtain”
“All Our Yesterdays”
There were 10 instances of it in the 7-year Star Trek: The Next
Generation:
“We’ll Always Have Paris”
“Time Squared”
“Yesterday’s Enterprise”
“Captain’s Holiday”
“A Matter of Time”
“Cause and Effect”
“Time’s Arrow”
“Tapestry”
“Firstborn”
“All Good Things…”
It’s happened at least 5 times in the 5 seasons of Star Trek:
Deep Space Nine:
“Past Tense”
“Visionary”
“The Visitor”
“Little Green Men”
“Troubles and Tribbel-ations”,
and at least twice in the first season of Star Trek:
Voyager.(“Time and Again” and “Eye of the Needle”). They
also used time-travel in the movies “Star Trek IV: The
Voyage Home”, “Star Trek: Generations”, and “Star Trek:
First Contact”. That’s a total of 26 instances of time
travel in the Star Trek universe! You would think all this
temporal activity would cause some catacylsmic disaster
throughout the space-time continuum. Yet, amazingly, the
stability of the universe is always maintained, no matter how
much dangerous time travel takes place.
What’s also interesting is that in all these acts of
time-travel, the time travelers rarely use it to their
greatest advantage. If the Enterprise crew could so easily
travel back to 1985 in Star Trek IV, why not just destroy the
Klingons, Romulans, and Tholians before they are ever born?
For some reason, they don’t! Somehow, miraculously, these
time travelers in Star Trek always refrain from using time
travel to their advantage, and always leave everything alone,
untouched. Since time-travel can apparently be done at
will,(as just demonstrated with ST IV) why not just use it
whenever something bad happens? That way you could prevent
anything bad from ever happening. People could and would
fight each other over their conflicting time-travel goals(as
witnessed in the movie “TimeCop”). Another big plot hole in
Star Trek.
In Babylon 5, there was only one instance of time
travel(“Babylon Squared”/”War Without End”), and even in
that case, it did not just happen trivially, like an everyday
occurrence. They had to use the Great Machine on Epsilon 3
at full power and carry their time stabilizers with them.
Not something that can be done easily. Not only that, but
the time shift damaged Captain Sheridan’s time-stabilizer and
nearly got him killed, demonstrating the inherent danger in
time travel. Also, in that case, the time travelers in
question used their time-travel capabilities to their
greatest advantage: to win the Great War. Thus, they had
only one chance to ever use time-travel, and they used it for
what they needed most. Which I think is much more plausible
than that, “Let’s leave everything alone” attitude.

Subj: The Final Word, pt 10
Date: 2/19/97 11:52:29 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

So, in six of the seven categories,
Types of Technology in the Future
Frequency of Plot Holes
State of Humanity in the Future
Death and Resurrection
Alien Makeup
Time Travel
Babylon 5 surpasses Star Trek as far as quality and
plausibility is concerned. In the remaining category,:
Military Services and Ranks
Star Trek surpasses Babylon 5 due to consistency. Overall
Babylon 5 is superior.

P.S. – I know JMS doesn’t like us to discuss this topic, but I just had to get all this off my
chest.

Subj: CONCLUSION
Date: 2/20/97 1:15:05 AM
From: CEDREIC
Posted on: America Online

B5 is alot better then Star Trek and with time most sci-fi fans will believe it.Besides if
Voyager
is any example of a new idea for the show ,its doomed….

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 1
Date: 2/20/97 3:32:30 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<To me, Babylon 5’s portrayal is more realistic and
plausible.>>

Well, the only real diffrence bewteen B5’s Tech and Trek’s is the transporter (Replicators,
and holodecks are extensions of transporters). As for deflector shields, pick up “The
Physics of Star Trek”, they are not so implausable. Not to mention that at least some B5
races have some sort of “shield”, like the Vorlons, and the Great Machine.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/20/97 3:42:24 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Who, you screwed up big on this post.

1. “site to site transporting” is very DANGEROUS. That is why the only use it in
emergencies.
2. Transporter beams can be traced, if you beam something out of a vault the authorities
would no right were you are!
3. As for holodecks and sex, you must not watch DS9 much. What do you think Quarks
holosuites are used for!. Geez, you could at least come up with points that hav been delt
with. Your not much of a challange.
4. As for replicators; 1. gold pressed latinum CANNOT be replicated! 2. Replicators are
not perfect, goods produced the “old-fashioned” way are more prized. Just as an original
painting is more prized than a copy. Why do you think there are real vinyards (the Picard’s
place), and real resturants that cook real food (Sisko’s resturant). Not to mention that many
medical substances have been shown not to be replicatable.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 3
Date: 2/20/97 4:01:16 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<And there are more fundamental discrepancies. The whole
Betazoid race, for instance. They have telepathic and
empathic abilities, meaning they can read a person’s thoughts
and emotions at will, freely and unrestrained. So what’s to
stop them from abusing their powers over us non-telepaths?
They could invade our privacy at will, without any resistance
from us. Counselor Troi could easily find out what I’d like
to do to her in the holodeck after hours!>>

Yep, they can do that. What is your point?

<<This ability of Betazoids would not only allow them to
invade our privacy, but it would also provide them with a
huge tactical advantage in any military situation. They
could simply scan the enemy at will(with the exception of
Ferengi opponents), and anticipate any possible move they
could make(As mentioned in “The Price”). This would allow
the Betazoid military to become the most powerful military
power in the Star Trek Universe. Yet somehow miraculously,
the Betazoids take a back seat to the Federation! It would
make more sense that they would be ruling us(like how the
Changelings rule the Dominion).>>

Probally because the betazoids are MEMBERS of the Federation. Duh. I have no doubt
they could cause trouble, however most betazoids are pacificts, and they don’t even have
their own military. You’d have to be a sick individual (like Sudar from Voyager) to
purposefully kill when you can feel your victims pain.

That does it for all the fundamental plot holes in Star
<<Trek, but there are hundreds more episode-specific plot holes
which exist in Star Trek, and are too numerous to list here
in this study. So now, we will examine the occurrences of
plot discrepancies in Babylon 5.
Babylon 5 avoids plot holes. In Babylon 5, there are no
“magic” devices, such as transporters or matter replicators,
which cause complications from a literary point of view.>>

Well, we can’t really evaluate any possiable plothole in B5 untill the show is over, due to
the very nature of the 5 year arc.

<<In the three seasons it has been on, there have been few
continuity errors in the stories. Of course, this is a point
which is hard to demonstrate, but I’ll just point out that
there has never been a book published about the plot holes in
Babylon 5, unlike Star Trek(The Nitpicker’s Guide for Next
Generation Trekkers, vols. 1 & 2; The Nitpicker’s Guide for
Classic Trekkers, and The Nitpicker’s Guide for Deep Space
Nine Trekkers are all available at your local bookstore).>>

Not surpiseing considering that there is virtually no B5 merchendise whatsoever.

<<For instance, take the following principle: military
conflict promotes defense building. When the Centauri
Republic started a war with the Narn Regime in “Coming of
Shadows”, the Earth Alliance began massing its defenses at
Babylon 5(“GROPOs”). It also sought more political
alliances with other major powers, in case it would have to
choose sides in the current conflict.(“GROPOs”) This is an
example of how Babylon 5 realistically portrays the action-
reaction principle which governs the nature of their
universe.>>

Boy, you really haven’t been watching DS9 have you? They are chock full of military
buildups and political maneuvering. Heck, the entire Dominion situation has just changed
this week!
cont….
–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 3
Date: 2/20/97 4:12:59 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< In Star Trek, however, this principle seems to be
lacking. In “Way of the Warrior”, the season 4 premiere of
Deep Space Nine, the United Federation of Planets had just
gone to battle with their long-time ally, the Klingon
Imperial Empire, over their conquest of the Cardassian
Empire. So why in the next episode, “The Visitor”, is there
no massing of weapons or defenses at Deep Space Nine? You
would think that Starfleet would want to prepare for any more
possible combat situations with the Klingons, but no! It
seemed like nothing had changed at all!>>

Hmm, I guess you didn’t research this topic very thoughly. 1. The Federation and
Klingons did not go to war untill “Broken Link”, a year after WOTW. 2. DS9 is not
exactly on the front lines bewteen the Klingons and the Feds, there are better places, and
more sutible starbases to stage fleet actions against the Klingons. 3. Even after the losses to
the Klingons and the Borg,a starfleet taskforce is still within 2 days of DS9 (“In
Purgatory’s Shadow”), that is closer than they were in WOTW. 4. DS9 is not an easy
target, the Klingons would need to dispactch a large fleet to take it out, and it’s not an
important enough target to commit those kinds of resources.
–AcDec

Subj: Re: Silly Argument
Date: 2/20/97 4:31:17 AM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

>Paul, by “class warfare” I refer to the Marxist-Hegelian paradigm. The reality of conflict
is >undeniable in this society; the question is whether one economic class must “struggle”
against >another and ultimately overwhelm it. It is the latter proposition that I dispute.

I stand corrected — but I’m not so sure that even “struggle” used in that sense is an
unwarrented characterization of the situation in the US. It seems to me that the corporate
class has been waging war, quite successfully, against the working class since the early
80’s. If the the working class fights back, is that class warfare in the Marxist sense? Or is it
just people defending their interests? (BTW, Marxism does NOT appeal to me, even on a
theoretical level. Besides, it doesn’t work, as witness unfortunate history of the USSR,
China, et al)

>A large part of the mechanisms I refer to which mediate differences between capital and
labor >are instrumentalities of government. Government, in this sense, is simply acting for
the general >warfare.

(I assume that last word was meant to be “welfare”!) I agree, government has a valuable
role in mediating disputes among various interests within society, and despite some current
theories, can do so far more powerfully than market forces. For example, government
bodies can exert the will of the people to reduce pollution by industry, whereas without
government intercession industry would (and does!) simply whine about
“competitiveness” — and move their pollution elsewhere.

—Paul

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 4
Date: 2/20/97 4:36:22 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<As a result, Psi-Corps is corrupted by own power,
engaging in acts of harassment, sabotage, and infiltration
of major government agencies.(“Spider in the Web”) This
demonstrates the principle that power corrupts, and absolute
power corrupts, absolutely; leaving no plot holes open.>>

Geez, Trek has done the “power currupts” storyline many,many times.

<<The next category to be examined is the state of
Humanity in Future.
<<In Star Trek, we have a Utopian Vision of humanity in
the 24th century.>>

Hehe, I knew this one was coming, you couldn’t be farther from the truth.

<< In their universe, there is no greed,>>

Bull, ever seen Vash? And she’s only an extreme example.

<<poverty,>>

Not on Earth, but there is in other human settlements. A society that 1. Increases
productivity through new technology, and 2. (and this is the important part) has a stable
popualtion, would do away with poverty pretty quickly. I sugest you read some of
Asimov’s nonfiction on advanced society’s (essays in “Robot Visions”) for a better
explanation

<< crime>>

Then why pray tell do they have penal colonies on Earth?

<<, or racism in the human race. In fact, nobody
ever gets a cold or a headache!(“The Battle”, ST:TNG)>>

I don’t see rampent racism in B5 either. As for colds and headaches, medical problems
easily delt with (with 24th century technology).

<<The shipmates never even fight each other, despite the fact that
they’re trapped up in a closed, isolated environment for 10
years at a time.>>

Thats what holodecks are for! Anyway I don’t think fights run rampent on the US’s
warships, and I’m sure that the preticapents are punished. And there have been fights have
been known to happen on the Enterprise, and espeacilly DS9 (O’Brian and Worf got into it
once). However those who fight are thrown in the Brig.

<<Star Trek assumes that by the 24th century,
mankind will have solved all of society’s problems and Earth
will be paradise.(“Homefront”, Star Trek: Deep Space 9)>>

Earth is not called “Paridise” becuase there are no problems. It’s called that because it’s a
really neat place to live compared to many other area’s in the Federation. And many
Federation citizans don’t consider the Federation as “Paridise” (ie the Maquis). As I said,
human arrogence is alive and well in the 24th century.

<<In Babylon 5, we have a more pessimistic vision of the
future. In the 23rd century Earth Alliance, we still have
hate groups & racism(“The War Prayer”),>>

I’m not postive, but wasn’t that speciesism, not racism. Racsim is bewteen humans.
Humans who hate aliens, would be spiecisist. And in Trek there are a lot of those.

<<poverty(lurkers in
Down Below)>>

I’ve delt with this.

<< corrupt politicians(President Clark)>>

Many in Trek.

<< viscious labor strikes(“By Any Means Necessary”),>>

I don’t know about viscious, but there are strikes in Trek.

<<pirates &raiders(“Midnight on the Firing Line),>>

Many of these in Trek. The Maquis being my favorite, The Orion Pirates (Humans are
members) are cool too.

<<and crime bosses(“Grail”).>>

As I said, I’m sure there are crime “bosses” in the Orion Syndicate.

<< Babylon 5 assumes that humanity has not
evolved very much in 300 years, and that the problems of
society will still exist, even in the future. I find this
assessment much more realistic, given that in mankind’s
entire presence on this planet, we still posess many of the
problems of society(crime, poverty, disease, corruption,
greed, racism, persecution) which have plagued our existence
for centuries. Earth is nowhere near being paradise, and
willl not be for a long time.>>

And the Federation is nowhere near paradise either. At least now that Ira Behr rules the
alpha quadrent. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 5
Date: 2/20/97 4:42:02 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<It is apparent to me that Paramount will resurrect any
dead Star Trek character if the fans want it badly enough,
using whatever convenient plot device they can think of, no
matter how faulty or convoluted. This might satisfy the fans
in the short term, but in the long run it damages the show’s
credibility.>>

Sorry, but your only valid example (I’m not counting the one from Voyager, because I
don’t watch that show and I already admit that show is crap) was Spock. The Tasha that
was in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” was a completely diffrent person from a completely
diffrent universe than the one from season one of TNG. Kirk never died, untill the end and
he is staying dead. Scottie never died, he just put himself in suspended animation. BTW,
are you forgeting Sheridan, blown to bits by a nuclear bomb but still brought back to life (I
still wonder how they got a new body).

–AcDec

Subj: Re: Hail the King
Date: 2/20/97 4:47:36 AM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

AcDec,

>I now have absolute proof that Star Trek:Voyager is better than Babylon 5. Voyager has
never >stooped to using Elvis impersonators to get a laugh. :)

>On a serious note, was that scene really necessary in such a good episode?

C’mon, Ac! One of the wonderful things about Babylon 5 is the humor. IMHO, most of
the really good TV dramas throw in a little humor. That’s how life is, after all — even
among its horrors are the little absurdities that put things in perspective.
I once saw a PBS special about a woman who returned to Auschwitz, 30 years after being
imprisoned there. As she was explaining to her son the role of the “Scheisskommando”
(sp?), responsible for cleaning the latrines in the barracks ( a *good* job at Auschwitz!)
she started to laugh and said, “It’s all so bloody funny when you think of it”. The banality
of evil, I suppose.
Besides — didn’t it make you wonder? It’s 2261 — who are these people? Ministers of
The Church of The Devine Elvis? Even given 264 years of technological and (presumably)
social progress, that’s silly enough to be believable.
—Paul

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 6
Date: 2/20/97 4:48:19 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online
Geez, almost all of those dead B5 charaters were only in one episode! Aside from Na’Toth,
Keefer, Kosh, and Talia, they were all bit players. I could list hundreds of bit players killed
of in Trek. And trek has killed of many major charaters. Kirk, Sarek, Tasha, all on screen.
Many others off screen.
<<Even this instance of resurrection can be plausibly
explained by theorizing that Lorien has the ability of
flight, and caught Sheridan as he was falling, then brought
him to some “limbo” state where Sheridan was caught in
between. Once Sheridan surrendered to death, Lorien
immediately administred Cardio Pulmonary Rescucitation on him
to revive him, thus bringing our hero back to life again.>>

Maybe you missed the part about how Lorien infused Sheridan with his own “life force”.
Talk about hokey. I really wish JMS had found a better way.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/20/97 4:53:54 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Not this Old Argument Again!!!
Anyway, Ac –DS9 WAS a B5 rip-off, accept it or not, but I’d prefer not to have to
read your statements of denial concerning this matter since I’ve already seen more than I
care too when it comes to that. It has nothing to with “double standards which thrive on
this Board,” it’s simply what IS. It occurred –you don’t have to swallow that it did, but I
know it did and I’d prefer not to have to listen to your whining again.

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 8
Date: 2/20/97 4:56:06 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Therefore Babylon 5 does a much better alien makeup job
than Star Trek, and does not cut corners. Star Trek would
have us believe that alien races which had no relation to
humans would look exactly like them? Yeah, right!>>

1. In TOS they didn’t have enough money to makeup very many aliens, Spocks ears alone
cost them an arm and a leg.
2. As for TNG, and DS9, each show has a specific budget, they have spending prioities,
and makeup is a the bottom of the list. For instace, when a show takes place on the station,
you’ll see better aliens, because making a “bottle” show costs very little. However if they
do a show with extensive location shooting (something B5 almost never does) they have to
cut corners on the makeup. However, when they do a “major” episode (Dealing with the
Dominion or Klingons) they spend a huge amount of money on makeup. A lot goes into
budget decisions.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/20/97 4:58:39 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Trek have no sense of humor? You have GOT to be kidding. DS9 does more comedy
episodes than any other “serious” S.F. show.<<

Ahh, if you’re referring to episodes focused on the Ferengi, then no thanks. By
en large the only way I can get a laugh out of Quark is in little spurts, not in silly,
ridiculous episodes about his naked mother, thank you very much.
>> And no, Trek writers would never put Elvis impersonators into a scene, it has been
WAY overdone and is NOT funny anymore. IMHO of course.<<

Exactly what futuristic sci fi dramas would you say we’ve seen this in? Perhaps it
hasn’t been as done to death as your accrediting it for.

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 9
Date: 2/20/97 5:01:08 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Thus, they had only one chance to ever use time-travel, and they used it for
what they needed most. Which I think is much more plausible
than that, “Let’s leave everything alone” attitude.>>

Actually, “War Without End” had some major logical inconsistancies (as does all time
travel stories)

As for trek overdoing it in the time-travel department, I agree (though they are usally some
of the best episodes and movies). Of course, we know so much time-travel does upset
starfleet, hence the “Temporal Investigators”.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 10
Date: 2/20/97 5:02:11 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<So, in six of the seven categories,
Types of Technology in the Future
Frequency of Plot Holes
State of Humanity in the Future
Death and Resurrection
Alien Makeup
Time Travel
Babylon 5 surpasses Star Trek as far as quality and
plausibility is concerned. In the remaining category,:
Military Services and Ranks
Star Trek surpasses Babylon 5 due to consistency. Overall
Babylon 5 is superior.>>

As you can guess, I don’t agree. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to Blobbb
Date: 2/20/97 5:03:44 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Blobbb
Agreed DS9 has more comedy episodes than any other sci/fi series because it is a joke!!<<

The episodes about Quark and the Ferengi are utterly pathetic in their stupidity.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/20/97 5:05:07 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Anyway, Ac –DS9 WAS a B5 rip-off, accept it or not, but I’d prefer not to have to
read your statements of denial concerning this matter since I’ve already seen more than I
care too when it comes to that. It has nothing to with “double standards which thrive on
this Board,” it’s simply what IS. It occurred –you don’t have to swallow that it did, but I
know it did and I’d prefer not to have to listen to your whining again.>>

What, you were there in the room when Berman and Piller were drooling over the B5
synopsis? If not that than you sure as heck don’t know anything. And you sure have not
supplied any clear-cut evidince that ANYTHING happened.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to Archer
Date: 2/20/97 5:06:07 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Archer C1
My alternate suggestion would have been to show a bunch of people in TOS Trek
uniforms, and have one say, “We’re here for the convention.”<<

Yeah, that would have brought a lot of fanatical Trekkers over to our side all
right! <g>

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/20/97 5:06:25 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Exactly what futuristic sci fi dramas would you say we’ve seen this in? Perhaps it hasn’t
been as done to death as your accrediting it for.>>

Not in Sci-fi but in telivision and movies in general. It’s been done WAY to often.
–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/20/97 5:08:38 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: Blobbb
DS9 can’t use Elvis as the show is so far removed from anything in the real world. It’s
complete hokum.>>

>>>From: AcDec
No, DS9 just has more class. :) <<<

I just love it when you tip your hand like that, Ac, and let us know which side
you’re really on. :)

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 9
Date: 2/20/97 5:11:39 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Man, GKarB5 is on a Mission!

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 5:AcDe
Date: 2/20/97 5:18:37 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
BTW, are you forgeting Sheridan, blown to bits by a nuclear bomb but still brought back
to life (I still wonder how they got a new body).<<

It should be clear to you that Sheridan managed to survive only by Lorien
somehow shielding him. There was really no other way he could have endured that
explosive blast, nevermind the radiation, because he was located at ground zero. It was a
unique situation which I would probably argue shouldn’t even be compared to Trek in any
way.

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/20/97 5:30:29 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
What, you were there in the room when Berman and Piller were drooling over the B5
synopsis? If not that than you sure as heck don’t know anything. And you sure have not
supplied any clear-cut evidince that ANYTHING happened.<<

I’ve heard first hand Joe’s recounting of this situation and I have no doubt about
what went down. I already told you that I’m not interested in trying to cut through your
denial so why don’t you just take your hot air and blow it down an open steam pipe.
Tackling this matter with you is a no-win situation as your mind is clearly made up, thanks
in no small part to a well placed and deliberate mental block on your part. We’ve already
banged heads on this and you’re simply an immovable object, so therefore MOVE ON.

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/20/97 5:32:12 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Not in Sci-fi but in telivision and movies in general. It’s been done WAY to often.<<

Part of what made it funny is that it hasn’t been done in this genre.

 

Subj: Re: Silly Argument
Date: 2/20/97 5:51:25 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<If the the working class fights back, is that class warfare in the Marxist sense? Or is it
just people defending their interests?>>

I would characterize it as the latter. In the absence of a greater “class consciousness”, to
use the Marxist term, it is difficult to see how the “class struggle” dialectic applies in this
country.

[Quoting me: >A large part of the mechanisms I refer to which mediate differences between
capital and labor >are instrumentalities of government. Government, in this sense, is
simply acting for the general >warfare.]

<<(I assume that last word was meant to be “welfare”!)>>

Yes, it was. As a matter of fact, I was thinking about the Commerce Clause and its utility
in expanding the powers of government at the time I was writing that sentence; being so
distracted, I substituted the word “warfare” for “welfare”.

<<I agree, government has a valuable role in mediating disputes among various interests
within society, and despite some current theories, can do so far more powerfully than
market forces. For example, government bodies can exert the will of the people to reduce
pollution by industry, whereas without government intercession industry would (and
does!) simply whine about “competitiveness” — and move their pollution elsewhere.>>

Most economists would agree that externalities must be mediated by nonmarket forces — in
fact, this is so by definition. I think we agree that government’s role is partly to ensure that
the marketplace does not take over to such an extent that more important things, like justice
and some modicum of general survival, do not fall by the wayside. Those libertarians that
cannot see this are also unable to explain how the mechanisms of the marketplace can work
to favor such things as the social safety net, or even courts of law, all of which most
reasonable people would favor.

Finally, I have no inclination to paint you as a Marxist, as I’m sure you know. I appreciate
being able to exchange ideas on this matter with you and would not presume to attribute
such characteristic to you merely because you have taken a principled position that in some
ways appeared significantly different from mine.

Thank you for your post. :)

Subj: Re: Silly Argument
Date: 2/20/97 5:59:46 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Expanding on my own statement: <<Those libertarians that cannot see this are also unable
to explain how the mechanisms of the marketplace can work to favor such things as the
social safety net, or even courts of law, all of which most reasonable people would
favor.>>

It is not so farfetched to believe that there are libertarians who would dispense with the
social safety net as we know it. That is, it is believed by such that private charities and
churches could take over this function of government. My skepticism of this extreme
libertarian position is derived from my deep suspicion that, in the absence of the ability of
an entity to tax, no entity can afford to support the many in this country whose inability to
function to the level of the norm have forced them onto public assistance. Additionally,
with the advent of private arbitration and arbitration clauses in various contracts, “private
justice” is becoming more of a reality than ever before; thus is somewhat already
diminished the province of “courts of law”, in favor of “tribunals of private law”.

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 3
Date: 2/20/97 6:34:09 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<< Instead, I have noticed one principle in Babylon 5 which
seems to be lacking in Star Trek: the writers account for
the consequences of their plot devices. Whenever something
happens in the Babylon 5 universe, there are always
consequences as a result of that event. Nothing happens in a
vacuum, like they often do in Star Trek.>>

Aw, c’mon. This is in outer space. Everything happens in a vacuum.

Subj: Re:The Final Word
Date: 2/20/97 7:04:13 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

<<Geez, Trek has done the “power currupts” storyline many,many times. >>
They have to do a show about it. It isn’t intrinsic throughout the whole, like in B5.

[snip]

<<Thats what holodecks are for! Anyway I don’t think fights run rampent on the US’s
warships, and I’m sure that the preticapents are punished. And there have been fights have
been known to happen on the Enterprise, and espeacilly DS9 (O’Brian and Worf got into it
once). However those who fight are thrown in the Brig.>>
In the ‘Menagrie’, just what was the problem with Talos IV? Wasn’t it the power of
illusion? Now the Federation has it, and they are above it’s addictive effects.

[snip]

<<Earth is not called “Paridise” becuase there are no problems. It’s called that because it’s
a really neat place to live compared to many other area’s in the Federation. And many
Federation citizans don’t consider the Federation as “Paridise” (ie the Maquis). As I said,
human arrogence is alive and well in the 24th century.>>
But not throughout society. Only in a few lunatic fringe groups.

[snip]

Sure ST has addressed several aspects of the human condition, but nearly always in
individual episodes. Our human frailties are not considered to be intrinsic to the universe,
only abberations that deserve special treatment.

I just saw the rerun about the two planets where one produced an addictive drug for the
other one (for got the title). I was nearly sickened by the preachy, “we’ve moved beyond
that” attitude of the crew. Particularly Tasha Yar’s explqanation to Wesley. Then there
was the “Prime Directive is always correct” speach by Capt. Picard. I’m glad I don’t watch
ST:TNG much.
Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/20/97 7:27:50 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I just love it when you tip your hand like that, Ac, and let us know which side you’re
really on. :)>>

I guess you missed the :) smart guy.
–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 5:AcDe
Date: 2/20/97 7:29:53 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< It should be clear to you that Sheridan managed to survive only by Lorien somehow
shielding him. There was really no other way he could have endured that explosive blast,
nevermind the radiation, because he was located at ground zero. It was a unique situation
which I would probably argue shouldn’t even be compared to Trek in any way.>>

And how does one person shield another from a nuclear explosion, not to mention stopping
their fall at the same time. And if Lorien did shield Sheridan, why did he “die”?

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/20/97 7:32:13 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< I’ve heard first hand Joe’s recounting of this situation and I have no doubt about what
went down. I already told you that I’m not interested in trying to cut through your denial so
why don’t you just take your hot air and blow it down an open steam pipe. Tackling this
matter with you is a no-win situation as your mind is clearly made up, thanks in no small
part to a well placed and deliberate mental block on your part. We’ve already banged heads
on this and you’re simply an immovable object, so therefore MOVE ON. >>

Ahh, but did you hear first hand Berman or Piller’s recounting of the situation? Who really
is the one with the mental block. As for moving on, I am not the one that keeps bringong
this “issue” up.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word
Date: 2/20/97 7:41:08 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<They have to do a show about it. It isn’t intrinsic throughout the whole, like in B5.>>

Now, what is this supposed to mean?

<<In the ‘Menagrie’, just what was the problem with Talos IV? Wasn’t it the power of
illusion? Now the Federation has it, and they are above it’s addictive effects.>>

Actually, at the end of “The Menagrie” it was shown that illusion can be a good thing. As
for holodecks, unless a person is rather disturbed (Like Barclay), they won’t forget that
everything in the holodeck is fake.

<<But not throughout society. Only in a few lunatic fringe groups.>>

Bull, we have barely scene any of Earths general society, and thoose glimpses we do see
show that humans have not changed that much.

<<Sure ST has addressed several aspects of the human condition, but nearly always in
individual episodes. Our human frailties are not considered to be intrinsic to the universe,
only abberations that deserve special treatment.>>

Again, plain old bull. That might have been true when Roddenberry was in charge of TNG
(1st and 2nd season), but since Berman took over things have been diffrent.

<<I just saw the rerun about the two planets where one produced an addictive drug for the
other one (for got the title). I was nearly sickened by the preachy, “we’ve moved beyond
that” attitude of the crew. Particularly Tasha Yar’s explqanation to Wesley. Then there
was the “Prime Directive is always correct” speach by Capt. Picard. I’m glad I don’t watch
ST:TNG much.>>

That was a Roddenberry episode. As I said, things changed after Berman took control.

–AcDec

Subj: Irritate
Date: 2/21/97 1:06:19 AM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

This message is posted solely for the purpose of irratating AC/DC. Ready, bang your
head.. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, oh, gee, did I forget
that you fancy yourself as AcDec? Oh well. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,

Subj: Re: Silly Arugment
Date: 2/21/97 1:26:34 AM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

We the people, in order to form a more perfect union, promote the GENERAL WARFARE
and insure Domestic Tranquilizers . . .

Subj: Re:Hail the KING: to AcDec
Date: 2/21/97 4:37:48 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
I guess you missed the :) smart guy.<<

No, I didn’t. It just means that you’re brazen, but what else is new? :)

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 5:AcDe
Date: 2/21/97 4:42:22 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From AcDec
And how does one person shield another from a nuclear explosion, not to mention stopping
their fall at the same time. And if Lorien did shield Sheridan, why did he “die”?<<

I believe that whatever bubble shielded Lorien from that blast Sheridan found
himself caught in. Lorien is a spirit being, and I do believe he had the ability to protect
himself. However, his powers may not have been enough to completely help Sheridan,
who is like a mouse on the evolutionary scale, and far more vulnerable by his corporeal
nature.

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 4:46:02 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Ahh, but did you hear first hand Berman or Piller’s recounting of the situation?<<

Don’t need to since Paramount already has a history of theft, and I believe JMS’
accounting exactly as he spelled it out. They gave him the shaft and then stole his premise,
it’s just that simple.

>>As for moving on, I am not the one that keeps bringong this “issue” up.<<

No, but you seem more than willing to keep the same old song going. Someone
else brought it up, and I just don’t feel like enduring your singing on this issue all over
again. It’s just too annoying.

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 5:46:13 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Don’t need to since Paramount already has a history of theft, and I believe JMS’
accounting exactly as he spelled it out. They gave him the shaft and then stole his premise,
it’s just that simple.>>

Paramount is a HUGE company, just because there are some bad exec’s it does not follow
that Berman and Piller are theives. And the only “premise” suggested by Paramount execs
(Brandon Tartikoff) was nothing like the one that eventually became DS9, and delt mainly
with only the main charater, so you can’t say that Berman and Piller are innocent and only a
unnamed exec was at fault.. I suggest you read “The Making of DS9″, it might open up
your mind a little. As for what JMS supposedly told you, considering that you will not
even recite EXACTLY what he did say (which I’m sure he had no direct evidince either, or
he would have sued. I betcha it was only his own suspicions) I’m not going to take your
“inside information” claim seriously.

And the #1 reason I completely doubt your rip-off claim, is because the premise of DS9
(The rebuilding of Bajor, and exploration of the Gamma quadrent) and the premise of B5
(The Shadow war and “dawn of the third age of mankind”) are COMPLETELY
DIFFRENT!

Your position is as stupid as the people that claim B5 is a rip off of Trek!
<<No, but you seem more than willing to keep the same old song going.
Someone else brought it up, and I just don’t feel like enduring your singing on this issue all
over again. It’s just too annoying.>>

I will never allow an unfounded attack go unchallanged. And I will say it again, I’m VERY
glad your not a scientist or a lawyer, you ability to use logic is seriously lacking. If you
were a scientist you’d probaly be a “creation scientist”, and if you were a lawyer you’d be a
member of O.J.’s defense team.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 8:45:57 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Okay, one isolated post on this (for now), just for the benefit of the newcomers who
haven’t heard it yet:

<<And the #1 reason I completely doubt your rip-off claim, is because the premise of DS9
(The rebuilding of Bajor, and exploration of the Gamma quadrent) and the premise of B5
(The Shadow war and “dawn of the third age of mankind”) are COMPLETELY
DIFFRENT!>>

Yet again Ac employs the argument that because things are different in some ways, they
can’t be the same in others. It makes about as much sense to say that Sam’s English essay
can’t be plagiarized because DeQuincy didn’t write under the name of Sam and used the
term “eminently satisfying” in one sentence instead of Sam’s “cool.”
Apparently it’s time YET AGAIN for the Majel Barrett Roddenberry quote, in response
to the Trek powers that be rolling their eyes about JMS’ insistence that they stole his
premise: “Well, you did.” When this provokes a response from Ac at all, it’s usually along
the lines of even Majel not knowing what she’s talking about. Apparently Berman and
company are the only ones whose claims on this are gospel, to be believed on faith alone…
everyone else’s can’t be taken at face value and are discredited by the simple act of being
biased. This is called the genetic fallacy (“You’re wrong because I can account for why
you think so, but my belief is objectively true and don’t you dare scrutinize my motives for
believing it”) or Bulverism, which brings us to:

<<I will never allow an unfounded attack go unchallanged. And I will say it again, I’m
VERY glad your not a scientist or a lawyer, you ability to use logic is seriously lacking. If
you were a scientist you’d probaly be a “creation scientist”, and if you were a lawyer you’d
be a member of O.J.’s defense team.>>
Ac, if anyone’s demonstrated an inability to use logic (see two paragraphs up), courtesy
(above paragraph) or grammar (Ibid; I’d wave honest mistakes with anyone else, but
people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones), it’s you. From day one, no
matter what the issue, you stick blindly to one story, giving no refutations of any
substance, in the face of paragraph after paragraph, post after post, of clear-cut analysis
and example after example. The analysis apparently isn’t valid simply by virtue of being
the opposition’s. The examples never seem to count even as examples, yet are somehow
worthy of the profound refutation that they don’t count because they were followed up on
less than five times (ye gods, what IS with Trek?), didn’t take place under Berman’s
watchful eye, or you just plain don’t think that they should count.
Well, for the rest of you, the topic of the endless similarities between Trek and B5, from
the premise, to remarkably similar plots coming out on the same week (oo, the Wraiths,
cosmic enemies of the phony religious figures, evilly possessing Miles’ wife returning
from her scientific expedition), to actors being stolen from a role on B5 to play virtually the
same role on Trek, and on and on… well, it gets ridiculous after awhile. Just check out a
ton of back posts. The rest of us have gotten pretty sick of Ac’s ostrich technique of
showing again and again why they don’t “count” because the wrong person wrote them, or
because he doesn’t like Voyager anyway, or because they weren’t *quite* identical if one
looks really, really close, or because the writers like to pretend that it never happened
anyway. Well, hey diddle diddle. B5 has to live with “The Gathering” and a pretty
substandard fourth season, but you don’t see me (or JMS) writing them out of continuity.

Subj: Elvis works at many levels
Date: 2/21/97 10:28:49 AM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

This is already mentioned in The Lurker’s Guide, but I was surprised no one mentioned it
here:

More than just the obvious incongruity of Elvis impersonators walking into the scene, there
were 2 more layers to the humor:

1) The use of an Elvis catch-phrase “Thank you…” by one of them in actual conversation
(thanking the guy checking their passes).

and the BIG one:
2) Zack says he’s afraid the next person through will be “…the second coming…” and sure
enough, 3 “Kings” come through the door…

NOTE: Contrary to some other posts in this forum, there were exactly three, count ’em,
three Kings, and, though I haven’t seen mention from JMS on whether the above were
done purposely, I sure wouldn’t put it past him given his proven track record of making
things work at many levels…

–Seth

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 4:21:59 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online
<<Yet again Ac employs the argument that because things are different in some ways,
they can’t be the same in others. It makes about as much sense to say that Sam’s English
essay can’t be plagiarized because DeQuincy didn’t write under the name of Sam and used
the term “eminently satisfying” in one sentence instead of Sam’s “cool.”>>

I’m not talking about minor diffrences, the whole PREMISE of DS9 is diffrent than that of
B5. You people are REALLY thick headed. There is no way you can say that DS9 stole the
basic premise of B5 (the shadow war, dawn of the third age), so you go back into stupid
details. Let me go over your “examples” of proof.

1. Both shows are set on a space station.- DS9 had two choices (Paramount did not want
another ship-based show when TNG was on), a planet (their original idea, but one that
proved too expensive), or a space station. And in case you didn’t notice, JMS did not
invent the spacestation, they have ALWAYS been a part of Trek.

2. Both shows have female 1st officers- a. they are over 50% of the population, not a big
surprise, b. Trek had female first officers before B5 was a twinkle in JMS’s eye. Not to
mention that Kira is not even human, a part of starfleet, or even a citizan of the Federa

3. Wormhole-Jumpgate- I shall point out AGAIN, that wormholes are not fiction (like
jumpgates) and have been a part of Trek since TMP. And if you cared to do ANY research
you would know that they got the idea to use the stable wormhole from the episode “The
Price”. Not to mention that the wormhole serves a completely diffrent purpose (a gateway
to an unexplored area) story wise than the jumpgate (everyday intersteller travel).

4. Oh, yea, your best example of “proof”. Both Sisko and Sinclair were baseball fans! You
have got to be kidding.

<<Apparently it’s time YET AGAIN for the Majel Barrett Roddenberry quote, in response
to the Trek powers that be rolling their eyes about JMS’ insistence that they stole his
premise: “Well, you did.”>>

Ok, lets play the evidince game. When did she say this, did she have a smile on her face? I
want the complete quote, and I want direct evidince that Majel was involed in the creation
of DS9. How she “knows” they stole anything. (Your not going to find it, both Majel and
Gene had nothing to do with DS9).

<< When this provokes a response from Ac at all, it’s usually along the lines of even Majel
not knowing what she’s talking about. Apparently Berman and company are the only ones
whose claims on this are gospel, to be believed on faith alone… everyone else’s can’t be
taken at face value and are discredited by the simple act of being biased.>>

Why should I take Majels “quote” at face value? She had nothing to do with the making of
DS9, the only information that she had (and boy was she wrong about many fundimental
facts at a Convention here in S.A. just 1 month before DS9 preemeired) was from Berman
himself. If he did commit a crime do you think he would go around bragging about it? .I
don’t take ANYTHING at face value, I’m a true breed skeptic. You are the one accusing
Berman and Piller of commiting a serious CRIME, you have to provide the evidince. Of
course, every time I demand evidince from you, you “take all your toys and go home” like
you did when I called you on your “point” that people are less free today to have differing
opinions than they were 100’s of years ago.

<< This is called the genetic fallacy (“You’re wrong because I can account for why you
think so, but my belief is objectively true and don’t you dare scrutinize my motives for
believing it”) or Bulverism, which brings us to:>>

I do NOT consider my “belief” to be objectivly true. IF you can provide clear and
convinceing evidince that Berman and Piller are thieves, I’ll be the first to attack them. All I
am asking for is for you to back up your claims with more than rhetoric.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 4:41:31 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Ac, if anyone’s demonstrated an inability to use logic (see two paragraphs up), courtesy
(above paragraph) or grammar (Ibid; I’d wave honest mistakes with anyone else, but
people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones), it’s you.>>

Well, I have never been accused of being courteous, or haveing good grammer. However
judgeing from your own lack of logic (because both captains like baseball, Berman is
obviously a criminal), I don’t really care what you think of mine.

<< From day one, no matter what the issue, you stick blindly to one story, giving no
refutations of any substance, in the face of paragraph after paragraph, post after post, of
clear-cut analysis and example after example.>>

I think you have it backwards, I’m the only one posting example after example.

<< The analysis apparently isn’t valid simply by virtue of being the opposition’s. The
examples never seem to count even as examples, yet are somehow worthy of the profound
refutation that they don’t count because they were followed up on less than five times (ye
gods, what IS with Trek?), didn’t take place under Berman’s watchful eye, or you just
plain don’t think that they should count.>>

In case you have not noticed, “Trek” is made up of four TV shows and 8 movies, over 100
writers, atleast 25 producers, and 10 executive producers. None of which are the same
bewteen two shows. It is simply illogical to lump all of Trek together.

<< Well, for the rest of you, the topic of the endless similarities between Trek and B5,
from the premise>>

I guess you mean DS9, not Trek. As I pointed out (and you didn’t even try to refute) their
premise’s are 100% diffrent.

<<to remarkably similar plots coming out on the same week (oo, the Wraiths, cosmic
enemies of the phony religious figures, evilly possessing Miles’ wife returning from her
scientific expedition)>>

1. The Prophets were NOT phoney religious figures, and the Waiths are not the “cosmic
enemies” of the Prophets, they ARE Prophets. The ONLY way you can draw a parrelell
bewteen thoose two shows is to go soo deep into superficieality as to be like Good vs.
Bad.

<< to actors being stolen from a role on B5 to play virtually the same role on Trek,>>

Actually a completely OPPISATE role. This is like saying that B5 is a rip-off of TNG
because Andreas Kastulas plays an alien!

<< and on and on… well, it gets ridiculous after awhile. Just check out a ton of back
posts.>>

Your right, your “examples” are ridiculous.

<< The rest of us have gotten pretty sick of Ac’s ostrich technique of showing again and
again why they don’t “count” because the wrong person wrote them, or because he doesn’t
like Voyager anyway, or because they weren’t *quite* identical if one looks really, really
close, or because the writers like to pretend that it never happened anyway. Well, hey
diddle diddle. B5 has to live with “The Gathering” and a pretty substandard fourth season,
but you don’t see me (or JMS) writing them out of continuity.>>

Actually JMS has forgot a lot of things from “The Gathering”. And “Trek” has 10 times the
material that B5 does, contradictions are bound to pop up.

–AcDec

Subj: DS9 rips off B5
Date: 2/21/97 6:33:38 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

I’m sorry AC/DC but DS9 is a B5 ripp-off. Ignoring they are both on space stations for a
minute.

B5 has a threat of War, so DS9 invents the Dominion. B5 has a War so DS9 gets to scrape
Klingons off the station. There are so many examples. B5 does it first (or plans it as in the
case of Way of the Wimps and Severed Dreams) and DS9 copies it. The funny bit is that
when b5 CHANGES DIRECTION completely DS9 gets lost.

Subj: Censorship
Date: 2/21/97 6:35:24 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

On the Star Trek/DS9 board they had an End to DS9 type board, a bit like this one in tone.
They removed it and refused to re-instate it under DS9 as they didn’t like what they read. I
thing it got probably the highest amount of postings.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 8:56:59 PM
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

Speaking from the B5 side of things, let me say I agree with Ac on all the “DS9 ripped-off
B5″ BS. There is one very logical reason to think that paramount did not steal JMS’s
ideas. Namely, TV studios do not tend to play the rip-off game until something is a proven
success. Note that there were no X-Files imitations until after the show was a hit. If you
think Berman and Co. is going to bother stealing the ideas for a show that no one at
Paramount had wanted to buy, you’ve got a weird idea for how the TV business works.

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 1
Date: 2/21/97 9:17:13 PM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

< Not to mention that at least some B5 races have some sort of “shield”, like the Vorlons,
and the Great Machine.>

Not so, jms has repeatedly stated that there are no shields in B5. The “skin” of the Vorlons
ships partially deflect energy bursts.

Don

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/21/97 9:22:22 PM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<As for replicators; 1. gold pressed latinum CANNOT be replicated! 2. Replicators are not
perfect, goods produced the “old-fashioned” way are more prized. Just as an original
painting is more prized than a copy. Why do you think there are real vinyards (the Picard’s
place), and real resturants that cook real food (Sisko’s resturant). Not to mention that many
medical substances have been shown not to be replicatable.>

Convenient plot point. So we can replicate complex carbohydrates, amino acids but we
can’t replicate simple elements? By this logic latinum and those medical substances should
not be able to be transported either.

BTW, since they use Heisenberg compensators when transporting, shouldn’t it take only a
few transports before the transported material is unrecognizable since the compensators are
only giving you a best guess as to the location of every atom.

Don

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 8
Date: 2/21/97 9:33:47 PM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<1. In TOS they didn’t have enough money to makeup very many aliens, Spocks ears
alone cost them an arm and a leg.
2. As for TNG, and DS9, each show has a specific budget, they have spending prioities,
and makeup is a the bottom of the list. For instace, when a show takes place on the station,
you’ll see better aliens, because making a “bottle” show costs very little. However if they
do a show with extensive location shooting (something B5 almost never does) they have to
cut corners on the makeup. However, when they do a “major” episode (Dealing with the
Dominion or Klingons) they spend a huge amount of money on makeup. A lot goes into
budget decisions.

–AcDec>

Funny, all the current trek shows have a larger budget than B5 and your reply is that B5
does no location shots. hmmmm

The pilot fot for Voyager was, I believe $30 mil. jms stated he could do a season and a half
for that and still through a great wrap party.

Don

Subj: Irriate You
Date: 2/21/97 9:45:25 PM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

This message is posted solely for the purpose of irratating AC/DC. Ready, bang your
head.. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, oh, gee, did I forget
that you fancy yourself as AcDec? Oh well. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, This message is posted solely for the
purpose of irratating AC/DC. Ready, bang your head.. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, A

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/21/97 9:52:31 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Speaking from the B5 side of things, let me say I agree with Ac on all the “DS9 ripped-
off B5″ BS. There is one very logical reason to think that paramount did not steal JMS’s
ideas. Namely, TV studios do not tend to play the rip-off game until something is a proven
success. Note that there were no X-Files imitations until after the show was a hit. If you
think Berman and Co. is going to bother stealing the ideas for a show that no one at
Paramount had wanted to buy, you’ve got a weird idea for how the TV business works.>>

Thank you Archer. I’m glad I’m not alone. :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 1
Date: 2/21/97 9:55:53 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Not so, jms has repeatedly stated that there are no shields in B5. The “skin” of the
Vorlons ships partially deflect energy bursts.>>

Well, when they were shooting Kosh Vader it sure looked like the shots were hitting a
shield. And the scene when the StarFuries were shooting at the machine planet in “Voice in
the Wilderness” the Starfury blasts were dissipated by something perfectly clear above the
planets surface. (This scene is on the B5 screen saver)

–AcDec (who bets everyone though he had a Trek screen saver, not the B5 one.)

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/21/97 9:59:20 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Convenient plot point. So we can replicate complex carbohydrates, amino acids but we
can’t replicate simple elements? By this logic latinum and those medical substances should
not be able to be transported either. >>

No, transporters work on a completely diffrent resolution. Replicators always have errors.
That is why people were always complaining about replicated food. (Picard’s brother,
O’Brian’s mother, and Sisko’s father).

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 8
Date: 2/21/97 10:03:42 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Funny, all the current trek shows have a larger budget than B5 and your reply is that B5
does no location shots. hmmmm>>

Location shoots cost a TON. That, and they have cheaper sets, actors are payed less,
producers and writers are payed less. SFX cost less….. See a patern?

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Irriate You
Date: 2/21/97 10:05:23 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

KNAC Lives. Ahh, a Harvard graduate. :)

 

 

–AC/DC

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 1
Date: 2/21/97 10:57:10 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Who’s Kosh Vader?

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/22/97 8:17:00 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From AcDec
I will never allow an unfounded attack go unchallanged. And I will say it again, I’m VERY
glad your not a scientist or a lawyer, you ability to use logic is seriously lacking. If you
were a scientist you’d probaly be a “creation scientist”, and if you were a lawyer you’d be a
member of O.J.’s defense team.<<

Ya know what, Ac –you’re nothing less than despicable. To go so far as to say
that I’d go out of my way to see a murderer like the Butcher of Brentwood acquitted places
you beneath contempt. Do me a favor, when you see me walkin’ down the street cross over
to the other side. I don’t want to see any more messages from you, do you understand
me?! You may think you’re cute, but all you are is sleazy! Stay out of my way!!

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/22/97 8:34:05 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Archer C1
Speaking from the B5 side of things, let me say I agree with Ac on all the “DS9 ripped-off
B5″ BS. There is one very logical reason to think that paramount did not steal JMS’s
ideas. Namely, TV studios do not tend to play the rip-off game until something is a proven
success. Note that there were no X-Files imitations until after the show was a hit. If you
think Berman and Co. is going to bother stealing the ideas for a show that no one at
Paramount had wanted to buy, you’ve got a weird idea for how the TV business works.<<

No, I think you’re the one who’s misguided on this one, Archer. Have you ever
heard the story about Roddenberry’s pitching TOS to CBS? Well, here’s the deal: they
called him in for a preliminary pitch meeting, and when he was done making his pitch the
suits began asking him all sorts of questions, “Well, if you’re going to establish a
television drama set in space, how would you do this?” Or, “How would you do that?”
This went on for something like two and a half hours, and at the end of the meeting the
execs told him they were going to pass on his idea because they already had a sci fi project
on the table, which just so happened to be “Lost In Space” of all God-awful things, but
that’s beside the point. Once they told him this Roddenberry realized that what the
executives had actually been doing for the last two and a half hours was pumping his head
for all the ideas they could get to use in their “Lost In Space” series –the guy walked out of
there fuming so bad word has it you could have fried an egg on his forehead! I believe that
this is also how Paramount chose to view JMS’ treatment; as ideas they could use to
establish a second Trek series because they felt there was a market for one, and
transplanting ideas from the B5 universe into the Trek universe was easy enough for them
to do, and from their perspectives no doubt made a lot more sense as well. It probably
meant saving money since sets, uniforms and other stage props could be used on either
show, this being only *one* consideration from a business standpoint.
Now, what was that you were saying about certain people having no idea about
how the business works?

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 8
Date: 2/22/97 8:36:39 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>The pilot fot for Voyager was, I believe $30 mil. jms stated he could do a season and a
half for that and still through a great wrap party.<<

Heck, JMS could make a theatrical release with that kind of budget!!
And I know I’d look forward to it a lot more than a TNG movie they spent $45
million on!

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 8
Date: 2/22/97 10:30:31 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Abou DS9 being a B5 ripp-off. Okeay things get ripped off only if they are a proven hit,
BUT anything that has Star Trek attached to it is garunteed a large audience. So Paramount
types copied JMS. How can all the similarities that DS9 follows B5 with be explained. Ds9
changes with B5 taking the lead.

Subj: The Passion
Date: 2/22/97 4:10:14 PM
From: BandMan34
Posted on: America Online

I think there’s room for both B5 and Star Trek, even Star Trek DS9.

I tend not to think that DS9 was a rip off of B5. It alludes more to TV westerns from the
60s. And I think it’s found a good footing. DS9 has genuine and touching character based
humor – O’Brien fighting with the Major’s new boyfriend during her labor, Quark
demonstrating accounting skills to a crowd of Klingons. I’m not so impressed with the
Dominion, or with Captain Sisko, but I love the Cardassians and there have been some
wonderful episodes, such as Jake’s experience with his father disappearing into a subspace
pocket, reappearing once every few years. That was a wonderful father/son episode. It
really touched me. DS9, like all the Star Trek series, finds moments of gold. Let’s
appreciate that. And please don’t interpret this as a slam against B5. I love B5! It’s
grabbed me totally.

Subj: what I think
Date: 2/22/97 7:45:37 PM
From: PAMEOK
Posted on: America Online

I have to add my own ideas to this, so okay here go beside the aperent truth B5 and ST
have very little in commen they both have great story lines but you must keep in mind that
ST was writen before B5. Now truthfuly speeking B5 is a little more real and more likly to
happen were as ST has a more Fictionl basses in that the peace in the story is not likely to
happen. I must amit that the writhers for ST,NG, DS9 and STV have declinged in the later
years as the writhers for B5 have somewhat improved I am not sure witch one is better
both are good in there own elements but both have ther flows I personly will always think
of B5 as a kind’o sope opera and ST more as a story that just keeps going and going and
going… you get the point. I persaonly beleave that the St writers have pritty much woren
out there theam and bassed on the aproch that B5 has taken and the relitive new ness of the
show it still has a lot of posibultys. to make a long stroy shor as my mother woud say
Neather one is better.

Subj: Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/22/97 7:56:08 PM
From: PAMEOK
Posted on: America Online

St has always held my atintion longer and if it weren’t for ST there would not be a B5 or a
SW and what can I say I love both ST and SW.
B5 is good and I have only recently started watching it on a reguler basses I have not seen
the earlyer shows and in my own opinen thoughs are the shows that you judge by because
thoughs are the shows that they are working out all the kinks.
buy who am I to say I like Dr. Who as well and most would say that DW is stuped has bad
speshel efects and no real plot oh well

bye
as

Subj: Re: AcDec, ptI
Date: 2/22/97 9:28:54 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

So we meet again, AcDec. You might remember me as MQuariadi. Let’s see,
where do I begin…

<<2. Transporter beams can be traced, if you beam something out of a vault
the authorities would no right were you are!>>

Yeah, if they watched their “unauthorized transport sensor display” 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week to guard ALL the valuables within their jurisdiction!
Even if the authorities could immediately locate the theif, it doesn’t mean
they’d be able to catch them! The crooks could just beam the goods out and
warp away in their ship! Transporter-based theft would still be easy, and
this would cause chaos throughout the Star Trek universe!

In fact didn’t the raider ship in “Gambit” use this method to steal the
Vulcan artifacts from that Federation storage facility? All they had to do
was knock out their shield generator for just a few moments, and viola! The
merchanidise is theirs for the taking! In fact, since the entire shield grid
was down, those pirates could have beamed up the whole facility if they
wanted to!(If their ship was big enough) That whole theft took place at a
highly secured facility, yet seemed to be accomplished rather easily!

<<3. As for holodecks and sex, you must not watch DS9 much. What do you
think Quarks holosuites are used for!.>>

I know all about holosuites and Ferengis. What I’m saying is that this
portrayal only touches the proverbial tip of the iceberg and doesn’t even
begin to show the full range of holodeck abuse! They have these commercially
available holosuites which allow people to live out their wildest fantasies
in exchange for mere money, and yet, people don’t abuse them excessively?
Why would anyone bother playing darts or dabo for recreation when they could
spend that time in a holodeck fantasy world living in paradise! Holodeck use
would become the biggest addiction since crack cocaine!

And they have holodecks on the Enterprise and Voyager which are freely
available all the time, but yet they NEVER use them like the Ferengis do on
Deep Space 9! Come on! Since people can spend all their free time in a
holodeck and never have to suffer any consequences for it, they would get so
addicted to holodeck use that they would end up living in them, coming out
only to eat, sleep, and work.(Just like how Garak became addicted to that
brain implant in “The Wire”, season 4.) Dozens of Enterprise crew members
would spend hours and hours of off-duty time soiling themselves in taudry sex
fantasies like people use adult books today. Yet, the show hardly seems to
depict this!

<<4. As for replicators; 1. gold pressed latinum CANNOT be replicated!>>

Oh yeah, gold pressed latinum, a simple non-organic substance, can’t be
replicated; but food and other nutritional supplements, which contain complex
carbohydrates and amino acids(Don at B4@aol.com) can be? That’s a lame
excuse! Which makes no scientific sense! Even Commander Riker was
“replicated” by the transporter in “Second Chances”! Geez, I’d like to
replicate myself a Beverly Crusher for my own personal enjoyment!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 2
Date: 2/22/97 9:29:59 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<<Replicators are not perfect, goods produced the “old-fashioned” way are
more prized. Just as an original painting is more prized than a copy.>>

Oh yeah, you want me to beleive that people will still be willing to buy the
original version rather than replicate one just because of some microscopic
difference between the original and a copy?(In “The Mind’s Eye” they needed
LABORATORY facilities just to determine the rebel’s weapons were replicated
copies. Yet, those replicated weapons worked just as well as the original!)
Look at how many people copy software today rather than buy a legitimate
version! Despite that this is against the law! And these Trek characters
have LEGALIZED replicators which they can use to obtain almost any item they
want, yet they still choose to buy originals? Your logic has more holes in
it than a typical Trek plot.

And your presumption that the market for classic originals is what would keep
the Trek economy going is absurd. Vintage products, like prized paintings
hardly account for any share of the consumer goods market. Sure, we have
rich collectors who are willing to spend extravagant amounts of money for
genuine vintage automobiles, but we have billions more people who would
rather buy more affordable, mass-produced copies than some excessively
extravagant classic. How many mass-produced Honda Accords are sold in the US
and how many $330000 Ferrari 330GTs are sold! My guess is the ratio would be
quite extreme and highly favor those cheaply produced Accords!

<<Why do you think there are real vinyards (the Picard’s place), and real
resturants that cook real food (Sisko’s resturant).>>

Why do I think there are real vineyards and restaurants? Because the writers
are hiding the replicator in the background, that’s why! They want to show
people running businesses selling products, yet they fail to account for the
existence of the replicator! With the replicator, there really is no
economic scarcity, therefore, items have no value! And people like Picard’s
brother and Sisko’s father and Quark would not realistically be able to make
a dime selling their goods.(And don’t bother pointing out that Synthale has
no alcoholic effects, either. In “Up the Long Ladder”, Worf already
establishes that the replicator can produce alcoholic drinks with their
intoxication properties intact)

<<Who, you screwed up big on this post.
Geez, you could at least come up with points that hav been delt with. Your
not much of a challange.>>

Geez, your arguments and logic have more holes than a typical Trek plot, or
else I wouldn’t be able to write a long essay like this!

Subj: Re: AcDec pt 3
Date: 2/22/97 9:31:04 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<< <<The whole Betazoid race, for instance. They could invade our privacy at
will, without any resistance from us.>>

Yep, they can do that. What is your point?>>

My point is that it is unrealistic that they would have this power over us
and never abuse it. The writers fail to account for this. As I already
said, there’s nothing to stop them from abusing their powers over us non-
telepaths! They could invade our privacy at will, without any resistance
from us. What’s the matter, weren’t you listening? That is the point!

And there’s not even a law against hostile scans! Remember in “Violations”
Capt Picard said, “Memory invasion is simply not a crime in my world.” There
would be no way we could police them!

<< <<This would allow the Betazoid military to become the most powerful
military power in the Star Trek Universe. Yet somehow miraculously, the
Betazoids take a back seat to the Federation! It would make more sense that
they would be ruling us(like how the Changelings rule the Dominion).>>

Probally because the betazoids are MEMBERS of the Federation. Duh.>>

Duh, probably not! Being members of the Federation does not change the fact
that they could still use their telepathic/empathic abilities to gain a
tremendous advantage over us, an advantage we could never overcome. It also
doesn’t change the principle that power corrupts. How would Federation
membership stop one greedy little Betazoid from saying to himself, “Hmmm, I
could just scan the Federation President and blackmail him so that I become
the new President!” Psi-Corps is part of Earthgov, but it doesn’t stop them
from harassing Earthgov! Duh.

<<You’d have to be a sick individual to purposefully kill when you can feel
your victims pain.>>

They don’t HAVE to feel their victim’s pain; recall that most Betazoids can
block out other people’s emotions(“Tin Man”). Duh.

<< <<I’ll just point out that there has never been a book published about the
plot holes in Babylon 5, unlike Star Trek(The Nitpicker’s Guide for Next
Generation Trekkers, vols. 1 & 2; The Nitpicker’s Guide for Classic Trekkers,
and The Nitpicker’s Guide for Deep Space Nine Trekkers are all available at
your local bookstore).>>

Not surpiseing considering that there is virtually no B5 merchendise
whatsoever.>>

Apparently you’re not too well versed in this area. There IS B5 merchandise
out there. I have all 11 issues of the B5 comic, B5 trading cards from
series I and II, 4 of the 8 B5 novels, 4 B5 T-shirts, 2 B5 mugs, and the book
Creating Babylon 5. There are also B5 Micromachines, B5 posters, B5 CDs, B5
Halloween masks and a B5 calendar. Next time, do your homework!

Sure, there’s not as much B5 merchandise as there is Star Trek, but that’s
just because we’re not some “deep space franchise”, functioning as little
more than a “cash cow” for Paramount!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 4
Date: 2/22/97 9:31:48 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<<Boy, you really haven’t been watching DS9 have you? They are chock full of
military buildups and political maneuvering.>>

Then why don’t you NAME SOME? Your arguments don’t carry any validity unless
you can BACK THEM UP with examples.

And all that “military buildup” and “political manuevering” was not evident
in “The Visitor”, despite that it happened right after “Way of the Warrior”.
You still haven’t refuted my original argument.

<<Hmm, I guess you didn’t research this topic very thoughly.>>

Well, it’s not very easy, considering that the Star Trek Area has no Deep
Space 9 episode guide available(B5 does), and it’s near impossible to find a
decent one on the internet!

<< 1. The Federation and Klingons did not go to war untill “Broken Link”, a
year after WOTW.>>

Even if the Federation didn’t decide to go to war right away, they should
still be stockpiling weapons and mobilizing forces to prepare for the
possible conflict. George Bush didn’t wait until the minute he declared war
on Iraq before sending troops to Saudi Arabia! No, instead he wanted to
PREPARE for the possible conflict.

<< 2.DS9 is not exactly on the front lines bewteen the Klingons and the
Feds,there are better places, and more sutible starbases to stage fleet
actions against the Klingons.>>

Isn’t on the front lines? Then how come they had that huge climactic battle
with them in “Way of the Warrior”? Given the events which occured in that
episode, I would still want to start massing weapons there! Or would you
have us beleive that they would never attack again? And take that kind of
risk?

<<4. DS9 is not an easy target, the Klingons would need to dispactch a large
fleet to take it out, and it’s not an important enough target to commit those
kinds of resources.>>

Not an easy target? It sure seemed easy enough in WOTW! Easy enough for
them to actually BOARD the station and even get close enough to fight hand-
to-hand! Not important enough? It sure seemed important to them in WOTW!

<<Geez, Trek has done the “power currupts” storyline many,many times. >>

Then why don’t you name some? As I said before, you need to support your
arguments with examples in order for them to have any meaning!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 5
Date: 2/22/97 9:32:37 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<< <<In Star Trek, we have a Utopian Vision of humanity in the 24th
century.>>

Hehe, I knew this one was coming, you couldn’t be farther from the truth.

the Federation is nowhere near paradise either.>>

Oh yeah, then how come in “The Neutral Zone” Capt. Picard tells the cryogenic
sleepers about how the human race has done away with greed and material
wants?

How come in “Time’s Arrow” Counselor Troi tells Samuel Clemens how Earth has
done away with crime, poverty, famine, and disease?

How come in “Star Trek: First Contact” Capt Picard talks about how Zephram
Cochrane’s discovery will eventually rid Earth of all crime, poverty, and
sickness?

How come in “Little Green Men” Quark talks about how those slimy 20-century
humans are just like slimy Ferengis?

How come in “The Last Outpost” Commander Riker tells the guardian about how
those slimy little Ferengi are like how humans used to be a few centuries
ago?

How come in “Code of Honor” Capt Picard tells how the Ligonian’s “Pompous
strutting charades” are like those which nearly destroyed humanity a few
centuries ago?

How come in “Homefront” the president of the United Federation of Planets
says he doesn’t want to be remembered as the one who destroyed “paradise”?

How come in Star Trek IV: TVH Dr. McCoy reads the newspaper headline “Geneva
Talks Stalled” and utters the remark, “How these people ever got out of the
20th century I’ll never know!”

I’ll tell you why. Because the show’s writers are bound to portray the
future society of mankind as utopian. They are bound to portray a future in
which good intentions can overwhelm all of the problems that people face on a
daily basis. This was Roddenbery’s original vision. But then they realize
that it’s very difficult to write a story with any drama if the story takes
place in a utopian society, one in which there is no greed, poverty,
corruption, or disease. So then they start introducing these “dark elements”
into the story’s setting, like the Cardassian occupation of Bajor, the
Maquis, the Federation-Klingon War, the poverty in other human colonies, and
the presence of smugglers on DS9. The problem with this is, it contradicts
the original utopian vision they have already established! In effect, the
writers of Trek send conflicting messages!

<< << no crime>>

Then why pray tell do they have penal colonies on Earth?>>

Because the writers contradict themselves, that’s why!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/22/97 9:33:20 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<< <<In fact, nobody ever gets a cold or a headache!(“The Battle”, ST:TNG) >>

As for colds and headaches, medical problems easily delt with (with 24th
century technology).>>

Dealt with, yes, but they’re saying that noone ever GETS a cold or headache,
not that they can’t treat it!

<<And there have been fights have been known to happen on the Enterprise, and
espeacilly DS9 (O’Brian and Worf got into it once). However those who fight
are thrown in the Brig.>>

Name some, and support your srguments!

<<Earth is not called “Paridise” because there are no problems. It’s called
that because it’s a really neat place to live compared to many other area’s
in the Federation.>>

Your interpretation. They never said or implied that in the show.

<<As I said, human arrogence is alive and well in the 24th century.>>

Yeah, because the writers keep contradicting themselves!

<< << corrupt politicians(President Clark)>>

Many in Trek.>>

Names some, why don’t you!

<<As I said, I’m sure there are crime “bosses” in the Orion Syndicate.>>

“I’m sure” doesn’t count. It does not support your thesis.

<<I’m not postive, but wasn’t that speciesism, not racism. Racsim is bewteen
humans. Humans who hate aliens, would be spiecisist. And in Trek there are a
lot of those.>>

Oh yeah, they want me to beleive that Nog can be accepted into StarFleet
Academy without any resistance from anyone? Come on! He’s the first Ferengi
to ever apply to the Academy! The first black women to be admitted into a
white school needed FEDERAL TROOPS just to even allow her to phyisically
enter the building!

Those Starfleet cadets would be hazing Nog and tormenting him every day of
his stay there! Just like Sharon Faulkner at the Citadel!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 7
Date: 2/22/97 9:34:34 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<<Sorry, but your only valid example (I’m not counting the one from Voyager,
because I don’t watch that show and I already admit that show is crap) was
Spock. The Tasha that was in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” was a completely
diffrent person from a completely diffrent universe than the one from season
one of TNG. Kirk never died, untill the end and he is staying dead. Scottie
never died, he just put himself in suspended animation.>>

Not valid? According to whom? Maybe if you could show me how to bring back
a dead person using time travel, then I would beleive you.

Even if the Tasha from “Yesterday’s Enterprise was of a different universe,
she still must have existed in our universe in order to create her daughter,
Sela. “Different universe”??!! That is so lame! Maybe you could show me
this “different universe” so I can go there and resurrect Nicole Brown
Simpson!

Kirk never died in the Ribbon? That’s a sorry cop-out! He’s not in our
universe anymore, he fell out into space while saving the Enterprise-B, and
your telling me he didn’t die? Yeah, right. Just what do you call dead?

<<Geez, almost all of those dead B5 charaters were only in one episode! Aside
from Na’Toth, Keefer, Kosh, and Talia, they were all bit players. And trek
has killed of many major charaters. Kirk, Sarek, Tasha, all on screen. Many
others off screen.>>

Almost all??? I dont know what counting system you use, but there were only
5 out of that 9 who were one-time shows. That’s roughly 56%. I don’t know
how that counts as “almost all”. And as for Kirk and Sarek, they didn’t die
until after the original Trek finished its “3-year” mission. Sarek was not
a regular on ST:TNG when he died. As for Tasha, I already mentioned how she
got resurrected. Same for Kirk.

<<Maybe you missed the part about how Lorien infused Sheridan with his own
“life force”. Talk about hokey. I really wish JMS had found a better way.>>

Yeah, that was the same method the Zalkonian fugitive John Doe used to heal
people’s injuries in “Transfigurations”, ST”TNG! If it’s hokey, you know
who had it first!

<<1. In TOS they didn’t have enough money to makeup very many aliens, Spocks
ears alone cost them an arm and a leg.
2. As for TNG, and DS9, each show has a specific budget, they have spending
prioities, and makeup is a the bottom of the list. For instace, when a show
takes place on the station, you’ll see better aliens, because making a
“bottle” show costs very little. However if they do a show with extensive
location shooting (something B5 almost never does) they have to cut corners
on the makeup. However, when they do a “major” episode (Dealing with the
Dominion or Klingons) they spend a huge amount of money on makeup. A lot goes
into budget decisions.>>

Yes, it’s interesting how Babylon 5 has a budget ONE THIRD that of ST:DS9,
and yet they never cut corners on makeup! I guess that’s what you call
getting more for your money!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 8
Date: 2/22/97 9:35:21 PM
From: GKarB5
Posted on: America Online

<< <<Overall Babylon 5 is superior.>>
As you can guess, I don’t agree. :)>>

I guess not. But apparently the readers of SFX magazine do, or else B5
wouldn’t have swept all those categories in their Reader’s Choice Awards!
See for yourself:

1996 SFX Reader’s Choice Awards (published in the Feb issue of SFX (#22)):

***** TV CATEGORIES *****
Best SF/Fantasy TV Show of 1996
1. Babylon 5 (60% of the vote!!)
2. The X-Files
3. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
4. American Gothic
5. Doctor Who

Best Individual Episode of an SF/Fantasy TV show in 1996
1. Babylon 5 – Z’ha’dum
2. Babylon 5 – Severed Dreams
3. Babylon 5 – War Without End
4. The X-Files – Final Repose
5. Babylon 5 – Shadow Dancing
6. The X-Files – Jose Chung’s From Outer Space
7. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine – The Way Of The Warrior
8. Doctor Who – The Enemy Within
9. Babylon 5 – Inerludes and Examinations
10. The X-Files – Talitha Cumi

SFX Hame of Fame for Contributions to SF/Fantasy TV in 1996
1. J.Michael Straczynski (Producer/Creator/Writer, Babylon 5) (55%
of the vote!!!)
2. Chris Carter (Producer/Creator/Writer, The X-Files)
3. Neil Gaiman (Writer, Neverwhere)
4. Philip Segal (Producer, Doctor Who)
5. Shaun Cassidy (Producer/Creator, American Gothic)

Best SF/Fantsy TV Show or Film Opening Credits
1. Babylon 5 (Season 3)
2. Star Wars
3. Star Trek: Voyager
4. Doctor Who (Tom Baker era)
5. The X-Files
6. The Prisoner
7. Neverwhere
8. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
9. American Gothic
10. Babylon 5 (Season 4)

Best Thing to Happen To SF in 1996
1. New Doctor Who
2. Babylon 5, Season 3
3. Season four of Babylon 5 confirmed
4. Independence Day
5. Star Trek: First Contact

But it’s apparent that you actually watch the show, which is a good thing.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/22/97 10:46:00 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>f it weren’t for ST there would not be a B5 or a SW and what can I say I love both ST
and SW.<<

I can’t speak for B5, but I can speak for SW. SW would’ve arrived without Trek. Trek
was revived due to interest in SW. I believe a series with the old crew was planned after
Star Wars had broken. This series then became a film. As for B5 I think it was being
written in 1987, the year when Next Gen was created. I think that if Trek had not come
along that year B5 would’ve had an easier ride. In away Trek has suppressed B5. Any
show that can break through the Space Opera Trek boundry and succeed must be good.

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 8
Date: 2/22/97 10:48:38 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Teletext poll in the Uk

1 B5
2 Trek (all) joint

can’t remeber anymore.

 

Subj: Re:The Passion: to BandMan34
Date: 2/22/97 10:50:58 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: BandMan34
I’m not so impressed with the Dominion, or with Captain Sisko, but I love the Cardassians
and there have been some wonderful episodes, such as Jake’s experience with his father
disappearing into a subspace pocket, reappearing once every few years. That was a
wonderful father/son episode. It really touched me. DS9, like all the Star Trek series,
finds moments of gold. Let’s appreciate that. And please don’t interpret this as a slam
against B5. I love B5! It’s grabbed me totally.<<

BandMan, believe it or not I’m in agreement with you. However, it doesn’t
change the suspicious circumstances under which DS9 was created, nor did DS9 find its
“footing” as you put it, for a good three years in my view. Sure, there were a few episodes
during the first three seasons that were noteworthy, but by en large it was a lackluster show
in serious need of better writing. While it was never quite as bad as Voyager, it was leaning
in that direction, though granted, it has improved substantially as a series. As you say,
there is a place for both B5 and DS9, but it doesn’t change the fact that the Trek people
used JMS’ treatment for his proposed series on which to pattern a show of their own set in
the Trek universe using many of the same themes and fixtures. JMS wanted to sue
Paramount, but unfortunately he couldn’t afford to at the time because it would have meant
delaying the premiere of B5. His company was new and struggling and Paramount had the
ability to stonewall in the courts for years if they wanted too. AcDec knows this full well,
but he never passes up a chance to say, “Where’s the proof?” and “Why didn’t he sue?”
when he knows darn well why this never occurred. I wish Straczynski had sued because
then we B5 fans who know the truth wouldn’t have to put up with this incessant
boulderdash, but I of course understand why he just couldn’t given his position at that
time. Hey look, B5 even now operates under production budgets which are _half_ of what
the two currently produced Trek shows have to work with, so that in itself should tell you a
lot. 😉

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/22/97 10:56:40 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<who am I to say I like Dr. Who as well and most would say that DW is stuped has bad
speshel efects and no real plot oh well>>
With the good Doctor, it makes all the difference *where* you come into the series. I
thought it was the lamest thing I’d ever seen after seeing a few scenes from some of the
cheesier Bakers. Then I sat through Genesis of the Daleks, later Key to Time, and the rest
is history.
Anyone whose opinion was formed from a first experience with “Doctor McCoy” and
Ace certainly has my complete sympathy. 😉

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 1
Date: 2/22/97 11:00:08 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Who’s Kosh Vader?>>

The second Kosh. :) Someone in the episodes board came up with the nickname and It’s sp
fitting.

 

–AcDec

Subj: Re:The Passion
Date: 2/22/97 11:03:27 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I tend not to think that DS9 was a rip off of B5. It alludes more to TV westerns from
the 60s.>>

Correct. TOS was refered to as “Wagon Train to the Stars”. The producers of DS9 wanted
more of a “Bonanza”.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, ptI
Date: 2/22/97 11:08:07 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<And they have holodecks on the Enterprise and Voyager which are freely
available all the time, but yet they NEVER use them like the Ferengis do on
Deep Space 9! >>
In all fairness, GKar, TNG managed to sneak a couple lines past the Humanist Police,
like one episode where something titillating was going on on the bridge and Riker quipped,
“If anyone wants me, I’ll be in Holodec x”. There were clues. But of course one had to be
careful around Picard, lest anyone shatter his little utopian fanatasy of Federation life.
Then he wouldn’t let Riker out of the brig next time he committed treason.
Love the posts, GK, and the incredible amount of thought and detailed analysis that
went into it. (It’s casting pearls before swine to joust with Ac, but you’re new here and we
all had to learn on our own 😉 )
I think the point you’re trying to make about the Holodec could be made more succintly
like this, if I follow you: of course naughty sub-human (but IDIC, wink wink) races like
the Ferengi, with their primitive capitalistic greedy culture and their misogynistic values,
etc, would go in for Holodec abuses like that… but we enlightened 24th century human
beings would never do anything that wicked. Why, don’t you know that sort of thing is
degrading to women? Even if it’s just fantasy women, you’re establishing behavior
patterns for yourself! Evil, evil. In other words, it’s yet another example of ST’s elitism –
“we outgrew you, we ‘respect’ your cultural differences, but someday you’ll evolve into
enlightened beings like we have”. Why, of course you or I would act that way in a
Holodec, GK, but then we’re not morally-evolved, enlightened 24th century men. Sorry,
huperson beings. It’s only a sign of our barbarism that we would even *suggest* that
people would act like that in such an enlightened age!

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 2
Date: 2/22/97 11:15:11 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<They want to show people running businesses selling products>>
Uhh… Picard’s family *gave away* that wine, GK. People in the 24th century work
for the pleasure of it, for the sense of achievement. Money is only something used when
dealing with those throwback cultures like the Ferengi, Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians,
etc.
Put it another way: Picard grew up on that farm and still goes on about the Federation
not having money. Okay, it’s been claimed he’s naive on that subject. But how naive do
you have to be not to realize that your father was getting *money* for the wine you spent
all day making? Picture a conversation in the Picard household:
Jean-Luc c. age 8: “Daddy, why do we spend all day toiling to make wine?”
“For the achievement of it, son… forty, forty-one, forty-two…”
“What’s that green stuff, Daddy? Can I have some?”
“Sacre-bleu! Now I lost count! No, you can’t. Just enjoy working, son. It builds
character.”
“But you have lots of it. Just a little?”
“NO! Babbette, we’re sending this brat away to an English bordering school. He’s
starting to ask too many questions. Don’t come back until you have an English accent,
‘John Luke’!”

Subj: Re: AcDec, ptI
Date: 2/22/97 11:20:57 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Yeah, if they watched their “unauthorized transport sensor display” 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week to guard ALL the valuables within their jurisdiction!
Even if the authorities could immediately locate the theif, it doesn’t mean
they’d be able to catch them! The crooks could just beam the goods out and
warp away in their ship! Transporter-based theft would still be easy, and
this would cause chaos throughout the Star Trek universe!>>

Well, remote places would be in danger, but on the more “civilized” planets transporter
uses are probally closely monitered (you wouldn’t want someone to beam into a place
where someone is allready standing. Also, there are devices called “transporter scramblers”
that could be placed in places holding valubles.

<<In fact didn’t the raider ship in “Gambit” use this method to steal the
Vulcan artifacts from that Federation storage facility? All they had to do
was knock out their shield generator for just a few moments, and viola! The
merchanidise is theirs for the taking! In fact, since the entire shield grid
was down, those pirates could have beamed up the whole facility if they
wanted to!(If their ship was big enough) That whole theft took place at a
highly secured facility, yet seemed to be accomplished rather easily!>>

And they were caught.

<<I know all about holosuites and Ferengis. What I’m saying is that this
portrayal only touches the proverbial tip of the iceberg and doesn’t even
begin to show the full range of holodeck abuse! They have these commercially
available holosuites which allow people to live out their wildest fantasies
in exchange for mere money, and yet, people don’t abuse them excessively?
Why would anyone bother playing darts or dabo for recreation when they could
spend that time in a holodeck fantasy world living in paradise! Holodeck use
would become the biggest addiction since crack cocaine!>>

And they have holodecks on the Enterprise and Voyager which are freely
available all the time, but yet they NEVER use them like the Ferengis do on
Deep Space 9! Come on! Since people can spend all their free time in a
holodeck and never have to suffer any consequences for it, they would get so
addicted to holodeck use that they would end up living in them, coming out
only to eat, sleep, and work.(Just like how Garak became addicted to that
brain implant in “The Wire”, season 4.) Dozens of Enterprise crew members
would spend hours and hours of off-duty time soiling themselves in taudry sex
fantasies like people use adult books today. Yet, the show hardly seems to
depict this!

Well, I’m pretty sure that the ships counseler would quickly either treat, or throw out
anyone with “Holodiction”. Not to mention that with over 1000 people on the ship, not
everyone could use the holodeck whenever they wanted it. As for the non-starfleet people.
They’d run out of money. Really, while some people would probaly go overboard, most
would only treat the holodeck like a neat vacation.

<<Oh yeah, gold pressed latinum, a simple non-organic substance, can’t be
replicated; but food and other nutritional supplements, which contain complex
carbohydrates and amino acids(Don at B4@aol.com) can be? That’s a lame
excuse! Which makes no scientific sense! Even Commander Riker was
“replicated” by the transporter in “Second Chances”! Geez, I’d like to
replicate myself a Beverly Crusher for my own personal enjoyment!>>

Actually, we have no idea why gold-pressed latinum can’t be replicated, we just know it
can’t. (An explanation would be full of technobabble and I’m glad they left it up to our
imagination.)
As for Riker, that was a special circumstance.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec pt 3
Date: 2/22/97 11:23:34 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<You’d have to be a sick individual to purposefully kill when you can feel your victims
pain.>>

Tell that to Vince Foster.

<<<<Geez, Trek has done the “power currupts” storyline many,many times. >>
Then why don’t you name some? As I said before, you need to support your arguments
with examples in order for them to have any meaning!>>
In all fairness, Trek has done this on many occasions. But always as a “pathological”
behavior, something most people are immune to, something that afflicts only a select few
who are essentially mentally ill (after all, when you’re a good humanist, isn’t that all
criminal behavior is?) – remember Picard’s self-righteous words at the end of the
(otherwise excellent) episode “The Drumhead” – to the effect of, “She and people like her
will always be with us.” – the implication being that power is not some universal lure, but a
pathology affecting a tiny portion of the population that will always escape all our
enlightened drugs, education, and lord knows what else they do to stamp out
nonconformity on earth. Not to mention her (convenient 11th hour) hysterical hissy fit that
promptly categorized her as mentally unbalanced. That’s why “power corrupts” in the
world of the Federation. Not enough good counselors. Which is surprising because
Betazoids live to serve and all. 😉
Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 5
Date: 2/22/97 11:26:29 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

GKar:
Just have to congratulate you on your magnificent “How come” list! All these examples
were floating somewhere in the back of my head but you did a magnificent job of finding
and organizing them all into a comprehensive post. My hat is truly off. (A pity none of
them truly “count”, as we will shortly hear.)

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 2
Date: 2/22/97 11:30:32 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Oh yeah, you want me to beleive that people will still be willing to buy the
original version rather than replicate one just because of some microscopic
difference between the original and a copy?(In “The Mind’s Eye” they needed
LABORATORY facilities just to determine the rebel’s weapons were replicated
copies. Yet, those replicated weapons worked just as well as the original!)
Look at how many people copy software today rather than buy a legitimate
version! Despite that this is against the law! And these Trek characters
have LEGALIZED replicators which they can use to obtain almost any item they
want, yet they still choose to buy originals? Your logic has more holes in
it than a typical Trek plot.>>

It’s a phychological thing. Why would a someone spend millions of dollars to get the
orginal copy of a painting when they could get a copy? Why do people still buy “Red for
Men” when designer imposters has something that smells the exact same?

<<And your presumption that the market for classic originals is what would keep
the Trek economy going is absurd. Vintage products, like prized paintings
hardly account for any share of the consumer goods market. Sure, we have
rich collectors who are willing to spend extravagant amounts of money for
genuine vintage automobiles, but we have billions more people who would
rather buy more affordable, mass-produced copies than some excessively
extravagant classic. How many mass-produced Honda Accords are sold in the US
and how many $330000 Ferrari 330GTs are sold! My guess is the ratio would be
quite extreme and highly favor those cheaply produced Accords!>>

Yea, but with replicators, there would be many more prized goods, therefore the cost
would be less then an Ferrari. You would not need to be extremly rich to get real food, or a
hand carved trinkit. Not to mention that the Federation would still have a large service
based economy (you can’t replicate waiters, or babysitters.

<<Why do I think there are real vineyards and restaurants? Because the writers
are hiding the replicator in the background, that’s why! They want to show
people running businesses selling products, yet they fail to account for the
existence of the replicator! With the replicator, there really is no
economic scarcity, therefore, items have no value! And people like Picard’s
brother and Sisko’s father and Quark would not realistically be able to make
a dime selling their goods.(And don’t bother pointing out that Synthale has
no alcoholic effects, either. In “Up the Long Ladder”, Worf already
establishes that the replicator can produce alcoholic drinks with their
intoxication properties intact)>>

No, you fail to take into account human nature. Many would WANT the real food, or the
service of a real life bartender, or the communal atmoshphere of a resturant.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 5
Date: 2/22/97 11:30:34 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Then why pray tell do they have penal colonies on Earth?>>

<<Because the writers contradict themselves, that’s why!>>

Actually, it always seemed pretty clear to me from various examples (Ro, Paris, etc) that
the prisons were for Starfleet Officers who took a desperate gambit and disobeyed orders
and had that gambit fail… whereas if it succeeds (Data in Klingon Civil War, tons more)
they’re patted on the back.
But of course this worship of success is totally consistent with a society that believes in
moral and cultural evolution.

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/22/97 11:38:04 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Oh yeah, they want me to beleive that Nog can be accepted into StarFleet
Academy without any resistance from anyone? Come on! He’s the first Ferengi
to ever apply to the Academy! The first black women to be admitted into a
white school needed FEDERAL TROOPS just to even allow her to phyisically
enter the building!>>
This was always totally preposterous for reasons that have nothing to do with racism.
(BTW, the difference between racism and specism eludes me – sounds like Jackson or
Farrakhan going on about how blacks, by definition, can’t be racists. Racism is
prejudging on the because of racial distinctions. Ferengi are evil more completely another
“race” than blacks are… some people (myself included) even think that to say we have
more than one “race” on earth (the human race) is an abuse of terminology – but TPTB
seem to have decided that we have three basic ones: Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid)
Namely, sending Nog to Starfleet Academy would be like sending a Russian national to
West Point in the 60’s just because he’d lived in West Germany for a couple years instead
of Russia.) At best the Federation’s relations with the Ferengi are a cold war, or the years
suceeding one.
Add to that the total ridiculousness with which Wesley kept not being able to go the
Academy because they could only take the best candidate from location X, etc (a nice liberal
quota system, that) and you have inconsistency bordering on the sublime.

Subj: Re: AcDec pt 3
Date: 2/22/97 11:41:56 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<My point is that it is unrealistic that they would have this power over us
and never abuse it. The writers fail to account for this. As I already
said, there’s nothing to stop them from abusing their powers over us non-
telepaths! They could invade our privacy at will, without any resistance
from us. What’s the matter, weren’t you listening? That is the point!>>

Yes, they can, and they do (Troi did it all the time). I’m sure that some do abuse it (like
Lwaxana). I still don’t see you point on how this is a big “plot-hole” in Trek.

<<And there’s not even a law against hostile scans! Remember in “Violations”
Capt Picard said, “Memory invasion is simply not a crime in my world.” There
would be no way we could police them!>>

Hmm. Interesting, “Violations” is not exactly one of my favorites and I’ve only seen it
twice. I’ll ask Ron Moore about this issue.

<<Duh, probably not! Being members of the Federation does not change the fact
that they could still use their telepathic/empathic abilities to gain a
tremendous advantage over us, an advantage we could never overcome. It also
doesn’t change the principle that power corrupts. How would Federation
membership stop one greedy little Betazoid from saying to himself, “Hmmm, I
could just scan the Federation President and blackmail him so that I become
the new President!” Psi-Corps is part of Earthgov, but it doesn’t stop them
from harassing Earthgov! Duh.>>

I guess that it is very possiable. But of course, there is no gaurantee that it would work and
would probally just get that Betazoid arrested.

<<They don’t HAVE to feel their victim’s pain; recall that most Betazoids can
block out other people’s emotions(“Tin Man”). Duh.>>

Boy, you sure know many facts from some of the worst TNG episodes. I’ll really have to
bring this up to Ron.

<<Apparently you’re not too well versed in this area. There IS B5 merchandise
out there. I have all 11 issues of the B5 comic, B5 trading cards from
series I and II, 4 of the 8 B5 novels, 4 B5 T-shirts, 2 B5 mugs, and the book
Creating Babylon 5. There are also B5 Micromachines, B5 posters, B5 CDs, B5
Halloween masks and a B5 calendar. Next time, do your homework!>>

Damn, and I thought I had alot of B5 stuff.

<<Sure, there’s not as much B5 merchandise as there is Star Trek, but that’s
just because we’re not some “deep space franchise”, functioning as little
more than a “cash cow” for Paramount!>>

Well, you just listed a heck of a lot of stuff.
–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/22/97 11:47:59 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Ferengi are evil more completely another “race”>>
That should be “even more completely” of course. See how Trek episodes condition
you after awhile? Ferengi = unrestained capitalism = evil

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 4
Date: 2/23/97 12:39:22 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Stupid AOL it punted me, now I have te re-type everything!

<<Then why don’t you NAME SOME? Your arguments don’t carry any validity unless
you can BACK THEM UP with examples.>>

Ok, The addition of the Defiant in “The Search”, and the upgrade of DS9’s weapons in
WOTW.
Also there is the rearming of Starfllet ships (The Galaxy-class ship Venture had extra
phaser banks, also the Lakota and the ships in First Contact).

As for political manuevering, peace negotiations with the Romulans, Cardassians (Big
mistake), and of course the Klingons.

<<And all that “military buildup” and “political manuevering” was not evident
in “The Visitor”, despite that it happened right after “Way of the Warrior”.
You still haven’t refuted my original argument.>>

Well, political maneuvering is usally the job of the diplomats, and DS9 and the defence
forces in the sector seem to be able to take on a rather large fleet. Reinforcements would
probally be better used near the Klingon-Federation border (Like the Arkanis sector).

<<Well, it’s not very easy, considering that the Star Trek Area has no Deep
Space 9 episode guide available(B5 does), and it’s near impossible to find a
decent one on the internet!>>

Thats because money grubing Paramount and Micrsoft agreed to let MSN be the only
“official” sight. I’m glad that Ron Moore and others are nice enough to spend their free
time answering our questons. I’m actually surpised how many Trek people have AOL
accounts. Of course there is also Robert Wolfe on the DS9 newsgroup, and Rick Sternbach
on the “tech” newsgroups

<<Even if the Federation didn’t decide to go to war right away, they should
still be stockpiling weapons and mobilizing forces to prepare for the
possible conflict. George Bush didn’t wait until the minute he declared war
on Iraq before sending troops to Saudi Arabia! No, instead he wanted to
PREPARE for the possible conflict.>>

Of course, and what better place to mass forces than on the Border! DS9 is not very close
to the Klingon-Federation border.

<<Isn’t on the front lines? Then how come they had that huge climactic battle
with them in “Way of the Warrior”? Given the events which occured in that
episode, I would still want to start massing weapons there! Or would you
have us beleive that they would never attack again? And take that kind of
risk?>>

That Klingon fleet’s purpose origianlly was not to attack DS9, but to invade Cardassia.
They did not turn on Sisko and DS9 untill after he had helped the Cardies. That battle was
personal.

<<Not an easy target? It sure seemed easy enough in WOTW! Easy enough for
them to actually BOARD the station and even get close enough to fight hand-
to-hand! Not important enough? It sure seemed important to them in WOTW!>>

DS9 destroyed dozens of Klingon ships (including many of the large Attack Cruisers). The
Klingons would have too use at least that many ships too take DS9, and the Defiant (and
other Fleet ships in the Area). That would be tacticlly stupid when that would leave their
rear open to Federation counter attack.

<<Then why don’t you name some? As I said before, you need to support your
arguments with examples in order for them to have any meaning!>>

Ok, too start, “The Cage”, “Where No Man Has Gone Before”, “Charlie X”, “The Squire
of Gothos”, “Hide and Q”, “The Drumhead”, “Homefront” and “Paradise Lost”.
–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 5
Date: 2/23/97 12:52:37 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Oh yeah, then how come in “The Neutral Zone” Capt. Picard tells the cryogenic
sleepers about how the human race has done away with greed and material
wants?>>

Roddenberry re-wright.
Simple, Picard is extremely arrogent. Just ask captian Louvious (“The Measure of a
Man”), or Alfre Woodard’s charater from First Contact. Don’t most cultrues see
themselves as superior? Like I said human arrgoence is alive and well in the 24th century.

<<How come in “Time’s Arrow” Counselor Troi tells Samuel Clemens how Earth has
done away with crime, poverty, famine, and disease?>>

Again, human arrogence, other facts prove Troi wrong. She was lying.

<<How come in “Star Trek: First Contact” Capt Picard talks about how Zephram
Cochrane’s discovery will eventually rid Earth of all crime, poverty, and
sickness?>>

See above.

<<How come in “Little Green Men” Quark talks about how those slimy 20-century
humans are just like slimy Ferengis?>>

24th century humans are also a lot like Feringi. And like quark said in “The Jem’Hadar”,
there are some things not even the Feringi do (concentration camps).

<<How come in “The Last Outpost” Commander Riker tells the guardian about how
those slimy little Ferengi are like how humans used to be a few centuries
ago?>>

Roddenberry rewright.
Do I have to say it again? Human arrogence.

<<How come in “Code of Honor” Capt Picard tells how the Ligonian’s “Pompous
strutting charades” are like those which nearly destroyed humanity a few
centuries ago?>>

Roddenberry rewright.
See above.

<<How come in “Homefront” the president of the United Federation of Planets
says he doesn’t want to be remembered as the one who destroyed “paradise”?>>

<<How come in Star Trek IV: TVH Dr. McCoy reads the newspaper headline “Geneva
Talks Stalled” and utters the remark, “How these people ever got out of the
20th century I’ll never know!”>>

And someone in the 27th century is going to say the same thing about the 24th. (“All those
wars with the Dominion, Cardassians, Klingons etc.) See a pattern?

<<I’ll tell you why. Because the show’s writers are bound to portray the
future society of mankind as utopian. They are bound to portray a future in
which good intentions can overwhelm all of the problems that people face on a
daily basis. This was Roddenbery’s original vision. But then they realize
that it’s very difficult to write a story with any drama if the story takes
place in a utopian society, one in which there is no greed, poverty,
corruption, or disease. So then they start introducing these “dark elements”
into the story’s setting, like the Cardassian occupation of Bajor, the
Maquis, the Federation-Klingon War, the poverty in other human colonies, and
the presence of smugglers on DS9. The problem with this is, it contradicts
the original utopian vision they have already established! In effect, the
writers of Trek send conflicting messages!>>>

Actually the current writers have completely disregarded Gene’s “vision”, and it’s a good
thing they did.

<<Because the writers contradict themselves, that’s why!>>

No, because there IS crime.
–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/23/97 1:11:15 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Dealt with, yes, but they’re saying that noone ever GETS a cold or headache,
not that they can’t treat it!>>

Well, a cold could be prevented with a vaccine. And I many people have had headaches on
the show, so whoever said it was wrong.

<<Name some, and support your srguments!>>

Ok, watch the episode when Quarks bar goes on strike. Bashir, Worf and O’Brian get into
a fight.

<<Your interpretation. They never said or implied that in the show.>>

Well, they clearly showed that Earth still has problems, so it can’t be because it really is a
paridise.

<<Yeah, because the writers keep contradicting themselves!>>

Actually, they keep contradicting Roddenberry and his “vision”. But that’s a good thing.

<<Names some, why don’t you!>>

Ok, Corrupt Starfleeters- Admiral Pressman, Admiral Jameson, “the prosecuter in “The
Drumhead”, the Admiral in “Homefront”.

Corrupt civies- This is harder due to Trek almost exclusive focusing on Starfleet, but their
are Doctor Bashir’s parents, and others. (I’m tired and can’t remember names, I’ll post
more tomorow.)

<<“I’m sure” doesn’t count. It does not support your thesis.>>

Well, the Orion syndicate is a criminal organization, and it has leaders so I guess they
would qualify as “bosses”.

<<Oh yeah, they want me to beleive that Nog can be accepted into StarFleet
Academy without any resistance from anyone? Come on! He’s the first Ferengi
to ever apply to the Academy! The first black women to be admitted into a
white school needed FEDERAL TROOPS just to even allow her to phyisically
enter the building!>>

Like I said, what you are discribing is speciesism, not racism. And Speciesism does exist
in the Federation.

<<Those Starfleet cadets would be hazing Nog and tormenting him every day of
his stay there! Just like Sharon Faulkner at the Citadel!>>

Nog said in “Homefront” that he IS having trouble at the Academy.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 1:14:24 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Mythophile
Apparently it’s time YET AGAIN for the Majel Barrett Roddenberry quote,
in response to the Trek powers that be rolling their eyes about JMS’
insistence that they stole his premise: “Well, you did.” When this provokes
a response from Ac at all, it’s usually along the lines of even Majel not
knowing what she’s talking about.<<

Yeah, I know –don’t you just LOVE that?! An interesting double standard for a
Trekker I’d say, but of course we know it’s because he has selective vision and hearing
when it comes to this matter.

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 7
Date: 2/23/97 1:26:56 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Even if the Tasha from “Yesterday’s Enterprise was of a different universe,
she still must have existed in our universe in order to create her daughter,
Sela. “Different universe”??!! That is so lame! Maybe you could show me
this “different universe” so I can go there and resurrect Nicole Brown
Simpson!>>

The Klingon war universe seen in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” had a completely diffrent
history for the 27 years prior to the episode. That Tasha lived in a completely diffrent
universe than the one in season 1 TNG. They couldn’t be the same “person”. Completely
diffrent memories.

<<Kirk never died in the Ribbon? That’s a sorry cop-out! He’s not in our
universe anymore, he fell out into space while saving the Enterprise-B, and
your telling me he didn’t die? Yeah, right. Just what do you call dead?>>

Uhh, dead, as in your brain (or heart) no longer functoning. Kirk was sucked into the
Nexus just like Picard, he did not die.

<<Almost all??? I dont know what counting system you use, but there were only
5 out of that 9 who were one-time shows. That’s roughly 56%. I don’t know
how that counts as “almost all”. And as for Kirk and Sarek, they didn’t die
until after the original Trek finished its “3-year” mission. Sarek was not
a regular on ST:TNG when he died. As for Tasha, I already mentioned how she
got resurrected. Same for Kirk.>>

Sorry, I should have said a majority, happy now? And Sarek was in TOS, the moviesand
twice in TNG. That qualifies as a major recurring charater. Kirk was never ressurected,
and that wasn’t the same Tasha (That Tasha existed on Romulous when the “real” Tasha
was young).

<<Yeah, that was the same method the Zalkonian fugitive John Doe used to heal
people’s injuries in “Transfigurations”, ST”TNG! If it’s hokey, you know
who had it first!>>

It was hokey on TNG and it was hokey on B5.

<<Yes, it’s interesting how Babylon 5 has a budget ONE THIRD that of ST:DS9,
and yet they never cut corners on makeup! I guess that’s what you call
getting more for your money!>>

I will be the first to admit that JMS came up with some innovative ways to save money.
Doing almost no (have they ever done a location shoot?) location shots will save you a
bundle.
BTW remember I am a B5 fan too, and I see it as superior to all of Trek, except DS9 (I see
B5 and DS9 as equals).

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 8
Date: 2/23/97 1:29:33 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<But it’s apparent that you actually watch the show, which is a good thing.>>

Actually there are only 3 shows I regularly watch, B5, DS9, and now King of the Hill (the
best parody of Texas life ever). I catch X-Files, and the Simpsons whenever I can, but am
not upset when I miss them, like with the first 3.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/23/97 1:31:18 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I can’t speak for B5, but I can speak for SW. SW would’ve arrived without Trek. Trek
was revived due to interest in SW. I believe a series with the old crew was planned after
Star Wars had broken. This series then became a film. As for B5 I think it was being
written in 1987, the year when Next Gen was created. I think that if Trek had not come
along that year B5 would’ve had an easier ride. In away Trek has suppressed B5. Any
show that can break through the Space Opera Trek boundry and succeed must be good.>>

Uh oh, a Blobbb post I agree with. I must REALLY be in the Twilight Zone! :)

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, ptI
Date: 2/23/97 1:34:51 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< I think the point you’re trying to make about the Holodec could be made more succintly
like this, if I follow you: of course naughty sub-human (but IDIC, wink wink) races like
the Ferengi, with their primitive capitalistic greedy culture and their misogynistic values,
etc, would go in for Holodec abuses like that… but we enlightened 24th century human
beings would never do anything that wicked. Why, don’t you know that sort of thing is
degrading to women? Even if it’s just fantasy women, you’re establishing behavior
patterns for yourself! Evil, evil. In other words, it’s yet another example of ST’s elitism –
“we outgrew you, we ‘respect’ your cultural differences, but someday you’ll evolve into
enlightened beings like we have”. Why, of course you or I would act that way in a
Holodec, GK, but then we’re not morally-evolved, enlightened 24th century men. Sorry,
huperson beings. It’s only a sign of our barbarism that we would even *suggest* that
people would act like that in such an enlightened age!>>

As you yourself pointed out, Riker himself “messed around” in the holodeck.That blows
your “theory” out of the water.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 2
Date: 2/23/97 1:36:55 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Uhh… Picard’s family *gave away* that wine, GK. People in the 24th century work
for the pleasure of it, for the sense of achievement. Money is only something used when
dealing with those throwback cultures like the Ferengi, Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians,
etc.>>

Nope, they are payed in “credits”. What, you think Cassidy Yates goes around giving
away the cargo she is hauling?

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec pt 3
Date: 2/23/97 1:40:18 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Tell that to Vince Foster.>>

Sorry, don’t get this one.

<<In all fairness, Trek has done this on many occasions. But always as a “pathological”
behavior, something most people are immune to, something that afflicts only a select few
who are essentially mentally ill (after all, when you’re a good humanist, isn’t that all
criminal behavior is?) – remember Picard’s self-righteous words at the end of the
(otherwise excellent) episode “The Drumhead” – to the effect of, “She and people like her
will always be with us.” – the implication being that power is not some universal lure, but a
pathology affecting a tiny portion of the population that will always escape all our
enlightened drugs, education, and lord knows what else they do to stamp out
nonconformity on earth. Not to mention her (convenient 11th hour) hysterical hissy fit that
promptly categorized her as mentally unbalanced. That’s why “power corrupts” in the
world of the Federation. Not enough good counselors. Which is surprising because
Betazoids live to serve and all. ;)>>

You are forgeting “Hide and Q”, unless you think Riker is mentally ill.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/23/97 1:46:27 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<This was always totally preposterous for reasons that have nothing to do with racism.
(BTW, the difference between racism and specism eludes me – sounds like Jackson or
Farrakhan going on about how blacks, by definition, can’t be racists. Racism is
prejudging on the because of racial distinctions. Ferengi are evil more completely another
“race” than blacks are… some people (myself included) even think that to say we have
more than one “race” on earth (the human race) is an abuse of terminology – but TPTB
seem to have decided that we have three basic ones: Caucasoid, Negroid, and
Mongoloid)>>

Well, racism as used means divisions within a species. A human hateing Feringi would be
specisist.

<< Namely, sending Nog to Starfleet Academy would be like sending a Russian national
to West Point in the 60’s just because he’d lived in West Germany for a couple years
instead of Russia.) At best the Federation’s relations with the Ferengi are a cold war, or
the years suceeding one.>>

Actually there is already a precedent for non-federation members in Starfleet, ie the
Bajorians.
Also, the Feringi are not enemies with the Federation.

<<Add to that the total ridiculousness with which Wesley kept not being able to go the
Academy because they could only take the best candidate from location X, etc (a nice liberal
quota system, that) and you have inconsistency bordering on the sublime.>>

Anything involveing Wesley is stupid.

–AcDec

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/23/97 1:51:01 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Ferengi = unrestained capitalism = evil>>

Actually, the Feringi are not evil, or protrayed as such. If you notice, up untill “The
Jem’Hadar” Sisko aboustely hated Quark, and pretty much all Feringi. After that episode
he started to notice that it was he being a bigot, and then tried to treat them more fairly.
(Recommending Nog to the Academy, and helping Quark reestablish his bar in “Body
Parts”) Like I have said before, DS9 is promptly eraseing another part of Gene’s “vision”,
ie Feringi and capitalism are evil.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 1:53:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Yeah, I know –don’t you just LOVE that?! An interesting double standard for a
Trekker I’d say, but of course we know it’s because he has selective vision and hearing
when it comes to this matter.>>

Sorry, but this “Trekker” does not worship anyone or anything with the name Roddenberry
on it. Majel had nothing to do with the creation of DS9.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:prefer#2 to AcDec
Date: 2/23/97 3:43:23 AM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

As i was logging the posts since that last time I was here it becomes apparent that the two
posts I have prepared are woefully behind the times, but that’s life it is never fair.

>>From: DalAmroth

The very Fact that B5 can be compared to Star Trek:TOS speaks volumes
for its quality. But talk to me 30 years from now and then I’ll consider the
possibility that it might be better than Classic Trek. :)<<

This is true but when we think of The original Star Trek being so good we only remember
the truly great episodes like Amok Time, City on the Edge of Forever, Balance of Terror,
and Voyage to Babble, not to mention Trouble with Tribbles. There were many episodes
that were truly awful. Take the 10 best episodes from TOS and B5 and compare them,
then compare the 10 worst from each and you’ll probably get a different result than just
saying TOS is better. In 30 years B5 probably won’t be in the same situation as Star Trek
simply because the situations of the two 30 year spans will be so different. I haven’t seen a
TOS episode in at least 15 years but I could probably tell you the basic plot of most of them
from the title yet I couldn’t do the same for more than a handful of NextGen, DS9, or
Voyager and I have seen practically all of those shows. When TOS was on I wanted to
watch it but could only do so when my Father was working since he didn’t want us
watching that “crap” so I saw the great majority in the 70s when they were being shown in
the afternoon. How many stations show syndicated hour long dramas in the afternoon
now?

Rick

Subj: Re:prefer#2 AcDec
Date: 2/23/97 3:45:10 AM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

As I typed the subject for this post I realized that i put the wrong subject for the previous
post, it should have been for DalAmroth.

AcDec wrote
>>TOS, TNG, and espeacilly DS9 have had MANY thought provoking episodes. Sure,
we can nitpick all day, but if you do that you loose some of that you can
miss the point of the episode.<<

You missed the point of my post.(since I wrote it that is perfectly understandable) What I
meant was that when I watch a Trek episode(and it varies from episode to episode and
Voyager is usually worse that DS9) the problems bother me more than the good things
stand out.(and I am probably one of the World’s biggest nitpickers) B5 episodes simply
don’t do this to me.(and I haven’t seen the infamous Grey 17) After B5 is shown many
times on TNT the errors(and I know that there are errors) will probably bother me more
than they do now. Even when Trek has very good episodes they still make the kind of
errors that bother me, they obviously don’t bother others as much. The Jake goes to war
was a very good episode until the ending.(endings seem to be a particular problem) The
latest DS9 episode, with the Dominion capturing Garak and Worf, is very good so far but
they still have another episode where they can screw up. I do have problems with the
Founder being able to totally impersonate Bashir, I have no problem with the looks and
sounds being copied but as far as I remember we have never been given the explanation
how this Changeling would have all of Bashir’s memories and skills as a Doctor. The
latest Voyager episode wasn’t too bad either but again I have problems with the liklihood of
two Doctor programs being able to coexist.

Rick
Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/23/97 5:27:50 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec

<<Dealt with, yes, but they’re saying that noone ever GETS a cold or headache,
not that they can’t treat it!>>

Well, a cold could be prevented with a vaccine. And I many people have had headaches on
the show, so whoever said it was wrong.>>

Aw, c’mon, there are over 125 different cold viruses. You’d have to have 125+ vaccines!

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 5:29:16 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Sorry, but this “Trekker” does not worship anyone or anything with the name
Roddenberry on it. Majel had nothing to do with the creation of DS9.<<

Yeah, like should wouldn’t have gotten the inside scuttlebutt on that enchilada. :)
I’m sure she’s kept very apprised of Trek developments because her Estate is involved on a
one to one basis with such production and development. If SHE doesn’t know what the
inside scoop is on that count then no one does! The fact that she of all people is willing to
come out and openly state the truth is confirmation that it’s true, that DS9 was originally
stolen from the J. Michael Straczynski B5 pitch and treatment!!! And you know it! }:-)
Only you just DON’T WANT TO KNOW IT. :0 :)

 

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 5:30:49 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: AcDec
Sorry, but this “Trekker” does not worship anyone or anything with the name Roddenberry
on it. Majel had nothing to do with the creation of DS9.>>

Yeah, like should wouldn’t have gotten the inside scuttlebutt on that enchilada. :)
I’m sure she’s kept very apprised of Trek developments because her Estate is involved on a
one to one basis with such production and development. If SHE doesn’t know what the
inside scoop is on that count then no one does! The fact that she of all people is willing to
come out and openly state the truth is confirmation that it’s true, that DS9 was originally
stolen from the J. Michael Straczynski B5 pitch and treatment!!! And you know it! }:-)
Only you just DON’T WANT TO KNOW IT. :0 :)

 

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #4
Subj: Re:DS9 copy example!\DRAsvit
Date: 2/23/97 5:36:34 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: D R Asvitt
The instant the Romulans arrived at DS9 to “join the fleet” I wanted to turn the T.V. off.
This seems to me to be a VERY obvious copy of the B5 story line (In my opinion, that is).
I just hope it doesn’t end with the Cardasions and the dominon flying off to go beyond the
rim.<<

Oh no, you missed the obvious point of comparison when it comes to that: the
Dominion flew off “Beyond the Rim” even though they were never there! <bg>

 

Subj: Re:prefer#2 AcDec
Date: 2/23/97 7:42:51 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<The latest Voyager episode wasn’t too bad either but again I have problems with the
liklihood of two Doctor programs being able to coexist.>>
Really? To me, the problem always seemed to be the opposite: namely, it was never
remotely plausibe to anyone with an inkling of computer savvy (whether they be ours or
the computers of a zillion years hence) that the Doctor’s program could be lost by
“downloading” him, etc, that he is in danger on away missions, etc. The Voyager writers’
knowledge of computers seems to indicate that they’ve never spent five minutes on one.

Subj: Re:DS9 copy example!!!
Date: 2/23/97 7:52:12 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< I just hope it doesn’t end with the Cardasions and the dominon flying off to go beyond
the rim.>>
Well, couldn’t you just hear the Dominion saying something like, “There is nothing
except order”?
In all honesty, this plot development seemed to me to salvage a ridiculous storyline (a
military invasion by the Dominion when there is absolutely no call for it; they could
conquer the whole AQ from within in a month if they had half a mind to it). After last
time’s Sisko hissy fit and how cute Dax thought it was, Trek would have to sink pretty low
to get my stomach churning in disappointment. I thought this one was well written – the
Father thing was a logical plot development for Garrack and the clues about the D. plot
were there in part one.
The only thing that sickened me was the “now we’re at war with Eurasia again” kinda
feel. Halfway through the season, oh, we changed our minds, the Klingon war is off, the
Cardassians are the baddies again. (If Chakotay and co. ever make it back to the AQ, their
heads are gonna explode when someone tries to explain the Maquis-Cardassians
developments.)
Taking bets on which will happen first now: Kira getting another bland boyfriend or
switching back to the Klingons as baddies?

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 7:54:35 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Why Me? :\ I just noted a _correction_ that needed to be made in the very first
sentence(following the quote) of my very last message to our dear friend :::cough!
wheeze!::: AcDec. :)

The following sentence:
“Yeah, like should wouldn’t have gotten the inside scuttlebutt on that enchilada.”

Should have read as follows:

“Yeah, like **SHE** wouldn’t have gotten the inside scuttlebutt on that enchilada.”

I hate it when I just post away in a fast, haphazard fashion. :\

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/23/97 8:27:44 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<St has always held my atintion longer and if it weren’t for ST there would not be a
B5 or a SW>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Close but no banana. While B5 does owe ST something, SW was a completely indepedant
creation. When SW was first greenlighted in 1975, ST was in rerun pergatory. Rabid
fan following? Yes. Enough to influence a major studio into shelling out TEN MILLION
DOLLARS TO A MAN WHO WAS WIDELY REGARDED AS COMPLETELY NUTS?
No.
Quite the opposite. SW DERAILED STs first resurrection attempt. Remember Star
Trek Phase II? You shouldnt. It was cancelled because SW was so successful that
Paramount thought lightning couldnt posibly strike twice. And that B’s & G’s, is history.

Strahd

Subj: Re:DS9 copy example!!!
Date: 2/23/97 8:39:22 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<< Well, couldn’t you just hear the Dominion saying something like, “There is
nothing except order”?>>>>>>>>>>

Too late. They said that in The search part I

Strahd

Subj: B5 Owes Trek Nothing
Date: 2/23/97 10:00:02 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

> While B5 does owe ST something<

B5 is far removed from Trek. If you were to say that B5 copied Trek in some way, then I
would suggest you try reading some Robert A Henlein, Philip.K.Dick, the Dune saga and
Tolkien. They all have more in common than B5 than Trek. If anything B5 resembles SW
in many ways. Star Trek works on a wondering Starship theme, although this went wrong
with Voyager. B5 is bold in that it can change form every ten or twelve epidodes. Trek
cannot do this, DS9 has tried but failed.

 

Subj: DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 10:06:07 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

If I had any influence on DS9 I would really shake the series up. Bring out the threat of the
Romulans more, the cold war we saw in previous Treks. The Romulans have been
COMPLETELY wasted. Do more with the Dominion. Don’t talk about a war do one.
Make it ruthless. Don’t be afraid to have the good guys lose. Kill a few main characters
off, replace them, transfer them. DS9 is too static. Cut down on the Quark has a wife, or
Odo has a problem episodes. We don’t want to hear about Kiras private life in every other
episode as a main plot point

I’ve also noticed when there is action, we see people fall over a lot in ships and see very
little sfx. Watch carefully and compare to B5 and SW. Most action happens on screen in
B5, off screen in DS9. I am ready to defend this last sentence. Come on Mr.DC tell us you
don’t like action and SFX.

If DS9 introduces a story arc, keep it going more than a few episodes. Introduce a mystery
that is only soved by creating a new one. I know this sounds like B5, but it would liven
things up.

Subj: Re: Silly Argument
Date: 2/23/97 2:25:04 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

A5398457:

<< In the absence of a greater “class consciousness”, to use the Marxist term, it is difficult
to see how the “class struggle” dialectic applies in this country. >>

If “class conciousness” grows, as I suspect (hope!) it will, then what?

>>I think we agree that government’s role is partly to ensure that the marketplace does not
take over to such an extent that more important things, like justice and some modicum of
general survival, do not fall by the wayside. Those libertarians that cannot see this are also
unable to explain how the mechanisms of the marketplace can work to favor such things as
the social safety net, or even courts of law, all of which most reasonable people would
favor.>>

Yes, we agree.

>>Finally, I have no inclination to paint you as a Marxist, as I’m sure you know. I
appreciate being able to exchange ideas on this matter with you and would not presume to
attribute such characteristic to you merely because you have taken a principled position that
in some ways appeared significantly different from mine.>>

Not so different, I think. Frankly, my first impression was that you were a free-market
ideologue. Clearly, you’re not. Czechoslovakia tried “Socialism with a human face” — and
got run over by Russian tanks. I hope “Capitalism with a human face”, as you and I seem
to see it, will fare better.

–Paul

Subj: Re: Silly Argument
Date: 2/23/97 3:04:03 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

A5398457:
A? Why are we stuck with this “Silly Argument” tag? I understand the need for continuity
as well as the limitations of the medium (eg, “n” characters per subject line) but surely we
can do better. Maybe you can post your replies (if any) as “Politics” or somesuch? Or
simply e-mail me? Let me know what you think.

>>It is not so farfetched to believe that there are libertarians who would dispense with the
social safety net as we know it. That is, it is believed by such that private charities and
churches could take over this function of government. My skepticism of this extreme
libertarian position is derived from my deep suspicion that, in the absence of the ability of
an entity to tax, no entity can afford to support the many in this country whose inability to
function to the level of the norm have forced them onto public assistance. Additionally,
with the advent of private arbitration and arbitration clauses in various contracts, “private
justice” is becoming more of a reality than ever before; thus is somewhat already
diminished the province of “courts of law”, in favor of “tribunals of private law”.>>

I share your suspicion, my friend. And I agree that “private justice” endangers the rule of
law. I recently read a Science-Fiction story (in Asimov’s magazine) in which individuals
make “deals” (eg, sterilization = college education). Those without commercial value —
the old, the sick, the poor, the uneducated — were simply relocated to camps. Is that the
future? Is that what rampant capitalism entails?
—Paul

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/23/97 3:21:15 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<When SW was first greenlighted in 1975, ST was in rerun pergatory. Rabid fan
following? Yes. Enough to influence a major studio into shelling out TEN MILLION
DOLLARS TO A MAN WHO WAS WIDELY REGARDED AS COMPLETELY NUTS?
No.
Quite the opposite. SW DERAILED STs first resurrection attempt. Remember Star
Trek Phase II? You shouldnt. It was cancelled because SW was so successful that
Paramount thought lightning couldnt posibly strike twice. And that B’s & G’s, is
history.>>

This paragraph admits that were it not for *Star Wars*, strong fan support could very well
have caused Paramount to produce *Star Trek II*. It is highly unusual for a cancelled
show to be resurrected so many years after cancellation.

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 3:24:40 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< Bring out the threat of the Romulans more, the cold war we saw in previous Treks. The
Romulans have been COMPLETELY wasted. Do more with the Dominion. Don’t talk
about a war do one.>>

That’s fine for those who want conflict all the time. There are other things besides the
conflict of one race against the other that can be a source of interesting short stories.
Episodes of the various incarnations of *Star Trek* can be considered short stories that
often stand or fall on their own rather than be one chapter in a novel. While complexity is
diminished, variety is augmented. This is part of the reason each show appeals to a slightly
different audience.

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 3:32:47 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Judging by DS9 rapidly diminishig audience the show must need spicing up. You mention
Star Trek to most normal people they groan, one of the complaints is boreom. You mention
B5 they either say, whats that? or isn’t it great, better than Trek, more happens. There are a
few who prefer Trek and I have found in all cases that they are the ones that have only
watched one or two B5 episodes.

Trek does badly need spicing up. Blandness is the name of the game. The action scenes
when they do appear are unconvincing. Look at all thoses Klingon warriors on board DS9
beig beaten up by everbodies sister. Does that make Kirk a wimp for haveing trouble with
Chris Loyd in ST3? or is it another Trek error I’ve stumbled on!!!

Die hard trekkies say DS9 is near perfect. Those who have prefer B5 (growing in number),
want a bit of excitement with their Trek. I believe I’m correct in saying this but most if not
all B% fans watch Trek.
Subj: Re: S. Arg’mt [to Paul] Date: 2/23/97 3:36:53 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<If “class conciousness” grows, as I suspect (hope!) it will, then what?>>

(Thank you for your post, BTW.)

There were many attempts from the 1920s through 1940s to actually promote Marxist ideas
in this country, on the part of certain organizations. Even in the 1950s, with its
McCarthyism, Marxism was driven underground, but never quenched. And, of course,
we know that the academic brand of leftism gained a soft resurgence in the 1960s. All
these attempts to “raise consciousness” have met with little general success, so it is highly
doubtful to me that “class consciousness”, in the Marxist sense, will develop here.

The reason — and this is only my opinion — is that there is no need for “class struggle” in
the general population at large. To a certain extent, and some would argue, to a decreasing
extent, ordinary people are permitted a great deal of flexibility to “live the good life”, which
is perceived as middle class existence. Since there is no need for “class struggle”, no
amount of “class consciousness” can take root.

If, hypothetically, large portions of the population are kicked out of jobs and remain
unemployed for long periods of time, and if in that case government does nothing to
assuage the fears of the population of actual poverty or even starvation, appeals to “class
struggle” will seem a great deal more plausible to the average person.

Subj: Conflict Dynamics [To Paul] Date: 2/23/97 3:45:23 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<If “class conciousness” grows, as I suspect (hope!) it will, then what?>>

(Please note the proposed new subject line above, in response to your request.)

If conditions warrant development of “class consciousness”, then the traditional means of
accommodating conflict will have failed. I have argued that such traditional means include
formation of interest groups and the lobbying efforts of various organizations for their own
objectives. I suspect that to cause such an eventuality, a cataclysm on the order of the
Great Depression will have to have occurred, accommodation and conflict resolution will
have failed, and the response of government, or governments, will have to have been so
minimal that there is no choice in the mind of the general public but to join camps of rich or
poor, one against the other. Under such circumstances, conditions will also be ripe for
authoritarianism and suppression of liberty and human rights.

I do not foresee such a cataclysm or overall failure of accommodation, nor do I see any
other circumstance under which “class consciousness” will occur in the developed world.

Just my opinion.

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 3:50:03 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<You mention B5 they either say, whats that? or isn’t it great, better than Trek, more
happens. There are a few who prefer Trek and I have found in all cases that they are the
ones that have only watched one or two B5 episodes.>>

I must be in the minority, because I enjoy both *DS9* and *Babylon 5*, and I’ve seen
many episodes of both. I do agree that *DS9* tends to be a bit slow for my liking. There
*should* be more drama, in the popular sense of the word, rather than slow exposition, in
*DS9*. Nevertheless, I enjoy *DS9* because it is part of a tradition I am familiar with and
because I do enjoy the characters and many of the stories in the series.

I would hope there is enough room in the world for people of both camps.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/23/97 7:14:39 PM
From: TrekfanNB
Posted on: America Online

I agree STAR TREK RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I still like B5 though!

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/23/97 7:15:45 PM
From: TrekfanNB
Posted on: America Online

I agree STAR TREK RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I still like B5 though!

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/23/97 7:16:49 PM
From: TrekfanNB
Posted on: America Online

I agree STAR TREK RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I still like B5 though!

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 7:41:07 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I must be in the minority, because I enjoy both *DS9* and *Babylon 5*, and I’ve seen
many episodes of both. I do agree that *DS9* tends to be a bit slow for my liking. There
*should* be more drama, in the popular sense of the word, rather than slow exposition, in
*DS9*. Nevertheless, I enjoy *DS9* because it is part of a tradition I am familiar with and
because I do enjoy the characters and many of the stories in the series<<.

Firstly, I think I just replied to Mr.DCTRecfan by accident on this board,whoops, never
mind.

I believe that you fall into the category of watching both, and preferring B5, a bit like me.
You were covered.

 

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/23/97 7:42:57 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

<<I agree STAR TREK RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>>

At the moment it does. But when those Trekkers realise what they are missing (B5) then
this will change.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 2/23/97 7:46:56 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I agree STAR TREK RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<<

Yup, but changing fast. When all those narrow minded Trekkers decide they will watch b5,
then they might realise what a good thing the’ve missed.

 

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/23/97 8:07:57 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Aw, c’mon, there are over 125 different cold viruses. You’d have to have 125+
vaccines!>>

Yea, but they have 300 years to make them. :)

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 8:26:15 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Yeah, like should wouldn’t have gotten the inside scuttlebutt on that enchilada. :) I’m
sure she’s kept very apprised of Trek developments because her Estate is involved on a one
to one basis with such production and development. If SHE doesn’t know what the inside
scoop is on that count then no one does! The fact that she of all people is willing to come
out and openly state the truth is confirmation that it’s true, that DS9 was originally stolen
from the J. Michael Straczynski B5 pitch and treatment!!! And you know it! }:-) Only
you just DON’T WANT TO KNOW IT. :0 :) >>

Oh gimme a break. Berman is going to tell her, “Hey guess what we just stole this great
Idea, and…….” And Majel when she came to a convention here in SA right before DS9
preemired had a whole bunch of things wrong about DS9.

I’ll try to get this queston answered by you, again. EXACTLY (and I want DETAILS)
what did JMS pitch that they stole (of course I doubt you even know what was in JMS’s
pitch)? I betcha 100 cedits that whatever you can think of has already been done in some
form on Trek, or in another major work of literature and S.F.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 8:32:53 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I’ve also noticed when there is action, we see people fall over a lot in ships and see very
little sfx. Watch carefully and compare to B5 and SW. Most action happens on screen in
B5, off screen in DS9. I am ready to defend this last sentence. Come on Mr.DC tell us you
don’t like action and SFX.>>

Why should I tell you I don’t like action or SFX? It would’nt be true. I DON’T like SFX
without a good story, the reason why I didn’t like “Into the Fire”, but think “Severed
Dreams” is better than apple pie. I’m glad B5 is mostly done with all the “mystical”
hogwash and is back to good old fashioned conflict with tyrants.

<<If DS9 introduces a story arc, keep it going more than a few episodes. Introduce a
mystery that is only soved by creating a new one. I know this sounds like B5, but it would
liven things up.>>

Umm, DS9 has been doing both since season 2.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/23/97 8:40:15 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<That’s fine for those who want conflict all the time. There are other things besides the
conflict of one race against the other that can be a source of interesting short stories.
Episodes of the various incarnations of *Star Trek* can be considered short stories that
often stand or fall on their own rather than be one chapter in a novel. While complexity is
diminished, variety is augmented. This is part of the reason each show appeals to a slightly
different audience.>>

Great post. B5 is a mainly story-driven show (Like an Asimov story). DS9 on the other
hand is more charater driven, with the story arcs mainly providing a backdrop for the
charater stories.

–AcDec

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/23/97 10:28:27 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Oh gimme a break. Berman is going to tell her, “Hey guess what we just stole this great
Idea, and…….” And Majel when she came to a convention here in SA right before DS9
preemired had a whole bunch of things wrong about DS9.<<

We both know that a lot in the way of pertinent materials no doubt crossed her
desk as her Estate had a considerable financial investment in seeing the series do well. Stop
kidding yourself already!

>>I’ll try to get this queston answered by you, again. EXACTLY (and I want DETAILS)
what did JMS pitch that they stole (of course I doubt you even know what was in JMS’s
pitch)? I betcha 100 cedits that whatever you can think of has already been done in some
form on Trek, or in another major work of literature and S.F. <<

I already told you, Ac –my discussion about this took place quite some time back,
probably about two years ago in fact. Therefore, finding JMS’ actual postings would
literally be like trying to find a needle in a haystack, so don’t waste my time! In fact, I’ve
had several major system crashes where total reformatting was necessary to get my system
up and going again, so it’s possible that I no longer have them at all! And those CIS
messages that I do have are virtually impossible for me to open up and look at anyway
because they have an MSG file extension, and every time I try to open one of them up I
have Microsoft FaxMail starting up, only to then get some sort of a missing file message,
so I can’t even review those old records despite having them on my hard drive. You’ve
been told all of this before by me, which is why you’re so confident about your 100
credits, but I noticed you didn’t take me up on my offer yesterday about engaging in a little
wager after you brazenly called me a liar over in the Trek Section, only to find out that
you’re the one who’s either the liar, or worse, the fool! Do us all a favor already and go
suck an egg, will ya!
Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/24/97 4:36:07 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< We both know that a lot in the way of pertinent materials no doubt crossed her desk as
her Estate had a considerable financial investment in seeing the series do well. Stop kidding
yourself already!>>

Now you think they would keep, and even give out written proof that they were thieves?
You have GOT to be joking.

<<I already told you, Ac –my discussion about this took place quite some time
back, probably about two years ago in fact. Therefore, finding JMS’ actual postings would
literally be like trying to find a needle in a haystack, so don’t waste my time! In fact, I’ve
had several major system crashes where total reformatting was necessary to get my system
up and going again, so it’s possible that I no longer have them at all! And those CIS
messages that I do have are virtually impossible for me to open up and look at anyway
because they have an MSG file extension, and every time I try to open one of them up I
have Microsoft FaxMail starting up, only to then get some sort of a missing file message,
so I can’t even review those old records despite having them on my hard drive. You’ve
been told all of this before by me, which is why you’re so confident about your 100
credits, >>

Oh, come on, you can’t remember ANY details? Gimme a break. If your gonna go around
accusing people of crimes in an open forum, don’t be surprised if someone calls you on the
facts. If for any reason you can’t back up you assertations; keep your mouth shut!
<<but I noticed you didn’t take me up on my offer yesterday about engaging in a little
wager after you brazenly called me a liar over in the Trek Section, only to find out that
you’re the one who’s either the liar, or worse, the fool! Do us all a favor already and go
suck an egg, will ya!>>

I case you have not noticed, that board is full.

–AcDec

Subj: Why Wars Rules
Date: 2/24/97 5:39:30 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<< Quite the opposite. SW DERAILED STs first resurrection attempt. Remember
Star Trek Phase II? You shouldnt. It was cancelled because SW was so successful that
Paramount thought lightning couldnt posibly strike twice. And that B’s & G’s, is
history.>>

This paragraph admits that were it not for *Star Wars*, strong fan support could very well
have caused Paramount to produce *Star Trek II*. It is highly unusual for a cancelled
show to be resurrected so many years after cancellation.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Of course. But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point. If SW never happened
(God Forbid) ST WOULD have been brought back in TV series form. But, of course, it
didnt. SW destroyed treks chances of resurection on the small screen for 10 years.
YEAAAAAAHHHHHHH

Strahd

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/24/97 5:47:24 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<That’s fine for those who want conflict all the time. There are other things besides the
conflict of one race against the other that can be a source of interesting short stories.
Episodes of the various incarnations of *Star Trek* can be considered short stories that
often stand or fall on their own rather than be one chapter in a novel. While complexity is
diminished, variety is augmented. This is part of the reason each show appeals to a slightly
different audience.>>

I tend to agree in part, namely that DS9’s best episodes have been very human, self-
contained ones. I could also go in a major way with the conflict direction, done properly
(ie, by entirely new creative powers). The basic problem with DS9 (not so Voyager –
which is pretty much as advertised lately – just a straightforward, unprincipled would-be
ratings-grabber living with obvious desperation) is that it *lies*. They constantly
*promise* the big Dominion/Klingon/whichever this season war, the big infiltration of
Starfleet plot, the big this, the big that… they attempt to “grab” viewers with this kind of
hustle, and then completely *do not deliver*. DS9 viewers are basically hustled out at this
point; they don’t believe a word of its promises. Even with this promising Dominion
invasion of Cardassia, they’re like the boy who cried wolf; who will take an interest at this
point?
DS9 writers really *want* to do the “up close and personal” one-shots, etc, are clearly
happiest when doing so, but then they keep tossing bones to “the masses who won’t
appreciate what we want to do” (that’s us, gang). This is basically dishonest. They’re like
the 80’s sitcoms (maybe even still; I stopped watching) which claim to be comedies and
then do disease of the week, educate the ignorant masses storylines interspirced with one-
liner put-downs and laugh tracks. The DS9 writers obviously try to “grab” viewers and
then make them watch what they really want us to see. (I’m reminded of a slew of Fox
shows that came out circum “Herman’s Head”, which would titillate you for 25 minutes
and then make you feel like slime for having been titillated.)
DS9’s heart is obviously not in these grand invasion/infiltration/war/threat of war
“ongoing” (ie, 180ing every two months) storylines, so do us all a favor and DROP
THEM. Or bring in a new cast which will deliver. Either way. But just be honest.
In both DS9 and Voyager’s case, this will go down as the “bathing suit” season…
which is just fine with me, personally, but really, really pathetic and a sign (whatever
TPTB may be saying) that this year, the Trek franchise is for the first time in its modern
existence seriously worried for its survival.
Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules
Date: 2/24/97 6:13:24 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Of course. But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point. If SW never happened
(God Forbid) ST WOULD have been brought back in TV series form. But, of course, it
didnt. SW destroyed treks chances of resurection on the small screen for 10 years. >>

Well, Strahd, thanks for not gloating.

But seriously, the comparison between *Star Wars* and *Star Trek* is not one that bears
much scrutiny. One is a science-fantasy movie series, the other a science-fiction franchise.
I think you may be comparing apples and oranges here.

I also think it’s not all that productive to take glee in the fact, if it is a fact, that a movie
series destroyed the chances for reviving a television series.

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/24/97 6:28:24 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< They constantly *promise* the big Dominion/Klingon/whichever this season war, the
big infiltration of Starfleet plot, the big this, the big that… they attempt to “grab” viewers
with this kind of hustle, and then completely *do not deliver*. DS9 viewers are basically
hustled out at this point; they don’t believe a word of its promises. Even with this
promising Dominion invasion of Cardassia, they’re like the boy who cried wolf; who will
take an interest at this point?>>

I can certainly see that those of us who want to see big special-effects shows (including,
often, me) can be misled by UPN promos concerning DS9. I wouldn’t mind a bit more
follow-through with promises of space battle scenes, for example.

I guess I’m enough of a fan, having watched the original series back when aired almost
from inception, through the movies, *TNG*, *DS9*, and now *Voyager*, to forgive
these tantalizing little lies. Sometimes when you love something enough, you overlook the
flaws.

All in all, I suppose if you have enough faith in a series to keep on watching, the
entertainment and, to a lesser extent, the intellectual value of such a series to you is
proportional to what you bring to it. That is, you enjoy the show because you want to
enjoy it. That’s the essence of being a fan. This is also why it is difficult (but not
impossible) to honestly appraise a series if one has a vested interest in it.

For my part, as much as I’d like to be an honest critic of Trek, there’s a side of me that
*wants* to enjoy Trek. That side prevails when it comes to being let down by illusory
promises of big space battle scenes.

That said, I would like to think that I can also engage in criticism of Trek, and *Babylon
5*, for that matter, to the extent that is fails to maintain, in other ways, my larger
expectations of what good science fiction should be.

Thanks for your post.

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/24/97 6:34:57 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Correction:

<<I guess I’m enough of a fan, having watched the original series back when aired almost
from inception, through the movies, *TNG*, *DS9*, and now *Voyager*, to forgive
these tantalizing little lies.>>

should be,

“I guess I’m enough of a fan, having watched the original series almost from inception,
through the movies, *TNG*, *DS9*, and now *Voyager*, to forgive these tantalizing little
lies.”
Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/24/97 7:23:25 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From AcDec
Now you think they would keep, and even give out written proof that they were thieves?
You have GOT to be joking.<<

Majel said it because she KNOWS it, and it’s as simple as that only you just
don’t want to accept it! Additionally you so conveniently factor out Richard Compton, her
son in law, who had ties to early B5. It’s within the family –don’t kid yourself, those two
people know what went on at least to some degree. I’m sure papers crossed their paths that
spelled out a patten of what was happening, and where certain information may have come
from. It would be interesting to see if there are any documents that are obvious plagiarized
material from the actual JMS treatment. Who knows what crossed Majel’s path, but I have
virtually no doubt that a good deal of stuff did –her attorneys are involved, so again, stop
kidding yourself!

>>If your gonna go around accusing people of crimes in an open forum, don’t be surprised
if someone calls you on the facts. If for any reason you can’t back up you assertations;
keep your mouth shut!<<

Don’t you presume to tell me about how I can or cannot express my points of view
–“kid”. I should have just kept ignoring you after the OJ remark, but then you had the
nerve to call me a liar elwhere even though you were the damn liar when you said it!
Sorry Ac, but what little respect I may have had for you is now gone. Go Away.

Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules: to Strahd
Date: 2/24/97 7:29:23 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd27
Of course. But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point. If SW never happened
(God Forbid) ST WOULD have been brought back in TV series form. But, of course, it
didnt. SW destroyed treks chances of resurection on the small screen for 10 years.
YEAAAAAAHHHHHHH<<

You’re absolutely right on this point. I remember that whole deal pretty well
because I was paying close attention to the bulletins in the newspaper and periodicals as
well at the time. I was very disheartened when I heard they trashed the idea for the show.
In fact, the possibility of a movie wasn’t mentioned for a long time after that
announcement. They were thinking about it really for over a year after they nixed the idea
on the television show if I’m not mistaken, and I don’t think I am.

Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules: A5398457
Date: 2/24/97 7:32:17 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
But seriously, the comparison between *Star Wars* and *Star Trek* is not one that bears
much scrutiny. One is a science-fantasy movie series, the other a science-fiction franchise.
I think you may be comparing apples and oranges here.<<

I said that a month ago somewhere. Just look around some of the boards, it’s out
there, trust me. <g>

 

 

Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules: to A53984
Date: 2/24/97 7:36:48 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
I also think it’s not all that productive to take glee in the fact, if it is a fact, that a movie
series destroyed the chances for reviving a television series.<<

BTW, I agree with you on this one. I most definitely wasn’t happy by any stretch
of the imagination when I heard they aborted plans for a TOS television revival.

Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules: to A53984
Date: 2/24/97 2:13:50 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<>>From: A5398457
I also think it’s not all that productive to take glee in the fact, if it is a fact, that a movie
series destroyed the chances for reviving a television series.<<

<<BTW, I agree with you on this one. I most definitely wasn’t happy by any
stretch of the imagination when I heard they aborted plans for a TOS television revival.>>

I’m glad we agree! :-) And I remember being very pleased by the fact that *TNG* finally
did come along. *TNG* gave me the opportunity to like and dislike (mostly like) things
about Star Trek all over again. I remember, especially in the early part of the *TNG* run,
wishing the series well, but also cringing at the possibility that it might turn out to be a
disaster. (The character of Wesley didn’t help, for me.)

Ah, memories.

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST
Date: 2/24/97 4:00:51 PM
From: Soton
Posted on: America Online

>>>>Quite the opposite. SW DERAILED STs first resurrection attempt. Remember Star
Trek Phase II? You shouldnt. It was cancelled because SW was so successful that
Paramount thought lightning couldnt posibly strike twice. And that B’s & G’s, is
history.<<<

Close, but not quite. Plans for ST Phase II were scrapped in favor of taking the show
directly to the big screen. The script fot the pilot episode of the series is what became, in
essence, “Star Trek: The Motion Picture”

Subj: Re:DS9 Improvements
Date: 2/24/97 5:30:45 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Umm, DS9 has been doing both since season 2.<<

Hardly. The one about Odo was solved too completely. Any story arcs or mysteries were
and still are kept in the backgroun.

Subj: Multiple messages
Date: 2/24/97 5:31:29 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Had a problem with AOL yesterday with sending messages.

Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules: to A53984
Date: 2/24/97 9:09:11 PM
From: Sobelgirl
Posted on: America Online

<<character of Wesley didn’t help, for me.)>> from A5398457
It appeared to me that STNG wanted to be all things to all people (Putting Wesley in), so
they could get the “teenaged fans”; it also opened up the ability to toss in some Wesley goes
to Star Fleet stories. I was more grieved that at the end of the series they “threw in” the oh
by the way- Capt. Picard married Dr. Beverly C., but oh well they got a divorce. I longed
for a Guinan story-which they probably will save for a movie… I have NOT seen “First
Contact” yet.

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/24/97 9:25:15 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<
<<Majel said it because she KNOWS it, and it’s as simple as that only you just
don’t want to accept it!>>

Heck, you didn’t even post were Majel said that, or in the context that she said it.

<< Additionally you so conveniently factor out Richard Compton, her son in law, who had
ties to early B5.>>

He we go again. WHAT DOES RICHARD COMPTON HAVE TO DO WITH DS9?

<< It’s within the family –don’t kid yourself, those two people know what went on at least
to some degree. I’m sure papers crossed their paths that spelled out a patten of what was
happening, and where certain information may have come from. It would be interesting to
see if there are any documents that are obvious plagiarized material from the actual JMS
treatment. Who knows what crossed Majel’s path, but I have virtually no doubt that a good
deal of stuff did –her attorneys are involved, so again, stop kidding yourself!>>

Her attorneys are involved with what? How much of this is hard documentoed fact and
how much is purely your speculation? I have a feeling it’s all just in your head.
–AcDec
<<Don’t you presume to tell me about how I can or cannot express my points of
view –“kid”. I should have just kept ignoring you after the OJ remark, but then you had
the nerve to call me a liar elwhere even though you were the damn liar when you said it!
Sorry Ac, but what little respect I may have had for you is now gone. Go
Away.>>

You can say what ever you want, but I’ll be there right behind you calling you on the facts.
Bet on it.
–AcDec

Subj: Talking
Date: 2/24/97 10:07:11 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

AcDec although critical of B5 in some ways, and defensive of DS9, will always ask for
hard facts. People produce some and ACDEC produces some. It’s called a discusion. Now
pop over to the Trek board and you get, that’s not true you are an <<insert insult>>, no
hard facts follow. You produce a fact, they say give us another. The B5 board is much
more content.

That was a compliment ACDEC (returning one you gave me, well you agreed.)

Subj: Effects.
Date: 2/24/97 10:10:10 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Can I have some glasses or contacts please. I think B5 has some of the best effects I’ve
ever seen on TV. Some people say that they are terrible and look like cartoons. I can’t see
this. Only people who watch Trek and NOTHING else can. If you watch both you may be
able to make up your mind without biass.

Yeah some effects do look dodgy, but only because they are being over ambitious for the
budget, is it these examples that people refer to?

Subj: Continuity
Date: 2/24/97 10:58:22 PM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

One of the problems with Star Trek is the 30 year history and the multitudes of writers,
producers and PTB. There is so much information that it would be impossible for every
last item to be perfectly in sync with every other item; I just wish that they would make a
greater effort with the large items.

Just a few examples.(I don’t remember specific episodes and I might leave out
contradictory examples that I have forgotten)

1. Transporter/replicator problems, malfunctions, or novel ways of using them that are
never considered in later episodes. The one that always bugged me, Picard et al are turned
into their younger selves yet have all their lifetime memories and skills. How many of us
wouldn’t go back to age 15 if we still knew everything we know now?
2. The Cardassians were such a large threat that the Federation felt it necessary to sign a
treaty that gave away Federation colonies in order to stop the hostilities. Yet later the
Klingons have next to no problem defeating the Cardassians in a very short period of time.
The Maquis are a threat to the Federation yet are unable to take back their colonies from the
Cardassians after they were decimated by the Klingons.(I managed to see the first 15
minutes of the latest DS9 with the Cardassians and Dominion joining forces before my tape
stopped so there is a change in this situation but I don’t know what it is.)
3. Whatever happened to the super beings that Kirk & Company ran into every other
episode?

I have read many of the Star Trek novels and the better ones do a good job of explaining
away some of the problems with Trek that were set up by the original series. It would be
nice if DS9 or Voyager would just mention some of these excuses. The
transporter/replicator is one of the biggest problems I have with Trek but I fully understand
why they are there. In the original series the transporter was a cheaper special effect than
using the shuttles so the transporter was in, the later series couldn’t just forget about them
so we are stuck with them, I just wish they could be more consistent with their use.

Rick

 

Subj: Continuity
Date: 2/24/97 11:01:32 PM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

One of the problems with Star Trek is the 30 year history and the multitudes of writers,
producers and PTB. There is so much information that it would be impossible for every
last item to be perfectly in sync with every other item; I just wish that they would make a
greater effort with the large items.

Just a few examples.(I don’t remember specific episodes and I might leave out
contradictory examples that I have forgotten)

1. Transporter/replicator problems, malfunctions, or novel ways of using them that are
never considered in later episodes. The one that always bugged me, Picard et al are turned
into their younger selves yet have all their lifetime memories and skills. How many of us
wouldn’t go back to age 15 if we still knew everything we know now?
2. The Cardassians were such a large threat that the Federation felt it necessary to sign a
treaty that gave away Federation colonies in order to stop the hostilities. Yet later the
Klingons have next to no problem defeating the Cardassians in a very short period of time.
The Maquis are a threat to the Federation yet are unable to take back their colonies from the
Cardassians after they were decimated by the Klingons.(I managed to see the first 15
minutes of the latest DS9 with the Cardassians and Dominion joining forces before my tape
stopped so there is a change in this situation but I don’t know what it is.)
3. Whatever happened to the super beings that Kirk & Company ran into every other
episode?

I have read many of the Star Trek novels and the better ones do a good job of explaining
away some of the problems with Trek that were set up by the original series. It would be
nice if DS9 or Voyager would just mention some of these excuses. The
transporter/replicator is one of the biggest problems I have with Trek but I fully understand
why they are there. In the original series the transporter was a cheaper special effect than
using the shuttles so the transporter was in, the later series couldn’t just forget about them
so we are stuck with them, I just wish they could be more consistent with their use.

Rick

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 4:37:12 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<No, transporters work on a completely diffrent resolution. Replicators always have
errors. That is why people were always complaining about replicated food. (Picard’s
brother, O’Brian’s mother, and Sisko’s father).

–AcDec>

And this from the guy who has repeatedly told us that that replcators and transporters are
based on the same technology. Well no duh. Both take matter and convert it into energy
and then reassemble it somewhere else,A replicator reassembles in some other form and a
transporter makes an almost perfect copy of whatever transported.

Don

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 4:40:24 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<No, transporters work on a completely diffrent resolution. Replicators always have
errors. That is why people were always complaining about replicated food. (Picard’s
brother, O’Brian’s mother, and Sisko’s father).

–AcDec>

And this from the guy who has repeatedly told us that that replcators and transporters are
based on the same technology. Well no duh. Both take matter and convert it into energy
and then reassemble it somewhere else,A replicator reassembles in some other form and a
transporter makes an almost perfect copy of whatever transported.

Don

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 4:40:56 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<No, transporters work on a completely diffrent resolution. Replicators always have
errors.>

And this from the guy who has repeatedly told us that that replcators and transporters are
based on the same technology. Well no duh. Both take matter and convert it into energy
and then reassemble it somewhere else,A replicator reassembles in some other form and a
transporter makes an almost perfect copy of whatever transported.

Don

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/25/97 5:09:06 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<<<Aw, c’mon, there are over 125 different cold viruses. You’d have to have 125+
vaccines!>>

Yea, but they have 300 years to make them. :)>

Naw, they only need to go transports back to their rooms and let the “bio-filters” handle it.

Don

Subj: Re:Why Wars Rules: to A53984
Date: 2/25/97 7:08:28 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
I’m glad we agree! :-) And I remember being very pleased by the fact that *TNG* finally
did come along. *TNG* gave me the opportunity to like and dislike (mostly like) things
about Star Trek all over again. I remember, especially in the early part of the *TNG* run,
wishing the series well, but also cringing at the possibility that it might turn out to be a
disaster. (The character of Wesley didn’t help, for me.)<<

WOW! We’re 100% in sync dude. 😉 And Yeah, Wesley definitely made
me cringe –sometimes even more than a little. <g>

 

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST: to Soton
Date: 2/25/97 7:14:24 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Soton
The script fot the pilot episode of the series is what became, in essence, “Star Trek: The
Motion Picture”<<

And that right there was their first mistake. :\ <g>

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/25/97 8:13:55 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From G7Majel said it because she KNOWS it, and it’s as simple as that only you
just don’t want to accept it!>>

<<<From: AcDec
Heck, you didn’t even post were Majel said that, or in the context that
she said it.>>>

That’s because we’ve been through this all before, and it’s
on this Board already, or in “ST vs. B5 #3″ Folder, you irritant. That’s exactly why I
said I didn’t want to hear your moaning about this all over again. You’re
really a Federation spy parading yourself around like Garak *pretending* to
like B5. :) You don’t fool me one bit Ac. You’re just an unpaid lackey thinking you’re
doing some sort of worthwhile job for Paramount.

<<<He we go again. WHAT DOES RICHARD COMPTON HAVE TO DO WITH
DS9?>>>

That’s because we’ve been through all that before too you
pesky irritant. You do the back tracing if you don’t remember, I’m not going
to go into all the info me and Mythos relayed to you about a month ago.

<<<Her attorneys are involved with what? How much of this is hard documentoed
fact and how much is purely your speculation? I have a feeling it’s all just
in your head.>>>

Look, this part falls to common sense because the Roddenberry Estate stood to
take in a substantial amount of revenue off of the Trek name, and we’ve been though all
this before!! She stood to get a substantial chunk out of whatever ST incarnation came
down the line, and her husband left her to take over for him when he could no longer
handle it. Of course once it reached that stage it was mostly legal issues on the
Roddenberry side, but I’m sure her estate –the lawyers who are big when it comes to such
matters– wanted to know specifics about any new Trek incarnations that came about –what
they entailed, and naturally the principle cast and their respective roles, as well as any other
pertinent specifics concerning the plot and setting. She has been a part of Trek since the
beginning and I’m sure Majel wanted details as to whether they were producing something
worthwhile, or just cr*p which stood to put her percentage in jeopardy. It’s not something
I just want to think, it’s just basic common sense. Now, additionally, and I can’t believe
I’m going into this again too, but her son in law, Richard Compton was involved in the
very early development of B5, was billed on the first few episodes, then he fell out of
sight. However, the Roddenberry family had Trek material and B5 material within both
households, if you get what I’m saying. And part of the reason why Majel did what she did
by appearing on B5 is because she knew the truth, and spoke it openly. And don’t annoy
me by asking when because you know very well Mythos gave you the info on this one
some weeks ago.

>>You can say what ever you want, but I’ll be there right behind you calling you on the
facts. Bet on it.<<

What facts you liar? You dropped over to the Trek Section after I told you not to
bother me anymore and posted a message saying I’ve never had *any* objective
discussions about Trek in this Area, and that I do nothing but bash it. That’s nothing but a
bold faced lie, and people who have been around for the last month or so know that’s not
true. You are a fake, a phony and a fraud out to be an irritant. Why don’t you just lay off or
from now on we’re just not gonna get along, and seeing how we’re both here and can’t
avoid each other I’d rather not have to deal with the headache you enjoy being. Lay the hell
off, or just go away –it’s just that simple.

 

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 8:31:53 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Seems that someone is forgetting something ‘way back.

I rember an explanation of the replicators in one of the first TNG episodes where Riker (if
my memory is right) says that they no longer enslave animals for food, and they found a
way to use the transporter patterns to replicate their food.

If so, just HOW different are transporters and replicators?

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 8:34:00 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Seems that someone is forgetting something ‘way back.

I rember an explanation of the replicators in one of the first TNG episodes where Riker (if
my memory is right) says that they no longer enslave animals for food, and they found a
way to use the transporter patterns to replicate their food.

If so, just HOW different are transporters and replicators?

Subj: Re: AcDec, pt 6
Date: 2/25/97 8:39:28 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Seems that someone is forgetting something ‘way back.

I rember an explanation of the replicators in one of the first TNG episodes where Riker (if
my memory is right) says that they no longer enslave animals for food, and they found a
way to use the transporter patterns to replicate their food.

If so, just HOW different are transporters and replicators?

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 8:40:11 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Seems that someone is forgetting something ‘way back.

I rember an explanation of the replicators in one of the first TNG episodes where Riker (if
my memory is right) says that they no longer enslave animals for food, and they found a
way to use the transporter patterns to replicate their meals.

If so, just HOW different are transporters and replicators?

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 1:03:37 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I rember an explanation of the replicators in one of the first TNG episodes where Riker
(if my memory is right) says that they no longer enslave animals for food, and they found a
way to use the transporter patterns to replicate their food.

If so, just HOW different are transporters and replicators?>>

Transporters resolve entities down to the quantum resolution and cannot generally
reproduce copies of originals (except when malfunctions or anomalies occur — and this has
been known to happen! 😉 ). Replicators, on the other hand, resolve entities down to the
molecular level only and are used to reproduce items using a pre-existing molecular matrix.

It is my understanding transporters will scan to the quantum resolution the actual matter
from the subject, convert it to energy, beam it into the transporter buffer, and then beam the
exact same matter to the destination site. (If it were otherwise, not only would there be
metaphysical dangers of destroying physical identity (killing the subject and merely making
a copy that no-one, including the subject, knows is a copy), but there would be difficulties
connected with making more than one of the subject. This would be similar to the
problems with instantaneous cloning an individual that are so well covered in science
fiction.) Either safety interlocks, or the nature of the physical process involved, would
*normally* assure that no copies are made by transporters. (Thomas Riker is an obvious
exception to this, as is the *TNG* episode where Picard et al. are reduced to children — the
latter being absolutely incredible, in my view.)

In contrast to transporters, replicators merely use raw energy, so to speak, to form into pre-
existing patterns — for example, Beef Wellington, garden salad, or self-sealing stem bolts.
There is no theoretical limit to how many objects can be replicated from such patterns.

(For problems with the transporter concept, please see *The Physics of Star Trek*,
published last year (I can’t remember the author’s name right now). One major problem
with the transporter problem, as far as science concerned, is the incredibly high energies
involved. Another is the need for scanners whose dimensions must stretch into several
miles, in order to assure the level of resolution required. And, of course, who can forget
the need to compensate for Heisenberg uncertainty (which results from the observation
(scanning) of atomic phenomena).)

Subj: Re:Defending “Into The Fire”
Date: 2/25/97 11:18:28 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From G7
Majel said it because she KNOWS it, and it’s as simple as that only
you just don’t want to accept it!>>

<<<From: AcDec
Heck, you didn’t even post were Majel said that, or in the context that
she said it.>>>

That’s because we’ve been through this all before, and it’s
on this Board already, or in “ST vs. B5 #3″ Folder, you irritant. That’s
exactly why I said I didn’t want to hear your moaning about this all over again. You’re
really a Federation spy parading yourself around like Garak *pretending* to
like B5. :) You don’t fool me one bit Ac. You’re just an unpaid lackey
thinking you’re doing some sort of worthwhile job for Paramount.

<<<He we go again. WHAT DOES RICHARD COMPTON HAVE TO DO WITH
DS9?>>>

That’s because we’ve been through all that before too you
pesky irritant. You do the back tracing if you don’t remember, I’m not going
to go into all the info me and Mythos relayed to you about a month ago.

<<<Her attorneys are involved with what? How much of this is hard documentoed
fact and how much is purely your speculation? I have a feeling it’s all just
in your head.>>>

Look, this part falls to common sense because the Roddenberry
Estate stood to take in a substantial amount of revenue off of the Trek name,
and we’ve been though all this before!! She stood to get a substantial chunk
out of whatever ST incarnation came down the line, and her husband left her
to take over for him when he could no longer handle it. Of course once it
reached that stage it was mostly legal issues on the Roddenberry side, but
I’m sure her estate –the lawyers who are big when it comes to such matters–
wanted to know specifics about any new Trek incarnations that came about
–what they entailed, and naturally the principle cast and their respective
roles, as well as any other pertinent specifics concerning the plot and
setting. She has been a part of Trek since the beginning and I’m sure Majel
wanted details as to whether they were producing something worthwhile, or
just cr*p which stood to put her percentage in jeopardy. It’s not something I
just want to think, it’s just basic common sense. Now, additionally, and I
can’t believe I’m going into this again too, but her son in law, Richard
Compton was involved in the very early development of B5, was billed on the
first few episodes, then he fell out of sight. However, the Roddenberry
family had Trek material and B5 material within both households, if you get
what I’m saying. And part of the reason why Majel did what she did by
appearing on B5 is because she knew the truth, and spoke it openly. And don’t
annoy me by asking when because you know very well Mythos gave you the info
on this one some weeks ago.

>>You can say what ever you want, but I’ll be there right behind you calling
you on the facts. Bet on it.<<

What facts you liar? You dropped over to the Trek Section
after I told you not to bother me anymore and posted a message saying I’ve
never had *any* objective discussions about Trek in this Area, and that I do
nothing but bash it. That’s nothing but a bold faced lie, and people who have
been around for the last month or so know that’s not true. You are a fake, a
phony and a fraud out to be an irritant. Why don’t you just lay off or from
now on we’re just not gonna get along, and seeing how we’re both here and
can’t avoid each other I’d rather not have to deal with the headache you
enjoy being. Lay the hell off, or just go away –it’s just that simple.

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 11:34:50 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<where Riker (if my memory is right) says that they no longer enslave animals for
food>>
enslave? ENSLAVE? EN-FRIGGIN’-SLAVE?
I sense we are about to wander off topic here again. 😉

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/25/97 11:49:27 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Transporters resolve entities down to the quantum resolution and cannot generally
reproduce copies of originals (except when malfunctions or anomalies occur — and this has
been known to happen! 😉 ). Replicators, on the other hand, resolve entities down to the
molecular level only and are used to reproduce items using a pre-existing molecular
matrix.>>

I hadn’t explicitly made this distinction before but I suppose it’s a logical one,
consistent with everything established.
However, this “inability” to make copies with transporters is simply another example of
the ridiculous “Oh, we’re gonna lose the Holodoc’s program when he goes on his away
mission” thing. Raw data isn’t something that can be lost that way. Even Aristotle
wouldn’t go that far in saying that the “essence” of an individual is so bound up magically
with the substance. You turn the person’s matter into energy (how synaptic patterns are
preserved is another mystery, since I understand them to be energy already), store the
physical pattern as so much computer data in the transporter buffer, turn the energy back
into matter, and then the buffer gets erased. It’d probably take a Scotty five minutes to
figure out a way for the buffer not to be erased.
I congratulate your replicator/transporter process distinction, though. It rings true
somehow. But with Trek you know there’s always going to be a contradiction
somewhere, and this one’s here: I think we’re all agreed that the Holodec works (at best)
like the replicators, not the transporters – copying only the molecular level or even (it’s been
suggested) just putting holograms around matter-simulating force-fields (also presumably
molecular level at best). Yet in the Bond episode, their transporter patterns were preserved
by shunting them into the Holosuites.
Another problem with your “must get back the same bundles of energy you started
with” idea is “Rascals”, where they made a point of saying how much matter/energy was
lost when the gang de-aged. Coming up again with energy to put them back seemed to be
no big deal – just a question of coming up with *enough* energy.
Unless there’s something actually mystical about the transporter design, it is simple
technology and should be unable to distinguish between Picard-energy and Beverly-
energy. There is no *conceivable* mechanistic reason why they couldn’t disassemble,
say, 10 enemy Borg into 10 copies of Picard. Safety locks can be overridden (very
quickly, by about 50 minutes past the hour), and the nature of the physical process
involved is likewise no conceivable barrier… unless it’s being argued that every subatomic
particle in the universe has its own distinct “energy frequency” when transported or some
such pantheistic hogwash unworthy of Trek.

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 2:23:48 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Even Aristotle wouldn’t go that far in saying that the “essence” of an individual is so
bound up magically with the substance. >>

Hello, MythoPhile. Thanks for your post. Just to elaborate and comment a bit on the
foregoing:

I must say that some very serious philosophers have discussed what they call the
“transporter problem”, expressly referring to the transporters of *Star Trek*. (I realize the
idea of teleportation is prevalent in other forms of science fiction as well, including a very
nice story by Ben Bova whose title escapes me at the moment.) The problem, specifically,
deals with personal identity. As I’m sure you know, there is something about the self that
is unique — that is, there is the self, and then there is everything else. Someone could clone
me instantaneously, but that clone would not have the quality of my *self* — that is, that
that clone would not have the quality of *my* self. I would not see through that clone’s
eyes, nor feel his hurt, nor feel or think anything he feels. (I realize the twin phenomenon
may be deceptively counter to this thesis. One twin will often say he or she does feel what
the other twin feels.) In other words, the self cannot be cloned, it seems to me.

What I am postulating, *a priori*, is the uniqueness (in the technical sense) of self, based
purely on a common sense definition of “self”.

What accounts for this uniqueness of self? I really can’t say, except that, to me, the
continuing states of a given set of energies through time — defined as the actual, physical,
identical matter — of the body enclosing the self is the most plausible explanation. I
suppose you will have philosophical arguments that since matter is merely a form of
energy, and since energy, *qua* energy, is fungible, there is nothing special about any
particular specific instantiation of energy. But what is the alternative? The alternative
would be to postulate that not only is energy fungible, but the self is fungible as well, and
this would fly in the face of common sense, for this would dictate that perfect quantum-
level copies of individuals would feel *the same self*, which is a contradiction in terms.

With the advent of cloning, which, as the news would have it, is already a reality, these
philosphical problems may soon have a physical platform with which they may be tested.
As it stands, the “transporter problem” is still only a somewhat disturbing mind experiment
which, it is hoped, none of us reading this board, nor our immediate descendants, will
have to deal with in actuality.

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 2:33:42 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Yet in the Bond episode, their transporter patterns were preserved by shunting them into
the Holosuites.
Another problem with your “must get back the same bundles of energy you started
with” idea is “Rascals”, where they made a point of saying how much matter/energy was
lost when the gang de-aged. Coming up again with energy to put them back seemed to be
no big deal – just a question of coming up with *enough* energy.>>

Yes, these episodes irritated me no end. (I even mentioned that “Rascals” episode in my
post. :-)) . The peril of using the transporter/holodeck buffers in this way seemed not to
occur to the writers as being extremely serious, or else they would have come up with
some *explicit* technobabble way of explaining why (e.g.) Bashir, et al., weren’t actually
killed. I suppose one would have to rationalize, the Bond episode, that the “memory
overload” problem was precisely because the requirements of storing the quantum energy
packets were so demanding, but that somehow doesn’t sound right. We’re not talking
merely about memory, but also of storage of actual energy packets. But there’s really no
excuse for the de-aging episode, which is inconsistent with transporter theory as well as
personal identity (in my view).

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 6:43:48 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

A5:
<<With the advent of cloning, which, as the news would have it, is already a reality, these
philosphical problems may soon have a physical platform with which they may be tested.
>>
To start with, this seems to me to be a red herring. Cloning is only genetic copying,
and poses no more threat to any definition of the “self” than a twin does.
As to the rest, it seems to me this simple. We’re dancing around, as the judge put it
during Data’s trial, the real question: do people have souls? And if so, what are they,
exactly? To me, the soul is the extension of a person’s being into a nonmaterialistic reality
(which extension must exist to solve problems of the validity of reasoning and so forth),
and by definition not subject a priori to the material universe – only subject to it in terms of
what the mind receives of that universe through the senses.
As to the question of “beaming”, it seems to me that we fall into one of a couple camps.
(1) The soul is an illusion, or, if you like, an epiphenomenon of the body – ie, the soul is
only “mind” and entirely the product of synaptic patterns in the brain. This assumption of
materialism (despite the occasionally waxing posturefully on the existence of God, etc) is
what makes transporting no big deal in ST and most sci-fi. (2) A soul, a real soul of the
above type, an extension of one’s being into the supernatural world, does exist. In this
case it will work according to “supernatural” rules which, by definiton, are not going to be
subject to the scrutinies of scientific (examination of *this* reality) inquiry. To be blunt,
God, the Cosmic Mind, the Great Green Arkleseizure, whatever, binds the soul to the brain
of the individual and where that brain goes, it goes. Introduce transporting and that Mind
behind all souls will see that it ends up where it’s supposed to when the body is put back
together… though saying that is in itself an analogy since the whole point is that the soul is
not “in space” and doesn’t move about. In other words, as long as we have only one
individual moved about by transporting, the soul will accompany the body in the normal
way.
The problem arises with the concept of creating “transporter copies” of a being – two or
more subatomically identical, equally valid “versions” of a being. I don’t suppose it
matters which has the matter/energy of the pre-transported body; the matter of our bodies is
changing throughout our lives and at this moment. To me it’s no big philosophical deal.
For asthetic reasons let’s suppose we have two “souls” after this process (the alternative is
philosophically plausible, I suppose, and more interesting as a phenomenon but no
philosophical paradox). Fine. If we can accept twins with identical genetic codes, why not
two beings with the same memories up to that point? If the soul is an illusion as in (1) we
have to ask, “In what sense are these different beings?” But in (2) the soul is the *defining
characteristic* of individuality – two beings, two souls, with identical genetic codes and
identical memories up to a point (no more philosophically challenging than “alternate time
variants” of Tasha Yar with the same memories up to, let’s say, age 10). So we don’t have
to ask why these beings are distinct; they are distinct by virtue of having two souls.
The only remaining issue, it seems to me, is where the second soul comes from. One is
tempted to say “How can the transporter create it?” But the whole point is that it doesn’t –
anymore than it has any *material* effect on the soul of one beamed individual. What
happens is that God, whoever, creates a second soul and links it to one of the new bodies.
No more profound than supposing that God would put souls “into” carbon-based animals
or into Data’s positronic matrix. To say that the transporter is “creating” a soul would be
presumptuous and rather like saying that a doorman creates the people who walk through
his door.

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 2:11:04 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<[T]he whole point is that [a transporter] doesn’t [create a soul] – anymore than it has any
*material* effect on the soul of one beamed individual. What happens is that God,
whoever, creates a second soul and links it to one of the new bodies. . . . To say that the
transporter is “creating” a soul would be presumptuous and rather like saying that a
doorman creates the people who walk through his door.>>

I think we’re agreeing here. Clearly we are both dealing with the same phenomenon, but in
a different way. Your approach takes an outside-in look at personal identity, which you
see as equivalent to souls. My approach is more inside-out. That is, I have no idea what
the soul really is; I *do* know what personal identity is, and I suppose if I had to find an
equivalent term for it, it would be “subjectivity”. There is no need to create it, for it
naturally exists.

Let me also mention that I agree that the cloning situation probably will result in nothing
more than twinism (to coin a phrase, and for lack of a better word). There is no more
threat to personal identity when a clone exists than when a twin, triplet, quadruplett,
quintuplet, sextuplet, septuplet (etc.) exists — they all have separate personal indentities.
Each twin (and triplet, etc.) has a separate soul; each clone has a separate soul. This is also
to say that each twin, etc., has a separate personal identity.

But to take it further, if personal identity is all that is necessary for there to explain the
sense of self, whether one is a win or not, then why on Earth do we even need to postulate
the existence of a soul of any sort? (Ockham’s razor.) *It seems that subjectivity is all,
and subjectivity is enough.*

Still further, if clonism is merely twinism, and if physical tests tend to show this, then my
(our?) conclusion that the physical body is the basis of personal identity (call it materialism,
if you like) is rather reinforced. There is no implication of the existence of the soul, nor its
duplication. It is simply a matter of personal identity, or subjectivity, that either persists or
is destroyed.

I see the validity of your argument, but I think it takes the exteriorist approach. From an
interiorist approach, the existence, in any sense, of “the soul”, in the classic sense, is
irrelevant — it is merely a matter of personal identity and personal perception. (I cannot
illustrate the importance of subjectivity any more effectively than my prior references to
*perceiving out of two bodies*, which is normally thought to be impossible (some
anomalous results in actual twins notwithstanding, because the results do not convincingly
demonstrate the entire panoply of perception that I see as subjectivity; that is, merely
because some twins feel *somewhat* the same feelings, vaguely, as co-twins doesn’t mean
that they share the same self.). The destruction of the physical platform of perception (the
body), in the most real sense possible, destroys the only basis for subjectivity, because
there is nowhere for the personal identity (subjectivity) to “go”, or to emanate (so to speak)
from, after the physical body is destroyed. The self of a dead twin doesn’t go to the living
twin, as far as one can observe, nor, despite grieving, will a twin report that he or she has
two selves living in him or her after his or her co-twin dies. It just doesn’t happen.

All of this leads me to believe that to take the physicalist approach is to take the idea
seriously, and perhaps conclude, that the destruction of the actual, identity matter that
serves as the self, in favor of any copy — which would happen if the transporter functioned
like a replicator — would essentially kill the subject and substitute a copy. To use the
cloning example, it would be *exactly* as if one instantaneously cloned (or twinned) the
subject, and then killed the original: the clone has personal identity (or soul, if you prefer)
of its own, but the original is dead — its subjectivity forever lost.

Any thoughts?

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 2:30:39 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<All of this leads me to believe that to take the physicalist approach is to take the idea
seriously, and perhaps conclude, that the destruction of the actual, identity matter that
serves as the self, in favor of any copy — which would happen if the transporter functioned
like a replicator [and disposed of the original] — would essentially kill the subject and
substitute a copy. To use the cloning example, it would be *exactly* as if one
instantaneously cloned (or twinned) the subject, and then killed the original: the clone has
personal identity (or soul, if you prefer) of its own, but the original is dead — its
subjectivity forever lost.>>

(Bracketed phrase added herein.) To elaborate a bit on my own quote:

The implication of this is that I cannot agree that the supposition that a transporter functions
in a replicator way (e.g., a Thomas Riker way) is irrelevant to the subject (e.g., William T.
Riker when the subject is destroyed and a mere pattern is used for his re-creation. Lets
imagine such a transporter-level duplication (for whatever technobabble reason — let’s say,
as they claim, some bizarre and unique reflective strata in the atmosphere caused the
transporter to believe there were *two* individuals on the planet from which WTR was
beamed, and in desperation the transporter grabbed some excess energy and created
Thomas Riker (but conveniently stranded Thomas Riker on the planet); or, alternatively,
that the original WTR was dumped on the planet while the exact *copy* was beamed onto
the ship, believing himself to be the original). To me, the destruction of Thomas Riker,
wherever he might be, is the destruction of Thomas Riker’s subjectivity *alone*.
Equivalently, the destruction of WTR is the destruction of WTR alone — and his
subjectivity *in no way* persists in Thomas Riker. It really doesn’t make sense to speak
of it any other way, “soul” or not.

I believe that, accordingly, one should conclude as follows:

<<(1) The soul is an illusion, or, if you like, an epiphenomenon of the body – ie, the soul
is only “mind” and entirely the product of synaptic patterns in the brain. This assumption
of materialism (despite the occasionally waxing posturefully on the existence of God, etc)
is what makes transporting no big deal in ST and most sci-fi.>>

I cannot agree with this theory at all if it doesn’t accommodate my conclusion that
subjectivity is necessarily destroyed when the material body is destroyed.

<<(2) A soul, a real soul of the above type, an extension of one’s being into the
supernatural world, does exist. >>

I tend to conclude that personal identity does exist, but I think it exists irrespective of the
existence of “the soul” in the classic sense.

Hence, I take, if you prefer, a pragmatic intermediate position between (1) and (2), above:
Personal identity may be transported, yet nonetheless it is unique to the actual physical
body.

As we can see, the transporter problem is, in some ways, terribly different from the cloning
example, and a bit disturbing, as well.

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 2:38:41 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Technical corrections to my last two posts on this subject. The following sentences have
been corrected for an excess or deficit of parentheses and periods.

Corrected versions — please substitute for incorrect equivalents in respective posts:

Correction 1:

“The implication of this is that I cannot agree that the supposition that a transporter
functions in a replicator way (e.g., a Thomas Riker way) is irrelevant to the subject (e.g.,
William T. Riker) when the subject is destroyed and a mere pattern is used for his re-
creation.”

Correction 2:

“I see the validity of your argument, but I think it takes the exteriorist approach. From an
interiorist approach, the existence, in any sense, of “the soul”, in the classic sense, is
irrelevant — it is merely a matter of personal identity and personal perception. I cannot
illustrate the importance of subjectivity any more effectively than my prior references to
*perceiving out of two bodies*, which is normally thought to be impossible (some
anomalous results in actual twins notwithstanding, because the results do not convincingly
demonstrate the entire panoply of perception that I see as subjectivity; that is, merely
because some twins feel *somewhat* the same feelings, vaguely, as co-twins doesn’t mean
that they share the same self).”

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/26/97 4:12:44 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Does this explain the Tuvok-Neelix merging or Kirk’s twinning (and subsequent need to be
reintegrated? How about the episodes where they used the records remaining in the pattern
buffers to re-materialize someone again?

And to say that the replicators “work on a molecular level” doesn’t wash. Have you taken
chemistry? F’rinstance, replicating metals (e.g. a spoon) MUST work on atomic levels
because metallic substances are not molecular at all; they are a solid assembly of individual
atoms bound by a ‘sea’ of free electrons. Or something as simple as water – H2O cannot
be built up from a molecular matrix, it’s too simple. Or the salt (NaCl) in the soup is in the
form of free ions in the solution (individual ionized atoms of Na+ and Cl-). No amount of
molecular tinkering can explain the more simple atomic substances.

And now I have to go find ST:TNG #1. I remember Riker stating the replicators WERE
based on the transporters, and I seem to remember seeing objects materialize out of thin air,
just like they were being transported.

As for not replicating “latinum”, that has to be a self-imposed limitation on the replicators,
not an intrinsic property of the latinum itself. If replicators work on the atomic level, and
latinum is made of atoms, there seems no intrinsic reason for replicators to not be able to
handle it. Or else this latinum may not be an entirely physical substance at all.

Subj: Re:The Final Word, pt 2
Date: 2/26/97 7:56:52 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<And this from the guy who has repeatedly told us that that replcators and transporters are
based on the same technology. Well no duh. Both take matter and convert it into energy
and then reassemble it somewhere else,A replicator reassembles in some other form and a
transporter makes an almost perfect copy of whatever transported.>>

But replicators, unlike transporters don’t reproduse perfect copies. For instance take
“Data’s Day”, they knew that the spies death was fake because the repliated remains had
errors. This is one thing they have been consistant on.

–AcDec

 

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST:Gary7sevn
Date: 2/26/97 9:27:41 PM
From: Soton
Posted on: America Online

Soton (me) wrote:
>>The script fot the pilot episode of the series is what became, in essence, “Star Trek: The
Motion Picture”<< (apologies for spelling…)
Then Gary7sevn wrote:
>>>And that right there was their first mistake. :\ <g><<<<

True. But they made up for it with “The Wrath of Khan”

Subj: Re:Why I prefer ST: to Soton
Date: 2/26/97 10:22:37 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Soton
True. But they made up for it with “The Wrath of Khan”<<

Yeah, that was definitely a *sweet* comeback! <g>

Subj: I forgot the subject#1
Date: 2/26/97 11:40:43 PM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Blobbb

AcDec although critical of B5 in some ways, and defensive of DS9, will always
ask for hard facts. People produce some and ACDEC produces some. It’s called
a discusion. Now pop over to the Trek board and you get, that’s not true you
are an <<insert insult>>, no hard facts follow. You produce a fact, they say
give us another. The B5 board is much more content.<<

Blobbb in case you haven’t figured it out yet, the Brothers Hall are not interested in a
discussion of the pros and cons of Trek or B5, all they want is an admission that B5 is
drivel. I can’t remember a specific example that either has given to back up a complaint
about Babylon 5 it is always generalities. They view any comment that is positive about
B5 as a total condemnation of Trek.(I’m generalizing but after reading their posts in more
than one area I think I am reasonably close to the truth)

Rick

PS by the way what part of the UK are you from. The only time I’ve ever eaten Yorkshire
Pudding was in Yorkshire.

 

Subj: I forgot the subject#2
Date: 2/26/97 11:41:40 PM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

>>From: MythoPhile

<<The latest Voyager episode wasn’t too bad either but again I have problems
with the liklihood of two Doctor programs being able to coexist.>>
Really? To me, the problem always seemed to be the opposite: namely, it
was never remotely plausibe to anyone with an inkling of computer savvy
(whether they be ours or the computers of a zillion years hence) that the
Doctor’s program could be lost by “downloading” him, etc, that he is in
danger on away missions, etc. The Voyager writers’ knowledge of computers
seems to indicate that they’ve never spent five minutes on one.

Subj: Re:DS9
copy example!!!<<

To be honest I wasn’t paying that close of attention, I just was aware of the 2 doctors and
the idea they couldn’t coexist I didn’t even think about the foolishness that you point out.
As much as Voyager has improved from last year it still is more enjoyable if you don’t
really pay close attention to the story.

Rick

Subj: Re: S. Arg’mt [to Paul] Date: 2/27/97 12:11:05 AM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

>>To a certain extent, and some would argue, to a decreasing extent, ordinary people are
permitted a great deal of flexibility to “live the good life”, which is perceived as middle
class existence. Since there is no need for “class struggle”, no amount of “class
consciousness” can take root.<<

I *would* argue that ordinary people are losing access to better lives. There are certainly
success stories — talented, extraordinarily determined or just plain lucky people can nearly
always succeed — but the outlook for most Americans is becoming increasingly grim. The
high-pay, relatively low-skill jobs that powered the postwar boom are going south (and
east). We baby boomers are experiencing static and even declining standards of living, and
our children are forced to accept lower starting wages (in constant dollars, of course) than
we enjoyed, and much more limited opportunities. Even as the middle class shrinks the
gap between rich and poor widens. Given all that, class struggle may indeed loom ahead.

>>If, hypothetically, large portions of the population are kicked out of jobs and remain
unemployed for long periods of time, and if in that case government does nothing to
assuage the fears of the population of actual poverty or even starvation, appeals to “class
struggle” will seem a great deal more plausible to the average person.<<

Again, that seems far more likely to me than it apparently does to you. The ideological
struggle between liberals and conservatives may yet result in a government and a society
that essentially turns its back on the economically displaced — the results could be tragic.

Maybe I overstated my case — I’m not sure I “hope” class struggle ensues, but I do hope
the legitimate economic fears and aspirations of ordinary people are addressed before
resentments and despair breeds a massive loss of faith in our system.

— Paul
(P.S. — “S. Arg’mt” sounds OK by me. Thanks)

Subj: Re:Conflict Dynamics
Date: 2/27/97 12:23:06 AM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

A:

>>If conditions warrant development of “class consciousness”, then the traditional means
of accommodating conflict will have failed. I have argued that such traditional means
include formation of interest groups and the lobbying efforts of various organizations for
their own objectives. I suspect that to cause such an eventuality, a cataclysm on the order
of the Great Depression will have to have occurred, accommodation and conflict resolution
will have failed, and the response of government, or governments, will have to have been
so minimal that there is no choice in the mind of the general public but to join camps of rich
or poor, one against the other. Under such circumstances, conditions will also be ripe for
authoritarianism and suppression of liberty and human rights.<<

One “traditional” means if dealing with conflict is the union — and it seems to be failing.
Union membership has declined from one-third of the workforce in the 60’s to maybe one-
sixth today.
As for lobbying efforts and government responses — who speaks for working people
today? At nearly all levels, from nearly all political points of view, workers are told that
they must “adapt” to the new world of highly competitive international trade. What that
seems to means is, “Forget job security. Forget lifetime employment. Forget even wages
that keep up with the cost of living. Just be glad when you have a job.” For many working
people, this is evidence of a system that has failed them.

>>Just my opinion.<<

Glad to have it!

—Paul

Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/27/97 1:43:45 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<And to say that the replicators “work on a molecular level” doesn’t wash. Have you
taken chemistry?>>

Yes, decades ago. :-) Probably need a refresher course.

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #4
Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/27/97 8:44:15 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<We need a supernatural extension precisely to have a defining
characteristic of personal identity. The question of whether that extension
survives the body is an entirely separate one, and not as easily answered as
you might think. Guess which answer Biblical Christianity gives? Wrong.>>

Actually, MythoPhile, you have completely lost me on this one. I think that
to postulate an undefinable element — the soul — where one doesn’t need to
be postulated is without question more complicated than not to do so.

I see that you wish to extend uniqueness of the self into something
metaphysically on a higher scale, and that extension is something you believe
is best described as the soul. But I don’t understand how you can dismiss
the possibility that the self *is* merely epiphenomenal *and that the stratum
for this epiphenomenon is the physical body*. (I think Martin Gardner wrote
something about this in one of his books, a compendium whose title I can’t
recall.) If our unique perspective is unique to *us*, that really is all
there is to know about personal identity. How does the uniqueness of the
self equate to the need for a soul of any sort? I really don’t understand.

Incidentally, as to your Biblical comment, if you believe the “wrong” answer
to be that the soul persists after death, as the Bible is literally read,
then we probably agree. (I’m not so sure exactly what you are aiming for
here.)

<<Sure, you can have subjectivism by throwing logic out the window, but then
there’s no reason to post anything at all… which on AOL-nights like this
would make life a lot easier.>>

Ah, but you are saying that logic supports the existence of the soul, are you
not? How can you possibly do this? Isn’t it ultimately circular to say
that, because logic requires that the soul exists in order to account for
personal identity, the soul exists? Logic neither proves to exist what
cannot be perceived to exist — and the soul cannot be perceived to exist —
nor what is superfluous to the interrelations of the elements it claims to
operate upon. That is, logic doesn’t dictate that a soul exists when there
are perfectly understandable explanations of how personal identity can be
resolved as mere (as you put it) epiphenomena. The fact that externalist
logic is compatible with the existence of a soul doesn’t mean that such a
soul exists.

As to your comment about the nonapplicability of Lord Ockham’s razor, if it
were true that we were speaking specifically of what is less complicated, and
only of that, then the use of that device is merely to reiterate an argument.
But we are speaking from mind-experiment, and we are applying the technique
to our conclusions as to the possible alternative explanations of that
mind-experiment. This use, it seems to me, is a valid application of this
device.
Subj: Re:The Fnl Wrd [To MythoP.] Date: 2/28/97 12:56:05 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

Responding here, A5, not e-mail:
<< But I don’t understand how you can dismiss the possibility that the self *is* merely
epiphenomenal *and that the stratum for this epiphenomenon is the physical body*.>>
Well, the post you quote seems to have um… disappeared. I probably shouldn’t have
included that story idea about Marcus and Franklin going to Mars. And I don’t have it
anymore, in my naivety deleting it after I’d seen that it did in fact post. So, winging it:
First off, I didn’t dismiss the possibility. It was (1) on my short list of (2).
(Intermediate possibilities are simply a dismissal of (2) because of religious language or
genuine misunderstanding. Either being is entirely contained within the material universe
or it isn’t.)
Second off, I think the simplest reason for my rejection of
materialism/epiphenomenonism is that it doesn’t explain the thoughts going through my
head *right now.* Those thoughts are not synapses or chemical reactions per se. Those
may well be (indeed, I think we’d agree, are) essential factors, but my *consciousness*
itself is, by definition, not a materialistic phenomenon. The fatal word here is “merely”.
My brain may well be the material cause of my thoughts, but it cannot be the *total* cause,
cannot fully account for it… unless we wish to embrace Irrationalism, Total
Meaninglessness (in which case, why are we debating it?)
I believe that a properly functioning brain is essential to the Reasoning and Thinking
processes. But if it were the only cause, I would not be thinking right now… I would only
have all the appearances of thinking. And I know that I am thinking… To be blunt, I know
of at least one phenomenon in the universe (my own thoughts) which is not a material
phenomenon. This may seem to you word play (in which case I think we’re not going to
get much further) but to me it is axiomatic. My thoughts are not a materialistic
phenonemon. They may be the product of it, but only as the son is the product of the
womb or the table of the wood; lots more is needed. The brain is the backdrop against
which the mind functions.
To say that my brain fully “causes” my thoughts seems to me to be mixing up the
different uses of “because” in these sentences: The book fell because I tipped the table; the
book fell because of gravity; (I know) the book fell because I was watching.
Our minds need to partake of Reason in order to substantiate our claims that *anything*
is true, and Reason can no more be a product of a universe (that works according to
rational laws) than a carpenter can be the product of his table.
I reject the doctrine of total irrationality on the more flimsy grounds that no one has ever
really believed it, whatever he might say. Even the act of arguing about it proves that.

<<Sure, you can have subjectivism by throwing logic out the window, but then there’s no
reason to post anything at all… which on AOL-nights like this would make life a lot
easier.>>
Please disregard this bit. I realized as soon as I’d posted it that we were using the word
“subjectivity” in two very unrelated senses.

<<As to your comment about the nonapplicability of Lord Ockham’s razor, if it were true
that we were speaking specifically of what is less complicated, and only of that, then the
use of that device is merely to reiterate an argument. But we are speaking from mind-
experiment, and we are applying the technique to our conclusions as to the possible
alternative explanations of that mind-experiment.>>
In English, please? 😉 Never mind, I think I have the gist. I believe my reply is above.

MP
“in conics I can floor peculiarities parabolous”

Subj: Re:Silly Argument:toA5398457
Date: 3/1/97 2:08:54 AM
From: Sheridan59
Posted on: America Online

STAR TREK SUX BABYLON 5 RULZ #1

Subj: The Human Story
Date: 3/2/97 9:33:53 PM
From: Lady Tryel
Posted on: America Online

I have to say DS9 just impressed me with their last ep. Bashir being geneticly
engineered…That was a surprise, and his story was something I could relate to.
I also found myself thinking about how similar a situation he has to Susan. Both of them
would be/were in serious trouble if their “dirty little secret” came out. Either of them could
lose everything, and both parents had tried to do everything to protect their children. Also
they both grew to hate and fear their background…and in the end be ashamed of it. It is
something that happens all to often in real life. This was where the Good similarities
between b5 and ds9 show through. They are very good at telling stories of the human
condition. I’d rather see ds9 continue on this vein rather than trying to do overly action
oriented, or heavy handed moral tales. DS9 tells the simple “human” story very well.

Subj: Re:Conflict Dynamics
Date: 3/4/97 2:32:52 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

PaulM95237 writes,

One “traditional” means if dealing with conflict is the union — and it seems to be failing.
Union membership has declined from one-third of the workforce in the 60’s to maybe one-
sixth today.
As for lobbying efforts and government responses — who speaks for working people
today? At nearly all levels, from nearly all political points of view, workers are told that
they must “adapt” to the new world of highly competitive international trade. What that
seems to means is, “Forget job security. Forget lifetime employment. Forget even wages
that keep up with the cost of living. Just be glad when you have a job.” For many working
people, this is evidence of a system that has failed them.>>

I would have to agree that any reasonable analysis must account for the loss of well-paying
jobs in this country.

The PATCO strike was a most tragic affair, since, by law, Pres. Reagan had the right to
dismiss the participants in the illegal strike. Tragic, since it seems that there is a perception
in this country that unions are necessarily bad or obsolescent, possibly because of that
strike.

In my view, it is the most important prerogative of government to represent the overall
interests of all the people. If it seems, by any reliable indicia, that sizeable segments of this
economy are experience artificially depressed wages, then it cannot be in the best interests
of the people, at large, *not* to seriously examine whether some intervention is necessary.
This is true whether such intervention must be at the judicial, Congressional, or
Presidential level.

Economics is a most imprecise science, despite its preoccupation with numbers. The lives
of real people cannot be reduced to mere numbers. It is for the better that all of us realize
that to the extent real people are hurt, it is the role of government, notwithstanding
numbers, to address and assuage the needs which enterprise, or externalities, may have
wrought.

 

Subj: Re:Conflict Dynamics
Date: 3/4/97 4:38:09 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Correction: << If it seems, by any reliable indicia, that sizeable segments of this economy
are experienc[ing] artificially depressed wages, then it cannot be in the best interests of the
people, at large, *not* to seriously examine whether some intervention is necessary.>>

Correction indicated by brackets.

Subj: Re:Conflict Dynamics: to A5
Date: 3/4/97 8:06:51 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
Economics is a most imprecise science, despite its preoccupation with numbers. The lives
of real people cannot be reduced to mere numbers. It is for the better that all of us realize
that to the extent real people are hurt, it is the role of government, notwithstanding
numbers, to address and assuage the needs which enterprise, or externalities, may have
wrought.<<

I agree with what you and PaulM95237 have said, though I don’t think the
foreign threat to jobs in a world economy and marketplace is quite as bad as he makes it
sound. In the future perhaps, but not yet. At any rate, my assessment in part is also that the
Reagan precedent where unions were concerned was not intended, but rather happened by
accident and resulted in a dangerous precedent. After all, the Air Traffic Controllers signed
a binding contract with the government, a clause which allowed Reagan to do precisely
what he did by busting the Air Traffic Controllers union under the law. They were in the
wrong because the clause protected the government if the union was to wreak havoc to
such an extent that it seriously jeopardized the lives of civilians and foreigners alike.
However, what has happened now is that the left seized upon the erosion of unions that
had taken place, all resulting from the Reagan era precedents that came along because then
the companies scrutinized for loopholes they could use against the unions throughout the
country, and especially in big cities, which only made matters worse. And in this current
climate you see small remaining unions that now have strong contracts with the
government, so the unions embrace government intrusion into their businesses in order to
survive and in hopes of getting more out of the government when it comes time to
renewing any and all contracts the next time around. This is truly a sick climate we’re living
in, and it stands to get much worse. Unions aren’t the beginning and end of fixing
problems, but government and business have merged into a dangerous web that pits the
average working stiffs and their families in a place of total and complete powerlessness.
Just think of Chaplin’s twisted film, “Modern Times” and it’s easy to get the true picture.
Subj: Re:Conflict Dynamics: to A5
Date: 3/5/97 12:45:23 AM
From: DEWainio
Posted on: America Online

Regarding unions and business/government (I’ll even try to work in a star trek / bab5
angle) in our modern world of goods transport, dangerous weapons, and nation states
pitted against each other for limited resources, I argue that it is in the interest of government
to work with business. Such has been the natural course of social evolution since the fall of
the aristocracy and the rise of the middle classes. That is not to say that a just government
worth supporting ignores people’s rights or environmental concerns, but that the best
balance must be sought out. Although I’ve been in management (and there for not in a
union) my work career, my wife and several of my friends are union members and I must
admit that my wife is well paid – but there was the year she went on strike, a union offical
stole their strike fund and left the country, and her union told the local teh equivalent of
“tough, your money got stolen. Sorry, but no refunds on your dues”.
With their falling power, unions have (and this is my opinion and observation rather
than “fact” I can prove) tended to become self serving in that their main goal is continuing
the union rather than helping the indivual – which was their orignal purpose back.
Now – ST/B5 fitting in? An interesting dichotomy exists in that in ST we have often been
told there is no poverty, money isn’t even used, and almost all planets have single world
governments. Star Fleet especially, and mankind in general has “evolved” to higher
pursuits. In B5 mankind is still basically what he is today (although we have a single
government on Earth and appearently most planets). Commerce is heavy, thus part of the
reason for the station itself. While ST might be more “uplifting”, I find B5’s universe more
rich for story telling. In ST you expect the Star Fleet officer to be self sacrificing, moral,
and generally dedicated to “good”. In B5 when the command crew takes a stand against
their own people we see the courage and dedication we can more easily appreciate because
we can image our own government (local, business, or otherwise) going bad and
wondering if we’d just go along like everyone else or make a stand.
Curiously, it appears the “goody-two-shoes” universe of ST wore on the writers as well
as in the final years of STNG we saw conspiracies to take over earth and subvert Star Fleet
and the idea of commerce was reintroduced via DS9.

I would call this my two cents but looking at the length of the post I suppose I’m closer to a
dime.

 

Subj: Bashir
Date: 3/5/97 11:17:52 PM
From: Rickeshay
Posted on: America Online

Due to a taping mishap I didn’t get all of the 2nd episode of the recent 2 parter on DS9.
From the first part and what I did get of the 2nd I would have thought that Dr. Bashir was
going to get some glory, yet in the very next episode he is threatened with cashiering from
StarFleet. Actually I thought the lastest episode was one of the best I’ve seen in awhile
except that it suffered from the malady Trekus Endus.(The inability of a Star Trek episode
to have a good ending)(IMHO) I thought Julian’s line about the sentence that is father was
going to get to be to much was hilarious. After all he thought that if the truth came out that
he would be ruined as a Doctor and StarFleet officer was a justified punishment for
something he had no say in but two years was too much for the man who caused the
problem in the first place.

Rick

Subj: Annoying AC/DC
Date: 3/5/97 11:35:21 PM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

Yeah, there’s tons of Angus Young fans at Harvard.

This message is posted solely for the purpose of irratating AC/DC. Ready, bang your
head.. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, oh, gee, did I forget
that you fancy yourself as AcDec? Oh well. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, C/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, This message is posted solely for the
purpose of irratating AC/DC. Ready, bang your head.. AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC,
AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC/DC, AC

Subj: B5 iz bet r bcause . . .
Date: 3/5/97 11:46:29 PM
From: KNAC Lives
Posted on: America Online

As a Harvard grad, I say dat B5 iz bet r B cause it shoz more of the life of da ord’nary
people. ST tends to foucs on the leaders, military and political. B5 gives more time to
how regular people live in that time period — including “downunder,” union unrest, real
drug addicts, music PTSD among war vets, organized crime and how the news is (will be)
delivered in the futch r.

I still wish that JMS would create an episode where an intergalatic Centauri promoter puts
on sporting specktuhcles and the promotoer is Don King — imagine the $ they’d save on
make-up. But JMS doesn’t have that gooda sensea Yuma.

AC/DC — you may not know anything about anything important, but I love “Dirty Deeds
Done Dirt Cheap” and “She’s a Whole Lotta Rosie” — thanks for the music, if nothing
else.

Subj: Re:first
Date: 3/6/97 7:27:28 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

J Copeland used to srite. JC, if you read this, please drop me a line at d fagiole@aol.com

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to et al
Date: 3/6/97 7:35:40 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

Gary,

Yesterday’s Enterprise should be easy to find.

If you’re still stuck, e-mail me at
D fagiole@aol.com

for help

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi showsI
Date: 3/6/97 8:02:14 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

I did enjoy seeing DS9 turn things upside down.

What with all the effort they put into taking away Odo’s morphing, destroying the Kitimer
Accords, and turning Cardassia into a semblance of democracy (Although we got to see
little of this on screen), they overthrew all these conceits in a couple of episodes.

IT simply goes to prove that the show CAN be unpredictable AND take chances –when it
wants to.

There is simply no beeter s-f show on television. IT ain’t perfect, but nothing in the genre
is better, and it’s better than it has a right to be. DS9 has improved every season.

D fagiole@aol.com

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 3/6/97 8:04:11 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

Are you sure these superficialities *aren’t* what we see in day-to-day American life today?!

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDecI
Date: 3/6/97 8:46:56 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

I’m GLAD the writers have dropped the “warp drive rips open the fabric of space”
hypothesis!

It was/is terrible.

I can forgive them the omission in ds9!!!

Praise the maker (since stds9rs Usually do not have a religious faith=–unlike TOS!)

D fagiole@aol

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDecR
Date: 3/6/97 8:54:29 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

Read “Hollywood v. America”
By Michael Medved !!

D fagiole

Subj: Re:Silly Argument: to AcDec
Date: 3/6/97 8:58:14 PM
From: D fagiole
Posted on: America Online

 

Subj: Re:Supporting Sci Fi shows
Date: 97-02-11 15:41:52 EST
From: MythoPhile

<<OHOH, in the modern American context, a federal form of government implies a
relatively strong central government as compared to that of, for example, a confederation.
What is it about a federation that distinguishes it from a Republic, that makes you so
confident that the Maqui’s rebellion was legal?>>
“A federal form of gov’t” is a change of usage that has come about because our own
beginnings were as a federation of sorts – so that “federal gov’t” referred to the Washington
level of gov’t, and because of historical trends now refers to a strong central authority. But
it is still a misuse of terminology. A Federation is a very weak form of gov’t in which
sovereignty rests partially or completely in the members. We fought a nasty war about an
honest difference of opinion as to whether we were such a gov’t, and the people who
believed we were lost, rightly or wrongly.
There is little doubt in practice that the Federation is a Federation in more than name.
We are told until we’re blue in the face that there’s no down side to joining the federation,
that Bajor has nothing to lose… in a couple old TNG episodes I vaguely recall the
implication that the prime directive (such a clearly-defined thing on the old show – let’s say
instead the “non-intereference directive” here) even applied to Federation members.
Consider also how when Kirk and company fled to Vulcan the central authority couldn’t
simply order them back. They were protected by Vulcan’s sovereign rights and *chose* to
return. The implication was not that there was something unresolved here or any gray legal
area, but that with Vulcan’s permission they could have stayed there the rest of their lives if
they wanted. (It could possibly even be argued that there are Federation members where
slavery is legal.)
As far as I know, except for this Maquis business, there has never been anything
suggesting that Federation members are just plain stuck with it after they join. It would
certainly make the whole Bajoran debate very different. The status of the Maquis planets
could be more complicated, certainly – for instance if they are considered earth, not
Federation, colonies and never actually had membership status. But I think earth’s position
in the Federation would be hopelessly compromised if they refused to recognize the
secession of their colonies, especially considering earth’s “prima donna” status in the
Federation. No earth politician with a brain of common sense would try that; all the
member worlds would get edgy about the Federation becoming an “earth empire” (if they
aren’t already; bottom line is whose population is running the military).
A Republic is essentially gov’t by representation and has little to do with the issue. I
simply couldn’t think of a good word for a gov’t where sovereignty lies in the central
authority… most likely because it’s the norm and doesn’t require a name.

If this is Socialism, SO WHAT?? All the industrialized democracies are socialist, when
compared to laissez-faire U.S. corporatism. And what has this excess of greed without
morals gotten us? Exactly what the corporations want: value-free consumers! Little wonder
that they value anything else: life, family, honesty, hard work….

Dfagiole

Babylon 5 Message Center /B5 vs Star Trek #4
Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps
Date: 4/18/97 1:57:08 AM
From: IDLM8
Posted on: America Online

Do you think we will have a repeat of the Great War next season?

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 1:58:11 AM
From: IDLM8
Posted on: America Online

You guys are arguing about politics. This is not a folder for politics. Why don’t you email instead?

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps
Date: 4/18/97 1:58:59 AM
From: IDLM8
Posted on: America Online

I don’t think Babylon 5 is wimping out on anything. It’s a great show.

Subj::: The dumbing down of society
Date: 4/18/97 2:30:59 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Dear G-d

We now have proof that the reactionaries are winning the ideology war hands down. And yes when I say
reactionaries I mean the so-called conservatives who seem to hate anything new or intelligent.

When we have to start speaking in small words I get nervous.

< Because it is annoying, affectatious, and time-consuming. Don’t flatter yourself that I can’t translate; it’s
just that I usually end up not bothering. This is not a style point for me; it is a very real complaint about
something that inhibits communication. My English teachers used to say that if you can’t say it in ordinary
English, you probably don’t really know what you’re talking about. C.S. Lewis said the same thing about
theology. Rush says the same thing about politics. If “it” can’t be de-jargoned, one probably is hiding
behind the jargon.>

Then what would your English teacher say about “affactatious”? Hmmm? Be consistant Mytho. Either write
intelligently or write in only two syllables.

I don’t see what the problem is other than someone is displaying intelligence, and reason. And you are
throwing up straw men to hide behind.

<<As for your comments on flaming, if you believe what I’ve done constitutes flaming, you are in serious
error.>>
<Semantics. Call it what you like. It was still infuriating. Give or take what might be in the next post,
the sentence and the charge remain. >

Mytho, you just don’t seem to get it do you. This isn’t science where there is one outcome to everything.
This is language, which has a myriad of different avenues. Semantics is the soul of rhetoric in which you’re
participating.
People are going to continue to speak and think intelligently. And I’m sure you’ll still continue to rant and
rave against it.

<If your argument is that you could’ve gotten nastier, this is not something that comes as a complete shock.>

No the point was that he wasn’t nasty at all.

Subj::: Re:Moral of this Tale
Date: 4/18/97 2:42:26 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< I accept your apology.>>

Now, Mytho, smile when you read this, because you’d want me to smile when I read your posts, wouldn’t
you? It’s all in friendly criticism:

Perhaps one should read up on the meaning of the term “ad hominem”. It well describes the term “snob” as
in: “Would I be right in assuming that when conservatives talk about the “snobbish intellectual elite”, you
don’t really understand what they’re so worked up about?”. (Note: You said this, Mytho.) In this context,
you imply I’m a snob.

Okay, in case you still don’t understand: I was saying that someone on this board made arguments based on
accusations as to the character of the person making the argument, and not as to the merits or motivations
behind the argument. That..is..what…”ad hominem”…means! Okay: Next step: You attacked my argument
by implying I am a snob! Still with me? All right! So, my statement, “It’s not snobbery to speak in a
certain way, or act in a certain way, or to be secure. It *is* unbecoming, however, to deride the opposition
*ad hominem* and to prejudge another’s ideas and views by an artificial standard”, meant that it was
unbecoming for you to attack me. Still with me?

Get it, Mytho? It’s really not so hard to understand. So, it wasn’t an apology after all, and your own
sarcasm shows through. My, what a lesson we have learned today.

Those who live in glass houses, Mytho. — Peace, shalom, and, as B5rs might say, “In Valen’s Name”.

— A5. This is how flame wars start. This is also why they should end, dammit. So end it already.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 3:57:05 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<” A hack has a dictionary in one hand, a thesaurus in the other, which means he ends up writing with his
a**.” >>
Nice quote; have to remember that one. 😉

<<Even Shakespeare wrote so the groundlings could understand…>>
What many people fail to appreciate is just how affectatious Shakespeare was. If you read anything else
from roughly the same period, you can be shocked just how understandable it is.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:07:30 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<The simplification of language IS THE SIMPLIFICATION OF THOUGHT and the a perilous sign of
the idiotic view that nothing other than two-bit sentence construction can convey any ideas worth
keeping.>>
I think this conversation has gone about as far as it’s going to. Statements like that only re-emphasize
how many worlds apart we are. But I am beginning to appreciate how habitual it is for you, not intentional,
so I apologize for any misunderstanding there.
Yes, that is something of a back-handed apology. I have lived in the ivory tower world and that is why I
have so little patience with it. You’ll thus forgive me if it’s still a sore point.
As for the “language police”, you can post any way you like. I was merely suggesting that if you want to
be understood, you should come down out of that tower. As to your insistence that I should read what you
say, not what I think you said, I have already addressed that charming little bit of sanctimony.
Snootying up your attacks does not make them any less attacks. Just because I reply in clear language
does not make mine any worse. Yes, I have nothing but *contempt* for this academic snobbery, and I’m
only now beginning to realize how deeply ingrained it is.
<<he speaks the language you understand.>>
Yet another example. This whole little war is getting incredibly tiresome.

<<Mytho writes, <<I accept your apology.>>
<<Fine, Mytho, whatever you say. I doubt anyone else agrees with your interpretation of my comment.>>
Funny; I wasn’t aiming that high, but my remark soared clear over your ivory tower.

Subj::: Re:Infuriation, shmuriation
Date: 4/18/97 4:18:34 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<And try not to overcook that offering of peace I made to you>>
If that was a peace offering, I’d sure hate to see another personal attack. I thought I spelled out in no
uncertain terms why what you said angered me, why your attempts to hide behind language don’t mitigate
the attack, how you can make yourself clearer if I am misunderstanding you (and I still doubt that I am), and
all I get for my troubles is flame after flame.
In the future, I suggest that when people say things with *conviction*, and don’t succumb to that net
affectation (which I abhor) of prefacing every other sentence with “it’s just my opinion”, or when people
discuss topics you disapprove of, that you simply *not read* them. But to make blanket criticisms of the
way other posters’ minds work (implicitly, inferior to your “academic detachment”) and then flame people
for being offended, well, that is simply childish, even when done in PhD-speak.
If you think that there is any envy in this attitude, you are *sorely* mistaken. I’ve been where you are
now and know you only too well, which is why I have little patience. I have already apologized for that. I
haven’t yet apologized for deliberately pressing what I know to be your “hot buttons”, but I will now.
Until I start hearing something a little less hostile, I think I’ll put you on “ignore.”

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:21:36 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Funny; I wasn’t aiming that high, but my remark soared clear over your ivory tower.>>

Funny, I’ve been thinking about *Star Trek VI*:

We extend the hand of peace, and you blatantly defile that peace!

Great line, that.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:23:24 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<What many people fail to appreciate is just how affectatious Shakespeare was. If you read anything else
from roughly the same period, you can be shocked just how understandable it is.>>

Umm, Mytho, the poor guy was agreeing with you. I understand he’s a writer; he probably knows a bit
about Shakespeare’s contemporaries. Cut him some slack, willya?

— A5.

Subj::: Apology Accepted
Date: 4/18/97 4:25:05 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I think this conversation has gone about as far as it’s going to. Statements like that only re-emphasize
how many worlds apart we are. But I am beginning to appreciate how habitual it is for you, not intentional,
so I apologize for any misunderstanding there.>>

Okay, apology accepted. No irony here, none of that fancy-schmancy academic stuff you say I write. No
sardonic pan, no sarcastic remark.

Apology accepted, and let’s get on with life.

— A5. B5, red fish, blue fish….

Subj::: Lorien
Date: 4/18/97 4:29:22 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< I’ve been where you are now and know you only too well, which is why I have little patience.>>

One somewhat-close-to-last comment: Lorien asked, “Who ARE you?” Mytho, who *am* I? Am I the
carefully cultivated image of the sociologist? Am I some guy pretending to be a sociologist? Am I just a
misguided liberal fool, who hasn’t yet learned the lessons of academe which you apparently so know so
well? I suppose I will have to be content not to know the answers.

I doubt if even you know…. But that’s neither here nor there. I meant what I said…let’s get on with life.

So, how was tonight’s repeat of *B5*?

— A5.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:29:22 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<What many people fail to appreciate is just how affectatious Shakespeare was. If you read anything else
from roughly the same period, you can be shocked just how understandable it is.>>
<<Umm, Mytho, the poor guy was agreeing with you. I understand he’s a writer; he probably knows a bit
about Shakespeare’s contemporaries. Cut him some slack, willya>>

Oy. No wonder you think everything I say is an attack. That was just a *comment*, for crying out loud,
and “you” was not addressed to anyone in particular.
To read any hostility or even opposition into that reply is really incredible. Only hostility of the first
rank reads any disagreement with RWGib into that post. Now you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.
You want the last word, fine, you have it. This is getting disgusting.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:30:13 AM
From: RWGibson13
Posted on: America Online

>
<<” A hack has a dictionary in one hand, a thesaurus in the other, which means he ends up writing with his
a**.” >>
Nice quote; have to remember that one. ;)<

Guess I should’ve made it more clear I was talking in general terms when I said it, though. Seems someone
took it personally. It’s just in my job as an editor I’ve come across (five hundred) too many would-be
writers who think ten-dollar words show me anything more than that they know how to use the standard
tools of the trade.

And A5’s a nice fellow. I’ve had several conversations with him on other boards and he communicates very
well when he doesn’t try to be so self-conscious about it.

But since this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, it’s my last word on the

Subj::ect.

RWG

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:31:07 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<To read any hostility or even opposition into that reply is really incredible. Only hostility of the first
rank reads any disagreement with RWGib into that post. Now you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.
You want the last word, fine, you have it. This is getting disgusting.>>

So, how *was* tonight’s *B5*?

— A5.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 4:32:28 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<And A5’s a nice fellow. I’ve had several conversations with him on other boards and he communicates
very well when he doesn’t try to be so self-conscious about it. >>

Thanks, RWG. Sorry if I leapt out at you.

Self-conscious? Hard not to be, around these parts.

So, how was tonight’s *B5* repeat? ;-D

— A5.

Subj::: Re:Infuriation, shmuriation
Date: 4/18/97 4:34:53 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<But to make blanket criticisms of the way other posters’ minds work (implicitly, inferior to your
“academic detachment”) and then flame people for being offended, well, that is simply childish, even when
done in PhD-speak.>>

Hey, Mytho, all is forgiven for the sake of civility. The “doctor” is out.

So, for the umpteenth time: How the heck was that damn *B5* repeat tonight???????? Anybody?
Anybody?

— A5.

Subj::: Tonight’s *B5* Repeat
Date: 4/18/97 4:44:38 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<So, for the umpteenth time: How the heck was that damn *B5* repeat tonight???????? Anybody?
Anybody?>>

I’d say something to start this thread, but *B5* didn’t air tonight where I’m at. Was it even a repeat? If not,
isn’t the new one going to start pretty soon?

HEEELLLOOO … Heeellllooo…. helllloo :::echoic sound here:::

— A5. Okay, ignore me. See if I care… ;-D

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/18/97 5:08:24 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

I read a B5 article in Sci-Fi Invasion. Good article, but later I got bored and read one of the Star Trek
articles. Here’s a quote that kinda jumped out at me:

“Anybody who makes the claim that they have the next five years planned out in every detail is either full of
it, or is limiting the series to his or her own very small imagination.”
-Star Trek: Deep Space Nine”
Supervising Producer Hans Biemler

Methinks the Trekkie doth protest too much. The pressure must be getting to them for them to make an
obvious cut at JMS like that.

Prez4Life

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/18/97 5:16:11 AM
From: RWGibson13
Posted on: America Online

> Prez4Life

>I read a B5 article in Sci-Fi Invasion. Good article, but later I got bored and read one of the Star Trek
articles. Here’s a quote that kinda jumped out at me:

“Anybody who makes the claim that they have the next five years planned out in every detail is either full of
it, or is limiting the series to his or her own very small imagination.”
-Star Trek: Deep Space Nine”
Supervising Producer Hans Biemler

Methinks the Trekkie doth protest too much. The pressure must be getting to them for them to make an
obvious cut at JMS like that.<

Well, taken at face value, I’d say I agree with the quote. Anyone familiar with TV knows to say that it’s
impossible to plan out five years in every detail. I would SUSPECT that he’s replying to some of the fans
who have misquoted JMS as saying something like this. I’ve never heard Joe say he’s planned out every
detail, but I HAVE heard some B5 fans saying that he said it. And if they get obnoxious enough about it,
someone who knows better is eventually going to get tired of having it shoved in their faces.

RWG
Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/18/97 5:22:32 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Methinks the Trekkie doth protest too much. The pressure must be getting to them for them to make an
obvious cut at JMS like that.>>

Now, modern Trek loves to do character studies. Tonight’s *DS9* was about Maj. Kira Nerys and her
confrontation with her past. It *did* build on her history as a rebel, so I think we should give Trek credit
for that. (Yes, I know it was less than exciting.)

As far as the jibe at JMS, if it shows pressure, perhaps that’s a good thing. Competition is one of the most
powerful forces for improvement among shows.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 5:24:13 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

>>You show the ultimate bankruptcy of your views through the constant attacks you have made on my ideas
and my language. No wonder you admire Rush Limbaugh — he speaks the language you understand.<<

A5,

As someone who does respect your views…I think you just did the same thing your accusing him of. Rush is
cool. Let’s keep him out of it.

Prez4Life

Subj::: Re:bleh
Date: 4/18/97 5:32:05 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<As someone who does respect your views…I think you just did the same thing your accusing him of.
Rush is cool. Let’s keep him out of it.>>

I’ll keep the big guy out of it. No need to start anything all over again, obviously.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/18/97 5:47:37 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, taken at face value, I’d say I agree with the quote. Anyone familiar with TV knows to say that it’s
impossible to plan out five years in every detail. I would SUSPECT that he’s replying to some of the fans
who have misquoted JMS as saying something like this. I’ve never heard Joe say he’s planned out every
detail, but I HAVE heard some B5 fans saying that he said it. And if they get obnoxious enough about it,
someone who knows better is eventually going to get tired of having it shoved in their faces.<<

JMS always said some things in the arc are flexible, yeh. But it’s funny how pulled that 5 year number out of
nowhere, isn’t it? The quote was in response to a question about how DS9 does arcs……I guess I would get
annoyed if everyone kept asking me how many MHz I had and I was still using a Commodore64<G>.

Subj::: Re:The dumbing down of socie
Date: 4/18/97 5:48:28 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

>>We now have proof that the reactionaries are winning the ideology war hands down. And yes when I say
reactionaries I mean the so-called conservatives who seem to hate anything new or intelligent. <<

EXCUSE ME? As someone who makes Reagan look like a big city liberal, I take exception to that
statement. I love new and intelligent ideas. I accept any proposal that is compatible with my belief system
and am tolerant of others who believe differently. I will gradly debate any of my beliefs and values using
only logic and facts and I will choose my words to suit my intended audience.

But this is not the place. EVERYONE: Please read the title of this board! I enjoy a good debate now and
then, but this is becoming a mud-slinging match and it is totally inappropriate for this board. We’ve come
here to share our thoughts and ideas about an incredible show and compare it to others of it’s kind(ST
wishes!). If you want to slander each other, please do it in the political forums. I’d rather discuss B5 vs Star
Trek.

Prez4Life

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/18/97 5:53:00 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

>>As far as the jibe at JMS, if it shows pressure, perhaps that’s a good thing. Competition is one of the
most powerful forces for improvement among shows.<<

I agree! DS9 has always had great potential. I think B5 has really put their feet to the fire. I heard alot of
people who have a stake in DS9 are really PO’ed that DS9 cost twice what B5 does, yet B5 wins all the
awards for FX. Has anyone noticed an improvement in DS9 FX the past year?

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/18/97 5:58:33 AM
From: RWGibson13
Posted on: America Online

>
JMS always said some things in the arc are flexible, yeh. But it’s funny how pulled that 5 year number out of
nowhere, isn’t it? The quote was in response to a question about how DS9 does arcs……I guess I would get
annoyed if everyone kept asking me how many MHz I had and I was still using a Commodore64<G>.<

Err, the 5 year number was correct. Joe has always stated the framework was planned for 5 years… He’s
just never said every detail of the 5 years was planned out.

RWG

Subj::: Re:The dumbing down of socie
Date: 4/18/97 6:07:42 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<EXCUSE ME? As someone who makes Reagan look like a big city liberal, I take exception to that
statement. I love new and intelligent ideas. I accept any proposal that is compatible with my belief system
and am tolerant of others who believe differently. I will gradly debate any of my beliefs and values using
only logic and facts and I will choose my words to suit my intended audience. >>

Well, then, welcome to the club. :-) I don’t claim to speak for Tryel, but I’m pretty sure Tryel wouldn’t
classify someone who *is* open-minded as a reactionary.

I can speak only for myself. I’ve often said this: I’m conservative in many ways: I believe in fiscal
responsibility, a strong defense, a strong economy, a strong country, personal moral responsibility, and the
importance of freedom. I am also a Christian, and I’ve been raised to believe in God’s love and our
obligations of compassion and protection for the weak. I don’t see the two (conservativism and Christianity)
as either necessarily tied together or, on the contrary, contradictory. I do emphasize that if one is strong,
one cannot (must not) be oblivious to the legitimate points and needs of the opposition, be it on the political
front or otherwise.

This is the greatest country on Earth, not just because it is the freest, but also because it allows all to be the
best they can be for themselves and toward their fellow human beings. It is our role to keep it that way and
to do the best we can to follow the guidance of our hearts, conscience, and morals in our everyday dealings
in life.

— A5. Coming down off his soapbox, and returning you to your regularly scheduled topic. 😉

Subj::: ds9 flaws:to Mytho
Date: 4/18/97 7:15:48 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 97-04-16 05:02:43 EDT
From: MythoPhile

>>It is truly amazing how some people can take the statement “The liberal writers of Trek are worried if
they’re resorting to very un-PC T&A” and turn it into a diatribe about diatribes, or into the ten-thousandth
self-righteous posture about how “Everyone should be as above politics as I am.”<<
>> As for you, PaulM, the less said the better.<<

Huh? If you’re referring to my posting of 4/16, please read it again. The part of your message that I quoted
was indeed a diatribe, what my dictionary calls “a bitter or malicious denunciation”.
The rest of my message was *my opinion*. I never called you self-righteous or anything else.
Don’t be so quick on the draw, Mytho. Like most of us here, I just want to read other people’s opinions
and ocassionally offer my own. You know, communicate. But A5 is right — there’s far too much
intolerance here. Blasting others for their perceived political views just gets in the way of communication.

—Paul

 
Subj::: Re:The dumbing down of socie
Date: 4/18/97 7:29:08 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Last time ( because I had the same darn argument in my Ethics class when we got to cultural relativism)

Tryel’s definition of the words reactionary and conservative:

Conservative: Someone who believes in small government. Takes a hands off stance about government in
economic, and social concerns.

Reactionaries: These people believe that change is evil. They wear blinders and try to pretend that the world
is a static place, and when someone threatens their little world they become militant. A great example of this
is the Freik Corps who put down the labor parties in Germany after WW1.

Prez, trust me you weren’t the person I was aiming for. I respect you to much :-)

BTW B5 hasn’t aired yet here in Bumblefoot Ill so I can’t tell you how it was

Tryel

Subj::: Re:ds9 flaws:to Mytho
Date: 4/18/97 7:35:08 PM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

Sorry about the poor editing in that last post.
—Paul

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/19/97 1:42:43 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<< This argument that the political situation of DS9 was well thought-out is indefensible, plain
and simple.>>

I don’t think so. Every major shift was logically thought out and foreshadowed. Lets look at the history of
the politics on DS9.

::::::::yadda yadda yadda:::::::::::::::::::::::::
All the major political shifts fit together perfectly. And you are gonna have to do a lot more than just say
“It’s obvious”! Why not try and back up your statements next time?>>>>>>>>>

All of the shifts you mentioned may look well induvidually, Acdec. But from here, the Big Picture
amounts to a custard ketchup pie.

Strahd

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/19/97 1:49:56 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<2. This T&A thing has been run into the ground. DS9 has done 2 and only 2 “T&A” episodes. And
it’s T&A is nowhere as blatent as it was in Roddenberry run TOS and 1st season TNG (remember “Mudds
Women”, “I’ Mudd”, “Angel One”, “Justice” and all thoose women Kirk and Riker got it on with?) DS9 has
the least T&A of any Trek show! >>>>>>

But we’re all suffocating on soap bubbles.

<<<<Gimme a break, DS9 has had some of the best Trek ever to come down the line this season. “Nor the
Battle to the Strong”. “The Ship”, “Trials And Tribbleations”, “Things Past”, “The Darkness and the Light”,
“Rapture”, “For the Uniform”, “Dr. Bashir, I Presume”, “In Purgatory’s Shadow”, and “By Inferno’s
Light”.>>>>>>

You’ll pardon me if I dont take your word for it and mark down those particular eps in MY book as “OK” to
“Average” to “Mediocre”.

<<<<<Trek fans have ALWAYS thought they could do better, of course if they could they would be out
there making their own shows.>>>>>>>

Back to this pompous elitism that says you’re not worthy to shine my toilet seat if you dont have
“Producer/Hollywood Writer” next to your name. I’m sorry, but Hollywood is full of the DUMBEST
people in the country, not the smartest. Having known the right people to get yourself a job is hardly proof
posiitve of intelligence, or is your lack of a job in “Hollywood” proof of incompetence. I’ve seen and read
some fan stories that blow the top off of ANYTHING TPTB have done in years.

Strahd

Subj::: Ds9 flaws 3
Date: 4/19/97 1:58:32 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<The writers will build up to something big and then wimp out in the last act.>>

Like the Shadow War? :)>>>>>>>

I was thinking more along the lines of: The Search Part II, By Infernos Light, or the entire Dominion
or Klingon Conflict up to this point. The Shadow war ended BAD, not with a whimper. JMS promised a
FX fix, and delievered. Ds9 promises us an FX fix every other week, but I’m still waiting.

<<<<<They did pick a villian, the Dominion. All the other political changes came about BECAUSE of the
Dominion.>>>>>>>>

They shouldnt have had ANY political changes

<<<<<<<You can;t even get your list right. The ONLY time some switched affialitions was when the
Klingons and Cardies switched sides, and that was due to Domion intervention. The Dominion has always
been bad. The Klingons never joined with the Dominion, only the Cardies have done that.>>>>>>>>

I never said the klingons joined the dominion. I said they went from friends, to enemies, then back to
friends. A perfect Ds9 wishy washy flip flop.

Strahd
–AcDec
Subj::: Dax is a Bimbo
Date: 4/19/97 2:08:56 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<ONE ep in the 2nd, “The Jem Hadar”.>>

3 episodes in the 2nd. They were not seen untill “The Jem’Hadar”, but they were mentioned in two other
episodes. “Rules of Aquisition” and “Sanctuary”.>>>>>>

Acdec, I know you’re grasping at any straws you can find, but please. A single one word mention DOES
NOT qualify as an appearance of meaningful terror.
The Dominion APPEARED once, and only once, in the second season.

<<<<<<<“The Way of the Warrior”, “Hippocratic Oath”, “Indiscretion”, “Starship Down”, “Homefront”,
“Paradise Lost”,”Return to Grace”, “Sons of Mogh”, “The Quickening”, “To the Death”, “Broken Link”. All
featured either the Dominion directly, or events that happened because of the Dominion, and that are
important to what is happening this season.>>>>>>>

See above post about appearances of Meaningful Terror. Next you’ll be saying the Dominion influence the
breakfast menus of the Promenade.

<<<<<<<This should not even be dignified with an answer, but I will answer anyway. Let me list a few
episodes were she played a major role.
“Dax”,>>>>>>> I seem to remember Dax saying NOTHING in this ep.

“Blood Oath”, >>>>>>>>>>>I said I was looking for intelligence, not testosterone worship.

“Past Tense”>>>>>>>>>>>>”OH! I’ll just walk into a dangerous slum ALL BY MYSELF!!!!!! See how
smart I am??!?!”

, “ReJoined”>>>>>>>>>>I said intelligence. Not eroticism.

“Starship Down”>>>>>>>Knothead

, “The Sword of Khaless”>>>>>>>>>>More testosterone worship.

, “To the Death”>>>>>>Garbage

, “The Seige”>>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said

, “Invasive Procedures”>>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said

, and “Business as Usual”.>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said

Well?

Strahd

 

 

Subj::: Bleh II
Date: 4/19/97 2:33:52 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<Believe me, I wouldn’t waste so much time on something I absolutely despised. I’ve already said
how I’d love to have creative control of Trek. One could do a lot with it. They have 30-odd years of history
to draw upon, and what we get is incredibly, incredibly squandered.>>>>>>

Perfectly stated

<<<<<<>>I don’t think so. Every major shift was logically thought out and foreshadowed.<<>>>

Foreshadowed my asteriod. Give ONE example. And the “Locusts” dont count. THat was just more
throwing things against a wall and seeing what stuck.

<<<<<<<Ever noticed in Trek how most battles have people wobbling in starships etc and have very few
SFX…look carefully and compare with B5 >>>>>>>

Its like comparing a missile launcher to a firecracker.

<<<<<So, how *was* tonight’s *B5*?>>>>>>>

Brilliant. Thanks for asking.

<<<<<“Anybody who makes the claim that they have the next five years planned out in every detail is either
full of it, or is limiting the series to his or her own very small imagination.”
-Star Trek: Deep Space Nine”
Supervising Producer Hans Biemler>>>>>>>>>>

Another open-minded statement.

<<<<<<Now, modern Trek loves to do character studies. Tonight’s *DS9* was about Maj. Kira Nerys and
her confrontation with her past. It *did* build on her history as a rebel, so I think we should give Trek
credit for that. (Yes, I know it was less than exciting.)>>>>>>>>>

Give credit for something that was less than exciting? Not in this life.

<<<<<<DS9 has always had great potential. I think B5 has really put their feet to the fire. I heard alot of
people who have a stake in DS9 are really PO’ed that DS9 cost twice what B5 does, yet B5 wins all the
awards for FX. Has anyone noticed an improvement in DS9 FX the past year?>>>>>

What FX?

Strahd

 

 

 

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/19/97 2:58:49 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Give credit for something that was less than exciting? Not in this life.>>

Well, hello Strahd. I note from your online bio that you’re a physics teacher — I admire such a profession.
Surely you realize, as I do, that physics can be an exciting thing, if taught correctly.

However, physics can also be less than exciting. One can talk about Galileo’s alleged cannonball
experiment, but at some point you’re going to have to go into the math behind it. Now, if the math is less
than exciting, does that make the lecture entirely valueless? Wouldn’t you give some credit for teaching the
math, even if the presentation was a bit duller than you might ideally want?

Now, I realize that TV is not a physics classroom. Nevertheless, there are serious things that a TV show
can do, and to *not* give credit where such serious things are tried, even though the presentation may be
lacking in pizazz, doesn’t seem to be fair.

— A5.

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws: to Strahd
Date: 4/19/97 4:19:06 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd27
Back to this pompous elitism that says you’re not worthy to shine my toilet seat if you dont have
“Producer/Hollywood Writer” next to your name. I’m sorry, but Hollywood is full of the DUMBEST
people in the country, not the smartest. Having known the right people to get yourself a job is hardly proof
posiitve of intelligence, or is your lack of a job in “Hollywood” proof of incompetence. I’ve seen and read
some fan stories that blow the top off of ANYTHING TPTB have done in years.<<

I agree wholeheartedly with this statement –independent is the way to go with most filmmaking,
but it’s expensive and difficulty, and you can’t get around budget considerations if you want to produce a
good film.

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/19/97 5:18:32 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

>>Err, the 5 year number was correct. Joe has always stated the framework was planned for 5 years… He’s
just never said every detail of the 5 years was planned out.<<

I mean the how the DS9 guy pulled the 5 year number out of thin air. He didn’t refer to JMS specifically,
but how many 5 year arcs have you heard of?

Subj::: Re:The dumbing down of socie
Date: 4/19/97 5:25:31 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

Ditto your definitions of Conservative and Reactionary. I think alot of people mix it up because Liberals
will propose a change and Conservatives will oppose it and be accused of opposing change itself. And if
conservatives propose change, they’re accused of trying to turn back the clock.

Ok, I’m done with my pity party<G>

Prez4Life

 

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/19/97 5:28:38 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<To be honest, I didn’t spend a lot of time on it. I already know that you think the movements are logical,
I already know that they can be put together after the fact into some sort of structure (I could have done it
myself), but that doesn’t alter the basic fact that what we’re starting our work with is a meandering mess. I
applaud the time you spent putting it together logically, but I still maintain that that’s a heck of a lot more
thought than the writers are putting in… which is yet another of those “warning signs” I talked about – when
the fans have to be constantly “cleaning up” after the writers. (What fun we all had on Doctor Who: the
Movie and the McCoy years).>>

Can’t say I didn’t expect this, I’ll probally get the same BS from Strahd, but in not so friendly terms. Sorry,
but I didn’t make up one event in that post. EVERYTHING I said came directly from an episode. You took
the extreme viewpoint that their plotline was “indefenseable” and when I call you on it you chicken out. Just
the usual thing for some of the B5ers on this board. Well, there is some chance of a intelligent response
from Gary and Archer (I hold no hope for Strahd or Blobb).

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws: to Strahd
Date: 4/19/97 5:39:01 AM
From: Prez4Life
Posted on: America Online

>> I agree wholeheartedly with this statement –independent is the way to go with most filmmaking, but it’s
expensive and difficulty, and you can’t get around budget considerations if you want to produce a good
film.<<

Yeh, but you still wouldn’t be able to do a ST show. You can’t do anything in ST with permission for every
word from on high. So, if we could do better, we still couldn’t do ST. You could make up our own quality
Sci-Fi, if you had 10-20 years of experience and a name in hollywood. Then all you would have to do is
cram the whole history and characterization of our universe into a 2 hour pilot, while making it entertaining.
Then *if* you can con a studio into invested several million dollars into itt, and get the viewers to watch it,
you can bust your butt for five years before someone admitsit’s possible to have a good sci-fi that isn’t Star
Trek. Well, only if you’ve got JMS talent.

How the heck did JMS ever pull this off!?! I’ll never know.

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/19/97 5:39:26 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< All of the shifts you mentioned may look well induvidually, Acdec. But from here, the Big Picture
amounts to a custard ketchup pie.>>

Well, I was right about Strahd. Come on Strahd, you gonna have to work that brain a little harder to refute
my posting. Whats is it with people on these boards and the inabiltity of putting facts in their posts?

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/19/97 5:49:40 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<But we’re all suffocating on soap bubbles.>>

Another intelligent respomse. How about trying to refute what I say for a change?

<<You’ll pardon me if I dont take your word for it and mark down those particular eps in MY book as “OK”
to “Average” to “Mediocre”.>>

Frankly I don’t care what you do with your book. How about saying why thoose episodes are mediocre? Of
course, I don’t really expect much thought to come from you.

<<Back to this pompous elitism that says you’re not worthy to shine my toilet seat if you dont have
“Producer/Hollywood Writer” next to your name. I’m sorry, but Hollywood is full of the DUMBEST
people in the country, not the smartest. Having known the right people to get yourself a job is hardly proof
posiitve of intelligence, or is your lack of a job in “Hollywood” proof of incompetence. I’ve seen and read
some fan stories that blow the top off of ANYTHING TPTB have done in years.>>

Sorry, but I find most fan-fic to be horriable. If these people are so good don’t you think they would be
recognized? ANYONE can submit a story to DS9. A science teacher here in SA has sold two of them.
Heck, Ron Moore started his whole carrer selling a spec script.

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3
Date: 4/19/97 6:01:37 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I was thinking more along the lines of: The Search Part II, By Infernos Light, or the entire Dominion
or Klingon Conflict up to this point. The Shadow war ended BAD, not with a whimper. JMS promised a
FX fix, and delievered. Ds9 promises us an FX fix every other week, but I’m still waiting.>>

Well, if ya want an FX fix, STOP WATCHING because you are NOT gonna get it. They will have an
occasional FX filled show, but don’t expect much more than “Way of the Warrior”. Frankly their best battle
ever was in “For the Uniform”, not because of the FX, but because of the battle of wits bewteen Sisko and
Eddington. Just like the best battle in SF television history was in “Balance of Terror”, and they had crappy
FX, however the tension and the battle bewteen Kirk and the Romulan commander was wonderfull.

<<They shouldnt have had ANY political changes>>

WHAT? The enitre point of the Dominion was to shake up the Trek universe (that was rather dull in TNG
except for the times when political alliances shifted, ala “Redemption”)! Geez, the old complaint on this
board was that the Trek universe was too static. They just can’t win with you people!

<<I never said the klingons joined the dominion. I said they went from friends, to enemies, then back to
friends. A perfect Ds9 wishy washy flip flop.>>

Like I showed in my big post, that change was both logical, and fore shadowed.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Dax is a Bimbo
Date: 4/19/97 6:17:59 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Acdec, I know you’re grasping at any straws you can find, but please. A single one word mention DOES
NOT qualify as an appearance of meaningful terror.
The Dominion APPEARED once, and only once, in the second season.>>

You do know what foreshadowing is don’t you?

<<See above post about appearances of Meaningful Terror. Next you’ll be saying the Dominion influence
the breakfast menus of the Promenade.>>

“Meaningful Terror”? What is that supposed to mean? Thoose episodes either had the Dominion directly
involved. Ie “Hippocratic Oath”, “Starship Down”, “Homefront”, “Paradise Lost”, “The Quickening”, “To
the Death”, “Broken Link”,delt with political shifts that were caused directly by the Dominion, or setup
Dominion storylines for this season. In other words, they were like B5’s “arc epsidoes”.

<< “Blood Oath”, >>>>>>>>>>>I said I was looking for intelligence, not testosterone worship.>>

“testosterone worship”? That episode delt with revenge and honor. Dax’s conversations with Kira and Kang
were important charater moments.

<<“Past Tense”>>>>>>>>>>>>”OH! I’ll just walk into a dangerous slum ALL BY MYSELF!!!!!! See
how smart I am??!?!”>>

Yes, she was smart enough to get in and thereby help save the future!

<< “ReJoined”>>>>>>>>>>I said intelligence. Not eroticism.>>

That episodes was about love, and what she was willing to sacrifice for it. Thats not an intelligent plotline?

<< “Starship Down”>>>>>>>Knothead>>

Whoa, your intelligence amazes me! Her discussion with Bashir great.

<< “The Sword of Khaless”>>>>>>>>>>More testosterone worship.>>

Actually, she was doing testosterone controll. She was the only one that kept her cool.

<< “To the Death”>>>>>>Garbage>>

Frankly you amaze me. You must be a member of Mensa with the intelligent responses your full of.

<< “The Seige”>>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said>>

Lets see. She was instramental in helping Kira get too Bajor. But you will excuse me if I don’t go too the
video store to get you exact quotes.

<<<< “Invasive Procedures”>>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said>>>>

How about being willing to sacrifice herself for the good of her crew-mates?

<< and “Business as Usual”.>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said>>

Her scenes with Quark.
<<Well?>>

You bore me.
–AcDec

 

 

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/19/97 6:21:00 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Give credit for something that was less than exciting? Not in this life.>>

Frankly, I prefer a great story about betrayl, and forgiveness over mindless shoot’em’up. But I see know
were your prioties are.

<<What FX?>>

Try, “Way of the Warrior” or “Shattered Mirrior” if you want mindless FX blowouts.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/19/97 6:34:00 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Just the usual thing for some of the B5ers on this board. Well, there is some chance of a intelligent
response from Gary and Archer (I hold no hope for Strahd or Blobb).<<

Is that a flame ACDEC, an atempt at an insult. That’s funny I don’t remember attacking you at all, especially
on this topic. Well I might as well start. There is no planning on Trek, nothing is well thought out, they
make it up as they go along. They reach for the proverbeal reset button regularly. They have boring
character studies and pass them off as sci/fi. The characters are goody goody, and Major Kira’s acting
abilities are nill, she speaks in one tone, walks up to the camea, atamps her foot and wiggles her shoulders,
shouts out her lines and that’s it. Why do some women use her as a role model? Ensign Ro would’ve been a
better choice for this part but the actress had the forsight to turn down DS9.

 

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3
Date: 4/19/97 6:36:25 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, if ya want an FX fix, STOP WATCHING because you are NOT gonna get it. They will have an
occasional FX filled show, but don’t expect much more than “Way of the Warrior”. Frankly their best battle
ever was in “For the Uniform”, not because of the FX, but because of the battle of wits bewteen Sisko and
Eddington. Just like the best battle in SF television history was in “Balance of Terror”, and they had crappy
FX, however the tension and the battle bewteen Kirk and the Romulan commander was wonderfull.<<

Is this an admition that DS9 sfx are a sad and sorry effort in comparison to B5, at last the truth is out!

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/19/97 6:39:05 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Frankly, I prefer a great story about betrayl, and forgiveness over mindless shoot’em’up. But I see know
were your prioties are.<<

I prefer a great sci/fi story rather than bordem. Most B5 shoot ’em ups have a very good story, or haven’t
you noticed.

>><<What FX?>>

>>Try, “Way of the Warrior” or “Shattered Mirrior” if you want mindless FX blowouts.<<

I’ve replied in detail on one of these episodes on the Trek board. Is that two episodes out of 5 years for DS9
that have action in space……

 
Subj::: Re:The dumbing down of socie
Date: 4/19/97 9:40:43 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Prez4Life
Ditto your definitions of Conservative and Reactionary. I think alot of people mix it up because Liberals
will propose a change and Conservatives will oppose it and be accused of opposing change itself. And if
conservatives propose change, they’re accused of trying to turn back the clock.<<

But isn’t it interesting to see the liberals at work? I mean, after all, they’ve got it down to a
damn science! You’ve got to give credit where credit is due!! What I’m wondering about right now is how
the public who caught Bonior on the news actually perceived his tirade <g> He actually came up with a way
to blast Gingrich for doing a more upstanding thing than he or his kind are capable of, yet he(they) mock,
ridicule and cast aspersions on him because they know no limits and will sink to any depths of vileness. Bill
Clinton, God Bless him –he knew not to chuck any stones in that glass house of his. :)
Liberals are truly funny to watch, there’s no doubt about it. Unfortunately what we’ve got as
our alternative Party is one that has got to get some spine. I’m waiting to see just how the media is going to
:::ahem::: “report,” and I hate to even use the word here, but ‘report’ on the findings involved in Fred
Thompson’s investigation, and what kind of media ‘spin’ they’ll try to play on him.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3: to AcDec
Date: 4/19/97 9:53:45 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Frankly their best battle ever was in “For the Uniform”, not because of the FX, but because of the battle of
wits bewteen Sisko and Eddington.<<

Yes, the holo projector put an interesting spin on that one. It was different –both provocative and
daring, and something they knew they could make work.
I didn’t like the way they wrapped that one up though.

>>Just like the best battle in SF television history was in “Balance of Terror”, and they had crappy FX,
however the tension and the battle bewteen Kirk and the Romulan commander was wonderfull.<<

Yep, that’s precisely what I emphasized about the power of “The Doomsday Machine” as an
episode. The FX in a some shots were hokey, some so-so, but nothing that would stand up to today –that B5
wouldn’t put to shame! But did we care? Nope, because it was cool, and because it fired our imaginations,
and that was not a major consideration.

 

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps To Ac Dec
Date: 4/19/97 10:45:02 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

>>If, on the other hand, it’s a matter of time constraints, I would suggest that the shows cut short some of
the dialogue, or use certain editing techniques (such as voiceover segues, etc., previously discussed by some
other posters), to pack more SFX sequences in each episode.

— A5.<<

Can’t say as I agree with you, A5. I’ll take a good story over a space battle anyday. I know there’s a whole
camp of you SFX battle people out there, and God/dess bless you all, but I just don’t see it.
I think the story is the thing. I’d much rather TPTB cut the CGI or whatever FX for more dialogue and plot
development. Interestingly, I don’t think that B5 has an inordinate amount of FX. IMO, the Great Maker
tells the story just fine, thanks.
When people were complaining about the end of the Shadow/Vorlon war, a lot of them were disappointed
because we didn’t see the Mother of all Battles. I thought that resolving the war through intellect was a lot
better than another CGI sequence.
I know that there are tech folders, ships folders, White star v. Defiant folders, etc., but I just don’t get it.
I’m not saying y’all should agree with me, I’m just virtually scratching my head in confusion here…
Luna

PS One battle scene I DID like was the ground battle in Severed Dreams. When it was over, you could see
the dead and dying from both sides, human and Narn. Tells ya what war’s all about–death and dying, no
matter how “necessary” it may be.

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/19/97 11:15:26 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

A5 wrote:

>>Am I the carefully cultivated image of the sociologist?<<

I am the very model of a modern sociologist,
I know more than the scientist, the dentist and proctologist.
A plethora of opinions do I have on sociology,
I’m well versed in both Freudian and Jungian psychology!

I’m a student of religion, both the open and sectarian,
I’ve met the Dalai Lama (did you know he’s Presbyterian?)
I speak with God bi-weekly, and with Buddha quite sporadically.
I haven’t talked to Krishna yet–he dresses too dramatically!

I’m sure that I’m Napoleon, I look just like the Emporer,
But sometimes in the morning I’m convinced I’m Werner Klemperer!
I’m known to dress in drag and follow ants across the thoroughfare,
How can I feel depressed when I’m dressed up in fancy underwear?

I know you must be thinking I should talk to a professional,
Who helps out psychopaths like me in office hours sessional.
But I don’t think that I should go and visit a psychologist,
For…. I am the very model of a model sociologist!

Luna (who has had too little sleep!)

 

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/19/97 1:36:11 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Luna (who has had too little sleep!)>>

Luna, that was inspired!

Interesting you should use good old G & B — now *they* were the original theatrical impresarios. Quite
entertaining. If lack of sleep does this to you, then the solution to our problems here in flameland (oooh, I
hate that) is clear: Luna, post here more often, and NEVER SLEEP! 😉

— A5. :-) (Where is that brass polish?)

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/19/97 1:37:28 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I am the very model of a modern sociologist,
I know more than the scientist, the dentist and proctologist.
A plethora of opinions do I have on sociology,
I’m well versed in both Freudian and Jungian psychology!>>

More’n even a proctologist? Now, now, no need to get a PG-13 rating slapped on this bored — I mean,
board…. ;-D

— A5.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps To Ac Dec
Date: 4/19/97 1:38:58 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Can’t say as I agree with you, A5. I’ll take a good story over a space battle anyday. I know there’s a
whole camp of you SFX battle people out there, and God/dess bless you all, but I just don’t see it.>>

Me want ship go boom! Me want ship go boom, boom, BOOOOM!!!

— Admiral A5…. need more brass polish…. :-)

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/19/97 1:51:55 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I know you must be thinking I should talk to a professional>>

I most certainly DO: You *must* speak with a professional… a professional librettist! 😉

— A5, who has never been accused of being shy.

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/19/97 1:55:37 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Note to potential misintepreters: <<I most certainly DO: You *must* speak with a professional… a
professional librettist! ;-)>> <—- I meant she was so good, she should apply for a job with one.

— A5. (Sigh. Why am I so paranoid about bein’ misinterpreted today?)

 

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/19/97 2:44:24 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Interesting you should use good old G & B>>

Sorry, it obviously shoulda been ” G & S”.

— A5. Hey, so I made a mistake. At least I didn’t say “G ‘n’ R”. Welcome to the jungle. :-)

Subj::: Indepenant Trek?
Date: 4/19/97 5:01:49 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

“Yeh, but you still wouldn’t be able to do a ST show. You can’t do anything in ST with permission for every
word from on high.”

Actually Peter David will be doing a book series of trek that is independant of TNG, DS9, and Voyager.
Takes place in the same universe but without the “cannon” characters. I’m actually really hopeful for this.
Peter David’s one of the better Trek authors that they have.

Tryel

 

Subj::: Re:Indepenant Trek?
Date: 4/19/97 6:12:44 PM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

Tryel Sana wrote:

<<Actually Peter David will be doing a book series of trek that is independant of TNG, DS9, and Voyager.
Takes place in the same universe but without the “cannon” characters. I’m actually really hopeful for this.
Peter David’s one of the better Trek authors that they have.

Tryel>>

Anything Peter David writes for Pocket must be approved by Viacom Consumer Products. Just because
it occurs outside of the established universe doesn’t mean that it can be published without approval.
Stephen

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/19/97 7:34:01 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Is that a flame ACDEC, an atempt at an insult. That’s funny I don’t remember attacking you at all,
especially on this topic.>>

Actually, I was refering to your (and Strahd’s) habit of just attacking DS9 without posting facts. As you
yourself show in this post.
<< Well I might as well start. There is no planning on Trek, nothing is well thought out, they make it up as
they go along. They reach for the proverbeal reset button regularly.>>

Umm. Did you even read my long post? I showed how they DO plan stuff out. Of course you can’t refute
that post so you are back to mindless attacks

<< They have boring character studies and pass them off as sci/fi. The characters are goody goody, and
Major Kira’s acting abilities are nill, she speaks in one tone, walks up to the camea, atamps her foot and
wiggles her shoulders, shouts out her lines and that’s it. Why do some women use her as a role model?
Ensign Ro would’ve been a better choice for this part but the actress had the forsight to turn down DS9.>>

Typical Blobb post. 1. Most DS9 fans don’t find their “charater studies boreing. 2. The charaters are not
goody-goody (As I have already shown). 3. Nana is a better actor than any
other female in Trek history, and is sure better than most female actors on TV today. Just watch “Ties of
Blood and Water”.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3
Date: 4/19/97 7:35:17 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Is this an admition that DS9 sfx are a sad and sorry effort in comparison to B5, at last the truth is out!>>

Of course, if you want exciting space battles you go to CGI. But I still say that models look better.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/19/97 7:42:08 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I prefer a great sci/fi story rather than bordem. Most B5 shoot ’em ups have a very good story, or haven’t
you noticed.>>

Well, the battles involveing younger races are great. (Espeacilly “Severed Dreams”, and Narn-Centauri
stuff). But when they got too “Shadow Danceing”, and “Into the Fire”. Ick. Cool effects (though less
realistic than “Severed Dreams”), but a sorry story (IMHO). I’m very glad the Shadow War is over. Bring
on the battle of Sheridan vs. Clark!

<<I’ve replied in detail on one of these episodes on the Trek board. Is that two episodes out of 5 years for
DS9 that have action in space……>>

Yep, thoose are the only two real SFX blowouts. Thank goodness. I much prefer battles like in “The
Maquis”, and “For the Uniform”. A battle of personalities, not fancy FX.

–AcDec
Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3: to AcDec
Date: 4/19/97 7:49:03 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Yes, the holo projector put an interesting spin on that one. It was different –both provocative and
daring, and something they knew they could make work.
I didn’t like the way they wrapped that one up though.>>

The only thing I did not like was Dax’s comment at the end. It just didn’t fit. I still rate that episode as one of
the 20 all time Treks.

<<Yep, that’s precisely what I emphasized about the power of “The Doomsday Machine” as an episode. The
FX in a some shots were hokey, some so-so, but nothing that would stand up to today –that B5 wouldn’t put
to shame! But did we care? Nope, because it was cool, and because it fired our imaginations, and that was
not a major consideration.>>

I totally agree. My top 5 battles in SF history would go.
1. “Balance of Terror”
2. “Severed Dreams”
3. “Doomsday Machine”
4. “For the Uniform”
5. The Narn bombing scene in “The Long, Twilight Struggle”.

–AcDec

 

Subj::: B5 vs Star Trek
Date: 4/19/97 7:54:54 PM
From: Mystnex
Posted on: America Online

Well don’t take this the wrong way, Babylon5 is a great show, though they have never protrayed
the grand adventure of Star Trek where they are always traveling somewhere having terrible things
happining to them everyday, where it is your best guess what will happen next.Where they have to learn
painfully everyday for their mistakes.

Subj::: Re:Indepenant Trek?
Date: 4/19/97 11:49:44 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

” Anything Peter David writes for Pocket must be approved by Viacom Consumer Products. Just because
it occurs outside of the established universe doesn’t mean that it can be published without approval.
Stephen”

In the article (Starlog I think) it said the program has been given the broad approval rather than a leaning
over the shoulder’s view.

Tryel

Subj::: Re:B5 vs Star Trek
Date: 4/20/97 12:04:22 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<Well don’t take this the wrong way, Babylon5 is a great show, though they have never protrayed
the grand adventure of Star Trek where they are always traveling somewhere having terrible things
happining to them everyday, where it is your best guess what will happen next.Where they have to learn
painfully everyday for their mistakes.>

Babylon 5 never tries to be Trek. In this novel for television the adventure isn’t just in the single episode,
but throughout the whole series. And B5 does keep you guessing as what’s going to happen next. People
have been debating who exactly had Garibaldi, what did they program him with? What’s going to happen to
Minbar now the Shadow War is over? What’s going on with Sheridan’s father? These are just a few
questions. Trek usually only does this over two parters (ie Best of Both Worlds pts 1&2).

B5’s characters also have to live with there mistakes. Delenn has to live with the fact that Anna was alive
and didn’t tell John. Stephen’s recovery (yes Ac I know you don’t like it but it is a mistake ;-). Marcus who
seems to think he’s a walking mistake being alive. This cast has more angst than you can shake a stick at.

Tryel

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/20/97 5:02:06 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<Well, hello Strahd. I note from your online bio that you’re a physics teacher — I admire such a
profession. Surely you realize, as I do, that physics can be an exciting thing, if taught correctly.>>>>>>

Of course. My students love the clips of B5 I show them to illustrate Newtons laws and Momentum and
nonsuch. .

<<<<<<<However, physics can also be less than exciting. One can talk about Galileo’s alleged cannonball
experiment, but at some point you’re going to have to go into the math behind it. Now, if the math is less
than exciting, does that make the lecture entirely valueless? Wouldn’t you give some credit for teaching the
math, even if the presentation was a bit duller than you might ideally want?>>>>>>>>

The do and donts of educating and entertaining are apples and oranges. If trek is less than exciting, then it
is crap. (Well, maybe that’s too strong, but even in its own way, “The Inner Light” was VERY exciting.)

Strahd

 

 

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/20/97 5:11:31 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<< All of the shifts you mentioned may look well induvidually, Acdec. But from here, the Big
Picture amounts to a custard ketchup pie.>>

Well, I was right about Strahd. Come on Strahd, you gonna have to work that brain a little harder to refute
my posting. Whats is it with people on these boards and the inabiltity of putting facts in their
posts?>>>>>>>>>

Acdec, its not my fault you dont recognize a metaphor when its right in front of you. I’ll use smaller words
this time:::::

Every DS9 political shift may be adequatly explained at the TIME, and make sense at the TIME…..
But when they are put ALL TOGETHER, it looks like TPTB just change their mind whenever they are
worried about the ratings.
Do you honestly think changing the premise of your show 4 times in five years IS A BRILLIANT
IDEA?

Now, there’s an intelligent question, lets hear an intelligent answer….

Strahd

Subj::: DS9s mistakes
Date: 4/20/97 5:18:08 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<<Back to this pompous elitism that says you’re not worthy to shine my toilet seat if you dont
have “Producer/Hollywood Writer” next to your name. I’m sorry, but Hollywood is full of the DUMBEST
people in the country, not the smartest. Having known the right people to get yourself a job is hardly proof
posiitve of intelligence, or is your lack of a job in “Hollywood” proof of incompetence. I’ve seen and read
some fan stories that blow the top off of ANYTHING TPTB have done in years.>>

Sorry, but I find most fan-fic to be horriable. If these people are so good don’t you think they would be
recognized? ANYONE can submit a story to DS9. A science teacher here in SA has sold two of them.
Heck, Ron Moore started his whole carrer selling a spec script.>>>>>>>>>>

DO I think they would they would be recognized? Just like the best teachers always have the important
jobs? Just like the best men are running our country? Just like our TVs are filled with ONLY THE BEST
entertainment? :::::::::Chuckle:::::::::::: Nice idealism Acdec, but look out your window. Its not what you
know, its WHO you know.

<<<<<<<They shouldnt have had ANY political changes>>

WHAT? The enitre point of the Dominion was to shake up the Trek universe (that was rather dull in TNG
except for the times when political alliances shifted, ala “Redemption”)! Geez, the old complaint on this
board was that the Trek universe was too static. They just can’t win with you people!>>>>>>>>>

No, we’re just wondering why TPTB arent smart enought to be “unstatic” with something OTHER than
politics. There’s more to trek than that. Dont tell me you didnt know.

<<<<<<<<<<I never said the klingons joined the dominion. I said they went from friends, to enemies, then
back to friends. A perfect Ds9 wishy washy flip flop.>>

Like I showed in my big post, that change was both logical, and fore shadowed.>>>>>>>

And the ratings went down again too Acdec. :::::::::chuckle:::::::::::::

Strahd

 

Subj::: Re:Dax is a Bimbo
Date: 4/20/97 5:30:42 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<<Acdec, I know you’re grasping at any straws you can find, but please. A single one word
mention DOES NOT qualify as an appearance of meaningful terror.
The Dominion APPEARED once, and only once, in the second season.>>

You do know what foreshadowing is don’t you?>>>>>>>

Yep. Its something that had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the point I’m trying to make, and you’re
trying to avoid.

<<<<<<<<“Meaningful Terror”? What is that supposed to mean? Thoose episodes either had the Dominion
directly involved. Ie “Hippocratic Oath”, “Starship Down”, “Homefront”, “Paradise Lost”, “The
Quickening”, “To the Death”, “Broken Link”,delt with political shifts that were caused directly by the
Dominion, or setup Dominion storylines for this season>>>>>>>>

Perhaps. But are they an adequate substitute for the Dominion itself raising Hell? Instead of the same old
promise: “NEXT week! You’ll see it next week!” No. They arent. The Dominion are still
underdeveloped and underused accordingly.

<<<<<<<“testosterone worship”? That episode delt with revenge and honor. Dax’s conversations with Kira
and Kang were important charater moments.>>>>>>>

Why do you keep sidestepping this? I’m trying to find examples of Dax using her BRAIN. “Important
character moments” is not synomous.

<<<<<<<<“Past Tense”>>>>>>>>>>>>”OH! I’ll just walk into a dangerous slum ALL BY MYSELF!!!!!!
See how smart I am??!?!”>>

Yes, she was smart enough to get in and thereby help save the future!>>>>>>>>>

She was dumb enough to get caught. And the ONLY reason she got out with her innocence was pure dumb
luck.

<<<<<<That episodes was about love, and what she was willing to sacrifice for it. Thats not an intelligent
plotline?>>>>>>

Intelligent plotline does not equal intelligent character.

<<<<<<<<<<< “Invasive Procedures”>>>>>>>>Name one smart thing she said>>>>

How about being willing to sacrifice herself for the good of her crew-mates?>>>>>>>

Self sacrafice isnt intelligence, its self sacrifice. Highlander had an ep where a mentally retarded immortal
sacrificed himself to save McCloud. It proves dignity, nothing more.

<<<<<<<<Frankly you amaze me. You must be a member of Mensa with the intelligent responses your full
of.>>>>>>>>>>>

Uhhhhhhh Acdec? Thats “you are” contracted to “you’re”. Not “your”.

Was your statement an example of intelligent posting all of us traitorous B5ers are supposed to bow down
and worship?

<<<<<You bore me.>>>>>

Oh! Of course. Thats the intelligence Acdec was looking for. :::::;chuckle:::::::::

Strahd

 
Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/20/97 5:34:18 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<Give credit for something that was less than exciting? Not in this life.>>

Frankly, I prefer a great story about betrayl, and forgiveness over mindless shoot’em’up. But I see know
were your prioties are.>>>>>>>>

Seeing as how I will be the first to admit betrayl and forgiveness CAN be exciting if done RIGHT, it seems
your priorities are painting me in whatever “B5 animal” colors are popular with the trek crowd at the
moment. Ask me my priorities, and I’ll tell you. Save the insults for the Hall brothers. You shouldnt lower
yourself to their level.

<<<<<<<What FX?>>

Try, “Way of the Warrior” or “Shattered Mirrior” if you want mindless FX blowouts.>>>>>>>>

Nothing from THIS season? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Strahd

 

 

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/20/97 5:37:42 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<Is that a flame ACDEC, an atempt at an insult. That’s funny I don’t remember attacking you at
all, especially on this topic.>>

Actually, I was refering to your (and Strahd’s) habit of just attacking DS9 without posting facts. As you
yourself show in this post.>>>>>>>

Well Ac, just what is Blobbb supposed to do? Repost EVERYTHING he ever posted to PROVE he never
flamed you?
Quite the opposite. If youve got a Bloobbb flame, lets hear it.

 

 

Subj::: Re:B5 vs Star Trek
Date: 4/20/97 6:28:55 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<Well don’t take this the wrong way, Babylon5 is a great show, though they have never protrayed
the grand adventure of Star Trek where they are always traveling somewhere having terrible things
happining to them everyday, where it is your best guess what will happen next.Where they have to learn
painfully everyday for their mistakes.>

Hey, i’ve seen that show, it was called “Dusty’s Trail”, with Bob Denver and Forest Tucker.

Don

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/20/97 6:39:52 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< If trek is less than exciting, then it is crap. (Well, maybe that’s too strong, but even in its own way, “The
Inner Light” was VERY exciting.)>>

Well, I guess I would have to agree that it *is* too strong a statement. To cite a non-Trek example of
entertainment, *Berlin Alexanderplatz*, which I saw a long time ago, was rich, complex and mostly slow.
But it was interesting and worthwhile, though not necessarily exciting. The same principle would apply to
*DS9*.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Luna
Date: 4/20/97 7:23:56 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Luna457954
PS One battle scene I DID like was the ground battle in Severed Dreams. When it was over, you could see
the dead and dying from both sides, human and Narn. Tells ya what war’s all about–death and dying, no
matter how “necessary” it may be.<<

It was incredible –the whole thing, incredible! The intercuts between the space battle, C&C, and
where the breaching pod broke in were all damn incredible.

Subj::: Re: FX: AcDec
Date: 4/20/97 7:34:47 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Of course, if you want exciting space battles you go to CGI. But I still say that models look better.<<

AcDec,
I just watched “Atonement” last night, and I see superiority when they really put together a nice
sequence of scenes like that, sorry. I think CGI done right looks immense, but I’m not saying that models
can’t be effective also you must understand. Budgets matter, and I like a lot of what I see in B5 better than
what I might see in DS9. “Atonement” is just one perfect example of what I’m talking about.

Subj::: Re:B5 vs Star Trek: to Tryel
Date: 4/20/97 7:56:50 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Tryel Sana
Babylon 5 never tries to be Trek.<<

No, and thank God for that! As far as I’m concerned that’s a Plus!!

>>And B5 does keep you guessing as what’s going to happen next. People have been debating who exactly
had Garibaldi, what did they program him with?<<

The forces of President Clarke and likely the Psi Corp –has to be!

 

Subj::: Re:Bleh II: to Strahd
Date: 4/20/97 7:58:07 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd
Of course. My students love the clips of B5 I show them to illustrate Newtons laws and Momentum and
nonsuch. <<

Do you give them any bonus points if they answer a couple of B5 trivia questions correctly? <g>

Subj::: Re:Bleh II<–(Huh?): to A5
Date: 4/20/97 8:16:18 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, I guess I would have to agree that it *is* too strong a statement. To cite a non-Trek example of
entertainment, *Berlin Alexanderplatz*, which I saw a long time ago, was rich, complex and mostly slow.
But it was interesting and worthwhile, though not necessarily exciting. The same principle would apply to
*DS9*.<<
Okay, who’s seen “The Agony and the Ecstasy”? A good movie? Well, yeah. Did it take its
time in getting there? Definitely. A waste of time? By no means if you’re at all interested in that aspect of
the Catholic Church’s history, a very interesting period to be sure, and this says nothing about Michelangelo
and his painting of the Sistine Chapel, and how the film revolves around his relationship with Pope Julius II.
As far as I’m concerned I base my assessment about DS9 on what they produce from episode
to episode. I thought this week’s could have been better, but I’ll give them an “E” for “Effort” because it
wasn’t terrible either. I just think something was lacking when taking into account what Dukat did to them
and how he was going to allow everyone on that Station to fry. Sisko should have had him followed around
by an escort, yet they(Dukat and the Vorta) were roaming free –how quaint. And Kira told Dukat that the
next time she saw him she’d kill him, yet she was just fine being in the same room with him practically.

 

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/20/97 9:05:29 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Actually, I was refering to your (and Strahd’s) habit of just attacking DS9 without posting facts. As you
yourself show in this post.<<

Everytime I do post facts the Trekkers ignore them..look at the way the huge amount of polls and awards B5
gets are being pushed under the mat by certain people, just because DS9 wins very little these days. Is it
okay to say B5 has poor writing and not say why? Is it okay to say B5 has poor SFX and only compare the
worst shots with the best of Trek? Like Trekkers always post facts. Look again ACDEC, I do post a lot of
facts, when a Trekker sees them they ignore them and hope that they will go away.

>>Umm. Did you even read my long post? I showed how they DO plan stuff out. Of course you can’t refute
that post so you are back to mindless attacks<<

Yes I did read your post as I read everybody elses. The amount of U-turns that Trek is very obvious to me. I
am not making a mindless attack. Anybody who disagrees with you is mindless then?

>>Typical Blobb post. 1. Most DS9 fans don’t find their “charater studies boreing. 2. The charaters are not
goody-goody (As I have already shown). 3. Nana is a better actor than any other female in Trek history, and
is sure better than most female actors on TV today. Just watch “Ties of Blood and Water”.<<

1)DS9 fans would think that their character studies were not boring. Everybody else does!
2)The characters ARE goody goody.
3)Brains off Thunderbirds could act the pants off (Ban)Nana (The) Visitor. You are sadyl deluded if you
think she is one of the best actresses on TV. What awards or nominations has she won for her abilities? I
thought Terry Farrel was a better actress (even if she does play an airhead), along with that one that played
Ro.

 

 

 

 
Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/20/97 9:10:11 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, the battles involveing younger races are great. (Espeacilly “Severed Dreams”, and Narn-Centauri
stuff). But when they got too “Shadow Danceing”, and “Into the Fire”. Ick. Cool effects (though less
realistic than “Severed Dreams”), but a sorry story (IMHO). I’m very glad the Shadow War is over. Bring
on the battle of Sheridan vs. Clark!<<

It is your opinion and one | do not share.

>>Yep, thoose are the only two real SFX blowouts. Thank goodness. I much prefer battles like in “The
Maquis”, and “For the Uniform”. A battle of personalities, not fancy FX.

–AcDec<<

Produce a DS9 SFX shot that is better than a B5 shot…bet you can’t. A battle fot personalities, you maen a
boring character studies. You see I produced a fact with my posts, I used more than two examples and you
dismiss them. You say “Oh they are only two, that’s it!” The battle sequences in B5 are more exciting, more
watchable and of course have better SFX, that is a FACT supported by my post on the Trek board.

 

 

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3: to AcDec
Date: 4/20/97 9:11:24 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I totally agree. My top 5 battles in SF history would go.
1. “Balance of Terror”
2. “Severed Dreams”
3. “Doomsday Machine”
4. “For the Uniform”
5. The Narn bombing scene in “The Long, Twilight Struggle”.

–AcDec <<

For the Uniform…haw haw haw haw haw…
Subj::: Re:B5 vs Star Trek
Date: 4/20/97 9:14:44 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>> Well don’t take this the wrong way, Babylon5 is a great show, though they have never protrayed
the grand adventure of Star Trek where they are always traveling somewhere having terrible things
happining to them everyday, where it is your best guess what will happen next.Where they have to learn
painfully everyday for their mistakes.<<

Like thaey do this on Voyager and DS9 and not on B5. Totally wrong

PS Space stations don’t move much

PPS there is more style and grandeur in B5.

PPPS At least B5 learns form it’s mistakes, DS( and Voyager don’t seem to want to listen to anybody, even
the fans eg “DS9 is great but…”(a DS9 fan), and a B5 fan “I can’t wait to see what happens in the next
epiosde”.

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/20/97 9:18:05 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Try, “Way of the Warrior” or “Shattered Mirrior” if you want mindless FX blowouts.>>>>>>>>

Nothing from THIS season? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Strahd<<

You see Strahd Trekkers have to add all their good episodes over the entire season run together. B5 fans
only have to look at recent episodes.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Luna
Date: 4/20/97 9:20:11 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>> It was incredible –the whole thing, incredible! The intercuts between the space battle, C&C, and where
the breaching pod broke in were all damn incredible.<<

Notice how the similar scenes form “Way of the Warrior” looked fake when compared to “Severed
Dreams”, but then Trekkers never compare these two, do they?

Subj::: Re:Lorien
Date: 4/20/97 4:06:55 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

A5 wrote:

>>Luna, that was inspired!

Interesting you should use good old G & B — now *they* were the original theatrical impresarios. Quite
entertaining. If lack of sleep does this to you, then the solution to our problems here in flameland (oooh, I
hate that) is clear: Luna, post here more often, and NEVER SLEEP! 😉

— A5. :-) (Where is that brass polish?)<<

Why, thank you! How nice that such an esteemed person such as yourself should find my humble offering
amusing….

Luna (President, John and Delenn Mutual Admiration and Sacrificial Society)

Subj::: Re:B5 vs Star Trek
Date: 4/20/97 4:12:21 PM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

Mystnex wrote:

>>Babylon5 is a great show, though they have never protrayed the grand adventure of Star Trek where they
are always traveling somewhere having terrible things happining to them everyday, where it is your best
guess what will happen next.Where they have to learn painfully everyday for their mistakes.<<

Babylon 5, OTOH, is where they (with notable exceptions, of course), stay in one place and have terrible
things happen to them everyday, where it is your best guess what will happen next–where they have to learn
from their mistakes and rejoice in their successes.

Luna

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Blobbb
Date: 4/21/97 3:34:56 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

><From: G7
It was incredible –the whole thing, incredible! The intercuts between the space battle, C&C, and where the
breaching pod broke in were all damn incredible.><

>>From: Blobbb
Notice how the similar scenes form “Way of the Warrior” looked fake when compared to “Severed
Dreams”, but then Trekkers never compare these two, do they?<<

I can’t argue with you there because we both know it’s all to true.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Blobbb
Date: 4/21/97 3:57:19 PM
From: IDLM8
Posted on: America Online

What do you like about Star Trek?

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Luna
Date: 4/21/97 4:00:21 PM
From: IDLM8
Posted on: America Online

What was Severed Dreams about?

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Blobbb
Date: 4/21/97 4:09:52 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>What do you like about Star Trek?<<

Most of TOS, most of STNG, very little of Vayager and DS(, in fact it’s a mystery to me why I watch them
as I dont enjoy them, I’ll have to think on this one some more. I guess it’s old habit dying hard. I was
brought up with TOS, and I probably still watch modern Trek in the hope of that elusive good episode.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Luna
Date: 4/21/97 4:11:07 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>What was Severed Dreams about?<<

Visit the episode guide on this board and look it up, there is a brief synopsis under season 3.

Subj::: Re: B5 vs Trek
Date: 4/21/97 11:47:55 PM
From: TEHoth
Posted on: America Online

Personally I enjoy both , but on different levels :
B5 is great science fiction currently the best on the air right now // I watch it for the story it’s self.

Trek is great to watch for mindless entertainment // I enjoy it best with a group of females // voyager and
DS9 are well worth the Heckeledge

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaws
Date: 4/22/97 5:37:17 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Acdec, its not my fault you dont recognize a metaphor when its right in front of you. I’ll use smaller
words this time:::::

<<Every DS9 political shift may be adequatly explained at the TIME, and make sense at the
TIME….. But when they are put ALL TOGETHER, it looks like TPTB just change their mind whenever
they are worried about the ratings.>>

I still need it explained to me how logical political shifts, that are planned out and foreshadowed, is a bad
thing? Just because these shifts were not written down in the shows bible, does that mean the Trek universe
should remain static and unchangeing? Thats one of the things I HATED in TNG.

<<Do you honestly think changing the premise of your show 4 times in five years IS A BRILLIANT
IDEA?>>

They did NOT change the premise of the show. It’s been the exact same through all 4 years. It’s simply to
tell the story of the charaters on DS9 while they rebuild Bajor and explore the Gamma quadrent. A
changeing political backdrop (which is exactly what the Dominion were invented for, just read the
interviews back during the end of season 2. They were intoduced to shake the Trek universe up.) does not
equal changeing the premise of the series. Do you think that the changeing of the Narn and Centauri (Narn
were the “bad guys” in the beganing) was changeing the “premise” of B5?

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9s mistakes
Date: 4/22/97 6:02:59 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<DO I think they would they would be recognized? Just like the best teachers always have the important
jobs? Just like the best men are running our country? Just like our TVs are filled with ONLY THE BEST
entertainment? :::::::::Chuckle:::::::::::: Nice idealism Acdec, but look out your window. Its not what you
know, its WHO you know.>>

Sorry, but talent does count too. ANYONE can write a script for DS9 or Voyager. And if you really think
you can do better than them, put your money where your mouth is.

<<No, we’re just wondering why TPTB arent smart enought to be “unstatic” with something OTHER than
politics. There’s more to trek than that. Dont tell me you didnt know.>>

True, but DS9 has always been heavy in the politics department. And you people usally complain when they
do their charater stuff, or comedy, or just plain action. They just can’t win with y’all, so I’m glad they don’t
try to bend their great show, to make people like you and Blobb happy. I like my DS9.

<<And the ratings went down again too Acdec. :::::::::chuckle:::::::::::::>>

And this has what to do with the point I was makeing?

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaw
Date: 4/22/97 6:07:38 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

<<Do you honestly think changing the premise of your show 4 times in five years IS A BRILLIANT
IDEA?>>

Not to metion the uniforms as well!

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/22/97 6:12:30 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Seeing as how I will be the first to admit betrayl and forgiveness CAN be exciting if done RIGHT, it
seems your priorities are painting me in whatever “B5 animal” colors are popular with the trek crowd at the
moment. Ask me my priorities, and I’ll tell you. Save the insults for the Hall brothers. You shouldnt lower
yourself to their level.>>

Well, considering how you keep harping on FX, it sure sounds like it’s a priority to you.

<<Nothing from THIS season? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm>>

Nope, thankfully they have avoided the mindless FX blowout this year. Though they did have GREAT FX
in areas other than space battles (ie “Trials and Tribbleations”).

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/22/97 6:14:45 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well Ac, just what is Blobbb supposed to do? Repost EVERYTHING he ever posted to PROVE he
never flamed you?
Quite the opposite. If youve got a Bloobbb flame, lets hear it.>>

I was not refering to a “Bloobb flame”, just his quality of posts. I can bring out some real “gems” if ya want
me too.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re: FX: AcDec
Date: 4/22/97 6:16:25 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I just watched “Atonement” last night, and I see superiority when they really put together a nice sequence
of scenes like that, sorry. I think CGI done right looks immense, but I’m not saying that models can’t be
effective also you must understand. Budgets matter, and I like a lot of what I see in B5 better than what I
might see in DS9. “Atonement” is just one perfect example of what I’m talking about.>>

What I meant was that models are better in closeups, and beauty shots that when done with CGI are still
obviously computer generated.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/22/97 6:20:19 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Everytime I do post facts the Trekkers ignore them..look at the way the huge amount of polls and awards
B5 gets are being pushed under the mat by certain people, just because DS9 wins very little these days. Is it
okay to say B5 has poor writing and not say why? Is it okay to say B5 has poor SFX and only compare the
worst shots with the best of Trek? Like Trekkers always post facts.>>

Sorry, but you are refering to that stupid little squabble going on over in the Trek area, I’m not involved
with that one, it’s bewteen you, Strahd, Gary, the Hall brothers and DC. And you have not posted facts on
points you and I are discussing. Thats what I am calling you on.

<< Look again ACDEC, I do post a lot of facts, when a Trekker sees them they ignore them and hope that
they will go away.>>

Not all “trekkers” are the same.

–AcDec

>>Umm. Did you even read my long post? I showed how they DO plan stuff out. Of course you can’t refute
that post so you are back to mindless attacks<<

Yes I did read your post as I read everybody elses. The amount of U-turns that Trek is very obvious to me. I
am not making a mindless attack. Anybody who disagrees with you is mindless then?

>>Typical Blobb post. 1. Most DS9 fans don’t find their “charater studies boreing. 2. The charaters are not
goody-goody (As I have already shown). 3. Nana is a better actor than any other female in Trek history, and
is sure better than most female actors on TV today. Just watch “Ties of Blood and Water”.<<

1)DS9 fans would think that their character studies were not boring. Everybody else does!
2)The characters ARE goody goody.
3)Brains off Thunderbirds could act the pants off (Ban)Nana (The) Visitor. You are sadyl deluded if you
think she is one of the best actresses on TV. What awards or nominations has she won for her abilities? I
thought Terry Farrel was a better actress (even if she does play an airhead), along with that one that played
Ro.

 

 

 

 
Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/22/97 6:38:10 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

oopps, posted too soon. Now to the rest of that post.
<<Yes I did read your post as I read everybody elses. The amount of U-turns that Trek is very obvious to
me. I am not making a mindless attack. Anybody who disagrees with you is mindless then?>>

Considering you did not support your assertion as to the “obviosness” of them not planing anything out, and
you did not even attemp to post FACTS to refute my post; it is for that reason why I consider your posts
“mindless”. You did not put your mind into them.

<<1)DS9 fans would think that their character studies were not boring. Everybody else does!>>

Then all you are talking about is a matter of TASTE. That is purely

Subj::ective. Some people even like “Melrose Place”, or “Lost in Space”. Obviously millions of people love
what DS9 does, so if you don’t like it, STOP WATCHING!

<<2)The characters ARE goody goody.>>

Sure, terrorists are goody-goody. Sisko was real goody-goody in “For the Uniform” wads’t he? I’m sure
Garek was goody-goody in “The Die is Cast”, or “Broken Link”. Dukat is real goody-goody isn’t he, never
mind that he is responsiable for millions of dead Bajorians. Bashir, is so goody-goody he didn’t even try to
defy Federation law, and lie too StarFleet about his genetic engeneering. You see, your complete
disrewgard for the facts is demonstrated perfectly right here.

<<3)Brains off Thunderbirds could act the pants off (Ban)Nana (The) Visitor. You are sadyl deluded if you
think she is one of the best actresses on TV. What awards or nominations has she won for her abilities? I
thought Terry Farrel was a better actress (even if she does play an airhead), along with that one that played
Ro.>>

Lets see, if I am not mistaken she was nominated for a Sci-Fi Universe award. Also, what exactly is bad
about her acting? Do you care to give specifics?

 

–AcDec

 

 
Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/22/97 6:45:01 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Produce a DS9 SFX shot that is better than a B5 shot…bet you can’t.>>

It depends on what you are looking for. If you want SFX blowouts with a bunch of ships battleing, then B5
wins hands down. However, models are still much better for closeup work.

<< A battle fot personalities, you maen a boring character studies.>>

Sorry, but I don’t consider “Balance of Terror”, “Doomsday Machine”, or “For the Uniform” to be boreing,
even though they focused more on the people involved in the battle than the SFX of the battle itself. And
unlike Voy, DS9 usally keeps that TOS tradition alive. (With the exception of “Way of the Warrior”, and
“Shattered Mirror”.

<< You see I produced a fact with my posts, I used more than two examples and you dismiss them. You say
“Oh they are only two, that’s it!” The battle sequences in B5 are more exciting, more watchable and of
course have better SFX, that is a FACT supported by my post on the Trek board.>>

I won’t deny that they have more exciteing FX, but I still think focusing on the people involved in the battle,
is much better than 100’s of explodeing ships.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3: to AcDec
Date: 4/22/97 6:52:52 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<For the Uniform…haw haw haw haw haw…>>

There has not been a battle of wits on that scale since The Wrath of Kahn. With the addition of the holo-
screen, and the wonderful passing along of commands via NOG (Very submarine like), together with great
acting and tension bewteen Sisko and Eddington; is a recipe for a GREAT episode.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Bleh II
Date: 4/22/97 6:55:34 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<You see Strahd Trekkers have to add all their good episodes over the entire season run together. B5 fans
only have to look at recent episodes.>>

Actually, haven’t you got the point yet that I do not like mindless FX extravanzas? Thoose two episodes are
nowhere near DS9’s best.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Luna
Date: 4/22/97 6:58:57 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Notice how the similar scenes form “Way of the Warrior” looked fake when compared to “Severed
Dreams”, but then Trekkers never compare these two, do they?>>

Actually, Trek REALLY needs a new fight coordinator (DS9 and Voy share they guy). As a 3rd degree
blackbelt and instructor for 8 years, their stuff makes me want to jump up and down in frustration. Only
Worf and Dax seem to have any idea what they are doing.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaw
Date: 4/22/97 7:01:18 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Not to metion the uniforms as well!>>

At least they don’t look like PJ’s anymore!

 

–AcDec

Subj::: Re: FX: AcDec
Date: 4/22/97 7:19:07 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: G7
I just watched “Atonement” last night, and I see superiority when they really put together a nice sequence of
scenes like that, sorry. I think CGI done right looks immense, but I’m not saying that models can’t be
effective also you must understand. Budgets matter, and I like a lot of what I see in B5 better than what I
might see in DS9. “Atonement” is just one perfect example of what I’m talking about.<<

>>From: AcDec
What I meant was that models are better in closeups, and beauty shots that when done with CGI are still
obviously computer generated.<<

I don’t agree that models are better than CGI. Nice things can be done with both, but like I said,
“Atonement” is just one example of FX that stand up to anything DS9 has offered us all season and prior to
that even.

Subj::: HUGO Nominations announced
Date: 4/22/97 7:28:52 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Here are the official Nominations:

–Best Dramatic Presentation–

1- “Independence Day” (Centropolis Film Productions/20th Century Fox Film) Directed by Roland
Emmerich, Written by Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich, Produced by Dean Devlin

2-“Mars Attacks!” (Warner Bros.) Directed by Tim Burton, Written by Jonathan Gems, Produced by
Tim Burton and Larry Franco

3- Babylon 5 “Severed Dreams” (Warner Bros.) Directed by David J. Eagle, Written by J. Michael
Straczynski, Produced by John Copeland

4- “Star Trek: First Contact” (Paramount Pictures) Directed by Jonathan Frakes, Story by Ronald D.
Moore, Brannon Braga & Rick Berman, Screenplay by Ronald D. Moore & Brannon Braga, Produced by
Rick Berman

5- Star Trek: Deep Space Nine “Trials and Tribble-ations” (Paramount Pictures) Directed by
Jonathan West, Written by Ronald D. Moore & Rene Echevarria, Story by Ira Steven Behr & Hans Beimler
& Robert Hewitt Wolfe, Executive Producers Ira Steven Behr & Rick Berman

*NOTE: Babylon 5 episodes “War without End” and “Z’Ha’Dum” were nominated but J. Michael
Straczynski declined, no doubt in order to not split the vote.

Subj::: Re: FX: AcDec
Date: 4/22/97 8:40:36 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>What I meant was that models are better in closeups, and beauty shots that when done with CGI are still
obviously computer generated.

–AcDec<<

The Ds9 models are lacking in detail. Close up they look like Toys. Give me a CGI close up of a Star fury
or the Whitestar anyday. For that matter a later season close-up of B5. At least the windows don’t look like
hole drilled in a model with a 12 watt bulb behind them!

Subj::: Re:Hey Mytho, Strahd, Gary.
Date: 4/22/97 8:53:27 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Sorry, but you are refering to that stupid little squabble going on over in the Trek area, I’m not involved
with that one, it’s bewteen you, Strahd, Gary, the Hall brothers and DC. And you have not posted facts on
points you and I are discussing. Thats what I am calling you on.<<

I’m just ageeing with other people.

>>1)DS9 fans would think that their character studies were not boring. Everybody else does!>>

>>Then all you are talking about is a matter of TASTE. That is purely

Subj::ective. Some people even like “Melrose Place”, or “Lost in Space”. Obviously millions of people love
what DS9 does, so if you don’t like it, STOP WATCHING!<<

STOP WATCHING–now that’s midless. Melrose place and DS9 do have a lot in common, except the
relationships in the former are more realistic and better written. Come on, everybody is having a
relationship with everybody from another race in DS9, how can you take that seriously?

And to Nan Visitor..

>>Lets see, if I am not mistaken she was nominated for a Sci-Fi Universe award. Also, what exactly is bad
about her acting? Do you care to give specifics?<<

Big deal, she didn’t win, and so was Claudia Christ—-Ivanova…I told you she blurts out her lines as if she’s
on stage. She approaches the camera, wiggles her shoulders, stamps her foot and speaks. I prefer method
acting, I don’t hold for her style at all. What evidence do you have that she is one of the best Trek actress? I
stated that the actress who played Ro would have been better suited for the role, she has subsequently gon
on to make some great movies.

>>And unlike Voy, DS9 usally keeps that TOS tradition alive.<<

Rubbish Rubbish Rubbish…TOS had better plots and in the first season better writing. There are more good
stories in season 1 TOS than all DS9.

>>It depends on what you are looking for. If you want SFX blowouts with a bunch of ships battleing, then
B5 wins hands down. However, models are still much better for closeup work.<<

That’s a cop out, you can’t produce an example then?

>>I won’t deny that they have more exciteing FX, but I still think focusing on the people involved in the
battle, is much better than 100’s of explodeing ships.<<

Come on, with Trek you know the good guys always win..that’s why the battles are not exciting..on B5 the
good guys can loose, and sometimes get killed (and they don’t come back to life again, ie Scotty, Spock,
Wesley, Tasha Yar).

>><<For the Uniform…haw haw haw haw haw…>>

There has not been a battle of wits on that scale since The Wrath of Kahn. With the addition of the holo-
screen, and the wonderful passing along of commands via NOG (Very submarine like), together with great
acting and tension bewteen Sisko and Eddington; is a recipe for a GREAT episode.

–AcDec<<

Come on..it was comparatively dull to most B5. Exciting without a battle, try ZAHADUM.

 

 

 

 

 
Subj::: Re:Ds9 soaps: To Luna
Date: 4/22/97 8:55:10 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Actually, Trek REALLY needs a new fight coordinator (DS9 and Voy share they guy). As a 3rd degree
blackbelt and instructor for 8 years, their stuff makes me want to jump up and down in frustration. Only
Worf and Dax seem to have any idea what they are doing.

–AcDec<<

Yeah true, the fight scenes in Trek, including Worf and Dax all seem to be slow and iunconvincing. B5 with
less time and less money can do action better, ie the bar room brawls in GROPOS and The Long Twighlight
Struggle.

Subj::: Re:More ds9 flaw
Date: 4/22/97 8:55:59 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>At least they don’t look like PJ’s anymore!<<

Agreed.

Subj::: Re:HUGO Nominations announce
Date: 4/22/97 8:56:45 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>*NOTE: Babylon 5 episodes “War without End” and “Z’Ha’Dum” were nominated but J. Michael
Straczynski declined, no doubt in order to not split the vote.<<

Hmmmm..this looks like B5 is really in with a chance again then…..sorry brothers..

Subj::: Making it up as you go
Date: 4/22/97 5:01:54 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

DS9 starts up with the same basic theme as B5. We know that Odo comes from the Gamma quadrant and
his origins are a mystery.

B5 starts up and introduces the threat of an ancient enemy from the past hiding on the outer rim of the
galaxy.

DS9 introduces the Dominion, to threaten the Federation in the same way as the Shadows. Pre-planning or
was this because B5 introduces the threat of war first?

Odo suddenly becomes a founder, like was this planned? Did the Dominion not become known about after
the competion from B5. I know this, was a coincedence (oh yeah)!

Odo was one of the best characters on DS9 er I mean most interesting, so what do they do? Make him
human. They then open up all the possibilities of stories about Odo having to cope with his new found
mortality. They don’t bother so they turn him into a changeling again. Is this a cop out or bad planning, how
about a 180 degree turn?

And why we are at it what about bad plotting with this Dominion thing. If we are faced with the threat of an
invasion, why not plug the hole from the Gamma quadrant? How about mining the area, putting a sensor
network up around the wormhole and fortifying it better rather than relying on a space station and one
battleship.

This Klingon war thing .very badly planned ( if planned at all). “The Way of the Warrior” was probably in
my opinion one of the weakest DS9 episodes. The battle for DS9 was very unconvincing and I’m not even
mentioning the SFX. Six federation starships seeing off the entire klingon fleet? Pre-planning would have
had DS9 fortified several episodes ago, since they make things up as they go they fortified it just before the
battle, is this another example of making it up as you go?

If the Klingons are such a threat or even an annoyance why not blow their home world to bits or even just
blockade it, if six federation starships and a space station can see off their fleet then a blockade would be
easy.

 
Subj::: Close-Up SFX
Date: 4/22/97 5:03:17 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Now bach to my esteemed friends comments on close-up shots of DS9 models looking better than CGI..

Exhibit A me-lud….. “Walkabout”..as the new Vorlon ambassador arrives on DS9 we see a superb close-up
of the station with Sheriden space walking, followed by a great close-up of a Vorlon transport.

Back to DS9. The models for DS9, including the station are no good for close-up work. They lack detail
and definition, they are just for general purpose shots. Films such as the Trek movies and SW trilogy
construct special model sections for such close shots. DS9 does not appear to be willing to do this.
Subj::: Re:DS9s mistakes
Date: 4/22/97 6:51:47 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

“Sorry, but talent does count too. ANYONE can write a script for DS9 or Voyager. And if you really think
you can do better than them, put your money where your mouth is.”

And up until recently it seems they have had ANYONE writing DS9 and Voyager scripts. As a writer of
both fan fic and non fan fic stories I’d prefer to be known for my non fan fic. That’s what I want to do when
I get out of school, but writing fan fic is fun, and relaxing. And while not all fan fic writers are good, not all
of them are bad either.

Also do you know how much of a pain it is to submit a script without an agent? It’s difficult to get a good
deal without one if you’re new, and they cost an arm and a leg. Yet another reason why most FF writers
don’t sumbit their work.

Tryel

Subj::: Re:HUGO Nominations announce
Date: 4/22/97 10:40:30 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

><From: G7
*NOTE: Babylon 5 episodes “War without End” and “Z’Ha’Dum” were nominated but J. Michael
Straczynski declined, no doubt in order to not split the vote.><

>>From: Blobbb
Hmmmm..this looks like B5 is really in with a chance again then…..sorry brothers..<<<

May the Force be with Joe and his excellent cast and team. :)

Subj::: Education
Date: 4/24/97 4:56:38 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<>>From: Strahd
Of course. My students love the clips of B5 I show them to illustrate Newtons laws and Momentum and
nonsuch. <<

Do you give them any bonus points if they answer a couple of B5 trivia questions correctly?
<g>>>>>>>>>>>>

No, but just to torque off the Hall brothers, my next test will have the question:

“Which show is better, Babylon 5 or Deep Space Nine?”

Guess who gets to make the answer key 😉

Strahd

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3: to AcDec
Date: 4/24/97 4:58:38 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<>>I totally agree. My top 5 battles in SF history would go.
1. “Balance of Terror”
2. “Severed Dreams”
3. “Doomsday Machine”
4. “For the Uniform”
5. The Narn bombing scene in “The Long, Twilight Struggle”.

–AcDec <<

For the Uniform…haw haw haw haw haw…>>>>>>>>>

Ditto. What battle?

Subj::: Re:B5 vs Star Trek
Date: 4/24/97 5:01:07 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<< Well don’t take this the wrong way, Babylon5 is a great show, though they have never protrayed
the grand adventure of Star Trek where they are always traveling somewhere having terrible things
happining to them everyday, where it is your best guess what will happen next.Where they have to learn
painfully everyday for their mistakes>>>>>>>

Thats interesting, because even modern trek has forgotten how to portray the grand adventure!
Where as B5 DOES keep you guessing, trek always has one finger superglued to the Universal Reset
Button, and no one has learned from a mistake in years, particularly the writing staff.

Strahd

Subj::: Poor Ds9
Date: 4/24/97 5:03:56 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<You see Strahd Trekkers have to add all their good episodes over the entire season run together. B5
fans only have to look at recent episodes.>>>>>>

LOL!! How very true.
Excellent B5s of RECENT memory: Atonement, Illusions of Truth, Z’Ha’Dum, Epiphanies, or the One
when we last saw the Keeper, which one was that?

Strahd

Subj::: B5 victories
Date: 4/24/97 5:10:47 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<They did NOT change the premise of the show. It’s been the exact same through all 4 years. It’s
simply to tell the story of the charaters on DS9 while they rebuild Bajor and explore the Gamma quadrent.
A changeing political backdrop (which is exactly what the Dominion were invented for, just read the
interviews back during the end of season 2. They were intoduced to shake the Trek universe up.) does not
equal changeing the premise of the series. Do you think that the changeing of the Narn and Centauri (Narn
were the “bad guys” in the beganing) was changeing the “premise” of B5? >>>>>>

Thats not how DS9 advertised itself. When the Dominion first came around, they were touted as “A New
Villanous Direction for the Series”. And the Klingons were “Changing the Show back to Classic Roots.”
Those sound like premise changes to me. And the Narn and Centuari situation is apples and oranges. The
Narns never had the level the Dominion were given, right out of the gate at that.
So the premise of the show IS to explore the Gamma quadrant? Tell me, do you think they have
fullfilled that obigation? After 5 years, I still feel like I know next to nothing about the place.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:DS9s mistakes
Date: 4/24/97 5:13:55 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<Its not what you know, its WHO you know.>>

Sorry, but talent does count too. ANYONE can write a script for DS9 or Voyager. And if you really think
you can do better than them, put your money where your mouth is.>>>>>>>>>

Nope. WHO you know is most important. WHAT you know only keeps you there. Judging by most of the
crap on TV, I’m surprised by your position that Hollywood is filled with only the best.
Have you watched anything other than Trek lately? It isnt pretty. I’ll give you a hint: Pauly Shore has his
own TV show.

Strahd

 
Subj::: Sci FI priorities
Date: 4/24/97 5:26:19 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<< Ask me my priorities, and I’ll tell you. Save the insults for the Hall brothers. You shouldnt lower
yourself to their level.>>

Well, considering how you keep harping on FX, it sure sounds like it’s a priority to you.
>>>>>>>>>>>

I harp on unimaginative plotlines too. Intelligent SCI FI stories are another priority of mine, and another
area where DS9 falls short. On tonights DS9, Rom and Leeta had a fight about a prenuptial agreement.
OH THE HORRORS!!!!!!!

<<<<<<<What I meant was that models are better in closeups, and beauty shots that when done with CGI
are still obviously computer generated.>>>>>>>

Well, I didnt think that the film crew was on location………………..

<<<<<<<Come on..it was comparatively dull to most B5. Exciting without a battle, try
ZAHADUM.>>>>>>>>

A MEGADITTOS to that one……….

<<<<<<<Exhibit A me-lud….. “Walkabout”..as the new Vorlon ambassador arrives on DS9 we see a superb
close-up of the station with Sheriden space walking, followed by a great close-up of a Vorlon
transport.>>>>>>>

I’d forgotten about that great scene, thanks!

Strahd

 

Subj::: Re:Poor Ds9: to Strahd
Date: 4/24/97 6:34:13 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd
Excellent B5s of RECENT memory: Atonement, Illusion of Truth, Z’Ha’Dum, Epiphanies, or the One
when we last saw the Keeper, which one was that?<<

It was indeed “Epiphanies”. I hope this new ep, “Racing to Mars” is as good as I’m anticipating
based on how sick the promo for it is in and of itself.
The Keepers indeed. <g>

 

Subj::: Re:Sci FI priorities
Date: 4/24/97 6:38:34 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd
On tonights DS9, Rom and Leeta had a fight about a prenuptial agreement. OH THE HORRORS!!!!!!!<<

ROFL!!!!!
And it would be even funnier if it weren’t so tragic!
“Uhhhh, duuuumm …what ar ya don’ Leeta?”
“Oh, the Horror” is Right!! <g>

 

Subj::: ST plaques for sale
Date: 4/25/97 12:47:22 AM
From: REBinAZ
Posted on: America Online

I am selling:
Worf and Deanna plaque(from 7th season) #126/995 for $175.00
Crusher and Picard(From ‘Time’s Arrow’)#120/950 for $200.00
Ensign Ro #306/1994 for $90.00
Majel and Gene(Roddenberry legacy) (signed by Majel)#204/2500 for $100.00
Deanna Troi(from 3rd season)#493/2500 for $140.00
Lt. Yar(From Yesterday’s Enterrpise)#494/950 for $100.00
ALL come with Certficate of Authenticty from “catch a Star Collectibles’ OR ‘The Score Board’
(same company, they changed names.)

E-mail me at: REBinAZ@aol.com

Subj::: More Encyclopedias
Date: 4/26/97 9:53:22 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

I happened across anothe book that pretended to be the TV times encyclopedia of science fiction TV. It
listed up to season 3 B5.

It stated that B5 had poor dialogue, it implied that the jump gates were copied from DS9 (let’s not forget
that a wormhole is different and jump gates were used o Buck Rogers), and as a plus it said that B5 was
frequently interesting which is more than can be said for Voyager. Not one mention of any of the awards.

Now turning to DS9, nothing but praise. Not one mention of how DS9 mirrors B5, or how the idea of DS9
was allegedly copied from B5. I never looked at Voyager.

It went on to say that the X-Files challenged ST reign over TV sci/fi. I thought that B5 was the big Trek
challenge, since the X-Files is a totally different concept.

Subj::: Milwaukee, Wi. NEEDS HELP
Date: 4/27/97 4:35:59 AM
From: JDR x5
Posted on: America Online

UPN channel 24 in Milwaukee has put B5 on at 11:pm. at nite. This takes B5 out of the lime light of the
viewers. Many people have to get up early on Monday to start work. This isn’t right at all to put it on so
late. They put Xena and Hercules on just before B5. This also shows that UPN is covering up B5 because
they run Star Trek during the week 3times. They run the Star Trek movies at 6,7and 8pm slots not at 11pm
. Now how is covering us up… We need people to help us write to UPN for it unfarness to the B5 members
and viewers….
Please Help US and write to them to put them on earlyer!!

JDRx5@aol.com

 

 

 

 

 

Subj::: Re:More Encyclopedias
Date: 4/27/97 8:06:43 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<It stated that B5 had poor dialogue, it implied that the jump gates were copied from DS9 (let’s not
forget that a wormhole is different and jump gates were used o Buck Rogers), and as a plus it said that B5
was frequently interesting which is more than can be said for Voyager. Not one mention of any of the
awards.>>>>>>>

Ive come to expect this. Any ignoramous with a word processor wants to get in on the act, and more often
than not its just an excuse for trek propaganda.
Subj::: Re:Milwaukee, Wi. NEEDS HELP
Date: 4/27/97 7:36:15 PM
From: EP2LA
Posted on: America Online

<<UPN channel 24 in Milwaukee has put B5 on at 11:pm. at nite. This takes B5 out of the lime light of the
viewers. Many people have to get up early on Monday to start work. This isn’t right at all to put it on so
late. They put Xena and Hercules on just before B5. This also shows that UPN is covering up B5 because
they run Star Trek during the week 3times. They run the Star Trek movies at 6,7and 8pm slots not at 11pm
.>>
VCR Alert, VCR Alert. You should be taping the B5 & Star Trek shows!!

Subj::: Re:Milwaukee, Wi. NEEDS HELP
Date: 4/28/97 12:47:17 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Actually UPN has little control of it’s local stations. UPN in Chicago runs B5 at 8pm Thrusday against Must
See TV on NBC.

Subj::: War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 1:03:37 AM
From: Rick9719
Posted on: America Online

Its nice to see the war against the shadows effecting peoples lives in B5. DS9 has the dominion throwing
conversion triggers at Federation (allies) suns and yet life goes on at the station as usual. What exactly
would the Federation consider an act of war worthy of mobilizing Star Fleet. If trying to incinerate star
systems doesn’t qualify, what does?

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 1:50:20 AM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

<<What exactly would the Federation consider an act of war worthy of mobilizing Star Fleet. If trying to
incinerate star systems doesn’t qualify, what does?>>
Actually, the Dominion is now in alliance with the Cardassians; the Federation is in alliance with the
Klingons. These are opposing forces and presently the plots are testing the alliances. So what’s the problem?
None. I have a bigger problem with the portrayal of Earth in B5 and DS9. In DS9, the rebels were exposed,
opposed, and defeated on earth from within the Federation by CPT Sisko. In B5, there’s a flawed vision of a
Whimpy Earth- no Khmer Rouge, Viet Cong, Minute Men, Red Guard, Citizens of Stalingrad, Sendero
Illuminiso, Paul Revere, Che Gevarra, or Gen Lee. Just declare martial law and take over. That’s It? That
ranks up there with “Just Say No”. How simplistic! Just homogenous earth mush and earth slugs. Not
realistic! The EARTH?-no way! I repeat there would be blood running in the streets of earth, if this
happened. Let’s hope JMS begins to get it right, beginning with “Racing Mars”-can’t wait to see it! A fresh
ep from B5!

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 5:13:38 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

“In B5, there’s a flawed vision of a Whimpy Earth- no Khmer Rouge, Viet Cong, Minute Men, Red Guard,
Citizens of Stalingrad, Sendero Illuminiso, Paul Revere, Che Gevarra, or Gen Lee. Just declare martial law
and take over. That’s It? That ranks up there with “Just Say No”. How simplistic! Just homogenous earth
mush and earth slugs. Not realistic! The EARTH?-no way! I repeat there would be blood running in the
streets of earth, if this happened. Let’s hope JMS begins to get it right, beginning with “Racing Mars”-can’t
wait to see it! A fresh ep from B5!”

Ah back for more I see.
Blood did run when the order was given. There were senators who sealed themselves in the Senate chamber
when the Martial law order was given. You have to consider that most of the population is rather happy.
They don’t have much crime, they have order, and human beings mostly have a tendancy to care about that
and their personal happiness rather than the greater good. We also have the brown shirt er night watch
roaming around, and while I do believe that there are probably groups more like the Edelweiss Pirates, who
made sure that a couple of Hitler Youth didn’t show for muster, rather then the Viet Cong type.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 5:28:14 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Its nice to see the war against the shadows effecting peoples lives in B5. DS9 has the dominion throwing
conversion triggers at Federation (allies) suns and yet life goes on at the station as usual. What exactly
would the Federation consider an act of war worthy of mobilizing Star Fleet. If trying to incinerate star
systems doesn’t qualify, what does?>>

That’s an interesting question. However, the Federation itself has been infiltrated by Dominion agents to
some extent, so perhaps this accounts for some of the lethargy. Also, Starfleet is currently engaged in
patrolling its borders against Borg intrusions as well as rebuilding from at least two major encounters with
them. Finally, it is unclear whether the fleet in fact is being mobilized; perhaps it is and this fact is not
being publicized.

The Dominion threat presents a rather intricate political problem for the Federation. Through the efforts of
Benjamin Sisko, the Klingons have entered into an alliance of convenience with the Federation against the
Dominion. The Romulans have also been brought into this shotgun short-term engagement. Finally, the
Cardassians have cast their lot with the Dominion. Maneuvering diplomatically, to say nothing of militarily,
among these fellow political entities presents a major challenge to Federation policy-makers, and no doubt
accounts for some of the reluctance in overt military moves.

It is well worth noting that there are probably several dozen allied starships of several varieties within less
than a light-year of *DS9*, as I recall from a recent episode.

One minor quibble with the quote excerpted above: Only the Bajoran sun was

Subj::ect to the threat of detonation.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 5:33:15 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>In B5, there’s a flawed vision of a Whimpy Earth- no Khmer Rouge, Viet Cong, Minute Men, Red
Guard, Citizens of Stalingrad, Sendero Illuminiso, Paul Revere, Che Gevarra, or Gen Lee. Just declare
martial law and take over<<

Oh come on….give it up. At least they bother to cover things on Earth in B5 for more than a couple of
episodes. Once again look at military dictatorships such as Franco, Mussolini, Starlin Saddam or Hitler. I
see similarities to B5’s Earth. Maybe the people don’t realise whats goig on on Earth due to Propaganda.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 6:30:48 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Blobbb
Maybe the people don’t realise whats goig on on Earth due to Propaganda.<<

That’s the answer, and even a child could see it. If there’s someone they don’t like, or that stands
in their way, they reprogram him to their liking, it’s that simple. The rest of the population is tied into the
visual Earth propaganda machine –ISN and other network news outlets. The people have been

Subj::ected to programming on a massive scale, and there’s no getting around how the fascist arm of Clarke
and company want you to think –Nightwatch, the Psi Corp –*everything* is propaganda!! I wouldn’t doubt
for a second that the government is also using subliminal messages in their video transmissions. In fact,
we’ve seen it with Garibaldi, so they’re doing it –probably to the entire damn population!
So RAIDRONE wake up! The people are being led around by a leash and you can’t even see
what’s right before your eyes simply because you’re not looking for it.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 7:39:06 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Finally, it is unclear whether the fleet in fact is being mobilized; perhaps it is and this fact is not being
publicized.<<

I know one place the fleet ISNT being mustered and that’s where it needs to be- at DS9. One of my(few)
longstanding complaints about the show is that there is very little military presence at DS9. How many
times has the Defiant been lured away leaving DS9 vulnerable? It usually takes 2-3 days for reinforcements
to arrive. That’s plenty of time to overwhelm DS9. Remember the rogue Jem Hadar(sp?) that raided DS9?
Hell, that was ONE ship.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 4:19:15 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Maybe the people don’t realise whats goig on on Earth due to Propaganda.<<

goig!!!! I mean going…..typing too fast, my fingers trip over themselves.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/28/97 4:22:35 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I know one place the fleet ISNT being mustered and that’s where it needs to be- at DS9. One of my(few)
longstanding complaints about the show is that there is very little military presence at DS9. How many
times has the Defiant been lured away leaving DS9 vulnerable? It usually takes 2-3 days for reinforcements
to arrive. That’s plenty of time to overwhelm DS9. Remember the rogue Jem Hadar(sp?) that raided DS9?
Hell, that was ONE ship.<<

Why have the Trekkies not taken some basic military defence steps.

Mine the space around the wormhole! If anything comes through un-announced KABOOOOOM. Where is
the sensor network around the wormhole? Where are the patrolling ships? If the wormhole is the only way
through to federation space then why do they not do something about it? Riddle me that RADERONE.

Subj::: Toilets
Date: 4/28/97 5:14:35 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

At least they have toilets on B5, ever seen one on ST?

I know it’s a sad question.

Subj::: Re:Toilets
Date: 4/28/97 7:10:54 PM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

Blobbb wrote:

<<At least they have toilets on B5, ever seen one on ST?

I know it’s a sad question.>>

Which doesn’t negate the fact that STAR TREK has gone in the crapper …
<rimshot>
Stephen

Subj::: Re:Toilets
Date: 4/28/97 7:46:55 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

” Which doesn’t negate the fact that STAR TREK has gone in the crapper …
<rimshot>”

Letting your prejudice show again, Stephen? <VBEG>

 

Subj:::

Subj::: Re:SW Fiction
Date: 4/28/97 10:24:55 PM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

Maybe this is a throwback to an earlier day, but just why does the artificial gravity *always* work in the ST
universe? It seems the ships keep the A.G. even after life support and all else has been blown to
smithereens. Even the totally lifeless, abandoned ships still have A.G. Only once do I remember an
episode showing weightlesness (ST:Undiscovered Country). But even that one was a movie and not part of
any of the TV series.

Subj::: Re:Toilets
Date: 4/28/97 11:23:17 PM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

Tryel Sana wrote:

<<Letting your prejudice show again, Stephen? <VBEG>>>

It was a cheap shot. I took it.
Stephen

Subj::: RAID missed again
Date: 4/29/97 12:17:59 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<In B5, there’s a flawed vision of a Whimpy Earth- no Khmer Rouge, Viet Cong, Minute Men, Red
Guard, Citizens of Stalingrad, Sendero Illuminiso, Paul Revere, Che Gevarra, or Gen Lee. Just declare
martial law and take over. That’s It? That ranks up there with “Just Say No”. How simplistic! >>>>>>

Raidone once again displays the his baffling ability to miss what is right in front of him. I could have sworn
that last weeks ep: “Racing Mars” was based around just such a resistance group, but since RAID says he
has seen every ep, I must be wrong.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 12:19:38 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<Ah back for more I see.
Blood did run when the order was given. There were senators who sealed themselves in the Senate chamber
when the Martial law order was given. You have to consider that most of the population is rather
happy.>>>>>>

I seem to remember Mars being bombed for insubordiantion and colonies breaking away too. But of course
I dont ned to remind Raid, of that, because he’s obviously seen every episode.

Subj::: Quick Notes
Date: 4/29/97 12:36:26 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Just some quick notes regarding today’s posts:

I think *DS9* does have a fleet of ships around it; however, it *is* true that none of those ships seem to be
within easy range of the station, for whatever reason.

Also, commodes were seen in *Star Trek V*.

And, SSmith, you still haven’t answered my question about Kosh: Which Kosh would have said what you
said a few days ago? 😉 (Don’t say, “One of them” or “Both of them”, or “The ambiguous one.” That’d be
cheating….)

— A5.

Subj::: Re:Toilets
Date: 4/29/97 12:44:38 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Letting your prejudice show again, Stephen? <VBEG>>>

< It was a cheap shot. I took it.>

Just like Mike (Jorden who kicked butt against the Bullets singlehandedly yesterday)
Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 1:34:32 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<Ah back for more I see.
Blood did run when the order was given. There were senators who sealed themselves in the Senate chamber
when the Martial law order was given. You have to consider that most of the population is rather
happy.>>>>>>

Well, since in B5 we do not have an omiscient viewpoint, all we know is waht the characters know. At this
point we know their is open rebellion in the colonies and part of Earth Force, there was initial resistence on
earth, at this point we do not know how much of a resitence movement is left.

Don

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 1:38:39 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<<Its nice to see the war against the shadows effecting peoples lives in B5. DS9 has the dominion throwing
conversion triggers at Federation (allies) suns and yet life goes on at the station as usual. >>

Hey, DS9 has been infected with a serious case of inter-species lust. The amount of interbreeding in Trek is
incredible, cardassian-bajorans, klingon-humans, vulcan-humans. Imagine how the world would be if
biology really worked the way it does in Trek.

Don

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 3:04:58 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

” Imagine how the world would be if biology really worked the way it does in Trek.”

Actually Trek TOS made it clear that cross species mating can only occur in the lab, romance on the
otherhand…or should I say lust?

Tryel

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 4:49:38 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Tryel Sana
Actually Trek TOS made it clear that cross species mating can only occur in the lab,<<

With respect to a Vulcan\human hybrid, namely Spock, Yes, they did reference this, but I don’t
necessarily think it was meant as a blanket statement which should be applied to all races. Of course, it’s
possible that this is the case, but somehow I see the horrid image of Leeta suddenly carrying Rom’s
child(OH, THE HORROR!!). :\

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 5:00:15 AM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

<<What exactly would the Federation consider an act of war worthy of mobilizing Star Fleet. If trying to
incinerate star systems doesn’t qualify, what does?>>
And what would you have the federation do, go charging into the wormhole like Sheridan. (~”Captain, the
Vorlon and Shadow forces are going straight after each other, they’re ignoring us.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!”~
~”What, I won’t have that, set off NUKES 1 thru 4, Let’s kill some of them and make them notice us.
YAAAAAAAAAA”~
~”Captain, it worked they’re P’ed at us”~ ~”Good”~) I don’ think so, better to nuke the wormhole than go
charging around like Sheridan. But then, Sheridan is a character that, like Hudson Hawk, can’t die (for long
at least). And now he becomes distinctly Emissary-like in “Racing Mars”. Well, don’t tell me you didn’t
notice it. I saw you shift uncomfortably in your chair during that hand-kissing scene. To sum up, so far
Sinclair is Valen and Sheridan is becoming the Emissary, what’s that all about? Will Pop become the Pres?

Subj::: Re:Quick Notes
Date: 4/29/97 5:36:01 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I think *DS9* does have a fleet of ships around it; however, it *is* true that none of those ships seem to
be within easy range of the station, for whatever reason.<<

Freighters? Warships?

 

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 5:39:21 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>And what would you have the federation do, go charging into the wormhole like Sheridan. (~”Captain,
the Vorlon and Shadow forces are going straight after each other, they’re ignoring us.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!”~
~”What, I won’t have that, set off NUKES 1 thru 4, Let’s kill some of them and make them notice us.
YAAAAAAAAAA”~<<

Well yes you got it. Nuke the worm hole. As a great military leader why do you prefer a show with moogie,
little action, poorly choreographed fight scenes, poor continuity and romances (I think other people have
gone over these points on this board) rather than a well plotted action packed exciting show like B5?

Question to be ignored by RAIDERONE!

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 5:47:34 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

From: RAIDRONE

<And what would you have the federation do, go charging into the wormhole like Sheridan. (~”Captain, the
Vorlon and Shadow forces are going straight after each other, they’re ignoring us.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!”~
~”What, I won’t have that, set off NUKES 1 thru 4, Let’s kill some of them and make them notice us.
YAAAAAAAAAA”~>

:::Sounds of the fleet of White Stars that just flew over Raider’s head without him noticing:::

Uh hello… We covered this already. Sheridan had to draw them into a confrontation to get the truth to come
out. Or else this war would have ended like every other confronation they’ve had up till this point… One
side would ‘win’ and then they’d go back into hiding for another 1000 or so years. Sheridan’s tactics were
sound. Draw the sides out, stop them from desimating the planet below, and then let the other younger races
know what the hell was really going on so the Shadows and the Vorlons would lose their psycological
holds. I don’t see why you have such a problem with a simple concept.

<~”Captain, it worked they’re P’ed at us”~ ~”Good”~) I don’ think so, better to nuke the wormhole than go
charging around like Sheridan. But then, Sheridan is a character that, like Hudson Hawk, can’t die (for long
at least). And now he becomes distinctly Emissary-like in “Racing Mars”. Well, don’t tell me you didn’t
notice it. I saw you shift uncomfortably in your chair during that hand-kissing scene. To sum up, so far
Sinclair is Valen and Sheridan is becoming the Emissary, what’s that all about? Will Pop become the Pres?>

So you’re the one I had to call the cops on about peeking in my window. Seriously, Sheridan did die, and
came back. This is a major theme in many mythologies. Osiris, Odyessus, and everyone’s favorite Jesus
Christ. And the only similarity to Sisko’s ‘Emissary’ position is the fact that they are/were (in Sisko’s case)
uncomfortable with being raised to icon status. Sisko’s postion as Emissary is much more symbolic that
Sheridan and his coming back from the dead to drive the most powerful known races out of the galaxy. That
some of the more religous groups take it as a sign of divine favor on Sheridan’s part is a natural thing. It
happens… Garibaldi’s right about that one thing cult of personality is happening around Sheridan, even
though he doesn’t want it to. This isn’t a component of the Emissary, which is an office. When Sisko gave up
the office of Emissary he gave up the charisma that goes with it. Sheridan can’t give up the charisma
because it is inherent in him rather than in a office.

 

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 6:47:08 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

I should note in my last post that Odyessus didn’t die per se but did make the trip into the underworld.
Sheridan’s fall at Z is rather similar.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 6:57:33 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Well yes you got it. Nuke the worm hole.>>

Such an action might endanger the lives of the wormhole aliens. Besides, the Bajorans would not favor
destroying the temple of heaven. Since the Bajor is not a full-fledged member of the Federation, Bajor’s
sovereign consent would stand as an obstacle to such a move.

The wormhole can always be destroyed. It simply might be that it is not deemed politically feasible to do so
at this time.

Finally, keep in mind that there are many Federation citizens and other Alpha Quad sentients in the other
quadrant. Once the wormhole is destroyed, there would be no way back for these beings. As well,
Federation interests in the other quadrant could very well be destroyed if the wormhole is permanently
closed.

— A5.

Subj::: I got your Quick Notes
Date: 4/29/97 7:42:30 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>I think *DS9* does have a fleet of ships around it; however, it *is* true that none of those ships seem to
be within easy range of the station, for whatever reason.<<

What “fleet of ships”? Which ep was this? I remember WotW(and that TOTALLY phony battle) and
reinforcements taking days. The same in the “In Purgatory’s Shadow/By Inferno’s Light” two-parter.

 

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 9:24:37 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Such an action might endanger the lives of the wormhole aliens. Besides, the Bajorans would not favor
destroying the temple of heaven. Since the Bajor is not a full-fledged member of the Federation, Bajor’s
sovereign consent would stand as an obstacle to such a move.<<

The needs of the many outway the needs of the few or the one.

 

Subj::: Re:I got your Quick Notes
Date: 4/29/97 9:25:19 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>What “fleet of ships”? Which ep was this? I remember WotW(and that TOTALLY phony battle) and
reinforcements taking days. The same in the “In Purgatory’s Shadow/By Inferno’s Light” two-parter.<<

This would mean building some new models.

 

Subj::: Re:I got your Quick Notes
Date: 4/29/97 2:02:50 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<What “fleet of ships”? Which ep was this? I remember WotW(and that TOTALLY phony battle) and
reinforcements taking days. The same in the “In Purgatory’s Shadow/By Inferno’s Light” two-parter.>>

I recall that there were a fleet of warships (at least three or four Federation vessels) depicted in an exterior
shot in a recent episode. I can’t recall which one. The ships were within a mile of the station.

As for a large fleet, the Klingon and Romulan fleets may very well be in the sector, judging from past
representations. You have to keep in mind that they must defend their own territory as a first priority,
however. This may account for their lack of visibility in recent exterior shots.

The war with the Dominion is a drawn-out affair, besides. Stationing massive amounts of ships directly at
the station may not be the possible from the standpoint of allocating scarce Federation resources.

— A5.

 

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 2:09:43 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<The needs of the many outway the needs of the few or the one.>>

If that simple maxim were all there were to diplomacy, there would be no need for diplomats.

The Bajoran government must be respected as a sovereign entity, or else the Federation loses its legitimacy
as a fair-minded democratic organization.

It would be as if the United States were to station troops inside a small country without its consent. Even
during the height of the Cold War, such a thing ostensibly never happened, or at least was never supposed
to happen. This is part of what is provided for in international law. If a country were to station its military
forces inside a sovereign country without that country’s open and continued consent, such a circumstance
would be hardly distinguishable from the occupation of that country.

Recall that DS9 is a joint Federation/Bajoran operation. The station itself belongs to Bajor. Space near
Bajor, from analogy to maritime law, most probably is

Subj::ect to Bajoran sovereignty. Nothing official can be done on any large and permanent scale, as a
matter of interplanetary relations, around DS9 without Bajoran consent.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 2:14:15 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>~”Captain, it worked they’re P’ed at us”~ ~”Good”~) I don’ think so, better to nuke the wormhole than
go charging around like Sheridan. But then, Sheridan is a character that, like Hudson Hawk, can’t die (for
long at least). And now he becomes distinctly Emissary-like in “Racing Mars”. Well, don’t tell me you didn’t
notice it. I saw you shift uncomfortably in your chair during that hand-kissing scene. To sum up, so far
Sinclair is Valen and Sheridan is becoming the Emissary, what’s that all about? Will Pop become the
Pres?<<

More idiocy from RaiderOne. This course was already preordained since it’s part of the arc, and
I would in no way equate Sheridan and his return from Z’Ha’dum with Sisko as the “Emmisary”. Sheridan
was spared from death due to an extraordinary, exceptional being, who in case you hadn’t noticed it isn’t
around anymore.
I particularly like the way you try to pass yourself off as someone who actually likes this show,
only to show your true colors a day or two later. Perhaps you should consider changing your screen name to
TrekkerOne –at least that would be more honest than trying to pass yourself off as something you’re not,
namely a B5 fan.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 2:25:47 PM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Tryel Sana
I should note in my last post that Odyessus didn’t die per se but did make the trip into the underworld.
Sheridan’s fall at Z is rather similar.<<

From the structural point of view, myth is the sum total of all its versions. (Claude Levi-Strauss)

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 3:08:30 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<< From the structural point of view, myth is the sum total of all its versions. (Claude Levi-Strauss)>>

I particularly like his brand of jeans. <VBG>

Seriously, though, congratulations: Quoting Levi-Strauss here shows you have both good taste and talent. ;-
)

— A5. (Goshdarnit, now I’ll have to brush up on L-S. Wonder if there’s a planet I could move to with a 25-
hour daily rotation cycle?) 😉

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 3:15:33 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

How about mining all approaches to the wormhole. Closely monitor everything that gets through. If it does
not have clearence kabboooom. You can leave the wormhole intact. How come Dominion ships are always
sneaking through undetected? Set up a sensor network at the wormhole’s mouth to detect such ships.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/29/97 5:27:12 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Love the quote Gary. Haven’t read L-S yet. But if I remember Campbell stresses a similar point along with
Jung?

Anyway I put that down more for people like R. who has a very strange way of looking at literary references

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/30/97 2:40:46 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<The Bajoran government must be respected as a sovereign entity, or else the Federation loses its
legitimacy as a fair-minded democratic organization. >

Like the time the Federation handed over all those colonies to the Cardassians?

Don

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/30/97 2:47:09 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<It would be as if the United States were to station troops inside a small country without its consent. >

Hmm, I guess you’re not counting the many times the US has topled governments that were not frieindly
enough. Or countries that we liberated from other aggressors that we occupied for long periods, such as
Panama, the Phillipines, South Korea or even Haiti?

Don

Subj::: Get It Together, Please
Date: 4/30/97 4:34:19 AM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

Boy, you guys are disappointing, and this is a small point among many:
*From Gary7sevn <<Sheridan was *spared* from death due to an extraordinary, exceptional being, who in
case you hadn’t noticed it isn’t around anymore.>>
What show were you watching, Gary?
*FromTryel Sana <<Seriously, Sheridan *did die*, and came back. This is a major theme in many
mythologies. Osiris, Odyessus, and everyone’s favorite Jesus Christ.>>
Tryel is on the money! Except for the Jesus=mythologies bit. No myth, my
friend., the real deal.
When you guys get your stories together, let me know and I’ll jump back in. In the meanwhile, my original
statement about Hudson Sheridan -“can’t die (for long at least-” is accurate and stands. BTW, the “alien”
you couldn’t remember was Lorien (Gee, he was in more than one ep!). And as far as being a critic goes, I
am one of those who actively wrote to keep B5 on the air, as well as getting better time slots for it on
stations around the country. What have you gullible, buy every word/reset button fans done to earn your
wings, besides being insulting and of questionable knowledge (Gary 77 with foot caught in mouth).
Personally I think JMS prefers fans like me who watch and cheer at the good parts, and toss pillows at
unoriginality /borrowing a little too much. At least he’s honest enough to admit it when something like
“Grey 17 is Missing” pops up a tad rushed, borrowed, and undone. He needs to delegate more.
When is Martin Sheen coming down the river to dust off Sheridan? (The Horror, the horror) Soon, but let
it be Delenn, not Sheridan. (Oh, darn it, JMS has already told us about “David”-cancel the Delenn thought).
And why is JMS so fascinated with Ridley Scott. First, the Zarg “Alien” of Grey 17 and now, the “baby”
aliens in recent eps? (Knock off the “worm within” ploy. Look what it did to “Dark Skies”) Get back on
track, JMS.
Cheers, Raider One, “Flak is heaviest above the Vulnerability”

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/30/97 5:22:00 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Hmm, I guess you’re not counting the many times the US has topled governments that were not frieindly
enough. Or countries that we liberated from other aggressors that we occupied for long periods, such as
Panama, the Phillipines, South Korea or even Haiti?

Don<<

Since I am not American I kept quiet on this one.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 4/30/97 5:24:47 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>What have you gullible, buy every word/reset button fans done to earn your wings, besides being
insulting and of questionable knowledge (Gary 77 with foot caught in mouth). <<

Go back and read my posting on the reset button and Trek.

>>When is Martin Sheen coming down the river to dust off Sheridan?<<

What are you wittering about..no comparison with FFCoppola’s little flick.

 

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/30/97 6:08:42 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Like the time the Federation handed over all those colonies to the Cardassians?>>

Oh gee, not the Maquis argument. The colonies were settlements granted specific rights and protection by
the Federation. They were not sovereign entities in and of themselves.

The right of a political entity to determine its foreign policy is an adjunct of its existence. For the
Federation to have required the Maquis to assent to the colonial transfer would be a bit as if the astronauts
in Space Station Mir were to have to be consulted on whether the station needed to be transferred to
American control, and, even more, as if civil governments were to have to seek the absolute consent of
landowners before proceeding with zoning or highway construction. As to the latter, landowners are

Subj::ect to eminent domain power, and so long as they are fairly compensated they *must* relocate or
defer in order to permit reasonable zoning or highway construction.

The Bajorans are *not* comparable to the Maquis in any way, shape, or form, either politically, culturally,
historically, or otherwise.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 4/30/97 6:15:02 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Hmm, I guess you’re not counting the many times the US has topled governments that were not frieindly
enough. Or countries that we liberated from other aggressors that we occupied for long periods, such as
Panama, the Phillipines, South Korea or even Haiti?>>

Several arguments are relevant here. First, you will note that I specifically stated that the U.S. was not
supposedly one to do such things. That it allegedly may have done so would not have been in conformity
with general principles. Second, “toppling governments” has nothing to do with stationing troops ON THE
SOIL OF FRIENDLY COUNTRIES without their consent. Third, I don’t know what the real world
examples you cite have to do with your contention, since each of these countries at some point consented,
through democratic governments or governments-in-waiting, to American provision of troops (with the
possible, debatable exception of Panama). South Korea, for instance, welcomes American presence to this
day.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 4/30/97 6:20:02 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: RAIDRONE
“Flak is heaviest above the Vulnerability”<<

But it apparently isn’t enough to fend off stupidity. One has to wonder what show you’re watching
by many of the things you say.

><From: G7
Sheridan was *spared* from death due to an extraordinary,
exceptional being, who in case you hadn’t noticed it isn’t around anymore.><
>>From: RAIDRONE
What show were you watching, Gary?<<

You’re right –apparently we must be watching different shows. If there was no Lorien, there’d be
no Sheridan, but obviously you haven’t figured that part out as yet.

>>What have you gullible, buy every word/reset button fans done to earn your wings,
besides being insulting and of questionable knowledge (Gary 77 with foot
caught in mouth).<<

Coming from a guy who’s always sticking his own foot in his mouth, I’ll just file this under “C”
for crap.
And BTW, I’m critical of B5 where I feel it’s due, but you’re just plain erroneous in a lot of what
you say. I find myself wondering what planet you’re living on.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 4/30/97 6:22:18 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

Raider,

Ohh should I be impressed that you wrote to keep B5 on the air? I was one of the first who wrote to Warner
Brothers to produce the series, and I fought to get it renewed here in Bloomington. And your point is? Most
of us here have done stuff to contribute to the show. So your claims aren’t a big deal.

Second, there are different interperations of what exactly happened to Sheridan at Z. Either he died and was
resurrected, he was suspended between life and death, and was rescued by Lorien, or Lorien saved him
outright during the fall. So it’s not an issue of getting our stories straight. Good fiction has a tendency to
make you think.

< I think JMS prefers fans like me who watch and cheer at the good parts, and toss pillows at unoriginality
/borrowing a little too much.>

Last time Joe read your posts you left here with your butt in a sling. I doubt he ‘prefered’ your comments.
You complained rather than gave anything constructive.

“And why is JMS so fascinated with Ridley Scott. First, the Zarg “Alien” of Grey 17 and now, the “baby”
aliens in recent eps? (Knock off the “worm within” ploy. Look what it did to “Dark Skies”) Get back on
track, JMS.”

Uh, have you seen the arc? Do you know exactly where the plot is going? I doubt it unless you are the
world’s best hacker along with your other accolades. So don’t give us this ‘get back on track’ crap. And the
keeper was established back in WWE 2. which was before Dark Skies, and they look like the “Alien baby”
only when they’re spred out under a mircoscope being disected…What do you want? Geez!
Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 4/30/97 10:08:11 AM
From: Luna457954
Posted on: America Online

>>>><From: G7
Sheridan was *spared* from death due to an extraordinary,
exceptional being, who in case you hadn’t noticed it isn’t around anymore.><

>>From: RAIDRONE
What show were you watching, Gary?<<

You’re right –apparently we must be watching different shows. If there was no Lorien, there’d be
no Sheridan, but obviously you haven’t figured that part out as yet.<<<

This much is true, Gary, but you’ve got to admit that Sheridan *did* die on Z’ha’dum. That much of the
argument is correct.

Luna

Subj::: DS9 Fleet and B5 escort
Date: 4/30/97 12:11:29 PM
From: LRHuss
Posted on: America Online

In a world (universe) where you know your enemy can set off the local sun as a nova, you probably would
not keep your main fleet within blast radius. If your local supply base was, unfortunately, within the area
you would send as few ships at a time there for essential repairs and topping off. Now if the Dominion pops
Bajor’s sun the main strength of the Klingon/Federation fleet won’t be burnt up. If the sun is made nova it
will just be a (less effective) Pearl Harbor attack. it will mobilize public opinion for a hard war on the
Klingon/Federation side without damaging the essential military potential. As well as making any nuetral
powers moe likely to join an anti-Dominion coallition.
In B5 the possibility of Sun busting dosn’t (appear to) exist. So to protect your planetary (or satelite)
assests you post your fleet close enough to jump anything coming out of hyperspace. Differnt physical
laws, different tactics. LarryH

Subj::: Re:DS9 Fleet and B5 escort
Date: 4/30/97 5:30:34 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>> In B5 the possibility of Sun busting dosn’t (appear to) exist. So to protect your planetary (or satelite)
assests you post your fleet close enough to jump anything coming out of hyperspace. Differnt physical
laws, different tactics. LarryH<<

At least you see a sun near a planet quite often in B5. In Trek planets don’t seem to have suns, or if they do
you seldom see them. How many DS9 episodes have you seen where you see Bajors sun? One or
Two..more?

Subj::: Raiderone to planet Epsilon3
Date: 4/30/97 5:35:36 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

You have brought this Sheriden thing up before. You get credible explanations everytime. You’ve lost this
ridiculous argument. If somebody picks a flaw in your er logic you ignore them. Give it up. Try finding the
numerous ridiculous thing that the Trek universe does, the mistakes are easier to find.

Or maybe your brainwaves were fried when you were nuked, you did say you were exposed to radiation in
your profile didn’t you? Your memory has diminished to that of a Goldfish and you are unable to remember
events of more than a few minutes ago. Before posting read what other people have said, they answer you
and you just carry on. But you are fun. Thanks for the laugh.

Subj::: nah
Date: 4/30/97 7:42:57 PM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online
>> In a world (universe) where you know your enemy can set off the local sun as a nova, you probably
would not keep your main fleet within blast radius.<<

This doesn’t wash. Not only will the supernova tactic never be employed again it was promptly forgotten
about the next week. Hell if the Dom wanted to sow confusion in the Federation why don’t they just cause
our sun to ‘nova? If the Dom were to launch an attack DS9 would be their first target. Heck, the Fed could
keep ships just out of the solar system or at whatever distance is safe to avoid an exploding sun.

Subj::: Rip off
Date: 4/30/97 7:51:14 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Source of Rumour–Sky one text and phone in.(UK)

Voyager to team up with Borg (bore) to fight the most powerful enemy ever in Trek (until the next one).
Yes you guessed it the Shadows…er I mean an enemy who use organic ships.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 4/30/97 11:09:13 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<When you guys get your stories together, let me know and I’ll jump back in. In the meanwhile, my
original statement about Hudson Sheridan -“can’t die (for long at least-” is accurate and stands. BTW, the
“alien” you couldn’t remember was Lorien (Gee, he was in more than one ep!).>>

Sheridan CAN die. Lorien said he would live for no more than 20 years, barring illness and injury.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/1/97 12:19:00 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Luna
This much is true, Gary, but you’ve got to admit that Sheridan *did* die on Z’ha’dum. That much of the
argument is correct.<<

Luna,
Whether Sheridan actually died, or whether he was brought back from somewhere in between
thanks to Lorien’s help remains in question. I think he was brought back literally from the brink of death
with Lorien’s help, but it’s quite possibly that he did indeed die before being resurrected by Lorien through
his special powers. The fact is though that we don’t know exactly how Sheridan managed to survive the fall
into the pit on Z’Ha’dum, and while we might infer that Lorien had something to do with that aspect of it, it
is questionable since Lorien seemed surprised to see Sheridan himself, claiming that he was “the first one to
make it that far”. However, there is no getting around the fact that Sheridan would not have been able to
return to the living were it not for Lorien’s help. When things started to go black for Sheridan he most
certainly would have died if Lorien wasn’t there to guide and help him through it. I for one thought that a
powerful scene as he fell into the void crying out Delenn’s name. The last thing Lorien told him was that he
needed to find a reason for staying alive, and obviously Delenn was what he cared about most to make him
want to stick around, but even that in and of itself wouldn’t have been enough to save him from the clutches
of death without the help of *the First One*. 😉

 

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/1/97 12:24:18 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Archer
Sheridan CAN die. Lorien said he would live for no more than 20 years, barring illness and injury.<<

That must be a sucky way to live –watching your time clock wind down day by day like that as
the twenty year mark approaches. Of course, there are people who find out they’re terminal and have only
six months, which is probably a lot worse. Nevertheless, twenty years is still a long enough time period for
one’s own mortality to loom over their head like that. 😉

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/1/97 6:34:54 AM
From: RGitschlag
Posted on: America Online

>

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
>Date: 97-04-30 20:19:00 EDT
>From: Gary7sevn

>>From: Luna
This much is true, Gary, but you’ve got to admit that Sheridan *did* die on Z’ha’dum. That much of the
argument is correct.<<

>Luna,
> Whether Sheridan actually died, or whether he was brought back from somewhere in >between
thanks to Lorien’s help remains in question. I think he was brought back literally from >the brink of death
with Lorien’s help, but it’s quite possibly that he did indeed die before being >resurrected by Lorien through
his special powers. The fact is though that we don’t know exactly >how Sheridan managed to survive the
fall into the pit on Z’Ha’dum, and while we might infer that >Lorien had something to do with that aspect of
it, it is questionable since Lorien seemed >surprised to see Sheridan himself, claiming that he was “the first
one to make it that far”. >However, there is no getting around the fact that Sheridan would not have been
able to return to >the living were it not for Lorien’s help. When things started to go black for Sheridan he
most >certainly would have died if Lorien wasn’t there to guide and help him through it. I for one thought
>that a powerful scene as he fell into the void crying out Delenn’s name. The last thing Lorien told >him
was that he needed to find a reason for staying alive, and obviously Delenn was what he >cared about most
to make him want to stick around, but even that in and of itself wouldn’t have >been enough to save him
from the clutches of death without the help of *the First One*. 😉

Fairly good, except for a couple of things Lorien *said*

1. Lorien said that he couldn’t create life. He did say that he could blow on the embers (or something like
that), which implies that Sheridan wouldn’t be “all dead, just *mostly* dead” (with apologies to Billy
Crystal).

2. In the same scene, Sheridan asked Lorien if he would catch him, and Lorien answered “I caught you
before, and I can do it again”. So he must have been the one who shielded Sheridan from the ‘boom’, ’cause
he couldn’t have falled far enough in the few seconds he had to be shielded from the explosion. He would
have been vaproized in the fireball (even a 5-mile free fall wouldn’t have been enough distance, and would
have taken several minutes to reach the bottom, which he didn’t have anyway)
Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/1/97 6:38:48 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

“Fairly good, except for a couple of things Lorien *said*”

Lorien also tells Delenn:

“He was dying…He was dead.”

I think the can’t create life is that he can’t create new life…but he can restore life to a form that has it or once
had it.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/1/97 12:04:05 PM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

< Lorien said that he couldn’t create life. He did say that he could blow on the embers (or something like
that), which implies that Sheridan wouldn’t be “all dead, just *mostly* dead” (with apologies to Billy
Crystal).>

That statement and the one that states he has 20 years before he will “stop”, leads me to believe that
Sheridan was not brought back to “life”, merely animated by Loriens lifeforce. The 20 years being all his
body can handle safely from the alien energy.

Don

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 5/1/97 12:11:42 PM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<I don’t know what the real world examples you cite have to do with your contention, since each of these
countries at some point consented, through democratic governments or governments-in-waiting, to
American provision of troops (with the possible, debatable exception of Panama). South Korea, for
instance, welcomes American presence to this day.>

1. Just like the Bajoran, provisional government asked the Federation to provide a military presence by
administering DS9.

2. The wormhole being the most likely point that a Dom attack would come from, it would be a very logical
strategic move to place a large concentration of forces within striking distance of a major invasion
chokepoint.

3. I’m sure that the Federation, like the U.S., never does things that it sees are in its best interests, no matter
the harm it causes to minor countries.

Don

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 5/1/97 1:50:25 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<1. Just like the Bajoran, provisional government asked the Federation to provide a military presence by
administering DS9.>>

A major increase in military forces may well exceed the “administration” function referenced in your quote.
In any case, in context, to “administer” a facility does not mean to station troops; it means to provide for the
joint operation of the station.

An analogy might be a large offshore oil platform a mile or so off the coast of a small country (“A”) in
today’s world. Suppose that a large power (“B”) were to agree to administer that platform because the
smaller country were to lack the expertise to run it or due to financial arrangements. If, upon threat of war,
the large power were to send large concentrations of warships to protect the platform, it probable this could
only be upon the consent of the of the small country since the warships would have to traverse Country B’s
territorial waters. This is much clearer if, to reverse the situation, if Country A were the U.S. and Country B
were, for example, any other country.

<<2. The wormhole being the most likely point that a Dom attack would come from, it would be a very
logical strategic move to place a large concentration of forces within striking distance of a major invasion
chokepoint.>>

Yes, but this does not probable considerations of interplanetary law.

<3. I’m sure that the Federation, like the U.S., never does things that it sees are in its best interests, no
matter the harm it causes to minor countries.>>

Especially in 24th century Federation foreign policy, might does not make right.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:War changes things
Date: 5/1/97 2:06:08 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Corrected sentences in previous post:

<<This is much clearer if, to reverse the situation, Country A were the U.S. and Country B were, for
example, any other country.>>

<<Yes, but this does not void probable considerations of interplanetary law.>>

Sorry.

— A5.

Subj::: Got Brain?
Date: 5/1/97 8:16:54 PM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

Some more hilarious Raidone “SWISH”es

<<<<<“And why is JMS so fascinated with Ridley Scott. First, the Zarg “Alien” of Grey 17 and now, the
“baby” aliens in recent eps? (Knock off the “worm within” ploy. Look what it did to “Dark Skies”) Get
back on track, JMS.”>>>>>>>>>

Uh, have you seen the arc? Do you know exactly where the plot is going?>>>>>

From the complete factual bankruptcy of his posts, I’m skeptical.

<<<< I doubt it unless you are the world’s best hacker along with your other accolades. So don’t give us this
‘get back on track’ crap. And the keeper was established back in WWE 2. which was before Dark
Skies,>>>>>

Dont bother telling Raid the obvious. He missed it the first time around, and I doubt he’ll bother to keep his
facts together in the future either.
I stand by my assertion that he has yet to see a SINGLE ep.

Strahd

Subj::: Why we should keep Raider1
Date: 5/1/97 8:38:24 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

I thave thought of a single reason to keep Raider around… Utterly destroying his posts as a form of
agression therapy for those of us who have finals coming up. I find the venting very relaxing….

Tryel (with tongue firmly placed in cheek)

Subj::: Re:Why we should keep Raider
Date: 5/1/97 9:20:10 PM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

From: Tryel Sana

<<I thave thought of a single reason to keep Raider around… Utterly destroying his posts as a form of
agression therapy for those of us who have finals coming up. I find the venting very relaxing….>>

I don’t know why you guys even bother responding to this garbage. It’s obvious s/he comes in here to
taunt B5 fans. The thrill s/he gets is from watching all of you get upset. As soon as you stop responding,
the thrill is gone, and eventually s/he gives up and goes away.
Aren’t there better things to do with your time? Like finding a cure for cancer? Donating a kidney? Or
most important of all, watching B5?
Stephen

 

Subj::: Re:Why we should keep Raider
Date: 5/1/97 11:00:54 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online
< I don’t know why you guys even bother responding to this garbage. It’s obvious s/he comes in here to
taunt B5 fans. The thrill s/he gets is from watching all of you get upset. As soon as you stop responding,
the thrill is gone, and eventually s/he gives up and goes away.
Aren’t there better things to do with your time? Like finding a cure for cancer? Donating a kidney? Or
most important of all, watching B5?
Stephen>

Because I’ve got finals and poking holes in his/her drivel is very relaxing. Other then that my days have
been dedicated to writing papers on Religion and its effects on Ethics, the war in the former Yugoslavia,
and The Bible and B5. I’ve also been studing. So I’m releasing stress by using Raider’s posts as a cat toy.

Oh my fiance is the one working on the Cancer thingy. I just write fiction.

Tryel

 

Subj::: Re:Why we should keep Raider
Date: 5/2/97 12:35:38 AM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

From: Tryel Sana

<< … the war in the former Yugoslavia … >>

I hope you saw my interview of Mira Furlan in the current Sci-Fi Universe. Americans who wonder why
we should care about what’s happening in the Balkans should read what Mira experienced.
(If you didn’t, I can e-mail it to you. Let me know if you can handle Word for Windows 6.0, or if it has
to be a different format.)
Stephen

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/2/97 1:59:24 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: RGitschlag
2. In the same scene, Sheridan asked Lorien if he would catch him, and Lorien answered “I caught you
before, and I can do it again”. So he must have been the one who shielded Sheridan from the ‘boom’, ’cause
he couldn’t have falled far enough in the few seconds he had to be shielded from the explosion. He would
have been vaproized in the fireball (even a 5-mile free fall wouldn’t have been enough distance, and would
have taken several minutes to reach the bottom, which he didn’t have anyway)<<

Right! How did I forget about that line?!!
Thanks RG. 😉

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/2/97 2:06:14 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<From: RGitschlag
Lorien said that he couldn’t create life. He did say that he could blow on the embers (or something like
that), which implies that Sheridan wouldn’t be “all dead, just *mostly* dead” (with apologies to Billy
Crystal).>

>>From: Don at B4
That statement and the one that states he has 20 years before he will “stop”, leads me to believe that
Sheridan was not brought back to “life”, merely animated by Loriens lifeforce. The 20 years being all his
body can handle safely from the alien energy.<<

This is precisely right I do believe. It’s exactly how I read it as well. 😉

 

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/2/97 1:08:33 PM
From: ALYS 10
Posted on: America Online

Gary7,

I took that statement of Lorien’s to be that that was all the energy he had left to give Sheridan. I seem to
remember him drooping in the background after recharging Sheridan post-Kosh II fight.
After all, he was taking from his own energy to give to Sheridan, and would not have an infinite supply.
Different take on the same

Subj::ect.

Alys

Subj::: ATTENTION! Delenn’s New Move
Date: 5/3/97 1:54:03 AM
From: ZapataMage
Posted on: America Online

As most of us have seen the new B5 episode, “Lines of Communication”, I believe most of us Delenn fans
would agree that Delenn really kicked @$$. And she deserves to be commemorated!
In the episode, Delenn’s White Star fleet is attacked by the Shadow Allies, the Drak. While
escaping, White Star #14 is destroyed and the others are partly damaged. Instead of going back to Babylon
5, she goes back and ravages the Drak mothership!! But towards the end of the battle, Delenns orders her
ship to pass the Drak ship, get right in front of the jumpgate, flip upside down to face it and fire at it with all
it’s got. The result: Drak ship is completely destroyed.
You might say, “yeah, so?”. Well, I think that “maneuver” should be named after Delenn. Kirk got
one, Picard got one, even Sisko and Luke got some. So why shouldn’t Delenn get one!! From now on, I
hope everyone will recognize that that particular manuever should be called, Delenn’s “End This” manuever
(because that was what she said to obliterate the Drak ship).

So spread the word!!! Delenn has her own manuever!!! Delenn’s “End This” Manuever.

JOY!! RAPTURE!!

Thank you for reading this.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/3/97 8:38:59 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: ALYS 10
I took that statement of Lorien’s to be that that was all the energy he had left to give Sheridan<<

Well, either it was all Lorien could give Sheridan, or the best he could do for him, otherwise perhaps
he would have given him more if that would have solved the problem. The problem is that Sheridan’s cells
are degrading at an accelerated rate, and I don’t think Lorien could have remedied that because it wasn’t
within his power to change.

Subj::: Re:Get It Together, Please
Date: 5/3/97 4:24:13 PM
From: ALYS 10
Posted on: America Online

Point taken, Gary. I had forgotten about Sheridan’s cells degrading. Thanks for reminding me.

Alys :>)

Subj::: ST vs B5
Date: 5/3/97 7:02:49 PM
From: Qmpec
Posted on: America Online

As I am new to this section of the web, and somewhat new to Babylon-5 I am somewhat mystified as to the
antagonism I see in the media torwards Star Trek from B5 creators and fans. First of all, I think Star Trek
Deep Space 9 is not only the best science fiction series out there at the moment, but by far the best of the
Trek series, with Voyager definately being the worst.
However, despite the rating of DS9 as the best, Babylon 5 is very close to being the best. Only slightly
lower then DS9. Why do I like DS9 better? Very simply, It’s the first science fiction series I’ve ever seen
where the term ensemble cast actually defines what it means. It’s not Kirk, Spock, Mccoy and the rest of the
guys, or Picard, Troi, Data, Worf and the rest of the guys. I truly feel that DS9 has done the best job of
exploring all of their characters as well as coming up with some damn good supporting characters.
Sometimes you get a story that falls out of the overall plot-line for the season, but that’s okay.
What makes B5 so damn good is the fact that it’s one giant story, told over the course of five seasons.
That’s also it’s major drawback. See, I missed the first three years of the series. Being in the Navy and
stationed over in Japan for two of those years, I came back and started watching regularly in the middle of
season 4. This means that I don’t really understand what the heck is going on. I can read the plot synopsis’s
all I want, but that really won’t help.
As to which is better. Well, I’m a trekkie, and I love DS9. But I also love B5, simply not quite as much as
DS9. But I like it because it’s differant then Star Trek. Much differant then Star Trek.
And here’s the kicker. Both are better, hands down, then any of the Star Wars movies.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/3/97 7:58:30 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>And here’s the kicker. Both are better, hands down, then any of the Star Wars movies.<<

I wasn’t going to comment up to this point. Although I have a different opinion, especially with DS9 (It’s
dung), the post was a well argued opinion. I disagree totally with the above. You cannot compare DS9 to
SW, SW is watchable (as is B5).

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/3/97 11:38:25 PM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<I am somewhat mystified as to the antagonism I see in the media torwards Star Trek from B5 creators
and fans.>>

Have you ever seen the antagonism towards B5 from ST fans? I’m a huge fan of both universes and I have
been called more insulting names by ST-fanatics then I care to reprint, all for the sin of liking B5.

What hostility towards St have you seen from B5 creators?
(not saying it doesn’t exist, I know it does. I’m just wondering.)

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 3:15:43 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Have you ever seen the antagonism towards B5 from ST fans? I’m a huge fan of both universes and I
have been called more insulting names by ST-fanatics then I care to reprint, all for the sin of liking B5.>>

I haven’t seen much Five-bashing recently.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 4:32:39 AM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<I haven’t seen much Five-bashing recently.>>

A5, meet the Halls.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 5:42:55 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<I haven’t seen much Five-bashing recently.

— A5.>>

Neither have I. In the early days(back before either ST or B5 had their own forums) there was alot of
bashing going both ways.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 6:11:39 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<A5, meet the Halls.>>

I’ve read Wayne and Randy Hall’s messages in passing. (I don’t frequent the Five/Trek boards much, due to
intense tedium.) I find that they respond with great vigor to attacks on *Voyager* and Trek in general, and
from a viewpoint that suggests that they find *B5* boring.

If Fivers would leave Trek alone, the Halls would have nothing to say about how they dislike *B5*, or how
they dislike criticisms of Trek.

At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 6:51:55 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<And here’s the kicker. Both are better, hands down, then any of the Star Wars movies.>>>>>>

A well argued post before this came up, but first it sounded as if you were knocking points off B5s score
just because you werent caught up with the story. Well, that’s hardly B5s fault. For those enough fortunate
enough to have watched it since Day one, the 5 year plan is the ultimate blessing. No more blasphemous
universal resets, and JMS has the opportunity to set things up YEARS in advance. His best set up? Kosh’s
true appearance. The best things ARE worth waiting for, and being given tantalizing hints and glimpses of
Koshs true form which lead up to the fantastic pay off in “Fall of Night” was Heaven on a Supreme Pizza.
Trek hasnt done ANYTHING as well put together as that.

Now as for SW…………….it wins hands down. The Empire Strikes Back has more drama, story, FX, arc,
feeling, and mood than any 5 eps of B5, and any SEASON of trek. It is one of the painfully few, truly
FLAWLESS movies in existence.
That my story and I’m sticking to it.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 6:56:42 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<<<Have you ever seen the antagonism towards B5 from ST fans? I’m a huge fan of both universes
and I have been called more insulting names by ST-fanatics then I care to reprint, all for the sin of liking
B5.>>

I haven’t seen much Five-bashing recently.

— A5.>>>>>>>

Try the trek section mirror of this board. Its under the tyrannical shadow of 2 brothers who freely admit to
having been there for FOUR YEARS. They are self-appointed B5 containers/bashers, out to destroy B5
support whereever it appears. One of them even started a flame war with JMS himself on Compuserve, just
to further his own trek ambition. Its ridiculous.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 6:59:19 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.
>>>>>

Unfortunately, you are. Under another screen name, go over there and post something completely
innocently positive about B5. In 24 hours the Halls will have responded with no less than 12 messages
each, damning you to eternal flame.

 
Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 6:59:53 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>> Now as for SW…………….it wins hands down. The Empire Strikes Back has more drama, story, FX, arc,
feeling, and mood than any 5 eps of B5, and any SEASON of trek. It is one of the painfully few, truly
FLAWLESS movies in existence.
That my story and I’m sticking to it.<<

I’m glad you singled out TESB!

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 7:00:50 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>One of them even started a flame war with JMS himself on Compuserve, just to further his own trek
ambition. <<

I wish I’d seen this.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 8:03:13 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.<<

Well, A5, as a veteran of the ST v. B5 boards in the ST area, I can tell you they were routinely insulting to
both B5 and those who watched it. Of course if you disagreed your were given the infamous “B5
evangelista” tag.

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 5:41:21 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

>> Now as for SW…………….it wins hands down. The Empire Strikes Back has more drama, story, FX, arc,
feeling, and mood than any 5 eps of B5,<<

Except maybe the last two of Season 3 and Episodes 401 & 403. The return of Sheridan arc is rather classic,
and the mood, before his return is very similar to TESB. Not the same but still wonderful stuff.

>>and any SEASON of trek. It is one of the painfully few, truly FLAWLESS movies in existence.
That my story and I’m sticking to it.<<
Seconded

<I’m glad you singled out TESB!>

As am I. It’s my favorite of the Trilogy because of the character developement and the dark aspect of the
story.
Subj::: THE main reason….
Date: 5/4/97 5:51:46 PM
From: Niles46
Posted on: America Online

THE main reason B5 is better than ANY ST is the writing!!!!! JMS is one of the best writers of SF or any
Medium this country has!!!!! He doesn’t leave Plotlines dangling, and you know if some plotline is left
open in episode 2, it WILL be resolved in episode 10!!!!!! Consistancy and Continuity, something NO ST
has had, Remember STNGs “Conspiracy”?
Just my opinion…….
Niles46

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/4/97 6:50:27 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>THE main reason B5 is better than ANY ST is the writing!!!!! JMS is one of the best writers of SF or
any Medium this country has!!!!! He doesn’t leave Plotlines dangling, and you know if some plotline is left
open in episode 2, it WILL be resolved in episode 10!!!!!! Consistancy and Continuity, something NO ST
has had, Remember STNGs “Conspiracy”?
Just my opinion…….
Niles46<<

Yes I do remember “Conspiracy”, I also remember the start of the build up to the Borg in STNG season 1
with the big holes where cities were and the Romulan threat of the returning. Where did it all go wrong?

I shouldn’t tell the Halls about the writing bit though.

Subj::: b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/4/97 8:40:49 PM
From: Laley2
Posted on: America Online

Last DS9 episode was very good written, but when the ship was supposed to attack the enmy ships, the
climax of the episode, they chicken out (the producers i mean) they never showed the space battle; bunch of
losers.
B5 instead, showed the whole enchilada, the complete battle, besides showing a completely new and never
before seen alien, unlike Star Trek wich doesn’t take chances anymore and keep recycling old ideas.
Trek doesn’t take chances anymore…..B5 does.

Subj::: Re:To Flame or Not to Flame
Date: 5/4/97 8:49:11 PM
From: Laley2
Posted on: America Online

Voyager keeps stealing ideas from everybody: The Kess aging backwards gag was stolen from one of the
seven stories that make the book “Hyperion” by Dan Simmons, (By the way, She’s leaving the show next
season) And the latest dinosaur episode, althought well written and directed, was a “Planet of the apes” rip
off, and a friend pointed to me a book (I forgot the title) written years ago about a race of dinosaurs sapiens
looking for human fossils; he told me this was a trilogy, so the book’s have been around for a while.
They are just creatively bankrupt.

Subj::: Re:Ds9 flaws 3: to AcDec
Date: 5/4/97 9:01:04 PM
From: Laley2
Posted on: America Online

A great episode, but with a great anti climax. the way the enemy just surrender was just stupid and a way to
cheat the audience once more.
Same with the latest Klingon episode, what a dissapointment! the episode was great until the battle, wich
was never shown. I felt so cheated!!!
B5 instead showed the whole thing, a great spcace battle besides a new alien, with ground breaking special
effects, never before seen on TV.
Trek doesn’t do that anymore, they keep recycling old ideas, there will be yet another Klingon -on-ship
episode next May Sweeps.
By the way, the ratings where: DS9 0.9
B5 1.0 on the Southern California area.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 10:19:54 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<In 24 hours the Halls will have responded with no less than 12 messages each, damning you to eternal
flame.>>

Thereby ensuring, in recent days, that you’re not able to resond.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/4/97 10:28:20 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

I may be in the minority, but I actually liked the Klingon episode… and (or because?) I wasn’t expecting
anything. If there’s one thing that’s almost as bad as Ferengi episodes (greed, capitalism, male-bashing, etc)
it’s Klingon episodes… reduced as they have been since TNG’s premiere to a race of savage growlers. (And
what’s with Belanna? I thought she was *ashamed* of her Klingon heritage… now she’s reading Klingon
novels and blithering on about having violent Klingon sex)
But for what it was, I thought it was pretty well executed. I’ll never understand Klingon houses (why not
just start a House of Worf?) but then I never made much sense of that business in “Knives” on B5 either.
Of course Martok suffered from “plot against me” syndrome, but he made a solid case from his own
perspective. The “human” (if that’s the word) side of the story was well done… by Trek standards or recent
B5 standards.
That being said, I must have missed the bit where Jemhaddar and Klingons started having countless
battles against each other. Is the AQ actually at war the Jem/Cardy now or not? The usual Trek “we want
to do a story about X, so suddenly the status quo is Y” formula.
I also have serious problems with a Klingon warbird taking out *ANY* Jemhaddar ship, but you can’t
fault Trek for that at this point. Reducing once indomitable enemies with unstoppable tech to just another
bunch of guys with ships like ours is par for the course for Trek and that’s not going to change.

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/5/97 4:13:58 AM
From: Niles46
Posted on: America Online

Thats the other thing better about B5, IT’S Aliens could BE!!!!! What you get on ST is the ” Funny
Forhead” alien of the week!!!!!!!!!!! B5 gives you the entire alien,with the background and customs
attached, and a CREDIBLE look, an alien that looks like it could actually exist!!!!!!!!!!
Niles46

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 5:47:51 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>> I also have serious problems with a Klingon warbird taking out *ANY* Jemhaddar ship, but you can’t
fault Trek for that at this point. Reducing once indomitable enemies with unstoppable tech to just another
bunch of guys with ships like ours is par for the course for Trek and that’s not going to change.<<

Bear this in mind. One Jemmy ship flattened DS9. DS9 and six starfleet ships saw off loads of Klingon
ships. Jemmy ships were seen flattening and Enterprise class starship. An Enterprise starship was seen
taking on three Warbirds and in a film destroying one. Is this poor writing?

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 5:51:39 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Unfortunately, you are. Under another screen name, go over there and post something completely
innocently positive about B5.>>

I don’t think I’ll add to the mix. I personally don’t care to criticize either of the two series in comparison
with the other, because I think it tends to weaken sci-fi in general to do that.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 6:23:31 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Bear this in mind. One Jemmy ship flattened DS9.>>

How? Deep Space 9 still exists.

<<DS9 and six starfleet ships saw off loads of Klingon ships.>>

In battle, or through diplomacy? To which episode are you referring?

<<Jemmy ships were seen flattening and Enterprise class starship.>>

You’re referring to a GCS (Galaxy-class starship), the Odyssey? That ship was one of the first casualties of
Starfleet to the Jem’Hadar. The ship was not fully prepared for battle. The Odyssey’s shields were down
and the JH ship rammed it directly at the interhull section.

<<An Enterprise starship was seen taking on three Warbirds and in a film destroying one.>>

Which film was this?

— A5.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 6:31:08 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Except maybe the last two of Season 3 and Episodes 401 & 403. The return of Sheridan arc is rather
classic, and the mood, before his return is very similar to TESB. Not the same but still wonderful stuff.>>

I’m sorry, but IMHO the ONLY thing that ESB and they Sheridan “death” arc had in common was that both
were fantasy. Of course, ESB was GOOD fantasy, the Lorien stuff on the other hand, BAD fantasy.

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 6:35:21 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<THE main reason B5 is better than ANY ST is the writing!!!!! JMS is one of the best writers of SF or
any Medium this country has!!!!! He doesn’t leave Plotlines dangling, and you know if some plotline is left
open in episode 2, it WILL be resolved in episode 10!!!!!! Consistancy and Continuity, something NO ST
has had, Remember STNGs “Conspiracy”?>>

And the reason is obvious. B5 has ONE writer, with 4 years of 22 episodes. Trek has had nearly 100 writers
with 18, 26 episode seasons (on 4 diffrent shows with 6 diffrent sets of people running the shows), and 8
movies. Of course Trek is gonna have a lot of inconsistancies!

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 6:36:39 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<I’m sorry, but IMHO the ONLY thing that ESB and they Sheridan “death” arc had in common was that
both were fantasy. Of course, ESB was GOOD fantasy, the Lorien stuff on the other hand, BAD fantasy.>>

I’ve never really understood the Lorien thing. What is it with the guy, anyway? He kind of gives me the
creeps.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 6:37:02 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Yes I do remember “Conspiracy”, I also remember the start of the build up to the Borg in STNG season
1 with the big holes where cities were and the Romulan threat of the returning. Where did it all go
wrong?>>

Actually the delay of the Borg was due to a writers guild strike. As for “Conspiracy” TPTB felt that they
had better major enimies in the Borg.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/5/97 6:39:56 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Last DS9 episode was very good written, but when the ship was supposed to attack the enmy ships, the
climax of the episode, they chicken out (the producers i mean) they never showed the space battle; bunch of
losers.>>

Showing the battle would be completely unnessasary and ruin the pace of the show. The story “arc” of the
show was finished when the crew got their pride back. A battle would be an anti-climax. BTW, I was
challenged to point out a close-up shot done with models that blows away the realism of CGI, and the final
shot of the BOP is a great one!

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 6:47:32 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< I also have serious problems with a Klingon warbird taking out *ANY* Jemhaddar ship, but you can’t
fault Trek for that at this point. Reducing once indomitable enemies with unstoppable tech to just another
bunch of guys with ships like ours is par for the course for Trek and that’s not going to change.>>

The Jem’Hadar only had unstopable Tech for one episode “The Jem’Hadar”. That was a starfleet ship’s first
encounter with the Jem’Hadar and their weapons could peirce their shields. Starfleet, obviously has
compensated for that technology, probally from sensor data from the surviving runabouts and passed the
word onto everyone else. Kinda like the Whitestar “adapting” to Shadow weaponry from experiance,
Starfleeters would adapt their ships to face the Jem’Hadar. Remember, even completely unshielded the
Oddessey survived all the Jem’Hadar weapons could throw at them, and it took a kamakize to take it out.
Jem’Hadar fighters when fighting shielded ships a really no stronger than your average B’Rel-class BOP (As
the Defiant has proven).

–AcDec
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/5/97 6:51:11 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Thats the other thing better about B5, IT’S Aliens could BE!!!!! What you get on ST is the ” Funny
Forhead” alien of the week!!!!!!!!!!! B5 gives you the entire alien,with the background and customs
attached, and a CREDIBLE look, an alien that looks like it could actually exist!!!!!!!!!!>>

Actually, only SOME of B5’s aliens are all that “realistic”. The Minbari, and Centauri (along with some
background aliens) are still VERY human-like. Of course B5 is a TV show, and they have to have humans
playing most of the parts, First Ones (except Lorien) excuded of course. Too bad the First Ones didn’t have
a tenth as much charater development as attention to detail with CGI.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 6:55:33 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<And the reason is obvious. B5 has ONE writer, with 4 years of 22 episodes. Trek has had nearly 100
writers with 18, 26 episode seasons (on 4 diffrent shows with 6 diffrent sets of people running the shows),
and 8 movies. Of course Trek is gonna have a lot of inconsistancies!>>

Actually, B5 has only had 2 years with one writer. Seasons One and Two were written by multiple writers.
Unlike Trek they don’t have too many, and they have someone at the helm who is a major perfectionist.
Trek needs to pair down its writing staff and go back to basics.

The old axiom: “too many cooks spoil the broth” applies here

Tryel
“If you can’t dazzle them with dexterity, baffle them with Bull!”–Liberal Arts students mantra

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 7:00:58 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Bear this in mind. One Jemmy ship flattened DS9. DS9 and six starfleet ships saw off loads of Klingon
ships.>>

I guess you a refering to “To the Death”, and I’m afriad you have your facts wrong. Thoose rouge
Jem’Hadar came in a civilain freighter, and blew up a bomb INSIDE the station after raiding for supplies.
The ship didn’t harm DS9 at all.

<<Jemmy ships were seen flattening and Enterprise class starship. An Enterprise starship was seen taking
on three Warbirds and in a film destroying one. Is this poor writing?>>

See previous post for a explanation for the destruction of the Oddessey. But I would like to add a gripe of
my own. That captain could have killed all three of thoose ships before the Oddessey was even fired upon, a
full spread of Torps would have done nicely. Unfortueatly the captain was from the Jean Luc Picard school
of tactics, were you wait untill you have been damaged, then fire back. Also, he shared Picards habit of
fireing infrequently, and forgeting to use topedoes. The ONLY time the E-D ever showed her true might
was when she fired 3 phasers rapid fire, AND torpedoes at the Borg in “Best of Both Worlds”. Though he
seems to have gotten better by First Contact. By the way, the Oddessey, and the Enterprise-D were
GALAXY-class ships.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 7:11:52 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<And the reason is obvious. B5 has ONE writer, with 4 years of 22 episodes. Trek has had nearly 100
writers with 18, 26 episode seasons (on 4 diffrent shows with 6 diffrent sets of people running the shows),
and 8 movies. Of course Trek is gonna have a lot of inconsistancies!>>

I forgot to add that 90% of thoose writers fail to hold a candle to JMS. Amoung thoose in JMS’s IMHO
“leauge” are Coon, Ellison (for his 1 episode), Fontana, Behr, Moore, Wolfe, Fields, and Piller (his
Voyager stuff excluded). Jeri Taylor had some great TNG episodes (“The Drumhead”), but everything post
TNG has been BAD. And I can’t leave Roddenberry out, my opinion; an OK producer, who came up with
great IDEAS (when not chasing off talented SF writers with his infernal re-writing, and that still hurts post
Roddenberry Trek because the SF community still has a bad taste in their mouth), but a TERRIBLE writer
(Trek at least, supposedly he wrote good westerns and cop shows). The ONLY script that he wrote that was
good was “The Menagire” (Won him a hugo).

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 7:16:48 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Actually, B5 has only had 2 years with one writer. Seasons One and Two were written by multiple
writers. Unlike Trek they don’t have too many, and they have someone at the helm who is a major
perfectionist. Trek needs to pair down its writing staff and go back to basics.>>

And seasons 1 and 2 were not near as good as 3 and 4. See a pattern? And DS9 has the least consitancy
problems precisely because of the fact that Behr and Moore are the best producers Trek has had since Coon
(Though what Piller did with seasons 3, 4, and 5 of TNG were miraculous. Notice how BAD TNG was
when he left for DS9?).

–AcDec

Subj::: Cameras, Action!!
Date: 5/5/97 7:26:05 AM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

<<As a great military leader why do you prefer a show with moogie, little action, poorly choreographed
fight scenes, poor continuity and romances (I think other people have gone over these points on this board)
rather than a well plotted action packed exciting show like B5?
Question to be ignored by RAIDERONE! >>
DS9, less action than B-5? I hardly think so. Admittedly, DS9’s character explorations are not what some of
you shoot ’em up/action-only types crave. But on DS9 “the best ensemble cast in TV today” not only tackles
fascinating future interstellar conflicts and anomalies but weaves complex inner space landscapes that
reveal characterizations that go beyond anything available today. Our knowledge of the inner workings of
Sisko, Kasidy, Kira, Dax, Odo, Dukat, Bajor, Cardassia, Maqui, Jem’hadar, Klingons, etc. are rendered in
stunning, consistent, unfolding detail. DS9’s dedication to and focus on it’s vision from “Emissary” to
current eps is not deterred by the ratings game. With the addition of Worf to the cast, they essentially upped
the ante on the singlemindedness and faithfulness to what the DS9 fans really want. In today’s dollar- and
ratings-conscious world, those qualities are admirable and rare. “Darn the torpedos, full speed ahead”.
JMS’ vision, dedication, and arc are equally admirable in themselves in the form of B5. Most of B5 is
great and coherent, expect for five things. First, JMS’ mild fascination with DS9, “Emissary” in particular.
Second, his fascination with Ridley Scott’s “Alien” (Well, can’t really blame him; It is the most imitated SF
movie in history, as I recently mentioned in one of my LA movie reviews) as seen in “Grey 17″, “Racing
Mars”, and elsewhere. Thirdly, I just don’t buy the Sheridan/Delenn love affair at all. There is not much
romantic chemistry beyond the nice emoting. Delenn is ethically bankrupt in not telling Sheridan everything
about her role in Narn and Human deaths, letting the affair plow on with hugs, pecks, alien ceremonies, and
silence. As a matter of fact they’re IN THE WAY of what should be the focus. Fourth, Sheridan as religious
icon, where did that from? Not acceptable, sorry. “Sinclair is Valen” was pushing it, but a Great Move and a
stunning ep in the end (or rather the beginning, I suppose). Finally, responsible fans must also quibble with
the placid portrayal of earth’s inhabitants as vapid automatons who accept martial law after the “accident”
with no question. Not! No Jim Garrison in the future of earth? Indeed, in the real world, Sheridan’s father
would be leading the resistance on earth and Mars, and pegged as a future Pres (remember Will Pop
become the Pres?) after Clarke’s arrest. Instead, the placid attitude of earth’s inhabitants is a stalking-horse
for JMS’ Clarke vs B5 plot devices. These must be addressed satisfactorily. Most of you would lull JMS to
sleep with your acceptance of anything. (Like a dart wielding dummy on level Grey 17-c’mon). I want JMS
on his toes in the center of the ring, he’s a fighter, a writer, and can deliver the goods. Looking forward to
“Lines of Commo”.
Cheers, Raider One ” Flak is Heaviest above the Vulnerability ”

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 7:51:20 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>How? Deep Space 9 still exists.<<

It did, can’t remember the episode though, can somebody else. Remember they are very good at repairing
things in Trek.

>>In battle, or through diplomacy? To which episode are you referring?<<

Way of the Warrior.

>>You’re referring to a GCS (Galaxy-class starship), the Odyssey? That ship was one of the first casualties
of Starfleet to the Jem’Hadar. The ship was not fully prepared for battle. The Odyssey’s shields were down
and the JH ship rammed it directly at the interhull section.<<

But they still flattened it. Surely a federation ship like any military ship today would be alert and ready to go
to battlestations at any momment.

>>Which film was this? <<

Generations (after being disabled through trickery). Also Enterprise A got one in Trek VI. Yesterdays
Enterprise got one.

 

 

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 7:52:18 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I’m sorry, but IMHO the ONLY thing that ESB and they Sheridan “death” arc had in common was that
both were fantasy. Of course, ESB was GOOD fantasy, the Lorien stuff on the other hand, BAD fantasy.<<

Well if Lorien was bad fantasy that says very little for antything DS9 and Voyager have done.

 

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 7:53:04 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>And the reason is obvious. B5 has ONE writer, with 4 years of 22 episodes. Trek has had nearly 100
writers with 18, 26 episode seasons (on 4 diffrent shows with 6 diffrent sets of people running the shows),
and 8 movies. Of course Trek is gonna have a lot of inconsistancies!<<

Most of these writer are not “writers”. They are fans who write.

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/5/97 7:57:19 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Showing the battle would be completely unnessasary and ruin the pace of the show. The story “arc” of
the show was finished when the crew got their pride back. A battle would be an anti-climax. BTW, I was
challenged to point out a close-up shot done with models that blows away the realism of CGI, and the final
shot of the BOP is a great one!

–AcDec <<

Showing the battle in Trek would be impossible since the SFX would be shown up by B5. As for close-ups.
It would ryuin the pace of the show to put a battle in DS9 as it might speed it up, Trek likes a slow boring
pace rather than a fast exciting one with mystery, oh I think I’m trying to cite creative bancruptcy in Trek
again.Try the zooming in shot of the fireworks display in Atonement to the observation area where the party
was (even on my fuzzy tape in the UK it looks good). You could not do this with models. I can’t comment
on your example as I have not seen it.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 8:01:11 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>The Jem’Hadar only had unstopable Tech for one episode “The Jem’Hadar”. That was a starfleet ship’s
first encounter with the Jem’Hadar and their weapons could peirce their shields. Starfleet, obviously has
compensated for that technology, probally from sensor data from the surviving runabouts and passed the
word onto everyone else. <<

Rubbish. They forgot this. Did a U-turn. Don’t read things into Trek that aren’t there. A plot inconsitency.

>>Kinda like the Whitestar “adapting” to Shadow weaponry from experiance, Starfleeters would adapt their
ships to face the Jem’Hadar.<<

Nothing like it. The Whitstar is part Organic Vorlon technology, this was explained. You are trying to write
Trek law. They made the Jemboys too invincible so they decided to move the goalposts.

Subj::: skipping raidrone again…
Date: 5/5/97 8:01:16 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Kinda like the Whitestar “adapting” to Shadow weaponry from experiance, Starfleeters would adapt their
ships to face the Jem’Hadar.<<
This is great. Once again a fan has to “guess” an answer because TPTB don’t care enough to include a throw
away line that could explain 75% of their glaring inconsistencies. At least the Whitestar adapting thing was
mentioned ON AIR.

>>Showing the battle would be completely unnessasary and ruin the pace of the show. The story “arc” of
the show was finished when the crew got their pride back. A battle would be an anti-climax. BTW, I was
challenged to point out a close-up shot done with models that blows away the realism of CGI, and the final
shot of the BOP is a great one!<<

I have never agreed with you more Ac. Now, if Behr can just be talked out of all this Rom loves Leeta/Worf
loves Dax/Odo loves Kira stuff. I don’t want to sound condescending, but is this designed to draw female
viewers? I have NO interests in these multiple love stories. Pare it down to one or two and don’t beat us
over the head with it…
Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/5/97 8:03:58 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Actually, only SOME of B5’s aliens are all that “realistic”. The Minbari, and Centauri (along with some
background aliens) are still VERY human-like. Of course B5 is a TV show, and they have to have humans
playing most of the parts, First Ones (except Lorien) excuded of course. Too bad the First Ones didn’t have
a tenth as much charater development as attention to detail with CGI.

–AcDec <<

Agreed the First ones could have been explored more. It is difficult also to make a non-human alien
(something Trek seldom does). I think the point being made was that most Trek aliens have just a bumpy
nose or forehead. B5 tends to go for the full face mask, body suit or even a completely CGI alien. I think it’s
a case of the Trek people having very little creative imagination and a big budget, and B5 having the
opposite.

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 8:06:42 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I forgot to add that 90% of thoose writers fail to hold a candle to JMS.<<

Don’t tell the Halls.

>>The ONLY script that he wrote that was good was “The Menagire” (Won him a hugo). <<

A very enjoyable and clever way of using footage from The Cage. It deserved to win the Hugo.

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 8:08:16 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>And seasons 1 and 2 were not near as good as 3 and 4. See a pattern? And DS9 has the least consitancy
problems precisely because of the fact that Behr and Moore are the best producers Trek has had since Coon
(Though what Piller did with seasons 3, 4, and 5 of TNG were miraculous. Notice how BAD TNG was
when he left for DS9?).<<

This worries me. Season 5 (YES THER WILL BE ONE MR ORDOVER), will allow different writer sin.

 

Subj::: Re:Cameras, Action!!
Date: 5/5/97 8:22:08 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

More Frilly Underwear from RAIDERONE

>>DS9, less action than B-5? I hardly think so. Admittedly, DS9’s character explorations are not what some
of you shoot ’em up/action-only types crave. <<

I think you are ver wrong. B5 is attacked for having too much action by the Trekkies.

>>Our knowledge of the inner workings of Sisko, Kasidy, Kira, Dax, Odo, Dukat, Bajor, Cardassia, Maqui,
Jem’hadar, Klingons, etc. are rendered in stunning, consistent, unfolding detail. <<

Read a few posts back for consistent Trek. Even Trekkies admit that DS9 has problems in this area.

>>DS9’s dedication to and focus on it’s vision from “Emissary” to current eps is not deterred by the ratings
game.<<

How much did the DS9 ratings drop from season 1? The religious rubbish with Bajor got in the way too
much.

>> With the addition of Worf to the cast, they essentially upped the ante on the singlemindedness and
faithfulness to what the DS9 fans really want. In today’s dollar- and ratings-conscious world, those qualities
are admirable and rare. “Darn the torpedos, full speed ahead”.<<

Oh so you mean DS9 took a risk with Worf, a popular character from STNG. You mean that B5 hasn’t
done anything original and daring…er like Trek.

>>First, JMS’ mild fascination with DS9, “Emissary” in particular. <<

JMS says he doesn’t watch DS9 so your wrong buddy. DS9 is more likely a copy of B5, look back over this
board.

>>Second, his fascination with Ridley Scott’s “Alien” (Well, can’t really blame him; It is the most imitated
SF movie in history, as I recently mentioned in one of my LA movie reviews) as seen in “Grey 17″, “Racing
Mars”, and elsewhere<<

SW was imitated more than Alien. Robert Henleins The Puppet Masters (ever seen it), the keepers resemble
them more.

>>. Fourth, Sheridan as religious icon, where did that from? <,

Is he?

>>Sinclair is Valen” was pushing it, but a Great Move and a stunning ep in the end (or rather the beginning,
I suppose). <<

A very clever story, Consistent.

>>Finally, responsible fans must also quibble with the placid portrayal of earth’s inhabitants as vapid
automatons who accept martial law after the “accident” with no question. <,

Like the placid Gemans in the 1930’s, the Spanish under Franco, the Italians under Mussolini, the Russians
under Stalin…Should I go on.

>>Sheridan’s father would be leading the resistance on earth and Mars, and pegged as a future Pres
(remember Will Pop become the Pres?) after Clarke’s arrest.<,

Would he. How about keeping his head down. Let’s go to Nazi Germany

Sheridan Snr. : Oi Hitler leave my son alone.
Hitler : Have a holiday in my forced labour camp.

Eneter the real world Raiderone.

>>Instead, the placid attitude of earth’s inhabitants is a stalking-horse for JMS’ Clarke vs B5 plot devices.<<

We don’t hear much from Earth, but the Mars people are placid aren’t they?

>>” Flak is Heaviest above the Vulnerability “<<

Only a fool would enter battle without a weapon.

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 2:00:23 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>If Fivers would leave Trek alone, the Halls would have nothing to say about how they dislike *B5*, or
how they dislike criticisms of Trek.<<

Well said, A5.

>>At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.<<

You are not wrong.

Wayne

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 2:01:39 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>Under another screen name, go over there and post something completely innocently positive about B5.
In 24 hours the Halls will have responded with no less than 12 messages each, damning you to eternal
flame.<<

I thought you used other names, Strahd. However, you are wrong about us damning people.. most of you all
pretty much damn yourselves over there..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 3:36:45 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.<<

>>You are not wrong.

Wayne<<

Wayne is wrong (PS I’m not a lier by saying this).

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/5/97 3:37:33 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I thought you used other names, Strahd. However, you are wrong about us damning people.. most of you
all pretty much damn yourselves over there..

Wayne<<
Wrong again.

Subj::: Re:Cameras, Action!!
Date: 5/5/97 7:33:36 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

>>Finally, responsible fans must also quibble with the placid portrayal of earth’s inhabitants as vapid
automatons who accept martial law after the “accident” with no question. <<

Raider I have two books you should read.

_Hitler’s Willing Executioners_ by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, and _Inside Nazi Germany_ who’s author’s
name escapes me at the moment. These two books will advance your knowledge about life in Nazi Germany
and how so many people could go along with Hitler’s mad scheme.

Sound familar?

Tryel

The 2 rules of Bull for Liberal Arts students

1.) It must be coheriant
2.) It must have sources

 

Subj::: Re:To Flame or Not to Flame
Date: 5/5/97 8:41:48 PM
From: GWRep Zen
Posted on: America Online

<<<Voyager keeps stealing ideas from everybody: The Kess aging backwards gag was stolen from one of
the seven stories that make the book “Hyperion” by Dan Simmons, (By the way, She’s leaving the show next
season) And the latest dinosaur episode, althought well written and directed, was a “Planet of the apes” rip
off, and a friend pointed to me a book (I forgot the title) written years ago about a race of dinosaurs sapiens
looking for human fossils; he told me this was a trilogy, so the book’s have been around for a while.
They are just creatively bankrupt.>>>

I must say I was dreading the Dino Voyager ep, but it was actually well done. One of the very FEW well
done Voyager eps, AND they didn’t take the easy way out of making allies of the dinos or something where
everyone is a *happy camper* either. For once, a reasonably good Voyager.
Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/5/97 8:48:39 PM
From: GWRep Zen
Posted on: America Online

<<And the reason is obvious. B5 has ONE writer, with 4 years of 22 episodes. >>

Actually, JMS has only written ALL the eps of Season 3 and 4 so far. Season 1 was about 1/2 JMS and 1/2
*other* writers. Season 2 was more JMS.

Whether there are a multiplicity of writers for a series or multiple series, it’s up to the producers and/or the
directors, editors to ensure reasonable consistency. Mistakes are made on ALL series re’s consistency,
whether B5, or any of the plethora of ST stuff.

Mark-
Subj::: Re:Cameras, Action!!
Date: 5/5/97 11:04:09 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

>>Thirdly, I just don’t buy the Sheridan/Delenn love affair at all. There is not much romantic chemistry
beyond the nice emoting. Delenn is ethically bankrupt in not telling Sheridan everything about her role in
Narn and Human deaths, letting the affair plow on with hugs, pecks, alien ceremonies, and silence.<<

Raider, Sheridan is just as responsible for the Narn deaths as Delenn. Remember in _Ship of Tears_ when
Sheridan and Delenn are discussing bringing G’kar into the war council. He knew but did nothing. Maybe
you should listen to that speech, and the conversation with G’kar. You seem to have a problem with the
concept of sacrifice, and understanding why it is nessesary. Hey even Trek has dealt with it. Also about
Delenn telling Sheridan. What will it do except open old wounds, plus the line in _Lines of
Communtication_ seems to imply he does know more than we’ve seen. Delenn is a whole person, not an
appendage to Sheridan. She has a right to have secrets and a private life that doesn’t include him. So give up
the ‘ethically bankrupt’ line.

<< As a matter of fact they’re IN THE WAY of what should be the focus.>>

Oh this is funny considering the flap over the editing of a J&D scene. They are a part of the story, which is
about relationships. Why is this such a difficult concept? What _should_ be in the focus? What’s going on
on Earth? That’s not the main line of the story.

<< Fourth, Sheridan as religious icon, where did that from? Not acceptable, sorry.>>

BS it isn’t acceptible. It came from the fact that his return is an apparent miracle. Like as I said before
Osiris, or Jesus. The world of B5 is so bereft of magic that when something like this does happen it can be
seen as a miracle.

Tryel

 

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 12:00:15 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well if Lorien was bad fantasy that says very little for antything DS9 and Voyager have done.>>

DS9 has had almost no fantasy elements at all. It’s easilly the “hardest” Trek show. The closest thing to
fantasy on DS9 are the Phrophets. Voyager and TNG on the other hand had Q, and TOS had tons of fantasy
elements.

B5 has a LOT of fantasy elements, souls, ‘life force’, a ‘living universe’, human telepaths, etc.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/6/97 12:01:55 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Most of these writer are not “writers”. They are fans who write.>>

Uh, Blobbb. Anyone who sells a script is considered a “writer”. However we can argue as to if they are a
GOOD writer all day long.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/6/97 12:10:15 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Showing the battle in Trek would be impossible since the SFX would be shown up by B5. As for close-
ups. It would ryuin the pace of the show to put a battle in DS9 as it might speed it up, Trek likes a slow
boring pace rather than a fast exciting one with mystery, oh I think I’m trying to cite creative bancruptcy in
Trek again.Try the zooming in shot of the fireworks display in Atonement to the observation area where the
party was (even on my fuzzy tape in the UK it looks good). You could not do this with models. I can’t
comment on your example as I have not seen it.>>

Sorry, space battles are a lot easyier than having to create enterrainment without them. Too mant battles
would be a sign of a creative decline, not a lack of them.
And as I have already said 100 times. Yes, CGI can creat many more creative and spectacular shots,
however models still LOOK better. Heck, even the huge budget of The Lost World was not enough to go
total CGI, they still used big models for closeups. Someday CGI will look just as good as models, but for
now they are still catoony.

–AcDec

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 12:16:15 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<B5 has a LOT of fantasy elements, souls, ‘life force’, a ‘living universe’, human telepaths, etc.>>

Human telepaths…I’ve seen that in sci fi. And we deal with religion in real life, the living universe, and ‘life
force’ is a religious aspect. Lorien even says that there was nothing spiritual about how he saved Sheridan.

Oh and the prophecy thing in DS9…The imagedy came out of no where. It was a good ep but if it wasn’t
fantasy…

Tryel

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 12:23:39 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Rubbish. They forgot this. Did a U-turn. Don’t read things into Trek that aren’t there. A plot
inconsitency.>>

Sorry, but you are wrong. The only reason the Oddessey was destroyed was because it’s shields we
ineffective. I suggest you pick up a copy of the TNG tech manual. They specificly bring up the need for
adapting shields, sensors, and weapons depending on the enemy. And don’t forget that the people who wrote
that manual are the technical consultants on DS9.

<<Nothing like it. The Whitstar is part Organic Vorlon technology, this was explained.>>

Starfleet techs are just as able to modify their ships as the WhiteStar is able to modify themselves. Ships
adapting is an old Trek thing ie the Borg (of course if the Borg were to be introduced now, TPTB would
have been accused of stealing the adaptive nature of the Borg from JMS). It would not be a large task too
adapt shields for a certain type of weapon, espeacilly when you have 140 worlds and their scientists to help.
Actually it would have been completely unrealistic to NOT have Starfleet have a way to counter that
weapon. It’s the old offense-defense conflict that has been around since human started killing eachother with
rocks.

–AcDec
You are trying to write Trek law. They made the Jemboys too invincible so they decided to move the
goalposts.

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/6/97 12:30:44 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<This is great. Once again a fan has to “guess” an answer because TPTB don’t care enough to include a
throw away line that could explain 75% of their glaring inconsistencies. At least the Whitestar adapting
thing was mentioned ON AIR.>>

Actually the answers are almost always there. Just check the Tech Manual. And the main reason nothing
was mentioned on the air was because it would have forced a bunch of technobabble and TPTB at DS9 try
to use as little of that as nessasary. However if DS9 were Voyager I’m sure you would have gotten a 15
minute dissertation on shielding technology.

<<I have never agreed with you more Ac. Now, if Behr can just be talked out of all this Rom loves
Leeta/Worf loves Dax/Odo loves Kira stuff. I don’t want to sound condescending, but is this designed to
draw female viewers? I have NO interests in these multiple love stories. Pare it down to one or two and
don’t beat us over the head with it…>>

I agree, dump Leeta/Rom, keep Worf/Dax in the background like in “Soilders of the Empire”, and marry
Kira and Odo.

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/6/97 12:36:58 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Agreed the First ones could have been explored more. It is difficult also to make a non-human alien
(something Trek seldom does). I think the point being made was that most Trek aliens have just a bumpy
nose or forehead. B5 tends to go for the full face mask, body suit or even a completely CGI alien. I think it’s
a case of the Trek people having very little creative imagination and a big budget, and B5 having the
opposite.>>

Actually while DS9 has a much bigger budget, it also has many more expenses. They put things like guest
stars, location shooting (something B5 never does, and is VERY expensive), more expensive effects and
their elabortie sets ahead of makeup on the priority list. Considering that TOS and TNG had almost all
aliens looking like humans, DS9 does a much better job than any other Trek in that area.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/6/97 12:38:59 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<This worries me. Season 5 (YES THER WILL BE ONE MR ORDOVER), will allow different writer
sin.>>

As long as JMS keeps controll it should work out all right.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 12:56:28 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Human telepaths…I’ve seen that in sci fi.>>

True, but it’s still a fantasy element.

<<And we deal with religion in real life, the living universe, and ‘life force’ is a religious aspect. Lorien
even says that there was nothing spiritual about how he saved Sheridan.>>

No, the “LifeForce” thing is not just religious. Remember the “lifeforce” healing machine? And if Lorien
was not using ‘magic’, then how do you explain how he saved Sheridan?

<<Oh and the prophecy thing in DS9…The imagedy came out of no where. It was a good ep but if it wasn’t
fantasy…>>

Actually, all of the “prophecy” came from the Orbs, and the Orbs came from the phrophets. Because the
Prophets are nonlinear the future is as easy for them to see as the presant. Thats a BIG diffence from the
ways Prophecy is came about in B5 (Except for the stuff from Valen, we know were he got that info).

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/6/97 1:00:05 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Actually the answers are almost always there. Just check the Tech Manual.>>
I must have missed this episode.

I understand the basic fundamental problems with Braga’s science are explained to be “Q alters the
structure of the universe and basic biological law in those episodes.” This is all explained in the “Star Trek
Biological and Evolutionary Manual” by Braga/Taylor due out this summer. Silly us for seeing problems
where none clearly existed.

<<And the main reason nothing was mentioned on the air was because it would have forced a bunch of
technobabble and TPTB at DS9 try to use as little of that as nessasary.>>
This is positively hilarious.
Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 1:16:38 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Actually, all of the “prophecy” came from the Orbs, and the Orbs came from the phrophets. Because the
Prophets are nonlinear the future is as easy for them to see as the presant.>>

The prophecy ep I’m talking about didn’t use the Orbs. It was the most recent one.

Subj::: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/6/97 7:14:19 AM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

Actually, my messages are not aimed at you ankle-biters, but to JMS, himself. JMS is listening (and has
answered) and so is Jeri Taylor. If you check out the first two paragraphs of the latest TV Guide Voyager
story, that refers mainly to me and the meager handful of vociferous and unrelenting VOY critics. On the
Voyager boards and ep boards, I have kept up a staggered barrage on Jeri, mainly about the Borg and
“overall vision”. The Star Trek conglomerate handed her the Borg on a silver platter and said, “Make us
proud”. She then gives us the Borg Family Picnic (or a Trek version of Harry and the Hendersons). My
scathing denunciations of her “Borg vision” helped prod her to shelve the original two-part season ender
and bring back the Borg one more time this season: the BAD BORG (I hope). This is further evidence that
they care and are reading the boards. And I’m one of the few who unmercifully complains when they
lowball it, specifically, sarcastically, and constructively; AND CHEER WHEN THEY DO GOOD. No
smoozing and snozing here.
So. Score one victory for Raider One with VOY. But it’s because I care about the quality and accuracy of
our meager SF shows.
Just saw “LOC”; JMS came thru very well, down to and including the title: a formal military term with
many layered subtle meanings. The Delenn-Drak battle sequences had good FX, were well structured, and
CLEARLY utilized some of the principles of war: the biggest being Surprise, Speed, and Mass. Well done,
JMS! Sun Tzu and Clauswitz would be proud. “War is the continuation of politics by other means.”
BTW, superbabe ” Number 1″ lights up my TV screen a ton (Lucky Franklin!). And then, in the middle of
everything, up pops the word “EMISSARY”: ROTFL. I’m now convinced that the ’emissary’,’ dukat’, ‘leeta’,
& ‘number 1′ things are INTENTIONAL: needling PAR. (I now fully expect you to give us characters
named ‘ Kira’, ‘Geordi’, and ‘Dax’ in time.) No Ridley Scott sightings this week, but everytime a character
touches their neck, it’s danger time, kinda trilly. (Remember that eventually killed Dark Skies). As far as
the Sheridan/Delenn relationship receding into the background: won’t break my heart at all. And earth/mars
resistance groups are good. Great ep:with four overlapping storylines following the arc! “LOC”: Grade A.
(and a Great DS9 ep too, I’m impressed)
Go B5 ! Go DS9! Go Voy? Raider One, Above the Target

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 7:15:18 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

>>Finally, responsible fans must also quibble with the placid portrayal of earth’s inhabitants as vapid
automatons who accept martial law after the “accident” with no question. <<

??? Did you fail your history courses, or like most humans, including the ‘fictional’ inhabitants of
B5’s Earth, just fail to learm from it?

Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/6/97 7:22:15 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online
>><<Actually the answers are almost always there. Just check the Tech Manual.>>
I must have missed this episode.<<

OUCH!

And to the rest of you, PLEASE ignore raidrone’s posts…

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 7:25:34 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

All you really, incredibly, hard core Trek fans who keep being insulted by criticisms by devout,
non-Trek, B5 fans, you know there’s a Trek forum under keyword ‘Star Trek’ where you’ll probably find
much less aggravating talk, and a lot more people who completely agree with you.
And the Halls aren’t just dedicated Trek fans, they’re vicious guard dogs who bite at anything
remotely anti Trek. If you can’t handle the criticism guys, then just go back to the Trek boards and leave
alone those B5 fans who are posting their anti-Trek feelings here on the B5 boards, and aren’t invading the
Trek boards the way you are invading theirs.

The previous views are those of a Star Trek/Star Wars/Babylon 5 fan who has known Gene, George, W
Shatner and hopes to someday meet Joe.
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/6/97 7:47:49 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I must have missed this episode.>>

It’s in your bookstore. If you are gonna be so uptight because you don’t know how they modify shields, go
get it.

<< I understand the basic fundamental problems with Braga’s science are explained to be “Q alters the
structure of the universe and basic biological law in those episodes.” This is all explained in the “Star Trek
Biological and Evolutionary Manual” by Braga/Taylor due out this summer. Silly us for seeing problems
where none clearly existed.>>

Of course, what screwing up REAL science has to do with how Starfleet modified their fictional shields
escapes me.

<<This is positively hilarious.>>

I don’t know why, DS9 does use a lot less technobabble than either TNG or VOY. Really, if you complain
about shields so much why don’t you complain about all the unexplained technology in B5?

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 7:49:15 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<The prophecy ep I’m talking about didn’t use the Orbs. It was the most recent one.>>

Nope, you have your facts wrong. The reason Sisko was having visions was BECAUSE of his exposue to
the orbs. They were Orb “flashbacks”.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 8:14:37 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<I haven’t seen much Five-bashing recently.
— A5.>>

>>From: HFMoon
Neither have I. In the early days(back before either ST or B5 had their own forums) there was alot of
bashing going both ways. <<

It was thanks to Paramount and the indoctrinated Trekkers who didn’t even realize they had been
indoctrinated. I saw this from early on at Trek cons, and it was ugly, then I found out Paramounts
involvement, and I didn’t like it one bit. Initially it never even occurred to me why they would hate
something that was 8 months, a year away from its debut. When the big picture became clear it showed
something about haughtiness I didn’t like, and it was coming from a source that had provided me with one
of the things I loved the very most in entertainment –TOS Trek!

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 8:27:49 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
I’ve read Wayne and Randy Hall’s messages in passing. (I don’t frequent the Five/Trek boards much, due to
intense tedium.) I find that they respond with great vigor to attacks on *Voyager* and Trek in general, and
from a viewpoint that suggests that they find *B5* boring.<<

Not boring –a threat! There’s quite a difference. Once something is perceived as a threat,
natural defenses go up, ‘shields’ get ‘raised’. <g> (like the imagery so far? <g>) Something that one finds
“boring” doesn’t set them on *fire* –it renders it as something not really worthy of their attention. This is
not the case with the dynamic duo, not by any means. They boil at the thought of B5, and something that’s
dull doesn’t set one ablaze, this is not the nature of the human animal.

>>If Fivers would leave Trek alone, the Halls would have nothing to say about how they dislike *B5*, or
how they dislike criticisms of Trek.<<

But don’t you think it’s well, well –‘petty’? Childish, even babyish? Hey, take your piick.

>>At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.<<

You’re wrong and you’re right, because what you must realize is that they *inspire* it. When
there’s no such thing as a “fair shake,” then what you’re dealing with is a fascist state, No? What would one
call the resistors in France who aided Jews immediately after France folded to the Nazi’s? When you’re
looking at a dictatorial regime, well, need I say more?
I find and have found since the beginning that they make the B5 Folder in the Trek area nothing
less than appalling.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 8:33:33 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd
…and JMS has the opportunity to set things up YEARS in advance. His best set up? Kosh’s true
appearance. The best things ARE worth waiting for, and being given tantalizing hints and glimpses of
Koshs true form which lead up to the fantastic pay off in “Fall of Night” was Heaven on a Supreme Pizza.
Trek hasnt done ANYTHING as well put together as that.<<

I, G7, do hereby declare that in the future, when it is possible to pop in a DVD or better format
disc into a player, and when virtual reality has reached its peak, that the ultimate will be watching B5 laying
back in a lounger or something and viewing it in virtual immersion. <g>
How’s that for ya, Strahd? Quite a thought, eh? 😉

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5: to Strahd
Date: 5/6/97 8:35:38 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd
Try the trek section mirror of this board. Its under the tyrannical shadow of 2 brothers who freely admit to
having been there for FOUR YEARS. <<

Strahd,
You just made my head hurt, especially when considering the message I just posted here prior to
even reading this! ….Oiy they give new meaning to ‘pains in the ass’.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5: to Strahd
Date: 5/6/97 8:38:41 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: A5
At this moment, I cannot recall the Halls’ comments as anything but responses to criticisms largely
instigated by Fivers. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.
>>

>>From: Strahd27
Unfortunately, you are. Under another screen name, go over there and post something completely
innocently positive about B5. In 24 hours the Halls will have responded with no less than 12 messages
each, damning you to eternal flame.<<

ROFL!!! I’m sorry I didn’t come to this board sooner. I feel a little better now that I’ve vented and
seen confirmation that I’m not wrong when I say it is stupid madness. <g>

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 8:51:32 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: MythoPhile
I may be in the minority, but I actually liked the Klingon episode…<<

I found it acceptable –surprisingly acceptable since I’m not inclined to like Klingon episodes by
their very nature, though there have been a few exceptions to that predisposition of mine. What made it
good was that the writing was good, it’s that simple really. The relationships were fleshed out, and it didn’t
get soapy –the Klingon chant at the end a bit much, and exactly the kind of thing a can’t stand where the
Klingons are concerned. <g> I like Martok, and watching him keeps me interested, and is it just me or did
Worf come off pretty well overall? Predictable? In some ways, sure, but not bad, especially for a Klingon
episode in my book.

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/6/97 4:44:42 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Uh, Blobbb. Anyone who sells a script is considered a “writer”. However we can argue as to if they are a
GOOD writer all day long.<<

They have only written for Trek!

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/6/97 4:45:49 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Someday CGI will look just as good as models, but for now they are still catoony.<<

DS9 has toys in space then..cartoons..is your name Wayne?

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 4:50:18 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Starfleet techs are just as able to modify their ships as the WhiteStar is able to modify themselves. Ships
adapting is an old Trek thing ie the Borg (of course if the Borg were to be introduced now, TPTB would
have been accused of stealing the adaptive nature of the Borg from JMS). It would not be a large task too
adapt shields for a certain type of weapon, espeacilly when you have 140 worlds and their scientists to help.
Actually it would have been completely unrealistic to NOT have Starfleet have a way to counter that
weapon. It’s the old offense-defense conflict that has been around since human started killing eachother with
rocks.

–AcDec<<

If it aint in the episode it didn’t happen. My original post stands. You are writing Trek law yourself to
explain a hole in the plot.

 

Subj::: Re:Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/6/97 4:52:26 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>> So. Score one victory for Raider One with VOY. But it’s because I care about the quality and accuracy
of our meager SF shows.<<

And how many defeats loser?

All tis miltary bull. You have lost EVERY engagement on this board. You speak pants. Great Military
leader of men..Oh yeah..

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/6/97 5:48:26 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<<<I must have missed this episode.>>
It’s in your bookstore. If you are gonna be so uptight because you don’t know how they modify shields, go
get it.>>

Ac, 90% of the people watching probably don’t own a tech manual, don’t know it exist and if they do, have
no desire to go buy one. What are they supposed to do?

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/6/97 6:02:03 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<It’s in your bookstore. If you are gonna be so uptight because you don’t know how they modify shields,
go get it.>>
If the writers did their jobs in the first place, I wouldn’t have to buy such non-canon drivel. Remember
the explanations about renumbered warp and how there were two kinds of Klingons and how earth explorers
found Alpha Centauri, where they met Zefram Cochrane, and together they all invented warp drive, etc?

<< I understand the basic fundamental problems with Braga’s science are explained to be “Q alters the
structure of the universe and basic biological law in those episodes.” This is all explained in the “Star Trek
Biological and Evolutionary Manual” by Braga/Taylor due out this summer. Silly us for seeing problems
where none clearly existed.>>
<<Of course, what screwing up REAL science has to do with how Starfleet modified their fictional shields
escapes me.>>
It is exactly the same principle. “This contradiction will make be explained by non-canon stuff if you
shell out enough moola.” Said non-canon explanation designed to silence all criticism right up to, but not
including, the writers contradict it.
None of which addresses the basic *dramatic* problem with how all enemies’ superior tech becomes no
better than ours the minute shields or phasers are “recalibrated.” Overused, lazy, and a cop-out. At least do
a serious upgrade of Federation technology after they encounter these guys. Give them transwarp conduit
technology, etc. Where is the problem? Except that it would require serious innovation.

<<This is positively hilarious.>>
<<I don’t know why, DS9 does use a lot less technobabble than either TNG or VOY. Really, if you
complain about shields so much why don’t you complain about all the unexplained technology in B5?>>
You are kidding, right? How many times have the DS9 crew said, “There’s an unexplained buildup of
dechion particles?” and wondered for 20 minutes what it means while you’re screaming at the screen,
“There’s a cloaked ship again, you ninnies!”

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 6:18:20 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Nope, you have your facts wrong. The reason Sisko was having visions was BECAUSE of his exposue to
the orbs. They were Orb “flashbacks”.>>

I’m not sure we’re talking about the same ep. That was the one where he gave up the job of Emissary and
then got it back after the flashbacks. The ep I’m refering to is the one when he uses the holosuite to
reconstruct the monolith in a painting of that city. Then he gets shokced by wsome sort of short and starts
having visions. I’m pretty sure they didn’t mention the orbs in that one. The cause was the electro-shock, but
the images were all major stock prophectic type. The orb flash backs are usually much more conscience. I
wouldn’t call the orb visions the usual prophectic type because most prphecies use metaphors rather than
showing pieces of the actual events. Now I’m not complaining about the ep. I thought it was one of the best
they had. I for a while thought the locusts were the Federation. Now that would have been a switch.

Tryel

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/6/97 7:43:56 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Then he gets shokced by wsome sort of short and starts having visions.>>

Pardon my dyslexia. this should read

“Shocked by some” not “shokced by wsome”

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 2:39:04 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<<Then he gets shokced by wsome sort of short and starts having visions. I’m pretty sure they didn’t
mention the orbs in that one.>>
Ac is speculating again. Take the explanation as gospel; he does.

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/7/97 3:08:22 AM
From: Niles46
Posted on: America Online

<< Agreed the First ones could have been explored more. It is difficult also to make a non-human alien
(something Trek seldom does). I think the point being made was that most Trek aliens have just a bumpy
nose or forehead. B5 tends to go for the full face mask, body suit or even a completely CGI alien. I think it’s
a case of the Trek people having very little creative imagination and a big budget, and B5 having the
opposite.>>

Thank You Blobbb, that WAS my point in the original message Exactly!!!!!!!!!!! Imagination is something
ST is sorely lacking Nowadays!!!!
Niles46

Subj::: “Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/7/97 3:35:15 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>(Remember that eventually killed Dark Skies).<<

So ”Dark Skies” was indeed cancelled after all. Pity. That show was just starting to grow on me.
And now that I know more about the possibility of an organization named ‘Majestic’ actually existing I’m a
little more disappointed.

Subj::: Re:THE main reason….
Date: 5/7/97 3:57:59 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<They have only written for Trek!>>

As far as I know only Ron Moore has written only for Trek, but even he is not a good example considering
he now has a movie deal. BTW Ron has a record for Trek Hugo nominations with 3.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/7/97 3:59:05 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<DS9 has toys in space then..cartoons..is your name Wayne?>>

Of course, the ‘toys’ still look more realistic. However CGI is sure more spectacular.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 4:00:59 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<If it aint in the episode it didn’t happen. My original post stands. You are writing Trek law yourself to
explain a hole in the plot.>>

No it did happen, shields now work so obviously they modified them. Completely consistant with their own
tech manual, and with history.

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/7/97 4:02:00 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Ac, 90% of the people watching probably don’t own a tech manual, don’t know it exist and if they do,
have no desire to go buy one. What are they supposed to do?>>

Then they really should not be so uptight with the operation of shields.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/7/97 4:13:26 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< If the writers did their jobs in the first place, I wouldn’t have to buy such non-canon drivel. Remember
the explanations about renumbered warp and how there were two kinds of Klingons and how earth explorers
found Alpha Centauri, where they met Zefram Cochrane, and together they all invented warp drive, etc?>>

Of course the diffrence is that the Tech Manual is made by people who work on the show, and the other
drivel was not.

<< It is exactly the same principle. “This contradiction will make be explained by non-canon stuff if you
shell out enough moola.” Said non-canon explanation designed to silence all criticism right up to, but not
including, the writers contradict it.>>

There is a diffrence bewteen a contradiction, and something happening offscreen.

<<None of which addresses the basic *dramatic* problem with how all enemies’ superior tech becomes
no better than ours the minute shields or phasers are “recalibrated.” Overused, lazy, and a cop-out. At least
do a serious upgrade of Federation technology after they encounter these guys. Give them transwarp
conduit technology, etc. Where is the problem? Except that it would require serious innovation.>>

Their technology WAS NOT that superior. Heck, three of their ships could not destroy a single unshielded
Starfleet ship without doing a Kamakazi. I don’t exactly call that superior. Jem’Hadar fighters seem to be
only slightly superior to a Klingon BOP, if at all. Now the Federation has working shields, and therefore has
a much better chance in combat.

<<You are kidding, right? How many times have the DS9 crew said, “There’s an unexplained buildup of
dechion particles?” and wondered for 20 minutes what it means while you’re screaming at the screen,
“There’s a cloaked ship again, you ninnies!”>>

Actually it’s usally just a ‘subspace anomaly’ that a cloked ship appears as, and as we saw in TNG, a LOT of
things cause those. DS9 still uses a lot less technobabble than anyother Trek show besides TOS.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 4:16:14 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I’m not sure we’re talking about the same ep. That was the one where he gave up the job of Emissary and
then got it back after the flashbacks. The ep I’m refering to is the one when he uses the holosuite to
reconstruct the monolith in a painting of that city. Then he gets shokced by wsome sort of short and starts
having visions. I’m pretty sure they didn’t mention the orbs in that one. The cause was the electro-shock, but
the images were all major stock prophectic type. The orb flash backs are usually much more conscience. I
wouldn’t call the orb visions the usual prophectic type because most prphecies use metaphors rather than
showing pieces of the actual events. Now I’m not complaining about the ep. I thought it was one of the best
they had. I for a while thought the locusts were the Federation. Now that would have been a switch.>

Your talking about “Rapture” and in that episode Bashir explained that Sisko’s prophesies we caused by his
prior contact with the Orbs. Supposedly it’s happened to Bajorian priests before.

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 4:17:53 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Ac is speculating again. Take the explanation as gospel; he does.>>

I’m afraid not Mytho. It was specifically mention by Bashir as being caused by Sisko’s exposure to the Orbs.
Sometimes I think I’m the only one who actually watches these shows.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/7/97 4:41:59 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Ac, 90% of the people watching probably don’t own a tech manual, don’t know it exist and if they do,
have no desire to go buy one. What are they supposed to do?>>

<Then they really should not be so uptight with the operation of shields.>

Tryel breaks out into song:

“Just repeat to yourself its just a show I should really just relax?”

Does that about sum in up Ac? 😉

Tryel
This is your brain (0) this is your brain on finals ~~~~ Any questions?

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 4:49:22 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<Your talking about “Rapture” and in that episode Bashir explained that Sisko’s prophesies we caused by
his prior contact with the Orbs. Supposedly it’s happened to Bajorian priests before.>

Okay, till I get the re-runs of the ep in question and can satifiy my curiousty, I’ll take this at face value, but
the description of the dreams was much more on the line of common “fantasy” prophetic visions then what
we’ve seen in other “orb induced” dreams.

I still swear that Bashir said that in the ep with the return of the poet from the past rather than more recently

Subj::: Re: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/7/97 4:57:07 AM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

Blobbb, I’ve won them all, my friend. You know I’m right about everything. Admit it. And don’t attempt to
be insulting, it doesn’t suit the temperament expressed in your member’s profile.
BTW, have you checked out the ~”Is Delenn Sneaky” folder?
Raider One, Above the Target

Subj::: Re: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/7/97 6:07:43 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Blobbb, I’ve won them all, my friend. You know I’m right about everything. Admit it. And don’t attempt
to be insulting, it doesn’t suit the temperament expressed in your member’s profile.>>

Then why haven’t you answered any of my charges? And what color is the sky in your world Raider?

Tryel

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 7:52:01 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>…shields now work so obviously they modified them…<

Yeah, obviously.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 3:57:56 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>All you really, incredibly, hard core Trek fans who keep being insulted by criticisms by devout, non-
Trek, B5 fans, you know there’s a Trek forum under keyword ‘Star Trek’ where you’ll probably find much
less aggravating talk, and a lot more people who completely agree with you.<<

LOL. Maybe if B5 fans did the same …

>>And the Halls aren’t just dedicated Trek fans, they’re vicious guard dogs who bite at anything remotely
anti Trek.<<

We handle criticism just fine.. we get tired of the B5ers who raid the Trek area to hold up the holy 5-year
arch and ask Trekkers to bow in homage before it. They deserve to be encountered and they will be.

>> If you can’t handle the criticism guys, then just go back to the Trek boards and leave alone those B5 fans
who are posting their anti-Trek feelings here on the B5 boards, and aren’t invading the Trek boards the way
you are invading theirs.<<

What a laugh! B5ers are getting quite a reputation for invading the boards of other shows. A good example
was the fiasco on the Space:A&B boards..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/7/97 3:59:39 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>DS9 has toys in space then..cartoons..is your name Wayne?<<

LOL. Sorry, Blobbb.. Strahd is the one using multiple names..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/7/97 4:32:27 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Of course, the ‘toys’ still look more realistic. However CGI is sure more spectacular.
–AcDec<<

Okay that’s enough..I think we sought have agreed a bit anyway.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 4:33:44 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

<Ac is speculating again. Take the explanation as gospel; he does.>>

At least AC tries to explain unlike certain others. Give him credit for that,

Subj::: Re: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/7/97 4:34:54 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Blobbb, I’ve won them all, my friend. You know I’m right about everything. Admit it. And don’t attempt
to be insulting, it doesn’t suit the temperament expressed in your member’s profile.
BTW, have you checked out the ~”Is Delenn Sneaky” folder?
Raider One, Above the Target<<

Pants you have. Shot down everytime. Over the wrong target. Death by friendly fire. Everbody who thinks
Mr.Soldier has one post now.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 4:36:45 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>What a laugh! B5ers are getting quite a reputation for invading the boards of other shows. A good
example was the fiasco on the Space:A&B boards.. <<

Oh not again.not this one.

>>LOL. Sorry, Blobbb.. Strahd is the one using multiple names..<<

Is he..he’s not me or is he?
I would like to say I think I’m beginning to like Wayne……great guy.

 

Subj::: Re Evangelista to RH
Date: 5/7/97 4:55:27 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

What I’m about to say is an attempt at popping everybody’s balloon including my own :-)

Randy how about this:

“I’m a B5 ‘evangelista’ and you’re ‘militant’ Trekker…Why we could be nutty sitcom neighbors”
This act of lunacy was brought to you by ISU’s finals week. :-)

Subj::: Re:Re Evangelista to RH
Date: 5/7/97 5:35:46 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<“I’m a B5 ‘evangelista’ and you’re ‘militant’ Trekker…Why we could be nutty sitcom neighbors”
This act of lunacy was brought to you by ISU’s finals week. :-)>>

Heck, aren’t all sitcom neighbors nutty?

— A5. Mrs. Kravitz, go home.

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/7/97 10:45:04 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

Me: <<Ac, 90% of the people watching probably don’t own a tech manual, don’t know it exist and if they
do, have no desire to go buy one. What are they supposed to do?>>

AcDec: <<Then they really should not be so uptight with the operation of shields.>>

I see, only those who fork over for the tech manual have the right to an opinion?

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/7/97 10:50:34 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<We handle criticism just fine.. we get tired of the B5ers who raid the Trek area to hold up the holy 5-year
arch and ask Trekkers to bow in homage before it. They deserve to be encountered and they will be.>>

Gee, all I remember is a few people saying, “gee, maybe you ought to check out B5, too,” then getting our
heads bitten off for near blasphemy.

Subj::: Check out the new TV Guide..
Date: 5/8/97 1:01:43 AM
From: Youngpg
Posted on: America Online

The latest edition of TV Guide has an article about Voyager and its season finale…..Seems that there is a
threat to the Borg. Seems that the race rides around in ORGANIC SQUID-Like ships. Uh, hello? Are
there Vorlons in the Delta Quadrant or is somebody not being original?????

Paula

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/8/97 1:55:12 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Tryel breaks out into song:

“Just repeat to yourself its just a show I should really just relax?”

Does that about sum in up Ac? 😉

Tryel
This is your brain (0) this is your brain on finals ~~~~ Any questions?>>

ROTFL. I know the finals thing. Just got done myself. :)

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 1:56:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Okay, till I get the re-runs of the ep in question and can satifiy my curiousty, I’ll take this at face value,
but the description of the dreams was much more on the line of common “fantasy” prophetic visions then
what we’ve seen in other “orb induced” dreams.

I still swear that Bashir said that in the ep with the return of the poet from the past rather than more
recently>>

Nope, it was Rapture. I got it on tape. :)

–AcDec

Subj::: Re: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/8/97 1:56:48 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<
Blobbb, I’ve won them all, my friend. You know I’m right about everything. Admit it. And don’t attempt to
be insulting, it doesn’t suit the temperament expressed in your member’s profile.
BTW, have you checked out the ~”Is Delenn Sneaky” folder?
Raider One, Above the Target>>

Geez, does this guy ever go away?

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 1:57:43 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Yeah, obviously.>>

Yea, heck the did it all the time on TNG.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:b5 DELIVERS
Date: 5/8/97 1:59:18 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Okay that’s enough..I think we sought have agreed a bit anyway.>>

Who would have thought it possiable. Perhaps there is hope for the world afterall. :)
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 2:00:03 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<At least AC tries to explain unlike certain others. Give him credit for that,>>

Why, thank you Blobbb. :)

 

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/8/97 2:03:05 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I see, only those who fork over for the tech manual have the right to an opinion?>>

No, but if you want an INFORMED opinion then fork over the dough. :) Or you can just browze through it.
You should have seen some of the arguments I used to get in with LopezTrek about Trek tech. Makes this
stuff look laid back. :)
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Check out the new TV Guid
Date: 5/8/97 2:05:18 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<The latest edition of TV Guide has an article about Voyager and its season finale…..Seems that there is a
threat to the Borg. Seems that the race rides around in ORGANIC SQUID-Like ships. Uh, hello? Are
there Vorlons in the Delta Quadrant or is somebody not being original?????>>

Of course they had “TIN MAN” to “rip-off” from themselves. Come on people, JMS didn’t exactly invent
the idea of organic ships.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Check out the new TV Guid
Date: 5/8/97 2:47:16 AM
From: Youngpg
Posted on: America Online

<<<<The latest edition of TV Guide has an article about Voyager and its season finale…..Seems that there
is a threat to the Borg. Seems that the race rides around in ORGANIC SQUID-Like ships. Uh, hello? Are
there Vorlons in the Delta Quadrant or is somebody not being original?????>>

Of course they had “TIN MAN” to “rip-off” from themselves. Come on people, JMS didn’t exactly invent
the idea of organic ships.>>

Agreed…no argument from me….but, uh, SQUID like organic ships?

 

Subj::: Re:Cameras, Action!!
Date: 5/8/97 3:32:31 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

>>Our knowledge of the inner workings of Sisko, Kasidy, Kira, Dax, Odo, Dukat, Bajor, Cardassia, Maqui,
Jem’hadar, Klingons, etc. are rendered in stunning, consistent, unfolding detail. <<

the only thing that i have seen portrayed consistently about these characters is that they all have a healthy
case of “situational ethics” and incredible libidos apparently with desire to mate with anything that moves.
Even TV Guide callsit “Love DS9 Style”

Don

Subj::: B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 3:40:34 AM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<I don’t know what planet you come from,Tryel,but B5 has not nor ever has done well in the ratings. At
least not in the USA. Their ratings have always been pretty bad.>>

This post was from DC (not to be confused with Ac who I’m actually getting along with) on the ST v. B5
mirror board. I have heard very differently, where can I check and make sure on ratings?

Tryel

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 3:47:51 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<Actually it would have been completely unrealistic to NOT have Starfleet have a way to counter that
weapon. It’s the old offense-defense conflict that has been around since human started killing eachother with
rocks.>

Sorta like when the Europeans rolled right over the Indians, The Indians just adjusted their shields to deflect
bullets right?

Don

Subj::: Re:skipping raidrone again..
Date: 5/8/97 3:49:11 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<Actually the answers are almost always there. Just check the Tech Manual.>

If its not on the screen, it doesn’t exist.

Don

Subj::: Re:”Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/8/97 4:06:06 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

<< So ”Dark Skies” was indeed cancelled after all. Pity.>>

I was *very* disappointed in DS. I gave it every chance, but finally dropped it some while before the
end. Part of the problem was that the main characters were idiots (the same thing that killed “Nowhere
Man”), and part was that the whole premise was misbegotten. Why the heck didn’t he want to work for
Majestik again? I would’ve thought the imminence of the threat would’ve more than overriden his childish
“I don’t like their methods” protest. The whole premise – let’s be on the run from the aliens and from the
only ones that can stop them – was frustrating and pointless.

Subj::: Re:Check out the new TV Guid
Date: 5/8/97 4:17:50 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<Of course they had “TIN MAN” to “rip-off” from themselves. Come on people, JMS didn’t exactly invent
the idea of organic ships.>

No, organic ships go back to at least 1953,”Shape” by Robert Sheckley. This is the earliest occurence of
which i am aware.

Don

Subj::: Re:Check out the new TV Guid
Date: 5/8/97 4:41:58 AM
From: RWGibson13
Posted on: America Online

>
The latest edition of TV Guide has an article about Voyager and its season finale…..Seems that there is a
threat to the Borg. Seems that the race rides around in ORGANIC SQUID-Like ships. Uh, hello? Are
there Vorlons in the Delta Quadrant or is somebody not being original?????<

I noticed that also. But, judging from some of the other bizarre statements from both Taylor and Braga in
that article, I’m more apt to wonder how much of the above is still true… Could be their powers of
description aren’t the best <grin>.

RWG

 

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 5:30:03 AM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

From: Tryel Sana

<<<<I don’t know what planet you come from,Tryel,but B5 has not nor ever has done well in the ratings. At
least not in the USA. Their ratings have always been pretty bad.>>

This post was from DC (not to be confused with Ac who I’m actually getting along with) on the ST v. B5
mirror board. I have heard very differently, where can I check and make sure on ratings?>>

I guess it depends on how you define “well.” WB is very happy with the ratings or, to be more specific,
the demographics, which are far more important. After all, the stations carry B5 because they think they
can sell advertising during the commercial breaks. If they can show a potential advertiser looking for a
target market that B5 reaches that demographic quite well, then they’ll sell time.
B5’s Neilsen “rating” usually hovers between a 3.0 and 4.0. VOYAGER usually is in the 5.0 to 7.0
range, although repeats sometimes plunge into the 2’s. DS9 does about the same as VOYAGER.
Comparisons between B5 and network shows (such as VOYAGER) are meaningless, because B5 is
syndicated, i.e. sold to independent markets. (Although some network affiliates buy B5 anyway, which
leads to the occasional confusion some people have, thinking that B5 is a Fox or UPN product.) B5 is in
the Top 10 syndicated one-hour dramas, and occasionally breaks into the Top 25 overall (which includes
OPRAH, GERALDO, etc.).
Bottom line … Anyone who makes a sweeping generalization like “their ratings have always been pretty
bad” is simply ignorant. If that were true, how did B5 make it through four seasons?
Stephen

 

Subj::: Re: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/8/97 5:44:39 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>Geez, does this guy ever go away?<<

No, he’s obsessed with being a hemorrhoid.

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 5:45:31 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

>>What a laugh! B5ers are getting quite a reputation for invading the boards of other shows. A good
example was the fiasco on the Space:A&B boards.. <<

So you’re going to return in kind. A noble attitude. No matter how much you like Trek, you
obviously don’t believe in the messages they’re trying to send. Every post you or your Bro have ever left on
these boards was filled with tension in the nicest, and outright venom in most. If you’re upset that some B5
fans go to the Trek boards and bother you, you aren’t returning the favor to them, you’re spitting venom at
those of us who stay in the B5 boards and leave the Trek boards alone.

FFF
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:”Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/8/97 5:54:45 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

<<From: G7
So ”Dark Skies” was indeed cancelled after all. Pity.>>

>>From: MythoPhile
I was *very* disappointed in DS. I gave it every chance, but finally dropped it some while before the end.
<<

The difference between us is that I only saw one or two episodes its first several months in, and
then I picked up on its last three or four before they took it off and they finally seemed to be going
someplace. Profound things had happened –he lost his wife, by all appearances permanently, and he also
lost his child, who he was still after. He had given up on his wife, which was sad, but we were also starting
to learn more about the damn aliens, which is always annoying when they start moving into something like
this and then the rug gets yanked.

>>Why the heck didn’t he want to work for Majestik again?<<

Didn’t get to see that one, and couldn’t help but wonder about it myself in the end. I figured he
had two choices: work for them, or die. I also thought it was under false pretense, as a spy, which later
became more and more confirmed. When he was ready to blow the whistle on the government on CBS live
television it was the blonde that saved his butt or they might have shot him right there in the office when
confronting him. Then Loengard and the blonde were both stupid enough to go into one of the adjacent
offices after she told them they were only playing the ‘good cop, bad cop’ routine, talked about the real
circumstances openly without being paranoid to wonder if the office was bugged, and then both had sex as
the camera recorded. That’s where we were left off, the butt heads.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 5:54:46 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Comparisons between B5 and network shows (such as VOYAGER) are meaningless, because B5 is
syndicated, i.e. sold to independent markets. (Although some network affiliates buy B5 anyway, which
leads to the occasional confusion some people have, thinking that B5 is a Fox or UPN product.) B5 is in
the Top 10 syndicated one-hour dramas, and occasionally breaks into the Top 25 overall (which includes
OPRAH, GERALDO, etc.).>>

So apparently *B5* is trailing *DS9*. Since they are both syndicated shows, a comparison of the ratings
for the two *would* be meaningful. As well, and notwithstanding that *Voyager* is a network show, since
*DS9* shares the Trek name with *Voyager*, and since the audiences for the two Treks may not overlap
exactly, wouldn’t the fact that both *Voyager* and *DS9* consistently rate higher than *B5* tend to
indicate that there is still a solid combined core of Trekkers?

BTW, how is the Sanchez versus B-1 Bob controversy these days, SSmith?

— A5. Just thought you’d know, since (1) you’re from Irvine and (2) you’re political. Also, which Kosh
were you referring to a while back — I still haven’t gotten an answer from you on that yet. :-)

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5: to JhnyReb
Date: 5/8/97 6:02:33 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>What a laugh! B5ers are getting quite a reputation for invading the boards of other shows. A good
example was the fiasco on the Space:A&B boards.. <<

<<From: JhnyReb
So you’re going to return in kind. A noble attitude. No matter how much you like Trek, you obviously
don’t believe in the messages they’re trying to send. Every post you or your Bro have ever left on these
boards was filled with tension in the nicest, and outright venom in most. If you’re upset that some B5 fans
go to the Trek boards and bother you, you aren’t returning the favor to them, you’re spitting venom at those
of us who stay in the B5 boards and leave the Trek boards alone.<<

But here’s the kicker, JR –he’s referring to B5 fans who may also happen to be Trekkers, and who
frequent –get this– the Trek\B5 Folder! In other words, even if you like both to one extent or another, but
just *happen* to like B5 better despite being a Trekker as well, then you have no business over there! That’s
what you call tyranny –BS, childish, dictatorial idiocy!
Don’t let him fool you –he’s whining and complaining about people who frequent a *designated*
B5 section within that Area, not people who frequent the other Trek folders over there.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings: to A5
Date: 5/8/97 6:12:35 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5
So apparently *B5* is trailing *DS9*. Since they are both syndicated shows, a comparison of the ratings
for the two *would* be meaningful.<<

Here’s my gripe with this type of comparison: check out the time slots for DS9 across the
country, and then check out the time slots B5’s been given in many markets across the nation, and what you
see when you look at B5’s schedule in this regard is that it’s been shafted in many markets. And despite what
one of the Halls might say about the show just not finding ratings in that area, and that that’s the reason why
it’s ended up in a lousy slot just doesn’t wash because in a lot of those places B5 has always been scheduled
in those slots, or moved to time slots that were equally terrible. 12:00 or 1:00 in the afternoon on a Saturday
or a Sunday is not a good time for any show to be expected to bring in ratings, and this is the schedule for
B5 in many areas of the country. DS9 doesn’t get shafted like that by virtue of the fact that it’s got the Trek
name, and TNG proved that Trek shows could do well in syndication. B5 does well in all key, major
markets from what I understand, and it’s probably because all these markets give it a good time slot in which
to bring in an audience –here in my area which covers NY, NJ, and CT B5 is shown on Sunday nights at
8:00, a good, prime time slot, and the show does well here. It’s not on at 12:00 on Sunday afternoon when
many people might be sleeping late, out shopping, doing laundry or some such thing. It many areas the
show was never discovered because it was never given a chance to be discovered –the same fate “Forever
Knight” suffered.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 3:00:15 PM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

A5398457 wrote:

<<So apparently *B5* is trailing *DS9*. Since they are both syndicated shows, a comparison of the ratings
for the two *would* be meaningful. As well, and notwithstanding that *Voyager* is a network show, since
*DS9* shares the Trek name with *Voyager*, and since the audiences for the two Treks may not overlap
exactly, wouldn’t the fact that both *Voyager* and *DS9* consistently rate higher than *B5* tend to
indicate that there is still a solid combined core of Trekkers?>>

I don’t think that anyone is denying a “solid combined core of Trekkers” exists. STAR TREK has had
more than 30 years of hype and publicity. At Paramount, TREK is called “The Franchise.” All the
merchandise they sell helps pay for a lot of other shows and movies that otherwise might not be made. The
creative accounts at Paramount charge administrative overhead to TREK for things that have nothing to do
with the show, e.g. constructing a new office building on the lot. There’s a huge TREK propaganda
machine, and an entire Licensing staff for the sole purpose of selling TREK merchandise.
Compare that with B5, which isn’t even *made* by WB. The studio is the distributor and a co-investor.
WB’s “family jewels” are the LOONEY TUNES cartoons. If B5 ever had the budget, the propaganda
machine, and the Licensing staff that TREK says, that would certainly translate into better ratings, for no
other reason than the wider publicity would get it better time slots on all those little independent stations.
I’ve also heard some allegations, although I’ve seen no evidence first-hand, that Paramount early on
threatened to withhold TNG and DS9 from any station that carried B5.
But that’s all politics. In terms of writing quality and overall entertainment, there’s no doubt that B5 is
just as good, if not better. Those who make the time to find and watch the show invariably become hooked.
Just look at Scott Adams, the “Dilbert” creator, who called B5 “the best show in the history of television.”
Howard Stern (not one of my favorite people) recently said the same on the air. There are a lot of NASA
people who’ve gone over the fence to B5.
Frankly, I think this whole “TREK Vs. B5″ is a waste of time and energy. Watch ’em if you like ’em. If
you don’t, don’t.

<<… which Kosh were you referring to a while back — I still haven’t gotten an answer from you on that yet.
:-)>>

“We are all Kosh.”
Stephen

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 3:18:41 PM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<All the merchandise they sell helps pay for a lot of other shows and movies that otherwise might not be
made. The creative accounts at Paramount charge administrative overhead to TREK for things that have
nothing to do with the show, e.g. constructing a new office building on the lot. There’s a huge TREK
propaganda machine, and an entire Licensing staff for the sole purpose of selling TREK merchandise.>>

Gee, I wasn’t aware of that. Imagine if they were to reinvest all the money in Trek that was generated by
Trek. Perhaps then they could afford tons of neat effects and things that would improve the shows.

<<Frankly, I think this whole “TREK Vs. B5″ is a waste of time and energy. Watch ’em if you like ’em. If
you don’t, don’t.>>

I couldn’t agree more, and I’ve always said we should cross-compare the shows without having to deride
either one. That’s why, for example, I moved one thread which was originally in some other folder over to
the “B5 Connections With Trek” folder rather than this one.

<<“We are all Kosh.”>>

Okay, I’ll buy that. I think.

— A5.

Subj::: Re:Re Evangelista to RH
Date: 5/8/97 4:03:47 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>”I’m a B5 ‘evangelista’ and you’re ‘militant’ Trekker…Why we could be nutty sitcom neighbors”
This act of lunacy was brought to you by ISU’s finals week. :-)<<

I like it, anyway!

Waytne

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 4:05:42 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>Gee, all I remember is a few people saying, “gee, maybe you ought to check out B5, too,” then getting
our heads bitten off for near blasphemy.<<

I have never said that. Sorry you are so mistaken. Folks can check it out whatever they want. On the other
hand, if anyone dares say anything good about Voyager, they get called names..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:”Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/8/97 4:08:38 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>> I was *very* disappointed in DS. I gave it every chance, but finally dropped it some while before the
end.<<

You stuck with it longer than I did, Mytho.. I could only bear about 3 episodes.. aliens on the beach was a
disaster, as well as the Beatles being put on Ed Sullivan by the aliens.. even I couldn’t bear that..

>> Part of the problem was that the main characters were idiots (the same thing that killed “Nowhere
Man”),<<

I don’t agree with you on Nowhere Man, which I still miss tremendously. That was a well-plotted and
scripted show, IMHO.. you never knew what was going to happen next..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:Check out the new TV Guid
Date: 5/8/97 4:09:39 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>No, organic ships go back to at least 1953,”Shape” by Robert Sheckley. This is the earliest occurence of
which i am aware.<<

Actually, Robert Scheckley got a copy of the 5-year arc and ripped JMS off.. he just published it before
JMS did.. :-)

Wayne

Subj::: Re: Jeri & JMS on target
Date: 5/8/97 4:10:05 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Blobbb, I’ve won them all, my friend. You know I’m right about everything. Admit it. And don’t attempt
to be insulting, it doesn’t suit the temperament expressed in your member’s profile.
BTW, have you checked out the ~”Is Delenn Sneaky” folder?
Raider One, Above the Target>>

Thanks for posting this ACDEC..I never noticed…er I haven’t filled in my member profile, what is
Raiderone talking about. I think I’ll look at my member profile now..it must be blank..is he being witty?

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 4:10:53 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

<<At least AC tries to explain unlike certain others. Give him credit for that,>>

<<Why, thank you Blobbb. :)>>

I’m creeping..I’ll get ya later!

 

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 4:10:57 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>> B5’s Neilsen “rating” usually hovers between a 3.0 and 4.0.<<

Is this for the new shows or does this also include the reruns? I always wonder how the three-peats do in
the ratings.. and this kind of information is almost impossible to get.. JMS rarely gives it out..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:Check out the new TV Guid
Date: 5/8/97 4:11:58 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Of course they had “TIN MAN” to “rip-off” from themselves. Come on people, JMS didn’t exactly
invent the idea of organic ships.<<

Yes they did but I wonder why they have wauted so long for an organic alien ship. Maybe B5’s x-SFX
company?

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 4:13:09 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>> If you’re upset that some B5 fans go to the Trek boards and bother you, you aren’t returning the favor to
them, you’re spitting venom at those of us who stay in the B5 boards and leave the Trek boards alone.<<

Funny, but this argument doesn’t work on the B5ers who raid the Trek areas and those for other shows.. they
don’t care or on a holy quest. Well, at least some of you understand how people in the other areas feel..

Wayne

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 6:47:50 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<Funny, but this argument doesn’t work on the B5ers who raid the Trek areas and those for other shows..
they don’t care or on a holy quest. Well, at least some of you understand how people in the other areas
feel..>>

Gee, Wayne still hasn’t gotten the message that the B5ers on the Trek area were ALSO Trekkers. What’s
the point in trying to pound it into his skull. You’re arms will just get tired.

 

Subj::: Re:”Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/8/97 6:48:53 PM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

>> Part of the problem was that the main characters were idiots (the same thing that killed “Nowhere
Man”),<<

<<I don’t agree with you on Nowhere Man, which I still miss tremendously. That was a well-plotted and
scripted show, IMHO.. you never knew what was going to happen next..>>

I could never get more than about three episodes in, and ended up thinking, “This was done infinitely
better on the prisoner.” Gee, can you guess that the girl is really on their side, not a fellow victim? He sure
can’t. And I never understood the whole premise. All that fuss over the photograph… but he TOOK the
friggin’ thing. He must know SOMETHING about it. For the longest time I thought it was something from
Vietnam. He must have known where he took it, the general circumstances, what was going on, why he
took it, etc… but we never found out any of that and he wandered around like he didn’t know either. Simply
incomprehensible.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 9:24:40 PM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

From: WayneHall

<<Is this for the new shows or does this also include the reruns? I always wonder how the three-peats do in
the ratings.. and this kind of information is almost impossible to get.. JMS rarely gives it out..>>

Actually, the information is very easy to get. Someone posts it regularly on the moderated B5 Usenet
newsgroup, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated. The person posts ratings for all genre shows, both network
and syndicated. It’s quite thorough, with year-to-date ratings and comparisons to earlier seasons.
If I recall, B5’s ratings in reruns only drop around 1.0 points, which is pretty good compared to most
shows.
As for “JMS rarely gives it out,” that’s simply not true. I’ve seen him post that information many times in
response to questions on many different on-line services. I just searched the Lurker’s Guide for the phrase
“RATINGS” and found a number of postings by JMS citing specific numbers.
Another factor people need to keep in mind is if B5 is making WB a profit. It is. Big time. Most TV
shows don’t see a profit until they go into reruns. B5 is making money *now*. JMS and crew have
demonstated that quality entertainment can be produced without the ludicrous overhead or tremendous
waste of many TV shows and films. (James Cameron’s TITANIC, for example, just went over $200
million.) Ratings aren’t as important as profit. (Hmm, sounds like a Ferengi Rule of Acquisition.)
Greenbacks keep executives employed.
Stephen

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/8/97 9:59:04 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>Gee, Wayne still hasn’t gotten the message that the B5ers on the Trek area were ALSO Trekkers.<<

Gee, the Trekkers haven’t gotten the message, either. They keep telling Strahd and others to stop watching
Trek if all they are going to do is bash it. The evangelistas are transparent.. and only they think no one can
tell..

Wayne

 

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/8/97 10:01:57 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>Another factor people need to keep in mind is if B5 is making WB a profit. It is. Big time.<<

How much is it making? Where do you get this information? You seem to know more about avenues of this
kind of information than most I’ve seen online or on the Internet.

Wayne

Subj::: Blobbb, where are you
Date: 5/8/97 10:23:31 PM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

<<Thanks for posting this ACDEC..I never noticed…er I haven’t filled in my member profile, what is
Raiderone talking about. I think I’ll look at my member profile now..it must be blank..is he being witty?>>
I know you say you’re somewhere in the UK, but your profile is blank to us stateside, my friend, as of
5/8/97. I get other foreign profiles. I thought it was intentional. C’mon, Bobbbb, we’re curious.
Raider One, Above the Target

Subj::: Re:”Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/9/97 3:50:00 AM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

< I could never get more than about three episodes in, and ended up thinking, “This was done infinitely
better on the prisoner.” Gee, can you guess that the girl is really on their side, not a fellow victim? He sure
can’t. And I never understood the whole premise. All that fuss over the photograph… but he TOOK the
friggin’ thing. He must know SOMETHING about it. For the longest time I thought it was something from
Vietnam. He must have known where he took it, the general circumstances, what was going on, why he
took it, etc… but we never found out any of that and he wandered around like he didn’t know either. Simply
incomprehensible.>

In the last ep it was explained that he was actually one of their agents who volunteered for a brain washing
experiment. It made no sense to me either.

Don

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings: to A5
Date: 5/9/97 3:51:01 AM
From: Youngpg
Posted on: America Online

<< Here’s my gripe with this type of comparison: check out the time slots for DS9 across the country, and
then check out the time slots B5’s been given in many markets across the nation, and what you see when you
look at B5’s schedule in this regard is that it’s been shafted in many markets. >>

For the first two years I was in NC, it was DS9 at 10 pm Saturday and B5 at midnight or 1 am or 2 am on
sat/Sun nights….there was no consistency. Some weeks, it would be midnight, the next 1 am, etc. Now,
finally, B5 has settled here at 6 pm Saturday and 11 pm sunday (TWICE!!) and the commercials have
evolved from phone-sex commercials to real, honest Fishin Videos and Tampons…how’s that for
improvement!

Paula

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings: to A5
Date: 5/9/97 4:21:22 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<< Here’s my gripe with this type of comparison: check out the time slots for DS9 across the country,
and then check out the time slots B5’s been given in many markets across the nation, and what you see when
you look at B5’s schedule in this regard is that it’s been shafted in many markets. And despite what one of
the Halls might say about the show just not finding ratings in that area, and that that’s the reason why it’s
ended up in a lousy slot just doesn’t wash because in a lot of those places B5 has always been scheduled in
those slots, or moved to time slots that were equally terrible. >>>>>>

Speculation isnt necessary.
In the UK, B5 gets the BEST timeslot and is run from beginning to end of season. And it ANNHILATES
DS9 and Voy. It is the most popular sci fi show over there, and for good reason: It was played as it was
ment to, the ultimate serial. And as such it is unbeatable entertainment. UK proves it all.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/9/97 4:25:40 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<<>>Gee, Wayne still hasn’t gotten the message that the B5ers on the Trek area were ALSO
Trekkers.<<

Gee, the Trekkers haven’t gotten the message, either. They keep telling Strahd and others to stop watching
Trek if all they are going to do is bash it. The evangelistas are transparent.. and only they think no one can
tell..>>>>>>>>>>>

No hope for Wayne. Once again he refers to me and “The Trekkers” as two different groups. Sorry
Wayne, but I dont need your permission to have “trekker” status.
I am a trekker. Have been for a long time, and probably will be for a long time.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5: to Strahd
Date: 5/9/97 4:53:00 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Gee, the Trekkers haven’t gotten the message, either. They keep telling Strahd and others to stop watching
Trek if all they are going to do is bash it. The evangelistas are transparent.. and only they think no one can
tell..>>>>>>>>>>>

>>From: Strahd
No hope for Wayne. Once again he refers to me and “The Trekkers” as two different groups. Sorry
Wayne, but I dont need your permission to have “trekker” status. I am a trekker. Have been for a long time,
and probably will be for a long time.>>

And I absolutely love the total sidestepping of this so-called “invasion” taking place in a designated
B5 section within the Trek Area –I just love the sleazy, slimy calumny, don’t you?

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings:Youngpg
Date: 5/9/97 4:56:46 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Youngpg
For the first two years I was in NC, it was DS9 at 10 pm Saturday and B5 at midnight or 1 am or 2 am on
sat/Sun nights….there was no consistency. Some weeks, it would be midnight, the next 1 am, etc. Now,
finally, B5 has settled here at 6 pm Saturday and 11 pm sunday (TWICE!!) and the commercials have
evolved from phone-sex commercials to real, honest Fishin Videos and Tampons…how’s that for
improvement! Paula<<

Your area is a perfect example of my illustration of the facts, though at least there wasn’t a hair
brained programming exec over there who didn’t realize B5’s potential or you’d still be sitting in it like I did
with “Forever Knight.”

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings: to Strahd
Date: 5/9/97 4:59:55 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: Strahd
Speculation isnt necessary.
In the UK, B5 gets the BEST timeslot and is run from beginning to end of season. And it ANNHILATES
DS9 and Voy. It is the most popular sci fi show over there, and for good reason: It was played as it was
ment to, the ultimate serial. And as such it is unbeatable entertainment. UK proves it all.<<

No, no, no –let’s not forget the _discrimination_ they use to dismiss that one, the reason being —
according to them anyway– that the British ‘have a strange idea about what makes something good’ —
another beauty! <g>

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/9/97 5:22:24 AM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

From: WayneHall

<<How much is it making? Where do you get this information? You seem to know more about avenues of
this kind of information than most I’ve seen online or on the Internet.>>

I do free-lance projects for STAR TREK and B5 licensees. I’ve known people at both shows for many
years. There are several people on-line here who know me, and can verify this. You can also pick up the
current Sci-Fi Universe with the cover article written by me — “STAR TREK Vs. BABYLON 5,”
appropriately enough. (The only problem with the published version is that they cut my final section, which
was the point to which the article was building. It should still be in this folder, as I posted it a few weeks
ago.)
How much of a profit is B5 making? No has ever given me a precise number. It’s what I’ve been told by
a number of authoritative sources; since I talk with different divisions at WB, and I hear the same story, I
tend to think it’s true. (If it wasn’t, B5 wouldn’t be on the air.) The same goes for the creative accounting at
Paramount, which has been the

Subj::ect of a number of investigative journalism pieces over the years (not to mention quite a few lawsuits).
Stephen

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/9/97 5:42:25 AM
From: SSmith1701
Posted on: America Online

From: WayneHall

<<Is this for the new shows or does this also include the reruns? I always wonder how the three-peats do in
the ratings.. and this kind of information is almost impossible to get.. JMS rarely gives it out..>>

Just saw the latest ratings summary on the moderated B5 Usenet newsgroup. It listed these numbers for
the B5 repeats:

* * * * *

Babylon 5 rerun ratings (GAA repeated viewings):
3/03 3/10 3/17 3/24 3/31 4/07 4/14
Walk Grey17 Night Fire Epiph ISN Atonement
2.8 2.7 3.0 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.8

* * * * *

Again, keep in mind that first-run ratings tend to be in the 3.0 to 4.0 range. This shows relatively little
slippage.
Another interesting piece of trivia for the reported week of April 14 was that a new DS9 episode pulled a
5.9 rating with a presence in 98% of the total markets. The B5 repeat pulled a 2.8 rating with a presence in
only 93% of the total markets. VOYAGER was a repeat that week; the posting doesn’t report its rating.
Stephen

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5: to JhnyReb
Date: 5/9/97 10:13:04 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

Yeh Gary, I know, I’m a dual purpose fan just like you, well triple duty when you count SW. And
you’re right, that’s why I stopped going to the Trek boards. I had been on the Trek forum about two weeks,
and was getting really friendly replies, getting along with everyone. Even though I was consciously trying
to avoid talking about B5 the inevitable happened and I mentioned it. Maybe not all, but many of my until
then Trek ‘friends’ turned on me like a pack of crazy wolves. I was basically censured, and no one would
even reply other than a few who would cast disparaging remarks my way after that. At least we’re not
venomous around here, everyone has their SF Freedom, even those who we don’t all agree with.

FFF
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/9/97 10:27:32 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

>>Funny, but this argument doesn’t work on the B5ers who raid the Trek areas and those for other shows..
they don’t care or on a holy quest. Well, at least some of you understand how people in the other areas feel..

Wayne<<

Wayne,

I don’t know you, you might be a great guy. And I don’t know who the B5 fans are who are
‘raiding’ the Trek boards, or I’d give them the same message I gave you. I was addressing you because
you’re here, they’re not, and I don’t go to the Trek boards anymore. And even though you’ve never spit
venom (sorry to keep using that metaphor, but…) at me personally, I’m getting hit with the mist of that
which you are spitting at some of the others on these boards. I would appreciate it if you would take a
slightly less virulent attitude when you’re defending Trek.
And if you want to say something to B5 fans who are being venomous on the Trek boards, feel free
to post a copy of my previous statement and tell them that I say the same thing to them. They should
respect Trek, whether or not they like it, when they are on the Trek boards, just as Trek fans should respect
us when they are here.
BTW, I’d never call you names for saying that you like Voyager, even though I might politely
respond that I don’t.

Faithful Fellow Fan of All Three
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/9/97 4:12:03 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>How much is it making? Where do you get this information? You seem to know more about avenues of
this kind of information than most I’ve seen online or on the Internet.

Wayne<<

The UK video sales always make it into the top 10, recently to No.1. Apparently B5 is the highest rated US
import on Channel 4 UK.

Subj::: Re:Blobbb, where are you
Date: 5/9/97 4:14:41 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>I know you say you’re somewhere in the UK, but your profile is blank to us stateside, my friend, as of
5/8/97. I get other foreign profiles. I thought it was intentional. C’mon, Bobbbb, we’re curious.
Raider One, Above the Target<<

Okay nothing to tell.

Occupation Organic Chemist BSC
Second Occupation Owner of small but growing model company, that is where I have my knowledge of the
military, so what?

Nothing flowery like being nuked or commanding the entire US forces.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings: to A5
Date: 5/9/97 4:16:52 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>n the UK, B5 gets the BEST timeslot and is run from beginning to end of season. And it ANNHILATES
DS9 and Voy. It is the most popular sci fi show over there, and for good reason: It was played as it was
ment to, the ultimate serial. And as such it is unbeatable entertainment. UK proves it all.

Strahd<<

Space Above and Beyond is on at a midnight time slot on the same channel as both treks and it still has
better ratings! It doesn’t beat B5 though.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings: to Strahd
Date: 5/9/97 4:18:53 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>No, no, no –let’s not forget the _discrimination_ they use to dismiss that one, the reason being —
according to them anyway– that the British ‘have a strange idea about what makes something good’ —
another beauty! <g><<

Yes we like serial TV. One story loads of episodes. Rather than loads of episodes and no story (did I
mention Trek? I should have).

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/10/97 8:05:38 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>I have heard very differently, where can I check and make sure on ratings?<<

Next week I am going to visit my old TV station. They air B5 and since “the Book” came out about three
weeks ago I can check on it’s ratings. One thing I know for sure, B5 scores real big with the important
demographics, which is why it is still on the air, since it’s overall ratings are weak.

 

Subj::: Re:”Dark Skies” & *Majestic*
Date: 5/10/97 8:08:28 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>The whole premise – let’s be on the run from the aliens and from the only ones that can stop them – was
frustrating and pointless.<<

My feelings exactly. In fact, I yelled that out in frustration, “Why doesn’t he join back with Majestic!” right
before I turned off the damn show for the last time.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5: to JhnyReb
Date: 5/10/97 8:22:18 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>And you’re right, that’s why I stopped going to the Trek boards….<<
Add me to that list. I like DS9 a lot, thought TNG had some great eps(but mostly was dreck), and I despise
Voyager. However, it was my defending of B5 that brought down the wrath of certain brothers and that
idiot, DCTrekFan, among others.

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/10/97 1:25:43 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Next week I am going to visit my old TV station. They air B5 and since “the Book” came out about three
weeks ago I can check on it’s ratings. One thing I know for sure, B5 scores real big with the important
demographics, which is why it is still on the air, since it’s overall ratings are weak.>>

Thanks Necron, it’ll be interesting to see.

 

Subj::: Re:B5 Ratings
Date: 5/11/97 12:35:45 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: NecRon 01
One thing I know for sure, B5 scores real big with the important demographics, which is why it is still on
the air, since it’s overall ratings are weak.<<

Joe said a few weeks back that B5 does well in all the major markets, and that’s where its major
strength lies. This goes a long way toward backing my appraisal of their airing status in many places across
the country where it’s been shafted from the time of its debut concerning scheduling. If these stations in
lesser markets only saw B5’s potential my guess is that it would be right up there neck and neck with DS9
where the ratings are concerned. I don’t think that’s at all far fetched, but syndication sucks, and many a
good show have been doomed by virtue of their being produced within that venue. What Trek has had going
for it from TNG’s inception is the Trek name, which virtually assures a syndicated Trek show relatively
good time spots across the country. I don’t think there’s one station anywhere in the nation that airs DS9 at
12:00 or 1:00 pm on a Saturday or Sunday without it having a cushy spot in their line up as well.

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/11/97 5:07:21 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<LOL. Maybe if B5 fans did the same …>>

Agreed, Wayne. We should also extend that to all rabid fans of any show in other shows forums. Ain’t
gonna happen(though it would be nice if it did), any more than all the christians leaving the Agnostics and
Atheist boards alone…

It’s just in some people’s natures to be jerks.

Subj::: Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/11/97 8:56:03 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

I was handed two really awful DS9 episodes the other day.

1)Between the Darkness and the Light

It featured a small pregnant woman beating up trained security guards. The doctor performed an operation
on the Kira and she still had her clothes on!!! There was an explosive decompression on DS9, the station
didn’t even move, why did we not see the explosion or any of the wreckage? (maybe to save money and the
SFX couldn’t handle it.) A boring monologue of Kira remembering her past with the resistance, this would
have been a good time to show a bit of action. Why did the big bad cardy at the end not have plastic surgery
to heal his scars, afterall Bashir seems very adept at giving somebody a new face at the drop of a coin! And
the ending, those herbs Kira takes make her imune to the drug the Cardy gives her! Come on think of
something better. One good thing is that Sisko cut Worf short when he was about to techno babble. This
story did not hold credibility, there were so many holes in the plot you could drive a atarship through them.
Kira beating up those guards was one of the most embarrasing scenes I have ever witnessed on Trek. If B5
came up with an episode this bad then it would be condemned by everybody, including myself. Grey 17, all
is forgiven. And then their were all those views of the underside of the Defiant, yes they did look good but
again there was nothing ambitious or attractive about these shots, they were as inspired as the episode.

2)The Begotten

Yes Trek reaches for the reset button and makes Odo a changeling again. The worst of it was the scene with
O’Brien and co. banging all those drums and rattles when Kira has the baby. Then there was Odo cooing to
that bit of sputum. Why did the founders cast about one hundred of their number out into the universe, we
got a dumb explanation about how it was a test to see how other races dealt with their kind. Would anybody
like to send their first born out to sea in a ship and hope for the best. What a totally ridiculous idea for a
plot.

I can’t believe that these two episodes were recommended to me over the internet by Trekkers. Talk about
creatively bankrupt. I am sure that ACDEC can explain some of the above (and I mean that with respect),
but is it any wonder that I have trouble watching modern Trek? B5 has never had episodes of this poor
quality. If these were just two of a kind I could forgive Trek, but almost every episode is the same.
Subj::: Making Money adn the Media
Date: 5/11/97 8:57:32 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

About making money for Warners.

In the UK ST is only just beating B5 videos on sales. This can easily be explained by the fact that DS9 and
Voyager come out on video before they come out on TV. B5 comes out on video about a year after TV
broadcasts. The really important thing to notice is that B5 sales are rapidly catching up and that all the
major retailers are offering various incentives such as a making of B5 video and collectors cards. These
same retailers are also taking out full page adverts in main stream cinema magazines to sell B5. This is no
longer happening with Trek in the UK. The videos are also being advertised on prime time TV. On the rare
occasion that B5 and Trek are released together the B5 video in most charts is coming in higher. There are
still a few retailers that do not choose to stock B5 in large numbers in their stores and as a result it does not
appear on their charts, it has not dawned on them yet why it sells out in the first few days (Tesco, WHSmith
and Sainsbury I mean you). With all sci/fi mags covering B5 and the X-Files in the UK in detail, coverage
of Trek is slipping, resulting to straight fact or could do better articles. Indeed when a CDRom Trek games
comes out the reviews are quit amusing. So to conclude it seems that the popularity of B5 is overtaking
Trek in the UK at last.
I was handed a copy of the March/April edition of Cinescape yesterday. It had an article on B5. It tries to
explain how the press in the US does not recognise B5, preferring to cover the X-Files instead. It goes on to
say that B5 is winning just about every award under the sun and that it is the favourite show of astronauts
and NASA scientists.

 

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/11/97 8:07:39 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>>Once again he refers to me and “The Trekkers” as two different groups.<<

You forget again, Strahd, that YOU lumped Trekkers in one category and yourself in another.

Wayne

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/11/97 8:13:35 PM
From: WayneHall
Posted on: America Online

>> I don’t know you, you might be a great guy.<<

I feel the same way about you.

>> And I don’t know who the B5 fans are who are ‘raiding’ the Trek boards, or I’d give them the same
message I gave you.<<

Well, I DO give them the same message, frankly.. but so many of them are on a holy quest, they don’t hear
it.

>>And even though you’ve never spit venom (sorry to keep using that metaphor, but…) at me personally,
I’m getting hit with the mist of that which you are spitting at some of the others on these boards.<<

I feel the same way when the B5 evangelistas go to the areas of other shows..

>>I would appreciate it if you would take a slightly less virulent attitude when you’re defending Trek.<<

And I would appreciate it if the B5ers would do the same when slamming Trek. But it just doesn’t happen.

>>They should respect Trek, whether or not they like it, when they are on the Trek boards, just as Trek fans
should respect us when they are here.<<

Agreed. But so often they don’t.

>> BTW, I’d never call you names for saying that you like Voyager, even though I might politely
respond that I don’t.<<

Nice change of pace which I appreciate.

Wayne

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/12/97 12:35:01 AM
From: PinkyDVM
Posted on: America Online

Re the quality of DS9…I have also been greatly underwhelmed by this entire season, but I somehow ended
up watching this week’s ep (Children of the Future or something like that.) I was very impressed. They’ve
still got it, even though it doesn’t always show.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 1:19:37 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>2)The Begotten

Yes Trek reaches for the reset button and makes Odo a changeling again. The worst of it was the scene with
O’Brien and co. banging all those drums and rattles when Kira has the baby. Then there was Odo cooing to
that bit of sputum. Why did the founders cast about one hundred of their number out into the universe, we
got a dumb explanation about how it was a test to see how other races dealt with their kind. Would anybody
like to send their first born out to sea in a ship and hope for the best. What a totally ridiculous idea for a
plot.<<
Now, I’d have to disagree slightly with Blobbb on this one. I enjoyed it, especially just for seeing Rene act.
G’kar and Odo, man. How many other places have we ever seen a guy play up to what’s basically a blob of
slime, and do it convincingly? And while making Odo a changling again was a bit of resetism, it was also
very nicely done. I was getting tired of the solid-angst bit anyway.

As for the birth, ehh. At least the pregnancy is over with….

Subj::: Re:ST vs B5
Date: 5/12/97 5:51:03 AM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<>>Once again he refers to me and “The Trekkers” as two different groups.<<

You forget again, Strahd, that YOU lumped Trekkers in one category and yourself in another.

Wayne>>>>>>

For ease of writing, I’ll refer to Those On the Other Side of the Debate as “Trekkers”. I could call them:
Trekkers Like Me Who Are Too Biased To Like B5, but that would take too long to write.
Make no mistake. I worship the ground TNG and TOS walk on.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 5:55:04 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>As for the birth, ehh. At least the pregnancy is over with….<<

Oh yes the birth..why was an artificial womb not used for the baby. With present technology they reckon we
are within 20 years of this.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 6:08:30 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Oh yes the birth..why was an artificial womb not used for the baby. With present technology they reckon
we are within 20 years of this.>>

Because they needed the pregnancy because Nana was pregnant!!! It’s not like the writers WANTED that
plotline. They were forced into it.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 7:54:52 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>>>As for the birth, ehh. At least the pregnancy is over with….<<

Oh yes the birth..why was an artificial womb not used for the baby. With present technology they reckon we
are within 20 years of this.<<

Something about the Bajoran womb constructing a vast web of blood vessles between the baby and the
mother, or something like that, that made it dangerous to remove the kid after it had been there for a
while………No, I didn’t like their exp. either, but at least they gave one, which is more than one can say
about the wimping-out of the Jem’Hadar(with apologies to A5)

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 6:09:16 PM
From: Soton
Posted on: America Online

>>>Oh yes the birth..why was an artificial womb not used for the baby. With present technology they
reckon we are within 20 years of this.<<<

Right, like this is going to be standard equipment on a runabout.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 7:01:35 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Because they needed the pregnancy because Nana was pregnant!!! It’s not like the writers WANTED that
plotline. They were forced into it.<<

Pregnancy was handled well in the X-Files with Gillian Anderson and Gates McFadden in STNG. Failing
that they could have had it as Kiras baby.

 

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/12/97 7:02:51 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Right, like this is going to be standard equipment on a runabout.<<

Like this is going to be standard equipment on er…. a Space Station!

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 1:02:35 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Pregnancy was handled well in the X-Files with Gillian Anderson>>

Yea, but TPTB didn’t want Nana to disapear for awhile. :)

<< and Gates McFadden in STNG.

Yea, but Gates got to wear a big blue overcoat. Wouldn’t work with Nana.

<<Failing that they could have had it as Kiras baby.>>

With who? Shakaar? That would be WAY out of charater.

–AcDec

 
Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 1:03:34 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Like this is going to be standard equipment on er…. a Space Station!>>

But after they put it in, they couldn’t take it back out. They explained that.
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 1:25:25 AM
From: JRDavis711
Posted on: America Online

Bashir can perform brain surgery. Crusher replaced Worf’s spine. etc etc, but they can’t remove a fetus from
a pregnant Bajorann?!!
Also…
Just saw the DS9 ep where Worf serves with the General (army rank?) rescued from the Dominion a few
eps back. I thought it was extremely well done … with one exception.
Early in the ep, Dax and others are talking about serving on a Klingon ship and one of them says that
promotions are routinely gained through ASSASSINATION?!! Not exactly an honorable method! The
writers must have confused the Klingon Empire with the Terran Empire from “Mirror, Mirror.” Klingons
may duel, honorably, but I don’t buy assassination.
Finally, the last DS9 ep with the time travel descendants. A great ep that did NOT wimp out at the end and
was very good. Again with one exception.
Sisco says that he would NEVER ask Kira to sacrifice herself to save 8000 or even 8,000,000 innocent
people. What kind of military commander is that? He certainly would have trouble ordering someone to
fight the Borg or the Dominion.
Still, DS9 rocks. Voyager should just quietly go away and all copies be destroyed.
JRD

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 5:02:10 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>But after they put it in, they couldn’t take it back out. They explained that.<<

A very weak and terrible plot device from the script writers. They can do anything.Why not hold the
embryo in the transporter buffer, we have seen this done so many times before with people, ie Scotty in
Relics. To cover a pregnancy they could have done so much better.

 

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 5:03:45 AM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Sisco says that he would NEVER ask Kira to sacrifice herself to save 8000 or even 8,000,000 innocent
people. What kind of military commander is that? He certainly would have trouble ordering someone to
fight the Borg or the Dominion.<<
Ah Oh you’ve walked into a RAIDERONE trap. He’s moving over target with bombs primed.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 5:28:23 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<A very weak and terrible plot device from the script writers. They can do anything.Why not hold the
embryo in the transporter buffer, we have seen this done so many times before with people, ie Scotty in
Relics. To cover a pregnancy they could have done so much better.>>

Well, they had already made Keiko pregnant before they found out what havok Sid and Nana had done. :) I
think they had the right idea, but it just came off as too stupid. Think of what JMS would have to do if one
of his actresses suddenly got pregnant. Well, if it was Mira, no problem, with all of us knowing David is
coming, but what about that poor girl with no social life Ivonava?

–AcDec

 

Subj::: DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/13/97 8:04:19 AM
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, if it was Mira, no problem, with all of us knowing David is coming, but what about that poor girl
with no social life Ivonava?<<

Well, he would have handled it in a much believable and less painful way to watch. I am just glad as hell
that Kira’s pregnancy is over. Now if they would knock off the “he loves her/she loves him” crap and
concentrate on excellent sci-fi…

 

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 12:57:51 PM
From: Soton
Posted on: America Online

>>>Early in the ep, Dax and others are talking about serving on a Klingon ship and one of them says that
promotions are routinely gained through ASSASSINATION?!! Not exactly an honorable method! The
writers must have confused the Klingon Empire with the Terran Empire from “Mirror, Mirror.” Klingons
may duel, honorably, but I don’t buy assassination.<<<<
O’Brien was just expressing a common misconception about Klingons that still abounds in the Federation.
Dax corrected him immediately. A Klingon may only challenge a direct superior, and then only under
certain conditions. (Dishonorable conduct, cowardice, etc.)
Worf’s challenge to Martok is an example of this.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 1:01:22 PM
From: Soton
Posted on: America Online

>>>A very weak and terrible plot device from the script writers. They can do anything.Why not hold the
embryo in the transporter buffer, we have seen this done so many times before with people, ie Scotty in
Relics. To cover a pregnancy they could have done so much better.<<<<
OK, put it into the transporter buffer… and then what? Patterns can only be held in the buffer for a limited
amount of time, except under extraordinary situations. (The most exteme being the case with Scotty, and he
had hotwired that thing six ways to Sunday)

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 1:02:53 PM
From: Soton
Posted on: America Online

>>>Bashir can perform brain surgery. Crusher replaced Worf’s spine. etc etc, but they can’t remove a fetus
from a pregnant Bajorann?!!<<<

Sure they can… but only with extreme risk to the fetus. The safest approach, once Bashir had implanted it
in Kira, was for her to carry it to term.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 4:03:58 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>Think of what JMS would have to do if one of his actresses suddenly got pregnant. Well, if it was Mira,
no problem, with all of us knowing David is coming, but what about that poor girl with no social life
Ivonava?<<

Yes that would be interesting.

 

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 4:06:09 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>OK, put it into the transporter buffer… and then what? <<

1)Create an artificial womb on the station
2)Give Keiko a new womb, got to be easier than giving Worf a spine!

Limited time in the buffer, how many years was Scotty there?

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 4:09:33 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

Soton, you are writing Trek law. The plot device about the pregnacy was not the best idea. It seems
transplanting a foetus into another alien is easier in Trekdom than putting it in an artificial womb which is
nearing science fact today. Yeah and I’m a hamster, and my dog has had kittens.Go to a Biology class, I can
get very technical on this matter you know.

I would have liked to have seen the pregnancy hidden like Gillian Anderson in the X-Files.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/13/97 9:15:32 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I would have liked to have seen the pregnancy hidden like Gillian Anderson in the X-Files.>>

Well, they could not use clothing to cover up the ‘bulge’ like they could with Gillian (Trek uniforms are not
made for pregnant women), and unfortuneatly Kira does not wear a big blue lab coat like Dr. Crusher did. :)

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/14/97 5:50:34 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: NecRon 01
Well, he would have handled it in a much believable and less painful way to watch. I am just glad as hell
that Kira’s pregnancy is over. Now if they would knock off the “he loves her/she loves him” crap and
concentrate on excellent sci-fi…<<

It’s obvious that the team of writers have picked up a former soap opera writer and added him or
her to their staff.

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/14/97 7:08:26 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

LOL Gary!

FFF
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/14/97 5:58:48 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<It’s obvious that the team of writers have picked up a former soap opera writer and added him or her to
their staff.>>

Probally the same one JMS uses for his soap scenes. :) Anyone else cringe at the scene bewteen Garibaldi
and his ex-wife in his quarters right after they met? ::shudder::.

BTW Shouldn’t people born on Mars be much weaker than humans raised in 1g?

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/14/97 6:22:30 PM
From: Tryel Sana
Posted on: America Online

<<Probally the same one JMS uses for his soap scenes. :) Anyone else cringe at the scene bewteen
Garibaldi and his ex-wife in his quarters right after they met? ::shudder::.>>

Ex-lover not ex-wife. just a slight clarification :-)
Gee I leave for a weekend to move and everything goes to pieces here ;-).

Seriously though:
I think Mars’ gravity isn’t that much weaker than our own (Strahd?) so they’d be slightly weaker but not
noticably so, Unlike a moon colony native who would have problems adjusting to the higher gravity of
Earth.

Tryel

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/14/97 9:57:34 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<I think Mars’ gravity isn’t that much weaker than our own (Strahd?) so they’d be slightly weaker but not
noticably so, Unlike a moon colony native who would have problems adjusting to the higher gravity of
Earth.>>

Mars gravity is about 40% earth gravity, so there is a significant difference, but they could have medical
techniques to enhance bone density and stimulate muscles growth. The big problem might be the cardio-
vascular system suddenly forced to work against 2.5 times the gravity it normally had to deal with.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/14/97 11:32:54 PM
From: Don at B4
Posted on: America Online

<Well, they could not use clothing to cover up the ‘bulge’ like they could with Gillian (Trek uniforms are
not made for pregnant women), and unfortuneatly Kira does not wear a big blue lab coat like Dr. Crusher
did. :)>

Well, if Kira had another one of those weird Bajoran religious experiences and decides to (temporarily)
become an acolyte, perform a mystic journey, etc., she could have worn those big religious robes.

Don

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/15/97 1:43:34 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, if Kira had another one of those weird Bajoran religious experiences and decides to (temporarily)
become an acolyte, perform a mystic journey, etc., she could have worn those big religious robes.>>

Maybe, but in the middle of a war with the Klingons would be a bad time to go on a religious journey. :)

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/15/97 1:56:36 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Maybe, but in the middle of a war with the Klingons would be a bad time to go on a religious journey.
:)>>

On the other hand, there are no atheists in foxholes….

— A5. 😉

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/15/97 3:05:31 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<On the other hand, there are no atheists in foxholes….>>

Tell that too Roddenberry. Though he was in a bomber, not a foxhole. :)

 

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/15/97 4:32:18 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Probally the same one JMS uses for his soap scenes. :) Anyone else cringe at the scene bewteen Garibaldi
and his ex-wife in his quarters right after they met? ::shudder::.<<

I don’t go for that kind of thing either, but she was involved in the arc since earlier on, a lot earlier
on, so apparently JMS had her planted in there all the long and is now bringing to arc to its full circle.

>>BTW Shouldn’t people born on Mars be much weaker than humans raised in 1g?<<

I guess that’s where you’ve got to let your imagination fly, or consider that perhaps they’ve affected
the atmosphere through early stage terra-forming or something. We have it within our power to give Mars
an atmosphere, but it would be very expensive, and would probably take upwards of a millennia to achieve.

 

 
Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/15/97 4:38:55 AM
From: MythoPhile
Posted on: America Online

>>BTW Shouldn’t people born on Mars be much weaker than humans raised in 1g?<<
<< I guess that’s where you’ve got to let your imagination fly, or consider that perhaps they’ve affected the
atmosphere through early stage terra-forming or something>>

Actually, they dealt with this in “All Alone in the Night”, where the Martian team got into the world
series on a technicality (hit more home runs than any other team) but would be creamed in earth gravity.
I think that’s enough of a reference. Who’s to say how much human biology would alter because of
growing up in a weaker gravity? Certainly muscles wouldn’t be used to their full potential, the people
would be inclined to be weaker, but there are practical limits. (Unless we’re talking millions of years on
Mars and evolution kicks in) Humans are still humans. Put them back in “earth gravity” and they’d
probably be on the weak side of normal. A little exercise and they’d be probably be up to snuff. There may
be such standard martian exercise routines, at least for those inclined to travel. It’s not as if an earthborn
human living on Mars is going to be able to, oh, I don’t know, shoot heat beams out of their eyes and deflect
bullets.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/15/97 5:37:17 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Tell that too Roddenberry. Though he was in a bomber, not a foxhole. :)>>

Well, AcDec, I know you were saying that tongue in cheek. But let me clarify that I meant to say that in a
crisis, many people turn to a greater power. I have no idea whether GR ever had cause to turn to God in his
career as a bombardier.

— A5, not intending to go much further with this subthread.

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/15/97 8:29:06 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< I don’t go for that kind of thing either, but she was involved in the arc since earlier on, a lot earlier on, so
apparently JMS had her planted in there all the long and is now bringing to arc to its full circle.>>

Maybe, but it does not mean I have to like it. :)

<<I guess that’s where you’ve got to let your imagination fly, or consider that perhaps they’ve
affected the atmosphere through early stage terra-forming or something. We have it within our power to
give Mars an atmosphere, but it would be very expensive, and would probably take upwards of a millennia
to achieve.>>

Two problems.
1. Mars does not appear to be terraformed, at least from the exterior shots.
2. I was talking about surface gravity, unless they added a couple of Saturn’s moons to Mars’ mass, the
gravity would still be low enough to breed weeker humans. Espeacilly for native Martians.

–AcDec

 

 
Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/15/97 8:30:39 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<I think that’s enough of a reference. Who’s to say how much human biology would alter because of
growing up in a weaker gravity? Certainly muscles wouldn’t be used to their full potential, the people
would be inclined to be weaker, but there are practical limits. (Unless we’re talking millions of years on
Mars and evolution kicks in) Humans are still humans. Put them back in “earth gravity” and they’d
probably be on the weak side of normal. A little exercise and they’d be probably be up to snuff. There may
be such standard martian exercise routines, at least for those inclined to travel. It’s not as if an earthborn
human living on Mars is going to be able to, oh, I don’t know, shoot heat beams out of their eyes and deflect
bullets.>>

No, but considering how fast earth-born astronauts get week, the problem would be much worse for a native
born Martain.

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/15/97 8:35:58 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Well, AcDec, I know you were saying that tongue in cheek. But let me clarify that I meant to say that in
a crisis, many people turn to a greater power. I have no idea whether GR ever had cause to turn to God in
his career as a bombardier.>>

Nope, Gene never turned to a ‘higher power”. Not the time his bomber crashed killing most of his crew, and
not the time he went down in a airliner. Some people just don’t beleive in a higher power, no matter the
circumstances. In fact there was an interesting article on the web once called “I was an athiest in a foxhole”.
Very interesting. And considering that nearly a fourth of the population of Earth hold no religious beliefs,
I’m pretty sure there are more were they came from.

<<– A5, not intending to go much further with this subthread.>>

–AcDec , can never pass up a religion debate.

Subj::: Just a thought.
Date: 5/15/97 8:37:26 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Before anyone posts another “the Trek TPTB don’t care for the show or the fans” rant, I suggest you go read
Ron D. Moore’s latest post.

 

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/15/97 5:24:43 PM
From: Blobbb
Posted on: America Online

>>2. I was talking about surface gravity, unless they added a couple of Saturn’s moons to Mars’ mass, the
gravity would still be low enough to breed weeker humans. Espeacilly for native Martians.<<

According to all my Arthur C.Clarke books…the jolly old Martian populous would be weaker and may even
be taller. Put them in a high gravity area like Earth and they go wobble. Got to agree with ACDEC…again.

Subj::: Re:Dum Episodes.
Date: 5/15/97 7:22:22 PM
From: ArcherBlue
Posted on: America Online

<<On the other hand, there are no atheists in foxholes….>>

Not an arguement for God, but against foxholes…

Subj::: Re:Just a thought.
Date: 5/16/97 1:01:34 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Before anyone posts another “the Trek TPTB don’t care for the show or the fans” rant, I suggest you go
read Ron D. Moore’s latest post.>>

Way to go, Ac! :-) The “Ask Ron Moore” folder is one of the best reasons to sign on to AOL. I just wish
JMS would pay us a visit here as often. (Yes, I know JMS is a busy man and that he prefers CompuServe
(apparently). I’ve checked out CompuServe’s message boards (Sci-Fi section) and I *still* can’t get enough
JMS to satisfy my curiosity. And I know that JMS probably posts on several services all at once; somehow,
however, this doesn’t seem satisfying, since to keep up with him I’d have to have all those other services.)

— A5. (JMS, thanks for what you do, anyway, and keep up the good work. :-) )

— A5.

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/16/97 3:36:39 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Got to agree with ACDEC…again.>>

This is becomeing a bad habit Blobbb. :)

 

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/16/97 3:39:45 AM
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<According to all my Arthur C.Clarke books…the jolly old Martian populous would be weaker and may
even be taller. Put them in a high gravity area like Earth and they go wobble. Got to agree with
ACDEC…again.>>
Got to admit, that explains Number1 pretty well……

(Ah, amazons….)

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/16/97 5:34:53 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

From: AcDec

><From: G7
I don’t go for that kind of thing either, but she was involved in the arc since earlier on, a lot earlier on, so
apparently JMS had her planted in there all the long and is now bringing to arc to its full circle.><

>>From: AcDec
Maybe, but it does not mean I have to like it. :) <<

I wasn’t saying you had too, only that JMS was probably following through on something he’d
intended to all the long.

><From: G7
guess that’s where you’ve got to let your imagination fly, or consider that perhaps they’ve affected the
atmosphere through early stage terra-forming or something. We have it within our power to give Mars an
atmosphere, but it would be very expensive, and would probably take upwards of a millennia to achieve.><

>>From: AcDec
Two problems. 1. Mars does not appear to be terraformed, at least from the exterior shots.
2. I was talking about surface gravity, unless they added a couple of Saturn’s moons to Mars’ mass, the
gravity would still be low enough to breed weeker humans. Espeacilly for native Martians.<<

If we were to start terra-forming as of this moment(let’s say everything was in place) –in
accordance with *current* scientific and technological standards(more or less)– Mars would not show signs
of change on the surface for quite some time. It would take about a millennia before there would be a
breathable atmosphere(I think I’m correct here), which is a long time. Naturally in two or three hundred
years there would not be vegetation present on the surface of Mars, except in domes. As for the gravity, I
would *assume* they’d(as in those in the B5 universe) be tinkering around with that if they’re at all involved
with terra-forming. JMS should give us more insight into this, but he’s leaving it mostly to our imagination
and the visuals he’s having Netter Digital provide us with.

 
Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/16/97 5:42:08 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

G7 writes,

<< If we were to start terra-forming as of this moment(let’s say everything was in place) –in accordance
with *current* scientific and technological standards(more or less)– Mars would not show signs of change
on the surface for quite some time. It would take about a millennia before there would be a breathable
atmosphere(I think I’m correct here), which is a long time. Naturally in two or three hundred years there
would not be vegetation present on the surface of Mars, except in domes. As for the gravity, I would
*assume* they’d(as in those in the B5 universe) be tinkering around with that if they’re at all involved with
terra-forming. JMS should give us more insight into this, but he’s leaving it mostly to our imagination and
the visuals he’s having Netter Digital provide us with.>>

Some futurists believe that the entire planet of Mars can be terraformed (using technology that will be
within our reach in the next half century or less) in a matter of decades.

As far as gravity is concerned, I suppose it is possible that something equivalent to the gravity generators in
*Star Trek* could have been invented in the *B5* universe; however, if you’re talking about altering the
gravity of the planet itself, that’s impossible under any known scientific concept. As well, if they *had*
invented gravity generators, then why Earthforce cruisers (and Babylon 5, for that matter) require
centrifugal force to generate their artificial gravity?

Good post though. Always enjoy reading your contributions.

— A5.

 

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/16/97 5:43:30 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

Corrected sentence: << As well, if they *had* invented gravity generators, then why do Earthforce cruisers
(and Babylon 5, for that matter) require centrifugal force to generate their artificial gravity?>>

 

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/16/97 7:42:23 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

Glad I read ahead. What A5 said Gary. :)

 
–AcDec

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/17/97 4:47:09 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: A5398457
As far as gravity is concerned, I suppose it is possible that something equivalent to the gravity generators in
*Star Trek* could have been invented in the *B5* universe; however, if you’re talking about altering the
gravity of the planet itself, that’s impossible under any known scientific concept.<<

No, naturally I was talking about artificial means such as you suggest of course.

>>As well, if they *had* invented gravity generators, then why Earthforce cruisers (and Babylon 5, for that
matter) require centrifugal force to generate their artificial gravity?<<

That’s the part that wouldn’t fit of course, but as it is there’s still no explanation as to why there
isn’t an evident gravity factor problem on B5 right now anyway.
>>Good post though. Always enjoy reading your contributions.<<

Thanks, same here when it comes to me reading your messages. 😉

 

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/17/97 4:58:47 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

>>From: AcDec
Glad I read ahead. What A5 said Gary. :) <<

Yeah, but Ac –the point I just made in my message to A5 is that we still don’t see a gravity
problem on Mars right now in B5 when in actuality there should be one. And if there is some artificial
system in place on Mars, then it still doesn’t explain why Earth ships don’t have gravity systems which aren’t
dependant on rotational sections. Right? Either way there’s an obvious inconsistency here. Wouldn’t
human beings have problems acclimating when leaving Mars if they’ve been there long term under lower
gravity conditions? I would think so, unless there’s something in place, and Franklin had those Mars
refugees return with him, and we’ve seen people come from Mars to the Station, and there’s never been any
mention of Franklin so much as giving them a prescription to help them adjust to higher gravity conditions.
Something to at least help their bones and muscles should definitely be in order if you ask me, but of
course, I’m not a scientist. Still, this is basic common sense. 😉

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/17/97 8:53:53 AM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Yeah, but Ac –the point I just made in my message to A5 is that we still don’t see a gravity problem on
Mars right now in B5 when in actuality there should be one. And if there is some artificial system in place
on Mars, then it still doesn’t explain why Earth ships don’t have gravity systems which aren’t dependant on
rotational sections. Right? Either way there’s an obvious inconsistency here. Wouldn’t human beings
have problems acclimating when leaving Mars if they’ve been there long term under lower gravity
conditions? I would think so, unless there’s something in place, and Franklin had those Mars refugees return
with him, and we’ve seen people come from Mars to the Station, and there’s never been any mention of
Franklin so much as giving them a prescription to help them adjust to higher gravity conditions. Something
to at least help their bones and muscles should definitely be in order if you ask me, but of course, I’m not a
scientist. Still, this is basic common sense. ;-)>>

I know, this is called a big “pretend it’s not happening” thing. I doubt JMS intends to explain it. :)

–AcDec

Subj::: Who?
Date: 5/17/97 5:03:56 PM
From: RAIDRONE
Posted on: America Online

Who is the best new character on B5?
Who is the foxiest character on B5?
Who lights up the screen whenever they appear?
Who generates Megawatts of sex appeal?
Who strikes fear in the hearts of ex-lovers and enemies alike?
Who has the best outfit on B5?
Who never loses their cool? (Well, almost never).
Who needs more exposure on B5?
Who deserves a big role on the follow-on movies and series?
Why, Number One, of course! (No, not Riker, but just as engaging!)
More Number 1, please. Number 1 rules!!!

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/18/97 2:01:11 AM
From: JdiJade
Posted on: America Online

Regarding gravity on Mars vs on Earthforce ships, consider that when something new is invented it often is
done on a larger scale than is possible until refined. For example, the first computers invented were not
laptops; they took up whole ROOMS full of space to operate. Wristwatch televisions were impossible back
when the only means of making them involved large tubes and other components. Therefore, it’s possible
that some new advancements made it possible to have artificial gravity on planet Mars, while not yet refined
enough to be put into practical use aboard the EA starships (smaller than a planet), so they continue to use
the older spin gravity technology.

Janell

Subj::: Gravity
Date: 5/18/97 4:24:29 AM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

Off the top of my head, when Sheridan first boarded the White Star, he commented about the artificial
gravity:

“We don’t have artificial gravity, we have to use rotating sections on our ships…”

Delenn responded:

“We have had artificial gravity for quite some time…”

The

Subj::ect of gravity on ships and B5 has been addressed considerably on the show, admittedly in passing.
For example, C&C is in a rotating section and not the center, so it has light gravity. Sections of the station
spin at different speeds also. When Sheridan leaped from the transport, Ivanova explained that he wasn’t
falling–just floating, and how the motion of the station would result in fatal impact.

Yes, everyone is right that they haven’t explained how traveling from station to planet or planet to planet
gravity differences are dealt with, but here’s a couple of reasons:

1) Just by virtue of the inherent setting of the story, with people/aliens traveling from planet to planet, etc.,
it’s a basic issue–like how do people go to the bathroom in zero G. It’s not something they have to show, or
even discuss. The show is about a plot, and the technology only needs to be explained when it affects the
plot. Now if they attributed that Narns and Minbari are stronger than Centauri or Humans because their
planets had higher gravity, then it MIGHT be an issue to deal with in more detail, but even then, probably
not… Don’t waste time on technobabble that isn’t important to the story!

2) Like Sheridan’s escape from the room with Anna/Morden/Shadow/Justin, do they HAVE to explain
everything when there are so many ways you can fill in the blanks yourself? For example, it’s not
unreasonable to imagine as one possibility that there’s a standard exercise regimen for space travelers, or
some sort of technology is used not to generate artificial gravity, but to strengthen their bones and muscles,
or whatever…

–me

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/18/97 5:12:07 AM
From: PaulM95237
Posted on: America Online

Would humans born and raised on Mars really be weaker? A 75 kg human on Mars would still have the
muscles to shove 75 kg of mass around — standing, starting to walk, and stopping all involve acceleration
of mass, not just of weight. I can easily imagine a “Martian” having difficulty with balance on Earth, as
well as the physiological effects of higher gravity on blood flow, etc — but weaker? I don’t think so. I
suspect that the “weakness” astronauts and cosmonauts experience upon returning to Earth is partly due to
the unaccustomed heaviness they feel, but mostly due to the fact that their hearts are used to relatively easy
work.
There *is* a difference between mass and gravity, you know.

—Paul

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/18/97 12:59:54 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Would humans born and raised on Mars really be weaker? A 75 kg human on Mars would still have the
muscles to shove 75 kg of mass around — standing, starting to walk, and stopping all involve acceleration
of mass, not just of weight. I can easily imagine a “Martian” having difficulty with balance on Earth, as
well as the physiological effects of higher gravity on blood flow, etc — but weaker? I don’t think so. I
suspect that the “weakness” astronauts and cosmonauts experience upon returning to Earth is partly due to
the unaccustomed heaviness they feel, but mostly due to the fact that their hearts are used to relatively easy
work.
There *is* a difference between mass and gravity, you know.>>

Sorry, but it is very well documented that you loose both bone strength and muscle mass. And while a very
active exercise regime can help, for someone born or spending many years at less than 1g they will have big
trouble acclimating, and espeacilly running for their lives in 1g. :)

–AcDec

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/18/97 1:06:36 PM
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<1) Just by virtue of the inherent setting of the story, with people/aliens traveling from planet to planet,
etc., it’s a basic issue–like how do people go to the bathroom in zero G. It’s not something they have to
show, or even discuss. The show is about a plot, and the technology only needs to be explained when it
affects the plot. Now if they attributed that Narns and Minbari are stronger than Centauri or Humans
because their planets had higher gravity, then it MIGHT be an issue to deal with in more detail, but even
then, probably not… Don’t waste time on technobabble that isn’t important to the story!>>

For a show that prides itself on a certain level of realism (and rightly so) to ignore such a big issue is kinda
strange. Also, considering the things happening on Mars, it would be important. Both Franklin, and Marcus
should be much stonger and faster than any native born Martain.

<<2) Like Sheridan’s escape from the room with Anna/Morden/Shadow/Justin, do they HAVE to explain
everything when there are so many ways you can fill in the blanks yourself? For example, it’s not
unreasonable to imagine as one possibility that there’s a standard exercise regimen for space travelers, or
some sort of technology is used not to generate artificial gravity, but to strengthen their bones and muscles,
or whatever…>>

Considering all of the flap Trek gets from certain people (you know who you are) for not explaining
EVERYTHING, I couldn’t let B5 of on this one. And as a fan I also would like to hear some ideas to
explain it away.

–AcDec

 

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/18/97 6:25:38 PM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<< Franklin had those Mars refugees return with him, and we’ve seen people come from Mars to the
Station, and there’s never been any mention of Franklin so much as giving them a prescription to help them
adjust to higher gravity conditions. Something to at least help their bones and muscles should definitely be
in order if you ask me, but of course, I’m not a scientist. Still, this is basic common sense. ;-)>>

I know, this is called a big “pretend it’s not happening” thing. I doubt JMS intends to explain it.
:)>>>>>>>>>>>

Well the fact that the gravity isnt entirely explained just totally destroyed my love for this show. HOW
DARE HE NOT EXPLAIN SONETHING THAT ONLY A GEEK WOULD NOTICE IN THE FIRST
PLACE? Im going to burn all of my B5 tapes immediately.

Right after I figure out how all ST ships magically all think the same direction is “up” 😉

B5 had its one chance to portray accurate gravity, and it did it in “Fall of Night”, with Sheridans free
fall. As long as they get that right, I’m going to cut them some slack for anything else that doesnt directly
affect the story.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:DS9 still rocks…
Date: 5/18/97 6:25:40 PM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<< Franklin had those Mars refugees return with him, and we’ve seen people come from Mars to the
Station, and there’s never been any mention of Franklin so much as giving them a prescription to help them
adjust to higher gravity conditions. Something to at least help their bones and muscles should definitely be
in order if you ask me, but of course, I’m not a scientist. Still, this is basic common sense. ;-)>>

I know, this is called a big “pretend it’s not happening” thing. I doubt JMS intends to explain it.
:)>>>>>>>>>>>

Well the fact that the gravity isnt entirely explained just totally destroyed my love for this show. HOW
DARE HE NOT EXPLAIN SONETHING THAT ONLY A GEEK WOULD NOTICE IN THE FIRST
PLACE? Im going to burn all of my B5 tapes immediately.

Right after I figure out how all ST ships magically all think the same direction is “up” 😉

B5 had its one chance to portray accurate gravity, and it did it in “Fall of Night”, with Sheridans free
fall. As long as they get that right, I’m going to cut them some slack for anything else that doesnt directly
affect the story.

Strahd

Subj::: Time wasting
Date: 5/18/97 6:25:46 PM
From: Strahd27
Posted on: America Online

<<<<<< Franklin had those Mars refugees return with him, and we’ve seen people come from Mars to the
Station, and there’s never been any mention of Franklin so much as giving them a prescription to help them
adjust to higher gravity conditions. Something to at least help their bones and muscles should definitely be
in order if you ask me, but of course, I’m not a scientist. Still, this is basic common sense. ;-)>>

I know, this is called a big “pretend it’s not happening” thing. I doubt JMS intends to explain it.
:)>>>>>>>>>>>

Well the fact that the gravity isnt entirely explained just totally destroyed my love for this show. HOW
DARE HE NOT EXPLAIN SONETHING THAT ONLY A GEEK WOULD NOTICE IN THE FIRST
PLACE? Im going to burn all of my B5 tapes immediately.

Right after I figure out how all ST ships magically all think the same direction is “up” 😉

B5 had its one chance to portray accurate gravity, and it did it in “Fall of Night”, with Sheridans free
fall. As long as they get that right, I’m going to cut them some slack for anything else that doesnt directly
affect the story.

Strahd

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/18/97 8:02:59 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

<<Considering all of the flap Trek gets from certain people (you know who you are) for not explaining
EVERYTHING, I couldn’t let B5 of on this one. And as a fan I also would like to hear some ideas to
explain it away.>>

I may be wrong, especially since I skip posts that seem to be mindless ranting and raving, but I think people
bash trek much more for not explaining plot points or for technobabble explanations that affect the plot but
are really silly. I myself criticize Trek for a lot of things, but I (and I think most reasonable people) agree
that as long as the technology is handled consistently and reasonably given what is already scientifically
known in our own times, it’s not something to criticize on ANY show.

Heck, I think most of us are happy ANYTIME we see ANY SHOW present something technical that
doesn’t contradict existing science! B5 consistently attempts to be true to known science, so if they
occasionally screw up, we cut them slack because we know that they’re trying. On the other hand, I wouldn’t
be at all surprised to find out that something similar to the following two conversations take place regularly:

1) On the B5 set: “Well, if we have x happen, the laws of physics say that y will happen. How do we deal
with that?” “You’re right…guess we’ll have to allow some extra CGI time & money to portray that or modify
the script…”
2) On the Star Trek set: “Let’s have x happen.” “…but wouldn’t that cause y to happen in real life?” “So?
Just do it.”

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/19/97 5:43:02 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Yeeesh, I can’t believe this has become such a big thing on this board. However, since I myself also got
caught up in the accuracy of the gravity argument I feel that I should also remind people of something I said
to AcDec on 5\15 in response to this when it first came up.

>>From: AcDec
BTW Shouldn’t people born on Mars be much weaker than humans raised in 1g?<<

<<From: G7
I guess that’s where you’ve got to let your imagination fly,>>

 

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/19/97 5:46:14 AM
From: Gary7sevn
Posted on: America Online

Additionally, I know AcDec said he felt that this was one area where he wasn’t inclined to give B5
a pass because he knows that Trek has taken too many knocks when it comes to areas of accuracy such as
this, to which I’d add that MegaUser addressed this quite properly in his below cited two points.

>>1) On the B5 set: “Well, if we have x happen, the laws of physics say that y will happen. How do we deal
with that?” “You’re right…guess we’ll have to allow some extra CGI time & money to portray that or modify
the script…”
2) On the Star Trek set: “Let’s have x happen.” “…but wouldn’t that cause y to happen in real life?” “So?
Just do it.”<<

Right on, MegaDude! I completely agree.

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/19/97 11:45:09 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

>Considering all of the flap Trek gets from certain people (you know who you are) for not explaining
EVERYTHING, I couldn’t let B5 of on this one. And as a fan I also would like to hear some ideas to
explain it away.<

Ac,

Separate from the other responses to the above statement, I would say that as a fan of both
genre/universes, I cut B5 more slack since it’s only been around for four years. Trek has been around for
over thirty years. I cut STTOS much slack because of the period in which it was produced, as well as it’s
infancy. Now Trek should be fully evolved, so no slack. B5 is still in it’s infancy as was Trek in ’68, so
slack.
Fact is B5 is more developed and intellectual at age four than Trek is at age thirty-three.

FFF
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Storytelling
Date: 5/20/97 5:25:26 AM
From: StarFurie
Posted on: America Online

Ok guys, I want your *polite* opinions.

In B5, much has been made about the fact that the show has an overall plot. The ST shows don’t. Which
method do you prefer.

I, myself, am undecided about the issue. While the overall plot of B5 helps give it an epic feel, it also
quelches stories that would deviate from that plot line, regardless of how good the story would be. In ST,
the future is not set. Should Voyager ever stumble upon a plot, then it can take full advantage of it without
fear of diverting from the prepared future.

Ok. Start talking.

StarFurie (preparing for the ranting and raving.)

Subj::: Re:Storytelling
Date: 5/20/97 9:39:49 AM
From: JhnyReb
Posted on: America Online

>Ok guys, I want your *polite* opinions.

In B5, much has been made about the fact that the show has an overall plot. The ST shows don’t. Which
method do you prefer.<

Sorry, no ranting, but maybe just a little raving (mania). Personally I like both methods, when
done well and when they maintain some consistency. One of my favorite SF authors is David Drake, and
although many might disagree, the book, of his, I enjoy most is Hammer’s Slammers. This was a collection
of short stories he wrote over several years. But they all maintained consistency, and even a few threads.
Some of his later books, which stuck to a continuous plot line through out I don’t enjoy as much. However,
I prefer JMS’s story much more than I do the ST free flow.

FFF
Johnny Reb

Subj::: Re:Gravity
Date: 5/20/97 9:44:43 AM
From: A5398457
Posted on: America Online

<<Fact is B5 is more developed and intellectual at age four than Trek is at age thirty-three.>>

Well, that’s your opinion. Opinions differ, and that’s fine.

I’m not going to say anything more than just to disagree. I dislike setting up either series for serious
bashing, and I’ll not contribute to a major discussion on it.

BTW, the longevity argument works both ways: It’s difficult to maintain continuity over a long period of
time when there are a great many writers, producers, plots, and characters, among other things, involved.
Example: *Dr. Who*.

— A5.

 

Subj::: …if voyager stumbles…
Date: 5/20/97 8:22:39 PM
From: MegaUser
Posted on: America Online

That’s one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen: “If Voyager stumbles on a plot…”

Actually, Voyager does have an overall plot (the attempt to get home), and they have thrown in several
(IMHO, poorly executed) mini-arcs, and a LITTLE character growth is happening here and there, though
they reset as often as they push ahead…

Subj::: Re:Storytelling
Date: 5/20/97 10:33:48 PM
From: TBruin3235
Posted on: America Online

<<Ok guys, I want your *polite* opinions.>>

Actually, I never could really figure what this argument about “which is best” is all about. I, for one, am
thrilled that these Sci-Fi series are available (at least for now). My VCR is set to religiouly record B5 and
all Star Treks, and I equally look forward to watching each one.

What I’d really LOVE to see, is someone from B5 in their little fighter, fly through a jump gate and end up
at DS9 (or vise versa).

 

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>