HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: england@milton.u.washington.edu (england)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Deep Space Nine: Lacarno? (teensy spoilers?)
Date: 15 Apr 92 00:35:13 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <a1R6iB1w164w@seanews.UUCP> caladan!seanews!monorail@seattleu.edu (Brannon Boren) writes:
>
> 
>        Personally I'd like to see Lacarno turn up on
>Deep Space Nine, possibly as a crewman on a merchant vessel
>or something.  After all he *does* have the training (if
>not the actual diploma) of a Star Fleet Officer.  As far
>as a merchant vessel is concerned he's primo material.
>        His slick talking ways are just a *benefit* in that
>line of space services...
> 


I'd like to see Locarno turn up on Deep Space Nine to have his revenge 
against Weasley!!  

Maybe he could team up with Lore and take care of that 'little man' for once
and for all!!!

_______________________________________________________________________________
                                                         __ 
   I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed,       ///
   briefed, debriefed, or numbered.                __  ///  Only Amiga makes
                                                   \\\///   it possible..... 
   My life is my own.                               \XX/
_______________________________________________________________________________
 
                          england@u.washington.edu
From: sproule@gethsemane.EBay.Sun.COM (Dan Sproule)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: "The Outcast": Random Thoughts and Musings
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:02:53 GMT
Reply-To: sproule@gethsemane.EBay.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: gethsemane.ebay.sun.com


--I was completely satisfied with Worf's characterization.  Worf (and
--Klingons in general) has always been characterized as stubborn and
--narrow minded.  That's his function on the show.  It should be no
--surprise that he's homophobic, and the other characters were
--"politically correct" to dismiss his homophobia as the irrational fear
--that it is.


   The term "Homophobia" is absolutely ridiculous. A person can dislike
   the Homosexual lifestyle without being homophobic. It is, however, 
   politically correct to call those who dislike the homosexual lifestyle
   homophobic.
From: rlm7638@tamsun.tamu.edu (Jack McKinney)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: 666 or 18? (was Re: Cause & Effect & Sex)
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:33:35 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station

pat@berry.Cary.NC.US (Pat Berry) writes:
>rlm7638@tamsun.tamu.edu (Jack McKinney) writes:
>
>> numbers soon to be announced on the bridge (18 killed in engineering from
>> that last hit...   Anyone notice how often the number 18 comes up?) , and
>

[examples of ominous appearance of '18' deleted]

     There is also a mention of 'in 18 seconds' in one of the episodes you
mentioned, either 'Q Who', or 'Contagion'. I believe it was:

"Q Who"

DATA: "Outer hull breach in 18 seconds"

followed by someone reporting the 18 deaths.

+---------------------------------------------------+------------------------+
| "A lot of stuff in school... you don't appreciate | Jack McKinney          |
|  'til you get to be older, you know, little       | rlm7638@tamsun.tamu.edu|
|  things, like being spanked everyday by a middle- +------------------------+
|  aged woman... Stuff you'd pay good money for     | Blessed be the ties    |
|  later in life."      -Emo Philips                |      that bind...      |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current,rec.arts.startrek.misc
From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Subject: Re: Characters vs. Plot (Was Re: Grading scales)
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 22:01:53 GMT

Followups set to r.a.s.misc.

kanamori@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Atsushi Kanamori) writes:
>In article <1992Apr4.191640.12948@cco.caltech.edu> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:

[on "Brothers"]

>>I remember our exchange about the ending (it took you a while to realize
>>it was irony rather than a "moral-of-the-week", as I recall), but I
>>also remember your initial cries were "but the story, MY GOD, THE STORY!",
>>and hardly focused on the "cute one-liner ending".

>Careful -- if you're going to dig up 18 month old reviews as weapons,
>I've got all your reviews back to the 2nd season stored up. :-)

Egads.  You wouldn't.  :-)

>You mentioned how you weigh episode reratings stronger than your
>first impression -- why not rely on more recent information here too?
>People *do* change in 18 months, y'know.

Accepted.

>Well I don't have *my* BROTHERS review archived so I can't refute this
>with examples. Unless someone who was there remembers, we're stuck.

Wait a sec.  You've got all of my reviews archived, and not your own?  Pardon
me for saying so, but that's damned odd.  :-)


>>It still doesn't smack of the sort of thing I'd want to say unless it was
>>meant in a negative way.  A car is "serviceable", not an acting performance.

>Sheesh -- no wonder you see my reviews as negative. I *really* don't see
>what the problem with "servicable" is here. 

You're obviously not an actor.  I've gotten half a dozen letters from 
actors on this saying "dead on, son."  "Serviceable" sounds like the sort of
thing you'd say when you're looking for as kind a word as possible to say
"well, frankly...".  Granted, it doesn't have to be used that way, but that's
often the impression it gives.

Trust me on this one.  If you went up to a group of a dozen actors and told
them their work was serviceable, you'd be handed a matched set of lungs.  

>>Thank you for spoiling TFD for me.  I'll not be seeing that 'til tomorrow.
>>:-(

>I recall Matt Gertz's posting saying "I really liked the music in this
>episode" wasn't a spoiler -- what I said falls in the same category, IMO.

Ah.  So in other words, you no longer think my putting a one-line opinion
in the summary line of my review is a problem?  (I'm not seriously interested
in changing back at this point, but it does get a bit annoying to see people
say "please don't do this" and then be rather cavalier about it themselves.)

Tim Lynch
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: dabachma@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Donald A Bachman)
Subject: Where was Troi? (First Duty)
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:14:58 GMT


	Sigh, last week it was no Guinan, who would have said, "Captain,
I sense a time-loop", this week Troi was absent, "Captain, Wesley is 
hiding something." What next week, Riker breaks a leg, and they can not
find Dr. Crusher? 

	I know some will argue that it is unethical to read someone elses
emotions/mind without consent, but by previous example, and what Picard
said about his Betazoid Commandant, we know that is not the case. So where
were the telepaths/empaths? (Have to wonder in general, if there is a law
allowing you not to incriminate yourself, and if so, does it apply to thoughts
you broadcast).

	Another thing, why would they doubt the picture from the satellite?
A picture is generally admissable, and it clearly indicated deception of some
sort (which, IMHO, would have been enough to warrant a much more sever punish-
ment than that which was initially going to be handed down).

	Oh well, liked it anyway. I suppose because it shows that Wesley is
not perfect (at least in judgement), and can be as prone to human failings
as anyone (YAIIII, I almost said it made Wesley likeable).

--
From: jfrench@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Jason French)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Why 3 in "Cause and Effect?"
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:13:31 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

From ut-emx!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!news.wesleyan.edu!eagle.wesleyan.edu!ttullio Thu Apr  9 10:02:47 CDT 1992

=O>Why didn't Data choose the "obvious" and send a message of "Riker"?!
=O>Same number of characters as "three", after all, and a lot less ambiguious!

In the episode Geordi said that Data could on send only a few characters back
to the next loop.  We don't know his definition of "a few" though.  I assumed
that he sent 1 character "3" not 5 characters "three".  Also, Data had to
account for how is subconcious would play back the message.  If it was "Riker"
Data may not have caught on that it was a message from the other time loop.
While, over 2000 instances of the number 3 caught their intention.  I agree
that 3 could mean anything, but it seems logical once it was played out.

+-------------------------------Jason French-------------------------------+
!                                                                          !
! "We must strive to be more that we are...It does not matter that we will !
!  never reach our ultimate goal.  The effort yeilds its own rewards."     !
!                                                                          !
!                                        --  Lt. Commander Data            !
!                                            Star Trek: The Next Generation!
!                                           "The Offspring"                !
!                                                                          !
+-------------------------jfrench@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu-----------------------+
+------------------------csgx166@bongo.cc.utexas.edu-----------------------+



Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yung)
Subject: Re: Locarno's actions.
Organization: R-Node Public Access UNIX System (416-636-2026) - 24 hrs
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1992 22:37:06 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.142206.3281@cs.mcgill.ca> doctor@cs.mcgill.ca (Howard PICAIZEN) writes:
>Spoilers for First Duty...

>
>To all those claiming that Mr. Locarno is an asshole for what he
>did... UP YOURS!  Forgive my strong words, but I sympathize with
>Locarno. He did what he did for the benefit of his friends, not for
>himself. He was convinced that if they would step forward and admit
>the truth, that they would all be expelled. He was frightened; not
>only for himself but for his friends as well. And he felt he had to
>protect them at any cost. Way back in season 1, Captain Picard said to
>Troi: "Friendship must dare to risk, Counselor, or it isn't
>friendship." Well, friendship cannot simply be discarded, even if it
>means having to hide the truth. What gain was there for anyone in
>revealing what really happened? It would not bring Josh back. The only
>benefits would be to honor and duty. And what honor is there in
>letting down your friends?

So, lets say, if I and a bunch of drunk friends ran you over in the middle
of nowhere, it would be alright for us not to step forward since you are
already dead?

You, sir, are a very forgiving person.

>
>Captain Howard Picaizen (doctor@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca), IKN SANG.
>"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." -Kirk
>"A warrior does not let a friend face danger alone." -Worf
>"Let's be sure that history never forgets the name... Enterprise." -Picard



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amos Yung          | Macintosh Jr.: The power to crush the other kid.
yung@r-node.gts.org| 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu (Brian Perler)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Picard is old! (Minor First Duty spoiler)
Date: 7 Apr 92 00:29:54 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Apr6.032850.12251@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.015107.744@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> zell@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Joseph Zell) writes:
>>
>>Wan't MCCoy a RETIRED admiral when he was in Encounter? Also, McCoy could barely walk.  I wouldn't say Picard is still young.  He might live to be a ripe old
>>age, but that doesn't mean he'll be usefull(in an active-duty Starfleet front
>>line type of way-no flames about old age meaning uselessness please).
>>By the way, if McCoy was supposed to be decommisioned in STVI, how could he be
>>a retired Admiral?
>
>The Enterprise was decommissioned.  McCoy retired. :)
>
>He might have gotten an honorary promotion on retirement, or he may have 
>entered the fleet again later... we'll have to wait for the next movie to
>find out.

If I remember correctly, in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Kirk used an
obscure Starfleet activation clause to drag McCoy out of retirement to go on
the V'ger mission.  If it was done to the poor doctor once, why not again?
At least, that's the way I remember it.  If anyone remembers differently,
please correct me.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Trek and Training
From: msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (MARC SIEGALL)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:14:50 GMT
Reply-To: msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico

The American Society for Training and Development publishes a monthly
Info-Line of "practical guidelines for training and development
professionals".  March's issue covers the Americans with Disabilities
Act, and opens with the quote "The joy of creation is in its infinite
diversity and in the ways our differences combine to create meaning
and beauty."

The quote is attributed to Mr. Spock - Star Trek.
From: smc67406@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Request of Conundrum Bios
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:54:28 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati

Can someone send me a copy of the Next Generation Biography file from the
  episode Conundrum that was posted here a few weeks ago.  I lost part of the
file due to a bad sector on my disk.

Steve Crump
smc67406@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke)
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 22:02:27 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.221926.12208@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>     BTW, anyone notice the time frame for the ^last^ attempted Culvort
>     Starburst (spelling?) -- 100 years ago.  Kirk himself?...     

Probably not, considering that , according to Picard, all 5 pilots were 
killed.

Of course, if Spock could come back from the dead...


-- 
        Real Programmers Don't Eat Quiche.
                      hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
                      Gene Roddenberry 1921-1991
From: hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Why 3 in "Cause and Effect?"
Date: 6 Apr 92 13:50:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux1.1992Apr6.135053.11637
Distribution: rec
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

In article <1992Apr6.062030.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu> ttullio@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
>Why didn't Data choose the "obvious" and send a message of "Riker"?!
>Same number of characters as "three", after all, and a lot less ambiguious!

R I K E R . 

3

Same number of characters? :)

-- 
        Real Programmers Don't Eat Quiche.
                      hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
                      Gene Roddenberry 1921-1991
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: goodwin@orionsci.uucp (Ben Goodwin)
Subject: (Spoilers First Duty)
Organization: Orion Scientific, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1992 15:03:53 GMT

First duty spoilers: Assumptions!


Let's see, two things I thinkg:

1) All of you who say Locarno was OK are making a *big* assumption.
   You assume that the accident was Josh's fault.  You are making
   quite a leap here.  The scene where the gang said it was probably
   Josh, hum, seems to me that if Wes had been the one killed it would
   have gone, "Yea, that Wes, new to the team, just wasn't ready for it."
   There was no real evidence to support that Josh caused the crash.
   NONE!

2) Kirk=Locarno theory: BS!
   You are all basing your theories on no data.  We have almost
   no data on Kirk's days at the academy.  As a matter of fact the Kobyashi
   Maru is the only reference I've seen to Kirk's Academy Days.

Therefore I wish to present an alternate equation! (Drum roll ...)

  Locarno = Picard (at academy)

No more far fetched than the other equation.  We even have evidence to
support theory.

a) Picard was stabbed through the heart by some alien while a cadet
   because he was a hotblooded youth, reckless in a word.

b) Picard was thanking Boothby (overplayed IMHO) for getting him out of
   trouble when he was a cadet.

Sounds like a real troublemaker to me.  Remember the Picard of today is
(so some have said) approximately 60 years old.  He was probably a wild
freewheeling seat of the pants Captain in his younger days (Just like Kirk)
but he has matured.
   
-- 
============================================================================
| uunet!orionsci!goodwin        | you with your hair that's always combed,
| Ben Goodwin                   | your suit is always white, your car is
| Washington DC (703) 524-0504  | always clean.  You I hate!!! -Great Race
============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: ij59@vaxb.acs.unt.edu
Subject: Re: Boothby and Picard: TFD
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 02:58:10 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.173140.25324@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, heather@hub.toronto.edu (Heather Hinton) writes:
> In `The Game', when Wes returns to the Enterprise, there is a
> wonderfully heart-warming (read: stomach-churning) scene where Wes and
> Picard discuss the academy.  Picard had told Wes to introduce himself to
> Boothby on an earlier epsiode, and then in `The Game' asks how Boothby
> is doing.  
> 
> Doesn't Wesley reply that Boothby didn't remember who Picard was?  If
> so, how come Boothby suddenly is able to recognize Picard and list all
> his accomplishments?  What gives?
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Heather M Hinton 	(mail: heather @ hub.toronto.edu)
> Dept of Electrical Engineering
> 10 King's College Road
> University of Toronto

  As I recall, Wesley said "He didn't remember you . . at first. <smiles>" and
then tells Picard how he told Boothby something/described Picard/etc.
and Boothby remembered him then.

(Of course, that sentence _did_ start with 'As I recall . . .' which is a sure
sign that whatever follows is completely unreliable.) :)

  ======================================================================
  | "Sir, this chicken is still alive."               |  Mira-Sukotto  |
  | "Thank you, Mr. Spock.  Bones, give me a reading."| (Scott Miller) |
  | <Beep...beep...beep>                              |------------------
  | "It's raw, Jim!"                                  | ij59@           |
  | "Right, then, phasers on 'roast'."                | vaxb.acs.unt.edu|
  | Zzzaappp . . . <SQUAAAWK!>                        |==================
  |                                                   |
  |                  -- Tiny Toon Adventures          |
  =====================================================
 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current,rec.arts.startrek.misc
From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Subject: Re: Kobyashi and Kirk
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 19:53:03 GMT

Followups set to r.a.s.misc.

kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
>edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen) writes:

> > The way it worked is that Kirk refused to accept the "no-win"
> > scenario.  He took the test once.  He lost the simulation.
> > Rather then accept there is no way to win, he thought of it as
> > a giant videogame, where there must be *a* correct answer.  He
> > asked, and then took it a second time.  After being destroyed
> > again, the academy folks probably said "Look Kirk, you can
> > take this as many times as you want, but you'll NEVER win."
> > Kirk refused to accept this.  He refused to accept that there
> > are some situations which he could not triumph over.  Thus,
> > the third time and the re-programming.

Well put, Edward.  My thoughts exactly.

>How about this interpretation: Kirk thought the situation as
>presented wasn't really a no-win situation, and thought that if
>the situation were real there ought to be a way a cagey starship
>captain could to get out of it.  

In other words, he *refused to accept the validity of the concept of the
no-win scenario*.  Thank you.  That is precisely what we've been arguing
all along; that Kirk doesn't believe a no-win scenario exists, and that
its reality was thrown at him in TWOK.

>And so he wanted to try out his
>theories.  Finally when he realized that the simulation was
>flawed, he fixed it so that it would accurately simulate reality.

WHAT?

Exactly how is a simulation being no-win "flawed"?  Unless you agree with 
Kirk that a no-win scenario doesn't really exist, there are no obvious flaws
to be seen based on what we know of the test.

And BTW, if you want to go with non-canon material, the novel _Kobayashi
Maru_ says that Kirk's way of "fixing it so that it would accurately simulate
reality" was to have the Klingons flee in abject terror when they discovered
it was James T. Kirk commanding.  (Major macho power trip, methinks.)

>It's not Kirk's fault if the simulation programmers didn't do
>their job properly.  

But they did, and Kirk refused to see it.  

>Given a truly unbeatable enemy Kirk would
>back down as quickly as any man.  You didn't see him trying to
>attack V'ger did you?

I saw him prepared to blow up his own ship in an attempt to save all and 
go down the posthumous saviour of Earth.  Doesn't look like he thought V'ger
was unbeatable to me, Kyle.

Tim Lynch
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: merlyn@iWarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Subject: THE FIRST DUTY continuity errors (no spoiler)
Reply-To: merlyn@iWarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 17:49:29 GMT

About 10 minutes in -- Wes goes to the door.  The long shot has him
opening the door with his *left hand*.  Cut to close up, and the door
is being opened with his *right hand*.

Also, about 40 minutes in.  Wes is talking to (someone, argh, can't
remember) in his quarters.  From behind, his hands are in one
position, and when we cut to the front, they're in another position,
obviously different.

Hmm.  Looks like continuity was out to lunch when they shot the scenes
in the quarters.
-- 
/=Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ==========\
| on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III      |
| merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn |
\=Cute Quote: "Intel: putting the 'backward' in 'backward compatible'..."====/
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current