HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: btd43733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (BTDonovan)
Subject: Re: O'Brien's Rank [THE FINAL ANSWER]
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 20:42:33 GMT

v070p6nd@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Anthos) writes:

>In article <81012@ut-emx.uucp>, reza@magellan.ae.utexas.edu (Alireza Vali) writes...
>>In "Ream of Fear" Barclay gave O'brien a DIRECT ORDER.  Wait a second... how
>>can a Lieutenant Junior Grade give an order to a full Lieutenant???  After
>>a closer look, O'brien's rank insignia was revealed as a single hollow
>>pip!!!!  That's even lower than an ensign.  Didn't he used to be a full
>>Lieutenant?  I'm pretty sure he was referred to as Lt. O'Brien many times
>>in the past.  What's going on?  Did he get demoted?
>>-- 
>>Ali R. Vali - reza@magellan.ae.utexas.edu
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>If you're new, sorry for the scream.

>O'Brian is and has always been a Chief Petty Officer.  The Lt. reference is from
>season one and two (and any other season B4 the character of O'Brian was 
>established), since the actor was a 'regular' EXTRA (not portraying a named 
>part) and not O'Brian, yet.

>This is and will always be O'Brian's rank (until they actually decide to promote
>him.

I must wholeheartedly disagree.  First of all: he DID have two filled circles,
therefore, (surprise), he is a lieutennant.  The reason he is 'chief' is
transporter chief is because he is the top officer in the (for lack of a better
explanation) "transporter division" much like Lt. Cmdr LaForge is the Chief
of Enginnerring and Dr. (Cmdr) Crusher is Chief Medical Officer.  O'Brien
obviously earned his commission and rank as a security chief (as mentioned in
"The Wounded"- or whatever that episode was with that renegade captain in the
cool Nebula class ship.)  After being burnt out in the role of security chief,
he became involved in transporter operations and has not been heard from in
22 years:)

I think that the deal with "Realm of Fear" is that some writers got extremely
LAZY and with little regard to the flamewars which could occur on r.a.s.*
temporarily demoted O'Brien in order to put a cute scene in where Barclay
could order him around.  I wish that whoever is in control of series contenuity
and quality control down at Paramount (or wherever) would get off their
rear and actually fine tune and clean up the stories/scripts so we, the
audience, don't have to put up with as much _TRASH_ as we've been getting
in the last year or two.

Just my $0.02 and attempt to beat on this dead horse.
Flame away...

BTDonovan@uiuc.edu
-- 
-------------------------------------- Bernard T. (Tom) Donovan      
| All things are ready, if our minds | BTDonovan@uiuc.edu
| be so.  -- Henry V. IV.iii.71      | btd43733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu 
-------------------------------------- TDonovan@synapse.npa.uiuc.edu
From: g92n3258@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR RL NICOL)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: time-travel backwards possible? perhaps
Date: 27 Sep 92 12:10:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: giraffe.g92n3258.22.717595816
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa


It was stated on the network (sorry, can't remember who) that time-travel 
backwards is not possible, because if you went backwards and, say, killed 
yourself as a baby, you end up with a paradox.

This is not the case in the time-tree theory.  If you see time as having 
many branches, you can travel backwards and kill yourself, thereby opening 
up a new branch in which you never existed.  The old time line would 
continue without you and you would exist in the new one without any way of 
getting back to the old timeline except by going back in time to the point 
that you killed yourself, kill the "you" that was about to kill the baby you 
and then jump into the future to the point that you left.

Let's illustrate it as such:  I'm in a room with three guys, Joe, Bob, and 
Matthew.  I decide to kill myself by going back in time.  In order to do 
this, I need to merely leave the room.  According to the time-branch theory, 
I step out the room and go back in time, kill myself in the year 1973 and 
then jump forward to the point I left.  I will find a universe where no one 
knows me and everything has changed.  But in the other timeline, from the 
other three guys p.o.v. I will have left, they will continue with their 
lives and they'll never see me again.

Thus there is no real reason to go back in time except for personal gain.  
You can't consider going back in time to wipe out an alien race that is 
destroying Earth, as for you in your time line, they will be dead.  But in 
the one you left, the one in which you were born, they will still be alive; 
it is you who has left forever.

Just an idea.
Ryan.
From: CXMP@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CXMP000)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: RE: DS9??
Date: 2 Oct 92 01:31:26 GMT
Organization: McGill University

In article <13041@scottyb> gank@Software.Mitel.COM (Kok-Ti Gan) writes:
>I heard DS9 was supposed to air this season. Would some kind netter please
>send me the schedule. I would like to know when it starts so that I don't
>miss any episodes. Thanks in advance.
>
Sorry, it's due out in January.  I was thinking of Babalon 5.

Feeling really embarrassed,

Martin
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: g92n3258@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR RL NICOL)
Subject: re: timetravel backwards? - perhaps
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:48:50 GMT

I apologize for having said the time branch _theory_.  Okay - notion is more 
suitable.

Now I sticking to paradoxes and only paradoxes (for this was the only thing 
I was considering when I wrote my previous post) these can be pushed out by 
the time branch _notion_.  I agree that if you were to believe in time as 
being a straight line with no off-shoots, branches etc, it will lead to 
problems - one can't go back and kill yourself - PARADOX.  But please tell 
me how one gets a paradox if one were to follow this notion through?

I'm not considering causality or any other reason for it to be impossible 
yet.  I'm just focussing on paradoxes.

Any explanation as to why paradoxes would still result would be appreciated,
Thanks,
Ryan.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: andy@awds.imsd.contel.com (Andy Moskoff)
Subject: The Trouble with ST: TNG
Summary: Last Straw - (Realm of Fear)
Organization: GTE Federal Systems, Westlake Village, CA
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:13:49 GMT



I've had it with the b.s. techno-babble on Star Trek. For those that haven't
seen the episode "Realm of Fear", watch it carefully. Then decide for yourself
if you can follow the technical garbage that clearly doesn't make any sense.
For me, I don't give a damn about the micro details of the physics, and as
a matter of fact, it *RUINS* the story because it overshadows the plot. The
writers are becoming almost contemptous of the audience! Why don't they get
out of the psuedo-ivory tower and start writing episodes that have more
philosphical meanings NOT try to show how much they know about ST physics.
I want a STORY damn it! Something that entertains me! And the stunt at the
end of the episode is totally assinine. Why is it part of the show? It certainlydid NOT entertain me. It was a cheap thrill for the writers. For me the
"Realm of Fear" was in the realm of stupidity.


-Andy M.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: johnnyp@athena.mit.edu (John Piscitello)
Subject: Re: promos for: time's ar
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: rec
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:36:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.3208.11448@dosgate> "bernie wong" <bernie.wong@canrem.com> writes:
>>Since the "cliffhanger" (especially with "Time's Arrow") is primarily
>>advertisement for the conclusion, I think it's perfectly fair
>>to "wate" for the conclusion before rating either one.
>
>Oh be quiet, so I made ONE little spelling error...  :-)  (Wate, wait,
>what's da difference?!)
>
>>(Actually, I would have given TA1 a grade if I'd had any idea of
>>what that episode was trying to accomplish. I can't assign a grade
>>without knowing the damn premise.)
>
>Does every episode need a point?!??!  :-)
>
	No, but hey, this episode had plenty of points and issues it
was trying to forward:

	- what it means for a Data to confront his mortality
	- how Picard and Guinan "meet" is shown, with some very special
	indications on the unique nature of their relationship
	- Mark Twain's picture of mankind in "Connecticut Yankee in
	King Arthur's Court" is confronted by Roddenbery's optimistic
	vision of the future
	- we get to see the crew in 19th-century dress, having some
	fun beating up cops, posing as actors, and paying the rent -
	a change of pace from sitting on the bridge
	- we explore time-travel issues of actions in one century
	"instantaneously" affecting the results 5 centuries later

	I mean hey, that's a hell of a lot more than you're going to
get from most shows on an off-week!

/****************************************************************************
 Johnny Tello		* Postal Worker: "What's your first name, Mr. Burns?"
 504 Beacon St, Apt#23. * Homer: "I don't know..."
 Boston, MA 02215       *
****************************************************************************/


Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Heffernan)
Subject: Re: TAII
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 21:29:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.154939.15196@athena.mit.edu> johnnyp@athena.mit.edu (John Piscitello) writes:
|	You also center too much on plot. TNG is more than plot.

	Plot is 90% or more of any kind of drama.  Who cares how pretty it
looks if it doesn't make any sense?

|What about the 19th-centure costumes, which looked great?

	Big Deal.  Give me a million-six an hour to make a TV show and I'll get
the costumes right too.

|What about the development of the friendship (or is it morer?() between
|Guinan and Picard? 

	WHAT development?  All we got was another "nudge-nudge-wink-wink, hey
look we're being SUBTLE!" number.  We know nothing more about their
relationship now than we did before the epsiode.

|What about the seamlessness of the special effects?

	See costumes comment, above.  Any fool with a good studio can have
seamless effects.


|The creative storylines?

	THIS is your idea of a creative storyline?

|The little touches of dialogue among the actors (like Geordi holding the play
|upside down, Picard worrying about paying the bill at the hotel,
|Riker punching out the cop?)

	Why should I care about any of these?  Geordi holding the play
upside-down (and WHERE did they GET them from?) is cute, but it hardly makes
up for the colossal plot holes.

|	There is so much great stuff in this show. And you're
|sitting there whining "Well, why don't the aliens have photon
|torpedoes to shoot back?" Why don't you just ask where the
|captain goes to the bathroom?

	The latter isn't important to the plot.  The former is.  It MATTERS as
to why the aliens were so defenseless.

|	Maybe so. But TNG is an excellent show on every level.
|From plots to character to costumes to makeup. I think it's your
|criticisms that need to be more thought-out.

	I don't see how anyone could call the plots or the characters on this
show "excellent".  At best, TNG soars to the heights of mediocrity.


dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com   ...uunet!tronsbox!dfrancis     GEnie: D.HEFFERNAN1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't understand why you make such a big deal out of everything...haven't
you learned; if it's not happenning to me it's not important?" -Murphy Brown
From: rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Group Dynamics Review: Time's Arrow, Part II (*SPOILERS*)
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:59:21 GMT
Reply-To: rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept., Madison, WI

In <1992Sep28.033853.772@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin) writes:
>In article <rawdon.717647314@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>>In <1a5d76INN482@bigboote.WPI.EDU> jtruss@cauchy.WPI.EDU (Free the Expo 67!) writes:
>>I enjoy time travel stories where everything flows together smoothly, without
>>any such "mindfuck".  This came close to being one such.  My favorite
>>Doctor Who episode, "Mawdryn Undead", is in exactly the same vein (and is
>>an excellent story to boot).  The fun is not in seeing things get screwed
>>up, but in seeing the web of confusion untangled.

>But....can you sort out all the UNIT-dates mistakes?  :)

Yeah, but only because "The Pyramids Of Mars" is one of my *other* favorite
episodes. :-)

(But "Mawdryn Undead" is at least *internally* consistent, which is pretty
darned good for SF TV! :-)

>>Doctor Who is an excellent show, and a large chunk of it vastly exceeds
>>the quality of most of TNG!  (I'd rather re-watch the Tom Baker Doctor Whos
>>than re-watch TNG.  About 1 in 3 of those DWs are worth watching, at least,
>>while about 1 in 5 or 6 TNGs are.)

>Very intellignet person.  Come over to rec.arts.drwho (unless you already
>have or will/have)

I show up there occasionally, though there seems little to discuss these days,
since I hate most of the Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy episodes (save
"Survival", which is another of my favorite DW episodes).

Oh, well.  Maybe it will restart *someday*...

-- 
Michael Rawdon				 rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI

"Can this world not do better than you for a champion?"
"Probably.  I just do the best I can."
					- The Brigadier
					  Doctor Who, "Battlefield"
					  [Probably misquoted]
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: O'Brien's Rank [THE FINAL ANSWER]
Date: 5 Oct 92 17:29:38 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Oct5.095021.28938@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams) writes:
>>v070p6nd@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Anthos) writes:
> >O'Brian is and has always been a Chief Petty Officer.  
>When did you decide that?  :-)

> >The Lt. reference is from season one and two 
> >since the actor was a 'regular' EXTRA (not portraying a named 
> >part) and not O'Brian, yet.

>Wrong.  The O'Brien/Transporter Chief character was created starting 
>with the FIRST episode of season two.  He clearly wore the rank of
>Lieutenant, and in his next appearance they called him as such.

But Colm Meaney (who plays O'Brien) has been on the Enterprise from
"Encounter at Farpoint" on.  He plays the Battle Bridge helmsman (with
a red uniform and, as I recall, one pip) in "Farpoint", and in another
episode, possibly "Lonely Among Us", he has a couple of lines as a
security officer.

All this has been said before, many times.

Perhaps, instead of resolving it one way or another, we should ask another
question.  What happened, in Trek terms, to change his rank to this
previously-unseen combination?
From: ph111-bx@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;7202)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: "Trek" history made in "Realm of Fear" (**SPOILERS**)
Date: 5 Oct 1992 03:53:19 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu

In article <1amu50INN50v@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> rfd@po.CWRU.Edu
(Richard F. Drushel) writes:
>	I'm certain there was one shot somewhere in TOS where we
>were given a POV shot from the pads, but *NOT* during dematerialization.
>Anybody recall the episode?

Mirror, Mirror, last scene when Kirk gives his "In every revolution"
speech to Spock.  At least I think it was a Kirk POV shot.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo)
Subject: Re: The Enemy Within
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:58:03 GMT


The reason they didn't send down the shuttle craft was because at the time
they filmed this episode many years ago, they did not have enough money to
biuld the shuttlecraft set/model.  According to the Tech Man somewhere in
there.



--
|Jeffrey S. Jo                   |	         F-14D Tomcat                 |
|Computer Operations		 |             VF-142 Ghostriders             |
|University of Nebraska at Omaha |       United States Navy F-14 Tomcat       |
|tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu         |              Fighter Squadron              |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current,rec.arts.sf.tv
From: huggins@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jim Huggins)
Subject: Re: Will we have to pay to see Star Trek?
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.tv
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:17:44 GMT

Follow-ups to rec.arts.sf.tv ... this has lost relevance to StarTrek.

In article <1992Sep28.151613.6637@bnlux1.bnl.gov> schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) writes:
|
|This is off the subject a bit, but all of this talk of the SFC got me to
|thinking "gee, it might be nice to get our cable company to carry it.
|But then I thought...well, let's consider the programming that I hear
|they're offering so far: re-runs of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea,
|Lost in Space, Buck Rogers, and a number of other TV sci-fi series that
|pretty much stunk.  Do I really need a channel to give me these shows 24
|hrs a day?

Well ... at the moment it's only ~18 hours a day -- like a lot of
cable channels, they're showing Ronco Vegamatic commercials during
the wee hours of the morning.

|Any one out there getting SFC now?  What do you think so far?

Haven't seen all that much of it, frankly (trying to be good and
studious, y'know).  The daytime schedule is pretty much a wash
right now (old SF movies basically).  Evenings and weekends may be
better.

-- 
Jim Huggins, Univ. of Michigan                          huggins@eecs.umich.edu
"You cannot pray to a personal computer no matter how user-friendly it is."
                                                          -- W. Bingham Hunter
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: RE: Questions on Time's Arrow
From: hef@vitro.com
Date: 2 Oct 92 11:47:06 -0500
Organization: Vitro Corporation
Nntp-Posting-User: mbwatch

In article <28SEP92.14613277.0101@VM1.MCGILL.CA>, CXMP@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CXMP000) writes:
> In article <2021.406.uupcb@the_matrix.com> michael.davidson@the_matrix.com (Michael Davidson) writes:
>>
>>JB.Question 1)  I understand how Data knows it's 42 *North*.  Equators
>>  .can be defined.  But I thought that east and west lines were
>>  .subjective.
>>
>>Nope. They're measured east and west of the prime meridian.
> 
> Good.  Now locate the prime meridian on planet sigma 6.

In a previous episode longitude was measured east or west of the
terminator.  (Which terminator, I dunno.)

P.S.:  This does not mean:  I live 1.5 degrees west of a movie theater
                            which is currently showing "The Terminator."
                            Therefore my longitude is 1.5 degrees West.
                            :)

            ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
           //
          //   Mike Heffner               Internet: hef@vitro.com
\\\\\    //  Vitro Corporation
    \\  // 14000 Georgia Avenue          "To understand recursion,
     \\// Silver Spring, MD 20906  you must first understand recursion."
      \/                                        -- Unknown
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: lis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Elisabeth Riba)
Subject: Jean-Luc & Bev in Realm of Fear (no spoilers)
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 12:25:15 GMT

Was I the only one who noticed Picard's hand on Beverly's ass during
one of the briefing scenes?
They're standing awfully close together, and suddenly there's an extra
hand sprouting from Beverly's side.

Watch for it.
-- 
--------------->Elisabeth Anne Riba * lis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu<---------------
"I want to be Robin to Bush's Batman."  Dan Quayle
Quick!  Notify DC.  I think it's time for another 900 number poll.
"We are enjoying a sluggish economy & not enjoying it very much."  --Bush
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: 2104805@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU ()
Subject: Re: Guinan
Organization: school of Mathematics UNSW
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 08:43:00 GMT

Last night was the first episode in which i saw the Borgs (in which Guinan
and Q had their confrontation, it looked as thou both were some sort of cats,
and were ready to jump at each others throats.)

In that same episode when Worf kills the first of the Borg's away team, a
new one replaces the dead one, he removes something from the corpse and
teleports out of there.
What did he remove ?
How come the Enterprise didn't finish the Borg's cube ship off ?

As you can probably tell, we are pretty far behind on the plot down here
in Australia.

Peter.
From: dfried@mendel.genetics.washington.edu (David Friedman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Time-loop flaw in Time's Arrow II
Date: 2 Oct 92 23:32:55 GMT
Organization: University of Washington

In article <92Oct02.202342.22488@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.194945.11052@u.washington.edu> dfried@darwin.genetics.washington.edu (David Friedman) writes:
>
>>The watch is aging normally, and eventually will stop
>>working.  Every 500 years it is picked up by the Enterprise
>>and then brought back to the 19th century cavern to cycle
>>again.
>
>I didn't watch too closely, but is this possible?
>
>He dropped his watch in the cavern, brought the 'aged' watch back
>with him, and kept the aged watch? 

I don't think so.  We never see him keeping any watch, only purposely
leaving one in the cavern in the end.

>So from the watch's point of
>view, it got dropped, left for 500 years, then picked up and
>carried away (back to its 'home' time).
>

Indeed, only to be left for another 500 years...

>I probably missed some reason this explanation doesn't work (and
>avoids paradox)
>
>Joshua
From: meyers@mcclb0.med.nyu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Times Arrow/Realm of Fear
Date: 6 Oct 92 03:40:45 GMT
Organization: NYU Medical Center, New York, NY 10016, USA

Last night saw the reboardcast of "Times Arrow Pt. II" and noted
several things of interest. Whoever penned the script ignored the
writing of Pt I (what a horror). Clemmons does see his watch on the
Enterprise and Geordie mentions that it was found along with Data's
head and after 500 years probably does not work either, The scene then
changes and at no point do we see Clemmons take the watch or place it
in his pocket. When he returns to the 19th century he picks up his
watch, after Giugiun is removed, looks at it and puts it back. He
leaves The Presido without his pocket watch, past or present.
I enjoyed "Realm of Fear",I found it fun to see a normal person
instead of the super cool crew of the Enterprise. It reminded my why I
like TNG so much, humor that TOS did not and could not do. I will
grant you the shows are different, done for different generations, but
I like the humor. It lets me know that we are a peaceful Federation
and there is room for the eccentric so long as he is good at his job,
Barclay must be or he would not be on the ship.
 
Owen Meyers
Views expressed are my own.