HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sll28@cc.usu.edu (Lorna Payne)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: QL: This weeks episode was *not* a smart idea.
Date: 7 Oct 92 08:48:29 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Oct7.045250.22453@netcom.com>, sallylb@netcom.com (Sally Smith) writes:
> In article <1992Oct6.205142.7224@ms.uky.edu> thomasc@ms.uky.edu (Thomas Campbell) writes:
>>Spoilers below by the way ...
> 
> 
>>I was *very* disappointed.  Sam was able to overcome the abilities
>>of someone he was leaped into.  This can't happen.  If he is a 
>>parapeligic then he is a parapeligic.  He's always had to adapt
>>to the abilities of the person that he was in and work within those
>>constraints.  I was *not* happy.  Maybe I'm wrong on this fact but
>>I didn't think he was able to do stuff like that.
> 
> Well, I hate to tell you this, but you ARE wrong on this fact.
> 
> Sam is always Sam. He always has his own abilities. When he leaped
> into a blind man, he wasn't blind. When he leaps into old people,
> he doesn't have arthritis, etc.
> 
> And a picky correction: the guy Sam leaped into wasn't a paraplegic,
> he was a double amputee. *BIG* difference.
> 
> IMHO, this was one hell of an episode -- and I'm buying Tommy
> Thompson a drink the next time I see him.

And give him a big congratulations and thank you from me, too. This is
*definitely* a keeper.  

BTW, whose idea was it to cast Michael Boatman as Billy?  As soon as I 
saw his name, I thought "aha!  Sam Beckett, meet Sam Beckett!" (for those
who haven't seen China Beach, Mr. Boatman plays the camp chaplain(?), the
guy whose unhappy job it is to keep the morgue.  His character's name
is Sam Beckett.)

Lorna
-- 

     -------------------------------------------------------------
               Lorna Payne
               Certified Math Geek and Grammarian
     -------------------------------------------------------------
     The concept is simply staggering.  Pointless, but staggering.
                         -The Doctor (The Pirate Planet)
     -------------------------------------------------------------
From: mccoy@cayman.com (Michael McCoy)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Highlander: Series and third movie
Date: 9 Oct 92 14:42:45 GMT
Reply-To: mccoy@cayman.com (Michael McCoy)
Organization: cayman.com

bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu (Brian Perler) writes:

>In Highlander, Ramirez tells Connor
>something like, "You're safe only on
>holy ground.  It's tradition.  None of
>us will violate that."  The immortals
>don't attack each other on
>holy ground because they WON'T,
>not because they CAN'T.

Two problems with this (one from the movie, one from the series):

- Kurgen didn't strike me as the type to obey traditions that were clearly 
contrary to what he wanted. My sense was that he would have suffered 
some sort of major sanction if he had tried to engage MacLeod in the 
church (or vica versa).

- The first episode made several references to the "Old Ones," with an 
implication that they were some sort of supervisory council for conflicts 
between the immortals. (For example, Duncan told Conor he obtained 
permission from the Old Ones to build his cabin on sacred ground.) The 
existence of the Old Ones raises some interesting questions about the 
origins of the immortals and the framework in which they compete.

>>I liked the fact that the Prize was explained as the power of all
>>the Immortals.  This supports somthing I've always thought about the
>>movie: the lights and floating when an immortal kills another immortal
>>is the victor absorbing his opponent's power.  This is why everything
>>explodes when Conner kills Kurgen: he absorbs the power of every one of
>>the Immortals that Kurgen has killed.

But none of the immortals seemed more powerful in 1987 than they did in 
medieval times. Whatever "powers" they had didn't seem additive -- age 
just made the immortals better able to use them. Ramirez was hundreds 
of years old when Kurgen killed him, but you didn't see the same kind of 
pyrotechnics when he lost his head to Kurgen that you did when Kurgen 
lost his to MacLeod.

And how come the bodies don't float away when the immortals lose their 
heads anymore?

================================================
Will beta test for food...
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.tv:3956 rec.arts.tv:19988
From: jrjj@moscom.com (Jad Jordan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: QL: NOwhere to Run (Possible Spoilers)
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:03:15 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY

In article <1992Oct14.230645.8061@midway.uchicago.edu> rck1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>> >Remember the beauty
>>> >contest episode?  I thought it was fairly clear then that Al saw Sam
>>> >as Sam and not the leapee.
>
>I personally have no problems with Al being able to see Sam as Sam;
>in fact, I brought up the theory a few months ago that the rules
>had changed since "What Price Gloria" (probably due to the problems
>Al was having in that episode). IMHO, I like this idea, since 
>it's always seemed to me to be d*mned difficult for Al to interact
>so consistently with Sam if Sam looks different to him every other
>week...

I personally think Al sees Sam as the person he currently is, but has some way
to observe the person he is leaping into. But just to add another scene to the
controveersy, one of the USA episodes this week (Sorry, no good with titles.)
has Sam leaping into an oold pool shark. Al says clearly that:

"When I saw Black Magic Turner (or whatever) in the waiting room, I had to come
see you as fast as I could." (Al toured with this pool shark guy.)

-Jad
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.tv:3885 rec.arts.tv:19742
From: sallylb@netcom.com (Sally Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: QL: My Evil Leaper Theory
Date: 11 Oct 92 21:53:43 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1b9hmdINNgu2@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse) writes:

>I don't think that the Evil Leaper (EL) is evil.  I think that
>she is, like Sam, trapped in time and not at all in control of
>where and when she goes.  Now, since we already know that she has
>an Observer (Zoe), perhaps it is this woman who is telling her that
>she must do evil things in order to get home. 

Certainly sounds plausible. And perhaps her Observer is another
manifestation of...well, that word we don't mention? Or at least an
agent thereof.

Of course, she could just be your typical Evil Genius. We'll just have
to wait and see.

Shouldn't be too much longer since the first one's long in the can and
they've taken the publicity photos and done the publicity interviews.
Maybe about a month? My bet would definitely be for some time in
November, since that's sweeps.

Watch for those tacky, annoying, over-hyped, spoiler-ridden NBC promos.

Sally
-- 
Sally Smith (510)790-0608  sallylb@netcom.com (I was sally@tardis.tymnet.com)
I'm unemployed--these opinions *must* be mine!
"Don't investigate this too closely." -- Don Bellisario, re: "Quantum Leap"
From: jtisdel@digi.lonestar.org (J. Michael Tisdel)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: will sf channel survive? (but what you don't know is...)
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:20:22 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Oct13.153438.15840@news2.cis.umn.edu> donnell@manowar.micro.umn.edu (Your Heinous) writes:
>
>I hope for a day when you can pick the channels you wish to recieve from 
>a full menu of available choices. And only pay for what you recieve.
>But this will probably never come to pass. Especially with the Cable
>Bill going into effect...
>

Well, with Judge Green's ruling earlier this year & subsequent actions in
Washington, your wish just might come true.  The telephone companies would
like to get into the market of providing television service.  With their
network, you could get your choice of channels per month, per week. or
per show!

>Why the hell does E! exist anyway? Isn't there enough worthless entertainment
>fluff and promotion without it?
>
>					--Judex--

Remember what Don Henly said about the "bubble-headed bleach blonde"?

E! is a 24-hour ET.  I know, I *like* watching the "Coming Attractions"
program.  Trailers are nifty.


-- 
-----------------------------------\\\\\\\\\\\\\---------------------------
J. Michael Tisdel                   \\\\\\\\\\\\\ jtisdel@digi.lonestar.org
DSC Communications Corporation       \\\\\\\\\\\\\   ...!uunet!digi!jtisdel
1000 Coit Rd, MS 120, Plano Tx 75075  \\\\\\\\\\\\\        jmtisdel@aol.com
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Highlander: Series and third movie
Date: 8 Oct 92 23:16:41 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Oct8.151652.14111@njitgw.njit.edu> bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu (Brian Perler) writes:
>In article <92281.111530JW83HISW@MIAMIU.BITNET> JW83HISW@MIAMIU.BITNET writes:
>>     I liked the fact that the Prize was explained as the power of all
>>the Immortals.  This supports somthing I've always thought about the
>>movie: the lights and floating when an immortal kills another immortal
>>is the victor absorbing his opponent's power.  This is why everything
>>explodes when Conner kills Kurgen: he absorbs the power of every one of
>>the Immortals that Kurgen has killed.

>Except that in the movie, no one seemed to know what the prize was.
>Connor only found out AFTER he killed Kurgen and won the prize.  That
>either means the show occurs after the first movie (which is rather
>pointless) or someone didn't pay enough attention to the first movie.

Or they knew that the prize would involve the power of all the immortals
combined, but they didn't know what exactly they would gain from that.

>First of all, I think Brenda said 1985.  Minor point.  And, from the
>movie, I got the impression that Connor has been using the Nash
>identity for a while (maybe 10 years or so, at least).  Of course,
>there's nothing to back this up, it was just an impression I got.

Well, there was the scene where they compared the signatures of the
owners of the antique shop over the past century, and they were all
Connor's.

>>     Finally, a note on the third movie: Someone posted earlier the
>>possibility that the three immortals in #3 were buried on holy ground,
>>which explains how they were left out of the "There can be only One"
>>equation.

>Nope.  There is no mystical connection between holy land and the
>immortal's powers.  In Highlander, Ramirez tells Connor something
>like, "You're safe only on holy ground.  It's tradition.  None of
>us will violate that."  The immortals don't attack each other on
>holy ground because they WON'T, not because they CAN'T.

>Now, why this tradition exists, I can't say, but that's all it is,
>a tradition.

Simple way out of that one.  Why did the tradition get started?  How
about because the immortals couldn't be killed on holy ground?  Something
mystical exempts the holy ground from the battles of the immortals.  That
would be a re-interpretation, but not necessarily a contradiction.

>Odds are, Highlander III is going to turn out to be another Highlander
>II.  Remember:  Highlander:  There can be (or should've been) only one!

I doubt Christopher Lambert would have done it then.  Apparently the only
reason he re-upped for another Highlander flick was to repair the damage
that Highlander 2 did.
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Highlander: Series and third movie
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:55:42 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <70671@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt7994a@prism.gatech.EDU (ORMOND,SEAN PATRICK) writes:
>Agreed...but I liked the original poster's theory.  In the Euro-version
>of the movie, Fazeel(sp?) - Conner's first kill - had considerable 
>acrobatic skill.  If I remember correctly, he went head over heels 
>through a long stretch of the parking lot.  We always thought it would've
>been clever to give Conner similar abilities later in the movie.  It 
>would have been a simple way to show the accumulation of the other immortals'
>skills.

I've never been able to get my hands on the Euro-version of the original
movie.  Anyone care to summarize any other important details?

Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.tv:3791 rec.arts.tv:19488
From: 885celio@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: QL: Al and Sam...
Date: 8 Oct 92 02:48:14 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.tv
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <1992Oct7.212149.3551@ra.msstate.edu>, slrosser@whale.st.usm.edu (Sandra Lynne Rosser) writes:
>>After "What Price, Gloria?" which was the first time Sam leaped into a
>>woman, the Project realized that this could be a potential problem with 
>>Al if he kept seeing Sam, his best friend, as a gogeous woman.  So they
> 
> I'm kind of new to the QL scene...I've watched it off and on since first
> season, but only recently -really- gotten into it.  What -do- we know
> about Al's relationship with Sam?  Were they pals?  Did they hang out
> together, have a couple beers at the local bar?  Vacation together like
> Mac and Pete on MacGyver?  What's the deal?  They're so different, yet
> they click on screen like nothing I've ever seen--can anybody tell me
> what they've told us so far?
> 
Well, in my humble experience with the show, I'd have to say they're good,
if not best-est, friends.  Sam and Al met one night at their workplace ( they
both worked on Project Starbright (don't ask--it wasn't mentioned what it
was.) when Al, in a drunken fury, was trying to beat up a soda machine to get
his can o' cola.  Sam put a stop to it, and in the long run, was able to help
rid Al of his drinking problem.  Then they both worked on Project Quantum Leap. 
I think one of the turning points in their relationship was that they both had
confidence in each other at different times under different circumstances (the
implied circumstances in my view are Al's ability to quit drinking and the
worthyness of Sam's time-travel project).  All this is info I gleaned from the
"Man of LaMancha" episode.  There was much reminiscing from Al, as "Impossible
Dream" evidently was Sam and Al's theme song during PQL construction.
	This is all just my interpretation.  Anyone, feel free to add,
elaborate, and clear up fuzzy points.
					--GC
From: bz978@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Charles E Gibbs)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Another question on War of the Worlds
Date: 11 Oct 1992 04:06:55 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bz978@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Charles E Gibbs)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


I hope this one is simple.

How many seasons di the show last?  I say 2, but my friends swear up and 
down that it was 3?  HELP!

Charles Gibbs
gibbsc@ac.grin.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: thomasc@ms.uky.edu (Thomas Campbell)
Subject: Re: QL: This weeks episode was *not* a smart idea.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 22:49:53 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

Ok, first off i'm sorry about the Parapelegic statement.  My local 
paper had said that he leaped into a parapelegic and I hadn't known
the difference between the two until now.

I *still* wasn't happy abuot the episode though.  But, maybe I just
havent' been paying enough attention.  I always thought that he seemed
to have some of the attributes of the person that he was leaped into.
I thought that he *was* blind when he was in the blind man.  He *definitely*
whined about his back when he was pregnant.  (Does'nt that seem odd to say ;)
And when he was in the handicapped person he seemed to have problems 
with his motor functions.  But, like I said, maybe I just wasn't paying
enough attention maybe he was just trying hard at keeping those attributes
up so that no one would know it was him.  *shrug*  I always thought it was
his *mind* that leaped into the body.. not his body as well.. I'm very 
confused about the whole thing..

Can't argue with Sally can we?                       :)
Alex
From: jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: Re: Quanum Leap: THE NOVEL
Summary: Authorized does not imply any sort of artistic integrity
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:59:20 GMT
Organization: BT Tymnet, San Jose, CA

In article <1aul3dINN85g@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse) writes:
>I also enjoyed the book a great deal.
>And since it is authorized by Universal, it can't be all that far off base.

Hold it.  Your premise does not support your conclusion.  Since when does
anything done by the money-grubbing marketing types at the studio imply
artistic intregity or respect for the show?  So far all the novelizations
I've seen (including this one) are way off base because they were done
without any input from Don B or anyone else involved in the creative
process for Quantum Leap.

>The Prologue and Epilogue were some of the most beautiful prose I've
>ever read.  Very poetic.

For people who like flowery prose, I can understand that opinion.  But
people who like good writing will find those passages to be padded out with
far too many extraneous words, redundant phrases, excessive adjectives,
parenthetical phrases separated by commas, fillers that make the sentences
longer for no good reason, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

(Yes, that last sentence is an example of what I disliked about the writing.)

Maybe someone will post the the entire prologue so that others can get
a feel for this book without having to waste money on it.  (Copying short
passages from a book for the purpose of literary critisizm is allowed by
the copyright laws.)
-- 
Joe Smith (408)922-6220     BTNA GNS Major Programs, TYMNET Global Network
<jms@tardis.tymnet.com>     P.O. Box 49019, MS-C51, San Jose, CA 95161-9019
CA license plate: "POPJ P,"    Married to the LB, Quantum Leap's #1 net.fan
PDP-10, 36-bits forever!    Humorous disclaimer: "My Amiga 3000 speaks for me."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
From: nml@hq.lcs.mit.edu (Newton Loui)
Subject: Re: QL is bogus!
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
	<2ADD39E9.15646@news.service.uci.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:34:47 GMT

In article <2ADD39E9.15646@news.service.uci.edu>
dkrause@miami.acs.uci.edu (Doug Krause) writes:
 >In article <larne.03e6@canetoad.UUCP> larne@canetoad.UUCP (Larne Pekowsky) writes:
 >#Why?  The leaps are _not_ instantaneous, there may be a gap of several
 >#weeks between the time Sam leaps out of one situation and into another
 >#(ref: "Genesis").  What happens during that time is completely unknown.
 >
 >"Double Identity".
 >
 >Douglas Krause                      One yuppie can ruin your whole day.

Yes, but the same situation (episode).  Treat this as an isolated case
though, since this occurred for two reasons:

** SPOILER PROTECTION **


(1) PQL was trying to retrieve Sam, and (2) as "Casanova", Sam could
not "right what once was wrong."  So the BGU leaped him into the
Godfather.

"If I'm lyin', I'm dyin'"

BTW, I thought the leaps *were* instantaneous ... to Sam.  When Sam
leaps for the second time in "Genesis", he complained to Al - "Where
have you been?"  Al explained that the leap may have been
instantaneous to Sam, but that some time had passed at PQL and they
had to find where Sam had next leapt.

This still runs true with the quantum string theory as I understand
it.  All instants of time in Sam's lifetime touch each other instant
in time.

IMHO, asking what happens to Sam in-between (episode) leaps is like
asking how many angels fit on the head of a pin.

nml
--
========================================================================
+ Newton Loui     Senior Staff Assistant - MIT LCS/AI Lab Reading Room +
+ nml@hq.lcs.mit.edu               personal ANALOG assistant           +
+            Permanent and working for myself, thank you               +
+ "You're just a temp.  I'm a full-time person; I'm going to be here   +
+   a long time." - terms of endearment from a former office mate      +
+         before my next temp assignment in the Reading Room           +
========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.tv
From: dzembj@nuge101.its.rpi.edu (Jason Eric Dzembo)
Subject: Re: QL: What can Al see  (was Re: QL: NOwhere to Run (Possible Spoilers))
Reply-To: dzembj@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 17:04:50 GMT

In article <9OCT199208160225@zeus.tamu.edu>, hamlet@zeus.tamu.edu (Rosencrantz & Guildinstern are dead!) writes:
|> In article <+dtzv4m@rpi.edu>, dzembj@rpi.edu writes...
|> >In article <1992Oct7.193442.16271@u.washington.edu>, il@bambam.u.washington.edu (Il Hwan Oh) writes:
|> >|> rccarm00@mik.uky.edu (ron c carman) writes:
|> >|> > eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse) writes:
|> > 
|> > 
|> >An interesting theory has been proposed in private.  I hope Larne or Warren
|> >(whichever one of them it was which proposed it;  sorry, guys) doesn't mind
|> >my reiterating it here.
|> >After "What Price, Gloria?" which was the first time Sam leaped into a
|> >woman, the Project realized that this could be a potential problem with 
|> >Al if he kept seeing Sam, his best friend, as a gogeous woman.  So they
|> >started working on reprogramming the Imaging Chamber so that Al would see
|> >Sam as Sam and verse vica with the leapee.  This reprogramming was probably
|> >completed around the time of "Pool Hall Blues" since there's a mention made
|> >during that episode that Al sees the leapee as themselves and Sam as Sam.
|> >From that point on, it's been constant.
|> >
|> Spoiler for season opener ahead.
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> 
|>  
|> I had originally thought this also, but then I remembered the season opener.
|> In it, Lee Harvey Oswald saw Sam's reflection, not his own.

So?  Sam looks in the mirror in every episode and sees who he's leaped into.
The leapee looks in the mirror in the waiting room and sees Sam. It's always
been that way and changing the program for Al wouldn't affect that one way or
the other...

							- Jason
From: jogle@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Jim Ogle (Ks. Jim))
Subject: Re: QL: Prememption
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 14:24:59 GMT

>>>QL is getting preempted next week.  Damn politicians have decided
>>>to have a debate.  I hate election time.  First we have to deal

Does anyone know what the networks are going to be showing after the
debate?  If it starts at the same time and runs the same length as the
presidential debate yesterday did, it will be over and done with
before the network shows even come on here in the Mountain time zone
(Pacific too).



-- 
Kansas Jim (Jim Ogle, TORG guru)                               /|
jogle@aoc.nrao.edu (NRAO-VLBA, Socorro New Mexico)           o| |-
"I'd be apathetic if I cared."                              /| \|
Newsgroups: rec.puzzles
From: tlukka@vipunen.hut.fi (Tuomas Lukka)
Subject: Re: TRAPPED BUBBLE (answer)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:23:55 GMT

In <1992Oct14.161730.144899@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> dsbb@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (D. SPENCER BEECHER) writes:
>My question:

>In a weightless environment a jar of water with an air bubble inside
>is allowed to come to relative equilibrium (Standard Pressure and
>Temperature, accelerations = 0, eddies negligible).  What is the
>appearance and position of the bubble?

Two possibilities: if the jar is not too heavy, the bubble will
spread along the surface of the jar in some fashion, so that it
will be most distant from the center (i.e. if the jar's the 'traditional'
shape, then it'll be mostly around the 'corner' of the jar and the lid
and the 'corner' of the jar and the bottom.

If the jar's very heavy, however (this has no effect if the jar's 
spherical), then the air will be i'd say in the centre of the jar.
(at least not where it was when the jar was light).

	TJL
-- 
 /--\  TJL -- Tuomas J. Lukka  tlukka@vipunen.hut.fi IIIIIIIII -------    Just
/-\ o\        Puistokaari 1E18  _________--------------------+    I  J     go
\o \-/        00200 Helsinki    --------I GONE FISHING AGAIN ->   I        to
 \__/  SIGh.. Finland T. +358-0-6923924 /---------------------    L___    sleep..
Newsgroups: rec.puzzles