HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: CLARIFICATION ON COLOURIZ
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 05:30:39 MDT
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #2, Edmonton, AB, Canada

ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin) writes:

- >
- >  This was the period of which my parents were growing up in.  And Iain don'
- >take this personally, but it's obvious that you don't understand the UK.  It
- >not just a matter of getting a new set, it is also a matter of the standard
- >living.  Given right now that the majority of TV sets in the UK is now colou
- >When the parents and I were living in the UK say from 1963 to 1972, a colour
- >would have been considered a luxury, not a neccessity.  I would have been an
- >expensive proposition to own a colour TV, and then there is the annual cost
- >have a lincense to own one.
- >  It's a way different lifestyle than North America.  Mid you, I got readjus
- >to British life in a hurry 4 months ago.
-
-
-       I can recall color TV sets being luxury items here too, so it's not
- just a UK thing.
-       Anyway, what was the point of your pointing that out?
-
-
  The point that I was trying to make is that even though colour TV was
available, only a few people could have afforded it at the time.  For the most
part, we watched Jon Pertwee in bw, only because b&w was affordable, and the
license fee is as always less costly.

- >-


Dave Shariff Yadallee (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca,
userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Canadians: send a clear message to the government!  ON Oct. 26, Abstain
From: STDN%MARIST.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (Dan Newcombe)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: About as useless a bit of trivia as you can imagine.
Date: 29 Sep 1992 07:57:13 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

>3) In the same story, Douglas Adams slipped in an in-joke to The
>Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (look at the author of the book that
>the Doctor is reading while trapped under the beam).

Uh, who would that be?   (The author of the book)
It'll be a while before the local station gets back to that one and
I don't have it on tape.
  Thanks
   -Dan
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin)
Subject: Re: Invasion of Time
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 05:26:19 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.013038.4421@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> markc@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU () writes:
>A whole bunch of stuff deleted to make this readable.
>The stuff is my argument on Mawdryn and Invasion of time.
>How the hell do you know there is a full route to becoming a Time Lord?
>You don't. This is what annoys me about the whole argument. You build
>supposition,on supposition. We have no idea how a Gallifreyan becomes a
>Time Lord. Maybe they are all born that way. What happens is that people
>notice that Time Lords often talk about the Academy. So magically we have
>the conclusion: Gallifreyans become Time Lords after they go to the academy,
>and that is where they learn to regenerate. This is the work of your
>imagination. Then people say the Guards can't be time Lords. Oh but Andred was
>a guard and he went to the academy. No problem, he went to a different academy
>or he didn't go the whole fictious route you have made up in order to become
>a Time Lord. I've said it before. Maybe a future story will confirm all your
>ideas, but right now it is all the product of your imagination. That is
>fine. I have no fundamental objection to the ideas, but for god's sake why
>can't people separate their own imaginings from what has been established beyond
>doubt?
>
>Flame off,
>mark C.
>
>
>
>
>

OK.  Answer me this.   Do you think Susan was a full Time Lord?
We do know she is from Gallifrey, but do you think she is a Time Lord 
I don't think she is, because if she were a *full* Time Lord, then
won't husband David Campbell find it strange when she doesn't age as
fast as he does and one day perhaps even physically changes form?
(to say nothing of the neighbors.  hey, it's a new sitcom folks!
Be-Time-Lorded :)
And then ther'e their kids (if they can have any and if they did, 
but given the decimation of the Earth's population by the Dalek invasion
I owuld tend to think repopulation was a high priority on everybody's
minds post-Dalek invasion.)

If there was no distinction between ordinary Gallifreyans and Time Lords,
then why do we have lines like Rodan's, "The guards and the Time Lords,
all the boring people," in which she not only sets herself apart from 
the Time Lords, but sets the guards apart from them too.
If there was no distinction then why does Runcible say to the public
register videocast in "the Deadly Assassin,"  "Above me, here in the
Panopticon, already the Time Lords are gathering, donning seldom-worn
robes...."  It would be like Dan Rather saying, "here at the inaugriation,
already the humans are gathering..."

One other thing that perhaps can be solved... I believe "Shada" has a
few lines speaking to our argument.  I've misplaced my script so I 
can't look it up tonight, but perhaps in a couple of weeks here when the
video comes out we can learn something different (if we consider "Shada"
canon, which I think we can.)
From: otten@quark.umd.edu (Neil Ottenstein)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Dr. Who Audios
Date: 28 Sep 92 23:45:46 GMT

I was wondering how much those Dr. Who audio soundtracks, The Macra
Terror and Evil of the Daleks were selling for in England.

Thanks,

Neil Ottenstein
otten@quark.umd.edu


Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: cliff@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Cliff Chen)
Subject: Re: New Adventures as canon?
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:06:44 GMT

In article <15888@umd5.umd.edu> jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...) writes:
>>Also, there is absolutely no foundation for the "Gallifreyans are sterile"
>>comment within the series itself.  I have not yet read the Cat's Cradle
>>books but even if they say this is so, it means nothing as the New
>>Adventures cannot be taken as canon.  
>
>That's something I'd be willing to argue about.  At the moment, there is
>no Doctor Who production office to determine what is and isn't canon.  Most
>of the final staff at that office, including the last script editor and
>two of the last four writers, are working with the New Adventures people,
>who repeatedly say on their back covers that they have the BBC's blessing.
>Until the novels come up with something blatantly wrong, or until a new
>production team finally shows up and clarifies the status of the books, 
>I'd have no problem accepting Peter Darvill-Evans as a substitute producer.
>
>I've never been one of those strict "if you see it on the screen, it's canon;
>if not, it isn't" people.

	Actually, I think that we can take the New Adventures as canon.
For several reasons:
    a)  on the first Timewyrm novels it does say that it is the OFFICIAL new
	adventures of the Doctor and Ace.  Some of you may say that it's
	only words, well, so are your arguments, and at least this argument
	has published backing.
    b)  All of the new novels are not published by Target nor any
	derivative company thereof.  They are published by Virgin.
    c)  Unlike all of the Target novels which are Copyright in the name of
	the author with mention to the Copyright by the BBC of the original
	screenplay, the New Adventures are only copyrighted by the BBC,
	giving them the same sort of status as a BBC screenplay should
	receive.
    d)  The New Adventures are not strictly "fan written."  What with a
	novel by the writer of Ghostlight, as well as one by Terrance
	Dicks, the authors of the New Adventures know what they are writing
	about.

	Someone did point out that there are some mistakes in Genesys, this
is true, but if they read Exodus, they would know that the mistakes were
clarified by Terrance Dicks.  It was a cop out, but he was maintaining the
continuity.

					Cliff Chen
					cliff@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu

P.S. -  off the subject, for those of you who have been reading...how many
	of you thought that Mark Gatiss was being really mean to Paul
	Cornell.  I mean, the end of Nightshade isn't the most ideal place
	to start off a new story.
From: jblum@hamlet.umd.edu (Hi ho -- Kermit the Frog here...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Nightshade
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:59:11 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Oct5.200644.3533@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> cliff@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Cliff Chen) writes:
>P.S. -  off the subject, for those of you who have been reading...how many
>	of you thought that Mark Gatiss was being really mean to Paul
>	Cornell.  I mean, the end of Nightshade isn't the most ideal place
>	to start off a new story.

Well, this was an example of the continuity of the New Adventures.  I don't
exactly think Mark just handed Paul a copy of the "Nightshade" cliffhanger
and said "Here, find your way out of this one, ha-ha."  The New Adventures
people are certainly planning these things a lot better than, say, "Trial
of a Timelord".  Of course, they don't have authors dying and quitting
left and right.  :-)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: EXtanded Quiz 8
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 12:05:10 MDT
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #2, Edmonton, AB, Canada

we have the results from the first 7 trivia quizzes, scores
out of 70

  Frank Durda IV (uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org)  57.5
  James William Bennetts (james@mundil.cs.mu.oz.au) 48
  Jonathan Drukman (jondr@sco.com) 33.5
  Ron O'Dell (keeper@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us) 30.5
  Iain Asplin Roberts (ira2p@Faraday.clas.Virginia.edu)  27
  Ariane (ablanch@physics.su.oz.au) 15
  Kevin Blayton (kgb8752@ultb.isc.rit.edu) 14
  Neal Crossan (neal@riemann.math.mun.ca) 8.5
  Sam Worf (samworf@terrapin.com) 6
  Chris Nasipak (V116R8AC@ubvms.cc.ubuffalo.edu) 6
  Richard K. Fox (fox-r@cis.ohio-state.edu) 5
  Franklin Trumphy (swan@iastate.edu)  3.5
  Greg (?)     2.5
  Doug Mraz (jdm42241@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu)  1


Now, Quiz 8, concerning the 5th Doctor:

1)  NAme the Doctor's favourite sport during this time.

2)  Name the companion that died during the 5th Doctor's travels

3)  What does the word mara stand for from the Hindi(?) language?

4)  WHat did Omega try to do to become real again ?

5) What does the Welsh word Maydryn mean in English?
 ( Just for our Welsh  friends, could we have the real pronounciation for
  this word as I am aware from a friend that Llyr= krrlir, Islwyn=Isloo-win,
   Clwyd = Cloo-wid, etc... So could we have the real pronounciation of
    mawdryn?)

6) What is 'Enlightenment' from the story 'Enlightenment'?

7) Tell me who were the companions who were seen in the 5 Doctors which each
   of the 5 Doctors, phantoms NOT included.

8) Name the story in which the Doctor says "There should have been another
   way", one of the know DW 'tragedies' .

9)  Name the story in which the Doctor states "Not like this", another of the
    DW 'tradegies'.

10) How does one cure Spectrox Toximea (sp) ?

    Rules:

**  1)  No posting of answers.  That is up to me.    **
    2)  Enter as many times as you like, until you get 10/10.
    3)  Deadline is Saturday, 17 October, 1992 11:59 MDT.
        due to technical difficulties and 3 days in hospital due to "foo
        poisoning".
    4) On  a note of thanks to Tom Wilson, rarely done these days, anything
       based on precedence below are legit sources for the quizze:
       a) The shows
       b) The novels
       c) Documentaries concerning the show Doctor Who
       d) The Magazines
       e) The Quizze Books



Dave Shariff Yadallee (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca,
userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Canadians: send a clear message to the government!  ON Oct. 26, Abstain
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl (Phil Isherwood)
Subject: Re: UK news: NEW DR. WHO EPISODES!!!
Reply-To: pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl
Organization: ESA/Estec/WMS, Noordwijk, The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 09:23:16 GMT

In article 1465@cnsvax.uwec.edu, harderaf@cnsvax.uwec.edu () writes:
>There will not be any new Dr. Who episodes.
>
>The series finished in the UK in 1989, and the unpopularity of a recent (1992)
>series of repeats convinced the BBC that Dr. Who was a bust!  Sorry, all you US
>folks.

What are your sources? Does this mean that the Beeb won't even consider allowing an outside production company making a go of it? Does this also mean that the Beeb won't show any more of the repeats on BBC2 ? (I had heard it rumoured that another season of repeats of Baker through McCoy were scheduled for the autumn in the BBC2 Friday evening slot).

More information please!

Phil Isherwood
pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl
From: ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: The Guide to Remembering the 3 R's: was RE: Remembrance of the Daleks
Date: 28 Sep 92 03:13:50 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <1a598lINNgm@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aa634@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bill White) writes:
>
>In a previous article, ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin) says:
>
>>
>>No, it was "Remembrance."
>>
>>This points out a problem I see a lot of fans seem to have, i.e. getting
>>the 3 R's confused...Resurrection, Revelation, and Remembrance of the Daleks.
>>
>
>I erred in my original post. What I meant to say is that Foreman is
>mispelled in "Attack Of The Cybermen". I'm still not sure one way or
>the other (Maybe it's mispelled in both stories). I'm going to re-
>watch both stories today & report the findings.
>
>-- 
>Bill White, aa634@Cleveland.freenet.edu OR aa037@Medina.Freenet.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>       Assistant Sysop, Cleveland & Medina County Free-net's
>                  Science Fiction and Fantasy Sig

well then, you've still got it wrong then Bill, since in "Attack of the
Cybermen" they *did* get the spelling correct.
From: 92anderson@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Top Ten List????
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:56:31 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

Could WHO ever it was that posted the top ten list regarding the Doctor's
	companions please repost it?  I wanted to show it to my own
	female companion, but failed to before it was removed.
			Thank-you.  JC Anderson.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson)
Subject: Re: DR. WHO. COMPANION POLL ends Sept. 30, 1992
Organization: University of Central Florida, Orlando
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 08:01:57 GMT

ACPS6410@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca (Nadir U Ahmed) wrote:
>   It appears in my list of companions I forgot...
>...Kamelion.

Your omission is proper since Kamelion is usually not considered to be
a companion. There are lots of arguments for and against claiming Kamelion
and Glitz as companions and those claiming Katarina and Sara Kingdom not
as companions. The Terrestrial Index does not list the following as companions:
Kamelion, Glitz, Brigadier, Benton, and Yates.

I guess you could say that Kamelion and Glitz are not companions since, while
they are somewhat cooperative, their intentions concerning the Doctor are not
always friendly. The UNIT people are probably not considered to be companions
because they do not travel between stories with the Doctor. They do travel in
the TARDIS which is some people's rule of thumb (then again, a lot of people
have traveled in the TARDIS).

Of course, your definition of companions for your poll can be whatever you
want.

Tom
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: ira2p@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Iain Robert Asplin)
Subject: Re: Time Lords and Gallifreyans
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:59:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.014715.23281@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> markc@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU () writes:
>utters the line about "the Time lords gathering " in the panopticon.
>( I forget the exact line). Ian Robert Asplin argues that this must mean 
>that Runcible is not a Time Lord, because it would be like Dan Rather saying
>"around me, the humans are gathering...". I think this reasoning is false,
>but if it is not, then the argument that gallifreyans do not regenerate is
>false. The reason is that Runcible went to school with the doctor. The 
>Doctor has not been to Gallifrey in about 500 years, and Runcible isSTILL 
>ALIVE when he gets back. Runcible has to be about 750 years old, for the
>simple reason that he went to the Academy at around the same time as the
>Doctor. So if Runcible is not a Time Lord, why is he still alive if he 
>cannot regenerate?

First off, I am not going to argue the entire point of this posting
as now you're making sense to me and I think I can agree with the
"big picture" of this posting.  Thios section is the only point I
can take exception to, since we know that Time Lord bodies last longer
than human ones, so Runcible could still be in his first incarnation.
Pip and Jane Baker claim in their novels that the Rani is still in
her first and she was also in the Doctor' class.  Non-canon again
though, so we can't take this as read, but I do recall Runcible being
surprised that the Doctor has had a "facelift" this early and blames it
on the Doctor's rackety life.


So yes, I think I can see your point on all this.
I think the reason I argues the regeneration stuff was Mawdryn Undead,
but since that is a little vague, I'll concede that and say we don't
DEFINITELY know.  (I still think it's implied though.)


Steve/Iain
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Many Questions About Dr. Who
Date: 4 Oct 92 21:44:17 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.

In article <BCR.92Oct4120905@hpl3sn02.cern.ch> bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers) writes:
>>  Also, there is absolutely no foundation for the "Gallifreyans are sterile"
>>  comment within the series itself.  I have not yet read the Cat's Cradle
>>  books but even if they say this is so, it means nothing as the New
>Actually the Cat's Cradle books don't state that Gallifreyans are sterile.  It
>just says that no Gallifreyans have been born on Gallifrey since a particular
>date.  The real mystery is then where do Gallifreyans come from.

The real mystery is how evil magical curses exist in the Dr. Who universe.
It's not as if we've ever actually seen magic before, let alone curses....
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: quiz@nemesis.UUCP
Date: 01 Oct 92 23:06 CDT
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Quiz 4 - Dr. Who Quote Quiz
Message-ID: <-403762@nemesis>
Nf-ID: #N:nemesis:-403762:000:1237
Nf-From: nemesis.UUCP!quiz    Oct  1 23:06:00 1992


--------------------   Quiz  4  -------------------------------------------
Division A	Last quiz too tough?  Bet you can solve this one!

1.	"You, as a female are far more interesting."

2.	"I still think it could be a fire-demon, sire."

3.	"I must ask you to come down to the station with me."

4.	"Don't move.  You might spoil a priceless work of art."

5.	"Find your TARDIS, Timelord.  Much good will it do you now."

Division B

1.	"Now, I am going to turn the machine over to total self-control.
	 It will be entirely independent of all outside influences.
	 A living, thinking, self-supporting creature."

2.	"Emergency!  Emergency!  Unable to disengage from control position!
	 Humans on the bridge!"
	

Hint for Division B: Same black hats
REMEMBER: THIS HINT APPLIES TO DIVISION B ONLY.
	  DIVISION A AND B THEMES MAY BE DIFFERENT!


Answers by email ONLY - Must be received by 23:00CDT Wednesday, October 14th.
		Send them to:	quiz@nemesis.lonestar.org
				...uunet!utacfd!nemesis!quiz
				...letni!rwsys!nemesis!quiz

QuizMaster    quiz@nemesis.lonestar.org|"I know one of the ways out!"
            quiz%nemesis@utacfd.uta.edu|
	   ...uunet!utacfd!nemesis!quiz|
	   ...letni!rwsys!nemesis!quiz |Who said it and What story?


Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: jwagner@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (James C Wagner Jr)
Subject: Re: Where in the World is Doctor Who?
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Va.
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:38:49 GMT

In article <1992Sep18.063630.29346@cs.ucf.edu> wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson) writes:
>steven.k.manfred@UWRF.EDU wrote:
>>True or False:  "Doctor Who" stories have taken place on each of Earth's
>>	seven modern-day continents (Asia, Europe, North America, South
>>	America, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica).
>


well, now let me see....
(for those of you who couldn't remember..)
In the VERY FIRST SEASON, the doctor vistis the Aztecs..
now (If I have my geography straight) didn't the Aztec civilization
stretch down into central america? Is that (central America) counted
as South America???? (i.e. the part south of Mexico) 

ALSO, dodn't he ever visit the incas?? I remember some mention made 
thereof but the time/place/episode evades me....


James Wagner

"Do They BITE????"
Who, WHat story.
jwagner@galaxy.gmu.edu

-- 

*******************************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James C Wagner Jr            I 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho