From: mlsa@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (MICHAEL LAUREN SHERMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: The Official Dorm-Rec review of "Quality of Life"  (spoilers)
Date: 21 Nov 92 06:39:44 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1ebu55INNcei@gap.caltech.edu>, thogek@cco.caltech.edu (Thomas G. Kie
fer) writes:
>"Quality of Life" spoilers below...
>
>
>In article <BxuGyv.Er0@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> myempire@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Mat
t J. Martin) writes:
>>  This week, Crusher's bitchliness was transfered to the evil Mining Doctor wh
o,
>>by the way, was one of the most annoying one-show characters we've seen.  Firs
t
>>she was evil to Geordi and kissed Data's ass, then she did a 180 and dug into
>>Data.  She obviously forgot ST tenet #17, Data is always right.  And throughou
t                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Not true, in the episode where they kept doing the same thing again and again
to save money on film or writers Data is specifically wrong, that was the
problem, Picard assumed Data, not Will was correct despite the fact that Will
out ranks Data.  See what happens when we put too much trusts in machines, do
things as people.
>>the episode, she was a career minded, self-seeking opportunist, which would
>>normally be considered a positive boon.  But in this episode, since she was
>>pitted against Data, this quality was just damned distrubing.
>
>So, again with the "serious/stubborn female = bitchy/evil female" stuff
>again?  (If this isn't your attitude, I wish you'd think about that before
>posting this stuff.)
>
>The Doctor actually seemed quite happy to show off her work to the
>engineer in Geordi, especially the exocomps.  She was proud of it.
>Is that so horrible?
>
>She was much more familiar with Data because she's studied him specifically
>as the Android, felt like she know a fair amount about him, and was ever-
>curious to know more.  She later "dug into Data" because he suggested that
>her exocomp tools might be living beings, and she didn't want that to be
>(they were her super-tools, dammit, and could do wonders for her work!),
>so she wasn't very open to his suggestion or his arguments.  It's called
>"stubborn", kind of like Picard got when Polasky told him he needed an
>operation.
>
>And I don't know how carreer-minded she was, but she was *very* into
>and fascinated by her work, and she wanted to see it advanced and done.
>Sounds like a dedicated (maybe a bit obsessed) scientist to me.
>
>So, she was a very work-oriented scientist, and very stubborn.  Would you
>have called her "bitchy" and "evil" if the same character had been a man?
>(Just a question -- but think about it before you answer.  :)
>
>
>>  We were pleased to see that the good Doctor Crusher was able to redeem herse
lf
>>this week by taking butt-kicking lessons from Worf and giving well-refined
>>wisdom to Data.
>
>I was amazed at her having spent time combatting with Worf's.  It took me a
>moment to realize that was what they must have done, 'cause I wouldn't have
>expected *any* of the medical officers particularly interested.
>
>Question: were they using Worf's "calisthenics" program?  I've only seen it
>twice, but that's what came to mind (after a confused moment), and it seemed
>to fit the discussion and clothes.  But, if so, how come she got cut?  Or do
>the holodeck safeguards allow such minor injuries?  (Hope it was on
>beginner skill level!)
>
>
>>  We saw a contradiction in the actions of the Mining Doctor when she proposed
>>that they cut the command pathways to keep the exocomps from protecting
>>themselves.  To take away the exocomps' abilities to protect themselves is
>>to basically admit their sentience.  Yet, after that suggestion, she
>>continued to maintain that the exocomps were mere machines.
>
>Contradiction if you don't think about it.  She wanted to use the exocomps,
>and they'd been having "problems" with the command pathways, and somebody
>thought that they might be thinking and alive.  So, cut off the command
>pathways!  Even if it's meaningless, it'll shut the bozos up and let her
>use them.
>
>
>[...]
>>  The opinions expressed above are those of the Dorm-Rec alone and are subject
>>to change without notice.
>
>Make it so.  :)
>--
>======================================================
>====> Thomas Kiefer <===> thogek@cco.caltech.edu <====
>======================================================
>
-- 
MICHAEL LAUREN SHERMAN
758-0207
MLSA

"I really do appreciate the fact you're sitting here, you're voice sounds so
wonderful but your face don't look too clear so barmaid bring a pitcher,
another round of brew, why don't we get drunk and screw?"- J. Buffett