HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: JLM@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: I'VE CREATED A MONSTER !!
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:56:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: SLACVM.92098.145625JLM
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center


 When I posted the "WORTHLESS COMMENTARY" after The First Duty,
I was just trying to satisfy my "warped" sense of justice. It
never occurred to me that it would cause such a stir.

 Since the post appeared I have received over 30 email messages
(as of last count) from people telling me how much they enjoyed
it and asking me to post a "WORTHLESS COMMENTARY" after each
new TNG episode.

 Although it wasn't what I originally had in mind, I will post
at least another "W.C." (Europeans use the letters W.C. to mean
"water closet" or toilet, which is where my "WORTHLESS COMMENTARY"
really belong; there's gotta be something prophetic about the whole
thing). However, this week all we are getting is a rerun of the
episode where Alexander (you know, that Klingon kid with the premature
case of baldness) joins his father the big bad Warf.

 So the next "WORTHLESS ..." will appear the following week; which is
a good thing, 'cause it'll give me a chance to negotiate a contract
with the Alley cat and bring him as a co-host. He wants more sardines
than I'm willing to pay him.

 By the way, if you don't know who or what the Alley cat is or what
this post is all about, that means you did not read the *original*
"WORTHLESS COMMENTARY" and just for that you deserve to remain totally
clueless as to what's going on.

 Til we meet again in the next "W.C."

The Mad Reviewer
------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: All this ranting and raving is the sick product
            of an even sicker mind. This is a clear cut case
            of insanity if you ask me.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: jmhodapp@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Jon Hodapp)
Subject: Re: Why not down ? They do!!
Organization: JHU/APL
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 21:47:20 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.204959.5249@ux.acs.umn.edu>, me308lab@ux.acs.umn.edu (Mechanical Eng consultant) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Apr10.210627.361@pro-freedom.cts.com> pip@pro-freedom.cts.com (David Pipgras) writes:
> >How come the Enterprise - D crew never thought to go down instead of to the
> >side. Space is not restricted to sideways manuevers, so this constand
> >moving to the side is odd.
> >

> Wouldn't it be cool to see the E-D intercept a ship, or fight a battle,
> where the principle vessels were in different planes of orientation?
> 

If the big E decided to drop 'down' and attack the 'bottom' of an enemy ship, all 
that the enemy ship need do is rotate a bit (is that yaw or pitch? I think pitch)
and the two ships are facing in the same plane again.  Unless you can manuver
faster than a ship can pivot, there may not be any point.  Of course, warping to
a point behind the enemy  ship would probably be a pretty clever thing to do.  

Unless you can acheive an angular momentum of Warp+.  What visual effect 
would the TNG effects masters do for that?

Jon               JMHODAPP@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
If some unemployed punk in Trenton, New Jersey, lying on a sofa
with a bong, can get a cassette to make love to Elle McPherson for
$19.95, this virtual reality stuff is going to make crack look like
Sanka.  
-  Dennis Miller
From: v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: "The First Duty" **SPOILERS**
Date: 7 Apr 92 08:40:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr7.035608.4447@u.washington.edu>, iho@cac.washington.edu writes...
>david@xlnt.com (David Johnson) writes:
> 
>> Spoiler warning:
> 
>Here's my problem (a very minor one) with the episode.  At the end,
>Piccard says that Wesley won't advance with his classmates.  Huh?
>Does Wesley get to take the same classes again and ace them again?
>He wasn't having academic difficulties.  What's the point of holding
>him back?
> 

     It's called punishment.


          ^Hot Damn, That Pie Was Good!^
                     Common Phrases Heard at
                     RR Diner #32.

          ^Scott Gorcey, v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu^
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: jkramer@sunwise.UWaterloo.ca (Viscous Pig Dog)
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 13:49:47 GMT

Not really spoilers anymore but:


In article <1992Apr10.004658.10258@cco.caltech.edu> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>
These questions weren't addressed to me but .... who cares ?

>You think ST2 wasn't done well?  You think Kirk doesn't have this flaw?  
I don't think he had it until ST2.

>You think refusing to accept defeat *ever* is somehow noble and sensible?
>
>Yes, Kirk's had bad situations before, but never to the scale he had with
>Spock's death.  
How about 'Where no man has gone before'? The only difference between this
and ST2 was that Kirk's and Mitchell's relationship was stated whereas we
saw Kirk's and Spock's relationship on screen for three years and change.
There's also 'City on the Edge of Forever' and 'Balance of Terror'.

The episode that shows that Kirk had trouble accepting defeat or more
precisely, he thought of defeat as failure was 'Obsession' but at the end
of that episode he had learned to accept the fact that there are instances
where nothing you can do will make things work out.

>I don't fault Kirk for
>fighting to the end; I fault him for refusing to ever admit that there *might*
>be a time when he can't trick his way out of trouble.
>
And I don't think it was a major flaw until the guys who wrote ST2 brought
it up. I also think that the character flaw that they introduced in
ST2 flew in the face of the evidence presented in TOS.

Schlong,
Jeff Kramer.

-- 

"We're goin ta find out who the better man is, a chicken or a dog ...
 I tell ya boy, your mother's the better man" , Foghorn Leghorn.
                   "Education is a right", Phhhhhht.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: jhitch@crash.cts.com (Jeffrey Hitchin)
Subject: Re: _Disinherited_ opinions (Re: New TOS Book ... info)
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 23:14:00 GMT

	Well, I'm going to buck the tide here and say with complete
honesty that _The Disinherited_ sucked big time.  The plots never
really came together well, and the ending was so anticlimactic.
But the worst part was the writing.  I think Friedman was allowed
to "tie up" everything because it smacks of his awful style.  An
example:

	Uhura was unpacking when her door chime rang. "Come in,"
the Enterprise's communications officer mumbled.
	It was Spock. "Pardon me," intoned the Vulcan, "but I
need to ask you something.  The black woman shrugged.
	"I guess so," she resigned herself.  She inclined her
head slightly and held up a brown hand.

	Ick! Yuck!  This guy is AWFUL!  One name per character,
got that?!  ONLY ONE NAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  In a couple of scenes
both Chekov and Sulu are called, "the navigator," to an extent
to where it's hard to know what in blazes is going on.  MJF needs
an editor, badly.
From: hermit@dastari.uucp (Mark Buda)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: ST: TNG Upcoming Episodes Spoiler info from JSL on CIS.
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:49:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: dastari.HERMIT.92Apr9124925
	<1992Apr4.151318.10075@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Apr4.192348.13222@cco.caltech.edu>
	<1992Apr4.210414.14075@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Apr7.215722.26907@cco.caltech.edu>
Organization: Competitive Computer Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Apr7.215722.26907@cco.caltech.edu> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>>>>Spoilers ho!
>

>And sure, I know Daniel Stewart's in it.  At the moment, it's no big deal.
>If he's half the actor his old man is, he could be playing a giant turnip
>and probably do it well.

I heard that after filming this episode they were considering having
the giant turnip be a recurring role.

There was also a rumor that they planned move the giant turnip to Deep
Space Nine.
--
Mark Buda
"Here, with a compressed air drill, parsnips are harvested."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: runyan@cup.hp.com (Mark Runyan)
Subject: Re: Comment on Wesley's room (First Duty)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 17:22:52 GMT
Organization: HP, Cupertino, CA, USA

bn981@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ryan Mathews) writes:
>
>The door had a doorknob, and it swung open.  Awfully low tech, dontcha
>think?
>
>Either there's some point to this, or the average college dormitory in
>the 24th century is as old and unmodern as the ones today.  :-)

As I mentioned in another post somewhere, I think that there was a reason
for this `low tech' approach.  My reasoning is based on having observed
some of the strange things cadets are required to do at the US Air Force
Academy (USAFA).  My belief is that all the dorm doors at the Starfleet
Academy (SF {hence it has to be in San Francisco, eh?}) will have these
doorknobs.  The reason is that the cadet can not just stand somewhere in
the room when a person knocks on the door.  The cadet must go to the
door and answer the door and respond to the person at the door.  Answering
the door and manually opening it automatically makes you subserviant to
the person at the door (and as a cadet you're suppose to be subserviant, eh?)
Perhaps this is just a tradition, but it wouldn't be any crazier than what
cadets at the USAFA are sometimes required to do...

Mark Runyan
(No, I wasn't a cadet, I just talked with a few... :-)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: meb@sally.acns.nwu.edu (Mark Brodsky)
Subject: Re: "The First Duty" and Romulans at Starfleet.
Reply-To: mark-brodsky@nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 18:16:24 GMT

In article <6577@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> chow@plasma.icsl.ucla.edu (Elvin Chou)  
writes:
> Was that a Vulcan Star Fleet officer on the accident review  
board/investigation
> committee?  My roommate said he had too much inflection in his voice for a 
> Vulcan.  Perhaps a Romulan spy at Star Fleet Academy?

No, I don't think so. Many Vulcans use inflection in their voices from time to  
time. Most noteably, Spock's father.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: cec35848@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Chuck Carroll)
Subject: Re: Asimov lost
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 03:49:05 GMT

sdh5@po.CWRU.Edu (Scott D. Hurley) writes:


>Isaac Asimov died this morning , April 6, 1992 A.D.

>WHo's left?

Martin H. Greenberg is the only one of three still alive
who were listed on the Sci-Fi Channel's Board of Directors.

-- 
Chuck Carroll					      cec35848@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Vous bumme, il y a un poisson dans votre bibliotheque.
 (You bum, there is a fish in your library.)"		  -- Dave Barry
From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Subject: Re: Lynch's Spoiler Review: "The First Duty"
Keywords: TNG, Wesley, Academy
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 23:09:42 GMT

kanamori@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Atsushi Kanamori) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.214814.28913@cco.caltech.edu> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:

>>>>Let me tell you a little story.

[story deleted; we've seen it by now]

>>>Just how good a friend was he?  
>>
>>I have two answers for this.  The first is "good enough that I'm probably 
>>getting a wedding invitation in the mail soon."
>>
>>The second is that it's neither relevant to the discussion nor any of your
>>damned business, to be frank.  If you're going to start claiming that people
>>only sever all ties when it's "shallow" friendships, then we're not going to
>>remain civil long.

>Chill *out*, man. 

Your pardon.  I have had a *very* bad couple of days, and suddenly seeing the
(to me) implied "well, if you were going to do it that quickly, he/she couldn't
have been much of a REAL friend" was not exactly the best of statements.

Sorry, Jose.  It's not your fault.

>>>And would you have severed all relations to
>>>your *son*, if he had done the same?  Remember, that is the relationship 
>>>they have.
>>
>>No...I remember that that's the relationship YOU claim they have.  Saying 
>>someone is *like* a son is far from saying "this is my son".  

>Uh, you said yourself "Wes, and his two surrogate fathers (Locarno and 
>Picard)." I think "*like* a son" and "is a son" are, for all practical 
>purposes, equivalent. Unless you're thinking of some fundamental difference 
>other than the biological one, the analogy sounds quite apt.

The difference in this case would probably have to be length of time in which
I'd known the "son" in question.  Picard's known Wes for about four years,
Locarno for a year and change.  And while extremely strong bonds can form
in those times (esp. the former), I'd be hard-pressed to compare them with
someone I *literally* helped raise to Wes's age.  

The analogy's probably stronger than I dismissed it as, and that's my fault.
But it doesn't strike me as all that apt.

To answer your question, Jose, I don't know.  Probably not; but I don't
believe the analogy is apt.

Tim Lynch
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 00:46:58 GMT

kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
>goodwin@orionsci (Ben Goodwin) writes:
> > The Kobyashi Maru wasn't an exam.  It was a psychological
> > test.

>tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>> IN PART. It was not an exam per se, but it was designed, IMHO, to drive home
>> the very really lesson that *there are times you can't win*.  Kirk COULD NOT
>> accept that, and it's a sign of gross immaturity. It served him well in some
>> ways; he might never have survived the encounter with the First Federation
>> without it, to be sure.  But it is a deep, deep character flaw, and one that
>> was exploited magnificently well in ST2.

>I disagree.  

You think ST2 wasn't done well?  You think Kirk doesn't have this flaw?  You
think refusing to accept defeat *ever* is somehow noble and sensible?

Kyle, we've proven plenty of times in the past that the odds of our agreeing
on a topic even remotely involving ethics is close to nil.  Scott Gorcey
just answered this post in almost exactly the way I was going to; I leave you
to him.

Yes, Kirk's had bad situations before, but never to the scale he had with
Spock's death.  And you fail to recognize the basic fact:

The no-win scenario, in reality, EXISTS.  You can't cheat it in reality.
Refusing to admit there's a place for defeat in your mindset is living in a 
dream world--and Kirk paid a hefty rent there at times.

>I do not see Kirk's refusal to accept defeat _before he is
>defeated_ as a character flaw.  

I'm not claiming he, or anyone, should meekly lay down and die.  I'm claiming
that anyone who goes in with the conscious *and unconscious* attitude of
"I cannot possibly fail, ever" is someone who deserves what he or she gets.
It reflects arrogance, and a major dose of hubris.  I don't fault Kirk for
fighting to the end; I fault him for refusing to ever admit that there *might*
be a time when he can't trick his way out of trouble.

Tim Lynch
From: mlhb@mammoth.dr.att.com (54626-BonhamM(DR2020)214)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Kirk couldn't have done the last Culvort WAS:Re: Locarno = Kirk
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:05:03 GMT

Minor spoiler





















Sorry can't control L from here


























No way!  Picard said in the First Duty that all members of the last team who 
attempted the Culvort Starburst were killed.  That's why it was banned.
Now unless Kirk was crafty enough at that time to figure out how to resurrect
himself ;-) ;-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret H. Bonham          | "Marvelous!  Why this could kill millions"
mlhb@drutx.ATT.COM          | -- Trelane, Squire of Gothos
Don't even try:             |----------------------------------------------
mlhb@mammoth.dr.att.com     |  Disclaimer:  I'm not even an AT&T employee
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlhb@mammoth.dr.att.com (54626-BonhamM(DR2020)214)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: More Wesley bashing WAS: Wesley and Alexander
Date: 14 Apr 92 23:15:03 GMT

What the hell...

It was about time Wesley got held accountable for something, like in the
First Duty.  Personally, if I were Picard, I would have ejected him out of
the photon torpedo tube a long time ago. ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

Typical Wesley plot:

Wesley comes up with some great experiment
Experiment runs amok (not to be confused with Amok Time)
Enterprise is under extreme jeapordy because of stupid experiment
Wesley somehow saves the day

What I would like to see:

Wesley come up with some great experiment
Experiment runs amok (not to be confused with Amok Time)
Enterprise is under extreme jeapordy because of stupid experiment
Worf and Riker throw Wesley in the shuttle bay and decompressurize
Somebody besides Barclay saves the day

Oh hell, why don't we throw ol' Broccoli in too? 
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret H. Bonham          | "Good tea.  Nice house." -- Lt. Cmdr Worf
mlhb@mammoth.dr.att.com     |----------------------------------------------
mlhb@drutx.ATT.COM          |  Disclaimer:  I'm not even an AT&T employee
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: HADCDJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A)
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:44:57 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

   Just to put in my two cents:

   About the business with Reliant in TWOK, while Saavik did quote the regs,
it was SPOCK, not Kirk who said "The Admiral is well aware of the regulations."
Or words to that effect.  Kirk did, however, ignore the regs, which in this case
resulted in the unpleasant events that followed.
   In fairness to Kirk, even when the indications that something funny was going
on began to emerge, I submit, IMO, that people in movies are not as paraniod as 
those of us who watch them! :^)

Jammer Jim
aka Captain Thevinen Salar, CO USS EXCALIBUR
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: markm@wri.com
Subject: Re: TROI'S BIG BUTT
Reply-To: markm@wri.com
Organization: Wolfram Research, Inc.
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:52:27 GMT



Just saw Hero Worship for the first time last night, and I watched carefully  
for the BUTT to make an appearance.  Surprise!  There was not a single shot of  
here butt in the entire episode!
From: goodwin@orionsci (Ben Goodwin)
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Reply-To: goodwin@orionsci.UUCP (Ben Goodwin)
Organization: Orion Scientific, Inc.
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 17:58:09 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.223344.12153@cco.caltech.edu> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>goodwin@orionsci (Ben Goodwin) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr7.220953.13877@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>
>
>IN PART.  It was not an exam per se, but it was designed, IMHO, to drive home
>the very really lesson that *there are times you can't win*.  Kirk COULD NOT
>accept that, and it's a sign of gross immaturity.  It served him well in some
>ways; he might never have survived the encounter with the First Federation
>without it, to be sure.  But it is a deep, deep character flaw, and one that
>was exploited magnificently well in ST2.
>
>The investigators learned plenty, sure.  Kirk, however, learned nothing.  And
>apparently, you think that's just fine.

Hum, gross immaturity.  Well maybe in part.  Yes I saw ST2.  Good movie!

>>You can't compare the two.  I mean, you can, but the comparison doesn't
>>work.  Are you implying that if Kirk was bad at say Astrophysics that
>>he would have cheated to graduate?
>
>Possibly.

I am distressed Tim. This slanderous attack on Kirk is very interesting.
I love it when people are so willing to perform character assasination
with no evidence. The above attack is unfounded, unfair, and might show
just a teensy weensy character flaw in your personality. 

>
>>Do you remember the episode where Wesley tried to get into the academy,
>>they ran a scenario where he was only able to save one person from a
>>fire?  That wasn't an exit exame either.
>
>Oh, yes it was--of a sort.  (Or, rather, an entrance exam, since he wasn't IN
>the Academy yet.)  "You had to make a choice and you did."  Wes 
>managed to beat back his own fears related to Jack's death.  Had he frozen
>with indecision, do you really think they'd have let him in?  

They didn't let him into the academy in that episode. :)

>Tim Lynch (Cornell's first Astronomy B.A.; one of many Caltech grad students)
-- 
============================================================================
| 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
============================================================================
From: cortese@hepxvt.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: more Kobiyashi
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:18:28 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.215222.28077@uunet.uu.net> kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
>kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes...
> > I disagree.  Kirk had faced the no-win scenario before ST2, and
> > he did not freeze.  In "City on the Edge of Forever" Kirk let
> > Edith Keeler die, even though he paid a horrible emotional price
> > for it.  In "Where No Man Has Gone Before" Kirk killed his best
> > friend Gary Mitchell when there was no other alternative.  In
> > "The Menagerie" Kirk was prepared to sentence Spock to death for
> > his mutiny and subsequent violation of General Order 7 (?
> > whatever the stay-away-from-quarantined-planets order is).
>
>v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
> >      True, but the movie obviously didn't take these things into
> >      account.  We have to assume that the loss of Spock is 
> >      the most ^catastrophic^ thing that has ever happened to him.

You are ignoring something important to a control and command oriented
person like Kirk.  All of the previous situations involved something
where HE was forced to take action and resolve the situation.  Even if
he didn't like the way things turned out, he could say, "I did what I
though was correct at the time."  And for an action oriented individual,
guilt over making the wrong decision is tons better than helplessness at
not being able to do anything.  Kirk would much rather stew in guilt
than say, "There was nothing *I* could do."

But, here, he was faced with a situation that he could do absolutely
nothing about.  Spock was going to die, and he could do *nothing.*
Here, he could only watch and feel the worst emotion possible for him --
helplessness.

A big difference.

Regards,
Janis C.
 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current