HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: meb@sally.acns.nwu.edu (Mark Brodsky)
Subject: Re: Sulu spinoffs (was Re: PAD: Sexy and nude with Sulu; Yeesh!)
Reply-To: mark-brodsky@nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:41:46 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.094547.16388@leela.cs.orst.edu>  
petersm@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Marguerite Petersen) writes:
> In article <1992Nov4.175856.8712@morgan.ucs.mun.ca>  
glocke@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Gordon Locke  ) writes:
> >jlindqui@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (An Erik Estrada hate monger) writes:
> >>glocke@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Gordon Locke  ) writes:
> >>>sdt8s@curry.edschool.Virginia.EDU (Steve Tilson) writes:
> >>>>If memory serves, Mr. David recently mentioned a possible novel
> >>>>about Captain Sulu and the _Excelsior_.
> >>
> >>>	Shag that!  How about a movie!  Or another TV spin-off show?  
> >>
> >>But if somebody did decide to do such a thing, would we _have_ to put up  
with
> >>Christian Slater as the smarmy nightwatch comm officer?  Personally I'd  
rather
> >>see Janice Rand bump 'im off...
> >
> >	A - friggin' - gree'd !!  That dumb `cameo' by Christian "Jack
> >Nicholson wanna-be" (=^) Slater was a glaring black mark on an otherwise
> >stellar flick.  In the novelization, it was Rand who woke up Sulu (and
> >he didn't get mad, like he did at Ensign Wanna-be).  We didn't get to
> >see enough of Rand in VI; weren't even sure if it was Rand, or just a
> >cameo by the same actress.  She'd be half the reason to do a
> >Sulu-centric project, I think.  Maybe it would make up for her premature
> >boot off of TOS.   
> >-- 
> >    Gord Locke, a.k.a.    |  It's quite simple:   |        Read: 
> 
> I recently saw George Takei (Captain Sulu) at a convention and he said
> that he would absolutely *love* to do a Captain Sulu movie.  He also
> mentioned getting rid of the Ensign  with the hearing problem and
> replacing him with an Ensign with a full head of hair, by the name
> of Ensign Picard.  Sounds like a great idea to me!
> 
> Marg
> 
Naw, Picard wouldn't even be alive at the time of Capt. Sulu's adventure's.  
Let's not forget. STVI-TUC takes place about SEVENTY years before TNG.  
Picard is only in his fifties or sixties I'd say. (I'm sure someone out  
there knows exactly). Of course, how would Takei know this, he's only an  
actor :) Personaly, I liked Slater's cameo.
---
"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not  
sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
-Richard Nixon 

Mark E. Brodsky
Northwestern University
Evanston, Ill.
E-mail: mark-brodsky@nwu.edu
	or
	markb@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Ham Radio: KB9BLY
IRC: Rocketdog
From: tanski@inland.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Wanted: Press release for "Schisms"
Date: 4 Nov 92 09:18:42 CST
Organization: Inland Steel Company; East Chicago, IN

Would anyone out there email me the press release for "Schisms."  I believe
Mike Brown posts these.  I somehow missed this one, or deleted during a
purge of my account.  Thanks in advance!

-- 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
     John Tanski                   ><  "It's a dog eat dog world out   
     ISFPC - R & D Dept            ><   there and we're all just       
     East Chicago, IN              ><   different flavors of Alpo"   
     tanski@inland.com             ><     Judd Nelson's character in
                                   ><     "Tales from the Crypt" 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
From: cj471@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeff E. Moxley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Rascals...did anyone else like it?
Date: 6 Nov 1992 08:46:32 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: cj471@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeff E. Moxley)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, chetc@resumix.portal.com (Chester L. Cuaresma) says:

>Subject says it all.  I walked into it saying "Spock's Brain, Spock's
>Brain", but I ended up enjoying it.
>
>I really enjoyed the repartee between Guinan and Ro.  Both jumping
>on the bed was classic!
>
>The child actors they chose for each cast member was right on.  I
>almost thought that TNG couldn't do child shows AT ALL!
>
>The end was perfect, and summed up the episode:  never forget the 
>child within.  Kind of like the movie "Big"...
>
>					Chet C.
>
>

I guess we're in the minority as far as people who liked this episode. There
were a few questionable parts, like Riker only firing back once and waiting
too long to fire in the frist place and Worf getting taken out so easily.
But those few things didn't stop me from liking it. I liked the children
they chose. They did a wonderful job.  Was it just me or did anyone else
think "FIZZBIN" when Riker was explaining how to use the computer to the 
Ferengi.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: alan@pacdata.uucp (Alan McLachlan)
Subject: Re: ST: TNG Schedule
Keywords: -
Organization: Pacific Data Products
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:29:14 GMT

In article <900706s.9.721082229@ace.acadiau.ca> 900706s@ace.acadiau.ca (JAMES ALEXANDER STRUM) writes:
>
>
>The reason they begin to show repeats so soon is for two reasons.
>One of which being that while all the other shows are still showing new 
>episodes, Trek will probably keep most, if not all, of its following and 
>then when the other shows finish with the new episodes and start on reruns, 
>Trek still has new episodes to attract more new followers (of the show).
>The second reason is for people who may have missed a show or two in there 
>somewhere and they show the reruns so that those people don't have to wait 
>until the end of the season to see the repeats. IMO.
>
>				    	Peace and Long Life,
>						
>						J. Strum
>
> 

Did anybody think that these shows are rather complex to complete and take
more than a week to complete? The 9 shows we get early in the season may
have taken all summer to complete (post production and FX and all) and
the rest of the season is a catch up.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------
  Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alan McLachlan                       [ucsd|uunet]!pacdata!alan
Pacific Data Products                alan@pacdata.com
--------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: zygote@cs.uiuc.edu (The seed of all life)
Subject: Re: SPOILERS Rascals: Riker should be shot.
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:46:26 GMT

kan@bugs-bunny.rtp.dg.com (Victor Kan) writes:

>>>>>> On 9 Nov 92 16:11:13 GMT, hrsn@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Daniel Harrison) said:

>Daniel> If a couple dozen Iraqis had taken over the carrier
>Daniel> Independence in like fashion, there would be court-martials
>Daniel> aplenty.

>Hey, in the movie _Under Seige_, the battleship Missouri was captured
>by a bunch of musicians and caterers :-).

>Daniel> Riker, to the brig.

>Definitely!  What's this "Computer: disable command functions!" crap?
>Why not "Computer: transport all Ferengi to the brig (or into space
>:-)?"

>I wonder if Data ever considered running around like The Flash and
>applying Vulcan neck pinches to the Ferengi on the bridge.

If Data could take over the ship single handedly against the entire crew
in the episode with Dr. Soong, why couldn't he take it back from 6
Ferengi?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Re: ---< Fistful o' Datas >--- Synopis & *Spoilers*
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Date: 12 Nov 92 06:49:47 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1dst2cINNhmu@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes:

> But this episode lacked suspense,
> fails miserably in using a worn out plot device, has no character
> development to justify the action, not enough sci-fi, and bad acting.

OK, but other than that, it was pretty good. ;-)

Terry
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS
"Laugh while you can, Monkey Boy!"                        - Lord "John" Warfin
"There can be only one!"                                  - The Highlander
"There should have been only one. I want my money back!"  - Terry
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: lawson@mdc.com (Jim Lawson)
Subject: Re: Young Picard == Picard's Nephew in "Family"?
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 20:31:24 GMT
Organization: MDSSC-SSD
Reply-To: Lawson%ssdvax.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

He is the same actor, this was confirmed at the last Creation Convention
in Los Angeles. They also said that the woman who played Worf's mother has 
died :-(
--

Jim Lawson	Lawson%ssdvax.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
		Alt:	Lawson@netsun.mdc.com or Lawson@bbs.mdcbbs.com

Opinions/Comments expressed here are my own and no one elses !!
From: tanski@inland.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Wanted: Press release for "True Q" (?)
Date: 4 Nov 92 09:30:43 CST
Organization: Inland Steel Company; East Chicago, IN

Also wanted is the press release (posted I think by Mike Brown) on "True Q" 
via email.  Thanks in advance.

-- 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
     John Tanski                   ><  "It's a dog eat dog world out   
     ISFPC - R & D Dept            ><   there and we're all just       
     East Chicago, IN              ><   different flavors of Alpo"   
     tanski@inland.com             ><     Judd Nelson's character in
                                   ><     "Tales from the Crypt" 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: ostubble@agsm.ucla.edu (Otha Stubblefield III)
Subject: Sherry Lansing named as Tartikoff successor over MP Division.
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:20:12 PST

Former Fox exec Sherry Lansing was named today as Brandon Tartikoff's
successor over Paramount's motion picture division ONLY.  No head has
been named for the TV division.
From: DonD@cup.portal.com (Don Robert DeCosta)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Shatner Script
Date: Sat,  7 Nov 92 11:52:59 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Nov3.001724.9189@mic.ucla.edu> <1992Nov4.140420.257@rivers>
  <1992Nov5.095708.16484@leela.cs.orst.edu>

Sorry I never posted this sooner, I had assumed (don't even think of
replying to that!) that one of the Net-Trek-Gods would have it posted
long before I had even seen it.  Any how I pledge to be a more giving
Net-Citizen in the future.

October 9th, 1992 "Marilyn Beck's Hollywood" syndicated newspaper article:

A BOLD NEW JOURNEY: Expect the next "Star Trek" movie to feature both the
original cast and the headliners from "Star Trek: The Next Generation."
Paramount brass have not as yet settled on a "ST VII" story -- there are
several in contention including a WILLIAM SHATNER submission that focuses
on a romance for his aging Capt. Kirk character and a young lovely. However,
the sentiment among Paramount's r-e-a-l-l-y important powers calls for "Star
Trek VII" to be the time for the passing of the baton from the tried and tired
to the fresh and forceful who now guide the good ship Enterprise from TV
segment to segment.

  --- end of quote ---

Looking at that "tried and tired" line makes me ask, "Does anyone know the
age difference between Shatner and Stewart?"


DonD@cup.portal.com
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.current:17588 rec.arts.startrek.misc:11355
From: jal41820@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Smiley)
Subject: Re: Fistful of Datas (no real spoilers)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:14:34 GMT

firestar@leland.Stanford.EDU (Lipton Ann Meredith) writes:
:)Okay, so it wasn't the best episode of the season.  (Anyone besides me think
:)"Spectre of the Gun, Spectre of the Gun"?)  But it was all justified by

Not really. The only similarity to "Spectre of the Gun" was the fact that
some of it took place in the Old West. In another followup I have a list
of just about everything else you can think of being different.

-- 
        Josh Laff              #     #      
email to: smiley@uiuc.edu     _       _     Hello! I am a signature virus!  
      (217) 384-6249         |#\_____/#|    Join the fun and copy mo*#(*&^!>.
                              \#######/
From: pip@pro-freedom.cts.com (David Pipgras)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Young Picard == Picard's Nephew in "Family"?
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:20:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: pro-free.1992Nov10.092028.7088
Organization: ProLine [pro-freedom] AppleVan (Apple UG of Vancouver, WA)

In <721385970.0@ttlg.ttlg.UUCP>
Tom.Hall@f1.n342.z1.ttlg.UUCP (Tom Hall) writes:

>Several of us watching "Rascals" were of the opinion that the actor
>who played the young Picard was the same kid who played Renee,
>Picard's nephew, in "Family" a couple of seasons ago....
>
>Can anyone confirm this?
>
>============================================================================
>An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less,
>until he knows absolutely everything about nothing.
>============================================================================
>
> * Origin: Ten Forward (1:342/1)


The Original "Rene' Picard" was played by David Tristin Birkin. Is this the
same name in the credits ? If so, then yes. I admit, now that i think about
it, it is a striking comparison....

Dave
==============================================================
From: 00ajpayne@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: "Rascals" Actress Inquiry
Date: 6 Nov 92 04:23:38 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's

In article <21F802OZ2a3o01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, wlm10@cd.amdahl.com (William L Moore) writes:
> 
> Was Isis Jones (Young Guinan) the same actress who tormented Kevin 
> Bacon in "Flatliners"?
> 
> -Bill
> wlm10@cd.amdahl.com


I don't know that for sure....
but I do know she played the younger version of Whoopi in
"Saraphina" (sp?)

-Jay
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Heffernan)
Subject: Re: Rascals:  Kanamorites have missed the point again...
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:57:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.211615.26911@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> kevin@csd-d-2.Stanford.EDU (Kevin Ernst Duckworth) writes:
|
|Make my day, Kanamorites.
	
	Gladly.

	All elements in a dramatic presentation have to be held up to scrutiny
before you can slap a thumbs-up label on it.  I don't care how good the
characterization is, or how good the plot is, or how good the acting is, or
how good the direction is; no one of those things will carry the show by
itself.  In fact, even if they are -all- excellent the show itself may
-still- fail, because they might not work together.  The quality of the
parts does not automatically carry over to the quality of the whole, and
vice-versa.  Mediocre elements might very well combine to form an excellent
whole.

	"Rascals" had some potentially good moments in it.  Seriously dealing
with the potential of renewed youth could have made a powerful episode.  The
child actors were pretty good.  Keiko's scene with her husband was quite
good; the best part of the episode if you ask me.  

	But, they had to go and screw it up.  Why a transporter accident?
Didn't anyone think of the implications?  Couldn't they think of anything
else, in a universe established to hold all sorts of unexplainable wonders?
Why have the Ferrengi show up at all?  Why have the ship get taken over in
such an implausable manner?  If the ship has to be taken over, can't we
think of a better way to do it?  Why are the Ferrengi flying Klingon ships
-- someone step on the Ferrengi ship model?  (ObTOS reference!)  Because
they spend so much time dealing with the Ferrengi, you can't really claim
that the episode is "about" interaction or humanity.  They don't spend
nearly enough time on such things.  It's "about" a Ferrengi attack on the
Enterprise, and the plausability holes in that (and in the premise) are
simply too great to ignore.  An episode about a Ferrengi attack might have
been cool, too, but this one is too silly for words.  The plausability holes
leap right out at you when you're watching the episode, and that means it's
not entertaining enough to overcome its liabilities.

	You've got a well-handled plot with an implausable premise (the kids
bit) and an poorly-handled plot with an implausible premise (the Ferrengi)
both fighting for attention.  The result is, they both lose.  Neither one
carries the day.


Dennis F. Heffernan  dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com e4461005@apollo.montclair.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Look...I sympathize with your problem, but all things considered, I'd rather 
talk about me."  --Murphy Brown
From: mfd@aber.ac.uk (Margaret Frances Disbury)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Kirk never to appear on TNG
Summary: We seem to have got away from the subject a little, but, anyway ...
Date: 6 Nov 92 14:33:14 GMT
Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth


	[stuff deleted on the above subject, I forget all the details]
>   Possible spoiler on STVI: on the other hand, I can't imagine anyone on this
>net not seeing the movie yet.
> 
	[more stuff deleted]
>   
>   Looking back on Spock's line,  I think the reason he was reluctant to
>discuss the Khitomer conference with Picard (other than the usual commercial
>reasons) was that Spock IMHO invaded, and if you will, "raped" Valeris' mind.
>Being a Vulcan, he did so, conceding the necessity of it, but also being a
>Vulcan, that loss of protocol, as well as destroying Valeris' dignity would
>leave some kind of scar on Spock's "emotional" psyche.
>      Junsok Yang
> 

If you read the book of the film, there is an alternative interpretation ...
that Spock began the mind meld but waited for Valeris' permission to 
proceed and that although she acknowledged the necessity (and also the
validity ?) of what he did and why, she was still reluctant to divulge the
information and hence the struggle seen on the screen.  (IMHO , standard
disclaimers apply)

Fran Disbury

-- 
*******************************************************************************
Fran Disbury     JANET: mfd@uk.ac.aber    Internet: mfd@aber.ac.uk 
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: comptec92076@camins.camosun.bc.ca
Subject: Deep Space 9 premier
Organization: Camosun College
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:45:03 GMT

Does anyone have any information on where/when the Deep Space 9- 2 hour premier
episode will appear on satelite?

 Thanx,

 Jason Vaux
From: mark.lindsay@the-matrix.com (Mark Lindsay) 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Doohan vs Shatner
Date: 13 Nov 92 11:33:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The MATRIX BBS - Birmingham, AL - 205-323-2016
Reply-To: mark.lindsay@the-matrix.com (Mark Lindsay) 


|Well..  i went to see Doohan (again) Sunday at one of the worst cons ever...
|and practically all he had to say was things blasting Shatner.  I too
|laughed when he talked about the possibility of Star Trek VII... he said
|as long as Shatner doesn't write it would be ok. ::grin::  He said a lot
|of other things hinting about his distaste at Shatner... but he never came
|right out and said "Bill"... he just said stuff like "you know who..." etc.
|Also.. I noticed that Doohan was rather caught up in himself that evening...

I noticed that Doohan seemed rather stuck on himself when he was here
in Birmingham this summer.  He felt that he had gotten the shaft about
salaries compared to Shatner & Nimoy. He loved to make backhanded
remarks against Shatner.  Doohan struck me as a bitter and jealous
man.

I have seen Nichols, Nimoy and Spiner also in the last year.  They
all seemed very gracious to the fans about what the fans had done
for them.  Doohan seemed like he was favoring US with his acting,
and that we should be thanking him for all the money he gets.

 * SLMR 2.1a *  I doubt any God who inflicts pain for his own pleasure.
From: lpeters@postmaster@hq.af.mil (Leslie D Peters)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Holodeck etiquette (or lack of it!)
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:19:28 GMT
Reply-To: lpeters@marge.hq.af.mil
Organization: 7th Communications Group

In article <kaxiras.720842180@cs.wisc.edu>, kaxiras@falcons.cs.wisc.edu (Stefanos Kaxiras) writes:
|> 
|> As I understand it, the holodeck creates an arbitrary large world in
|> the holodeck room. People can walk in these worlds for hours and
|> long distances. However the distance between two real people in these
|> worlds cannot be greater then the dimentions of the holodeck room.
|> ( Example : Holodeck program is the recreation of the United States.
|> Can Riker be in N.Y. and Picard in San Fransisco ? -- Unless of course
|> two people in the same time, in the same holodeck room can see 
|> different things : Picard in one corner sees San Fran. and Riker in
|> the other corener sees N.Y. )
|> Can anyone clarify the for me ?
|> 
|> Thanx,
|> Stefanos.

Try this on for size....

The holodeck, realistically, has fixed dimensions; however, what it
to prevent the holodeck from giving Picard and Riker the *appearance*
of being 3,000 miles away from each other?  

|          ___           |
|         /   \          |
|___JLP__/     \___WTR___|

Between them is the holograpic image spanning the distance.  If they
were to start travelling towards each other, the "barrier" would be
compensating for less and less distance until it falls within the 
dimensions of the room.

Anyone think of a better explanation?  BTW, This was probably "used"
to explain the vast forest in "Hollow (Holo) Pursuits" when Riker,
Troi (and her butt), and LaForge entered and Barcley was not in sight.

Les Peters
-- 
/============================================================================\
|                    ___                     |                               |
|       ___....-----'---`-----....___        | I haven't lost my mind --     |
| =========================================  |                               |
|        ___`---..._______...---'___         |  it's backed up on            |
|       (___)      _|_|_|_      (___)        |   tape somewhere.             |
|         \\____.-'_.---._`-.____//          |                               |
|           ~~~~`.__`---'__.'~~~~            | lpeters@marge.hq.af.mil       |
|                   `~~~'                    |                               |
\============================================================================/
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: glocke@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Gordon Locke  )
Subject: The Tabukan Syndrome 
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 01:21:50 GMT

	What did people think of the latest story arc in the DC Star
Trek comics?  It's called "The Tabukan Syndrome", and I thought it was
really good.  It dealt with Sulu's first mission with the Excelsior
crew.  Of course Kirk and co. are along for the ride.  Throw in a nasty
new alien race, good fleshing out of a new bridge crew, some political
wheelin' and dealin' with those oh-so-principled Romulans, and you've
got a heck of a six-part comic epic!  
	What?!, you say you don't read the Star Trek comics??  Shame on 
you!  They're (for the most part) consistently excellent, and I'm surprised 
that I don't see any discussion of the latest issue here, while I 
regularly read things like, "The latest Pocket Book sucks ... again!" 
The comics are probably a bit expensive (15 issues a year @ $2.25 CDN a
pop), but probably better plots than the paperback novels.  I don't read
the TNG comics, so I can't speak for those, but Howard Weinstein (sp?)
writes the TOS ones, and they're great!  (I think Michael Jan Friedman
writes the TNG ones).  So c'mon, let's talk about the comics ...  
-- 
   Gord Locke, a.k.a.    |    "I'm not an       | "The Universe is so big
glocke@morgan.ucs.mun.ca | Internet address ... | I get dizzy when I think
  Newfoundland, Canada   |   I'm a free man!"   |  about it" -Sugarcubes 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current