HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: X-men 8 (a little late)
Date: 5 Apr 92 08:41:44 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <92094.231942MAC139@psuvm.psu.edu>, MAC139@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>I hope they resolve the Psylocke-Cyclops-Jean triangle quickly. The only thing
>'Locke and Cyke have in common are the Y's in their names. To me this is just a
>poor diversion from the sure-fire conclusion that Jean and Scott are meant for
>each other. I mean, come on. Are we meant to believe that Scott, who so
>mourned the death of "Jean" (phoenix), fell in love and married her copy, and
>then abandoned her to be with the real thing--the love of his life from the
>first moment she walked into the X-mansion--is somehow ga-ga over Psylocke all
>of the sudden? I think...not.
>
>--BJP
>

When did Cyclops ever show any interest in Psylocke?????? (issue # please)
This seems so strange! I see Jean and Scott hugging all the time. When DID
Psyluck butt in?
-- 
 (%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%)
  |  Off-campus address...                                          |
  |     first alley down this street, left refrigerator box. :-)    |
  |                                                                 |
   \_________Bobby Yung____RY01@NS1.CC.Lehigh.Edu____X-0471________/
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: X-Force and The New Mutants
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 05:46:03 GMT

In article <d-pjrk.dani@netcom.com> dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>>Illyana's mutant power was teleportation. Her armour and sword are both...
>This is open to a number of reasonable interpretations.  While the sword
>is certainly a magic artifact she herself created, the armour may be a
>reflection of the family mutation.  (Her brother gets a complete suit of
>it.)  And her teleportation is, more precisely, mental control over Limbo's
>space-time-teleportation disks, which includes being able to summon them
>into our world, but does not include being able to make a jump that
>doesn't go via Limbo.  Would her power have taken this form had she
>never lived in Limbo?

All indications are that her mutant power was "summon Limbo teleportation
circle".  I don't think the power was ever treated as a spell.

As for the armor, remember Kitty Pryde gets it too....
--
This is a newer version of the memetic .signature infection.  Now that's an
idea.  Copy it into your .signature today!

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: paladin@wpi.WPI.EDU (Ever Shifting Bearlike being...)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: Rogue and Cyclops Questions
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:27:39 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute

In article <1992Apr14.002610.24663@access.usask.ca> donald@dvinci.USask.Ca (David Donald) writes:
>uk02700@nx05.mik.uky.edu (mitchell e french) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Apr11.035053.18219@wam.umd.edu>  
>>rudeboy@next00wor.wam.umd.edu (Darrell T. Blake) writes:
>>> Is there any reason given why rogue can not control her powers?
>>> Is it just a matter of mastering control or is her power just  
>>> uncontrollable?
>
>>	Her power has been uncontrollable from the first time it  
>>manifested itself.  Xavier thought it could be controlled, which is why  
>>she joined the School for Gifted Youngsters in the first place.  (Anybody  
>>beside me remember that?  Rogue seems to have forgotten it....)  
>
>>> Is there anyone that her powers don't work on?
>
>This is just a theory of my own, but what the heck, I'll toss it out...
>
>	I don't remember if Rogue has ever tried to use her power on a telepath
>of any sort, and in particular, a powerful one(ie Charles or Jean or Rachel or
>Betsy)... I suspect that those with such a firm grasp on their self image that
>they can manipulate themselves on the "Astral Plane" may be able to hold her 
>off or even take control of her, especially since Magneto separted Rogue from
>the "Alien" part of Carol Danvers that made her psyche "slippery" as Charles 
>once put it.

	BZZZZZZZTTTT!!!!!!!!   wrong... but thank you for playing...

	Rogue in issue 176?, during the time with mastermind trying to convince
  the x-people that madelyne really was phoenix, cyke had rogue absorb prof x's
  powers, he was unconscious at the time, and use the telepathic abilities that
  she got with cyke's knowledgeof how they worked to show the rest of the team
  that they were being duped...


 Paladin (ever shifting bearlike being....)	     
     Reality	       | " Wouldn't you laugh if your head exploded???  
 		       |	 No.... I guess you wouldn't.....	 
 paladin@wpi.wpi.edu   | I would."   (Nosage, June 91)
	
human is the foulest name i can ever call a person......
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon)
Subject: Re: Best/Worst PAD
Reply-To: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept., Madison, WI
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:00:00 GMT

In <1992Apr8.194621.14843@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> fal20643@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Capt. Frank A. Lauro) writes:
>rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:
>>>	What is your least favorite PAD story?  Why?

>>Uh... good question.  I think I'd have to say his origin of the Justice
>>League (at least, I think it was him).  But it may not have been entirely
>>his fault; the post-Crisis revisionism and forced humor (constant humor has
>>NEVER worked in the JLA, and I'm convinced that it never will) sunk it
>>almost from the start.

>Even if you're right about the failure of the humor of JL[x], don't blame
>Peter.  He had no part in *anything* related to the League, pre- or post-
>Crisis.

Really?  I thought for sure that he'd written that origin story.  Oh, well.
(I must move my collection closer to me some day. :-)

In that case, as I've been thinking about it a little more, I think I'd
place his Dreadstar series as my least favorite of his work.

-- 
Michael Rawdon
rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI

"It is a fool's prerogative to utter truths that no one else will speak."
				- Dream, "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
From: branwen@cerebus.ccc.amdahl.com (Karen Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: Best/Worst PAD
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:24:17 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA


>	What is your least favorite PAD story?  Why?

Peter's absolutely best work is, of course, chapter 2 of A ROCK AND A 
HARD PLACE. :-)


--
                                          Karen Williams
                                          branwen@cerebus.ras.amdahl.com
"Don't whine. Warrior women speak in a husky whisper."
  -- Brat Pack #3
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Subject: Re: A Coupla Thoughts...
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 05:45:20 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb):
>Cable is an amnesiac time traveler.

Yup.  He's come back in time to prevent the X-Men's destruction.  When
he remembers this, he will use his special power to scan the possible
future of each X-Man in order to identify the traitor.  Each possible
future will be the subject of a different annual.

-----
Dani Zweig
dani@netcom.com

Roses red and violets blew
  and all the sweetest flowres that in the forrest grew -- Edmund Spenser
From: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: RAC SPLIT:NO!!!
Date: 10 Apr 92 04:27:24 GMT
Reply-To: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept., Madison, WI

In <1960@ra.nrl.navy.mil> ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil (G. Host) writes:
>Hmmm, if the reason threaded newsreader users don't like the idea
>of a split is that the Reference line gives them all they need the
>solution is two fold:

>1. Post articles by doing followups to completely different subjects
>and change the title.

>2. Delete reference lines for posts related to the same subject.

>Lets see how quickly they change their tune.

Let's see how quickly and consistently this solution can be implemented.
Go ahead, I dare ya!

More seriously, unless you start picking Subject: lines which have NOTHING
to do with the subject at hand, it won't faze me very much.  Considering
that I must read (and I mean *read*) hundreds, if not thousands, of
articles per week, I think I've gotten pretty good at following threads
when I don't have a clue as to what the Subject: line was.

Besides, some people and/or their newsreaders ALREADY delete the
I learned what it was used for.)  One such is one of the more voluminous
posters in soc.singles, and I don't have any trouble following the threads
he contributes to...

Anyway, feel free to give it a go... >:-)

-- 
Michael Rawdon
rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI

"It is a fool's prerogative to utter truths that no one else will speak."
				- Dream, "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
From: cl2g+@andrew.cmu.edu (Charles Anthony Leone)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: dr.doom
Date: 8 Apr 92 05:05:28 GMT
	<1992Apr7.140337.27328@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Organization: Senior, Chemical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Karthik,

***************************************
Also, I believe that Simonson apparently had a different story in mind for
FF #350.  He was cut off by the editor, though, and soon quit.
	His original idea involved retelling the origin of Dr. Doom,
explaining his intense hatred for Reed Richards.  Apparently, when Reed
told Dr. Doom (when they were in college) that Doom's experiment was going
to blow up, Doom checked it over, and realized it.  He then changed it, and
it blew up.  Some time later, he discovered that he was right originally,
and that Reed had caused him to doubt himself, and thereby make the
mistake.  Unfortunately, this goes against the marvel policy that Reed
Richards is never wrong. :-(
**************************************

How'd you find this out? I had to ask Walt himself over a beer, and
you're exactly right!!!!!!


________________
Tony L.

8^\)
________________
From: rhr9081@hertz.njit.edu (Ray Rich)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: Ex-Marvel Stuff
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:52:44 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <4ds0ADG00awS9013Ze@andrew.cmu.edu> cl2g+@andrew.cmu.edu (Charles Anthony Leone) writes:
>
>Peter David may not be happy with this, but I dream of Marvel collapsing
>and being bought out by someone who cares for the people who have grown
>up reading their comics, not just the poor little kids who read them
>now. How can they grow up with books that have nothing to teach them?
>
	Hey, here's something we all could live with:  Marvel is bought
out by us as a unified corporation of comics-loving net users.  That way,
all of us, even Peter David, are happy.
					:)
				Raythrax
From: ssircar@CANON.COM (Subrata Sircar)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: META: Rac Split: Vote NO
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:20:01 GMT

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: META: Re: RAC SPLIT:NO!!!
Summary: 

From: ssircar@canon.com (Subrata Sircar)
Reply-To: ssircar@canon.com (Subrata Sircar)
Expires: 

<1992Apr8.171557.793@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>

Followup-To: 

Distribution: 

Organization: SPAMIT
Keywords: 


ddd@harrier.cvs.rochester.edu (Derryl D. DePriest) writes:
>In response to Ryan, I feel that if the volume is too high, readers
>will be scared off or unsubscribe due to the terrific number of posts, 

>the majority of which may not be of interest to everyone save a few. 


If that were true, then groups would never overload on traffic, for readers
wouldn't post after a certain volume, and volume would be self-regulating.
Usenet history shows that to be emphatically *not* the case.  In fact, groups
historically show a quick *rise* in traffic *after* a split, which later
slows back to the usual growth pattern.

>It's dissatisfying just skimming, not really feeling like contributing because
>somebody may have already said what I wanted to say or I can't 

>spare the time to read through messages looking for replies.

On Usenet, getting beaten to the punch with a reply is a way of life.  Think
about - Usenet readership is 3 million+.  Even if only 1% of the readers know
the answer to a given question, and 1% of the net reads that group, you're
still looking at several thousand people, one of which will *surely* say
something very similar to what you wanted to say.  A split won't change
that.

>But, I would argue that so few messages pertain to more than one company 

>that this shouldn't be a concern.

Who does a split along company lines benefit?  It only makes sense if people
exclusively read (and discuss) Marvel, or only DC, or only indie.  Checking
the past lists of favorite comics, that just ain't so.  Check the reviews
people post, and the lists of what people collect.  We as a group do *not*
read along company lines; in fact, we're generally looking for hot new stuff
and willing to try things we wouldn't otherwise pick up.  A split along
company lines actively *hurts* the cross-fertilization that is one of the
things I really like about this group.

To summarize, it's not just that a split is incovenient; a split along company
lines *hurts* what I like about this group.  That's why I'll vote "NO", and
urge others to do the same.

---
Subrata Sircar|ssircar@canon.com (NextMail ok)|Prophet & SPAMIT Charter Member
Canon Information Systems and I do not share the same views on everything.
"All I have to do is write a thesis, but how hard could that be?" - Jordan
"I seem to suffer from irrelevant flashbacks." - Paul, PAUL THE SAMURAI #1
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sunday, 5 Apr 1992 23:43:02 EDT
From: <SMB147@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Image sells out

(which way did you read the title?)

Have you notice that Youngblood is shipping ssoo late that so people
believe it has sold out?  People are asking about second prints!
I'm sorry, with 580,000 copies, you can get a first print.

Image, the new Coutinity Comics.
Will Youngblood ship before Rob has been dead for five years?
Is it a series of annuals?
Will the fans (NOT THE INVESTORS) put up with bimonthly comics
that are supposed to be monthly?

Deallers: Don't throw out youre X-men 1a-e to make room for
tons of Youngblood 1.
                     R I K
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: mal6657@tamsun.tamu.edu (Mark A. Lindsay)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: MUTANTS: X-Traitor Theories Disproved
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:32:56 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station

jcp@gauss.rutgers.edu (Jonathan Petersen) writes:

|I just got back from a convention at the Ramada Hotel in New York City.  Scott
|Lobdell, writer of the X-Men, was there, and I had a chance to talk with him
|for a few minutes about the subject of the traitor.
|Then, so I could walk proud amongst the members of the Rogue fan club, I told
|him that if it was Rogue, some people will be very upset as that would throw
|away a whole lot of character development (she was a villain, can we trust
|her?).  At this, he told me that Rogue was a possibility, that he was thinking
|about making her the traitor.  Of course, he told me that since he now knew 
|that people were actually considering her, he would have to think about it 
|again.
	
	Actually, Rogue would make some sense still.  Yes, she's been an X-Man,
but working on the assumption that Charles hasn't really been able to help
her fix her power, it is also reasonable to assume that she still is having
some personality problems.  If her schizophrenia (sp?) were to remanifest
itself in a such a way then she could easily take out the rest of them
by absorbing their powers one at a time and using it against the others.
She would have killed the X-Men, btu not really a traitor per se though
since she would be mentally ill.  Gambit surviving would make sense as well
since she seems to be developing a thing for him.

I doubt any god who inflicts pain for his own pleasure.
    -- McCoy, "The Final Frontier,"  stardate 8451.1.

mal6657@tamsun.tamu.edu                                   Texas A&M University 
                A Sooner in a strange place called "Aggieland"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: dnaraghi@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dara Naraghi)
Subject: Re: MISC: DC:Whatever happened to....?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 14:11:23 GMT

In article <AduuIZ_00WDK84bUMe@andrew.cmu.edu> Vernon H Harmon <vh00+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>I was just reading some old comics and I was reminded of a question I've
>been wanting to ask ever since I first found r.a.c.--whatever happened
>to T.M. Maple? 

>Does anyone know who this person is/was and/or
>where he/she is now (I haven't seen any letters from him/her for
>years...)??

	T.M. Maple is actually Jim Burke, famous Canadian letterhack.  He
officially retired last year.  To the best of my knowledge, he still appears
at the San Diego Con in the letterhack panel with fellow scribes Malcolm
Bourne, Charlie Harris and Elizabeth Holden.

-- 
*****************************************************************************
* Dara Naraghi                       * "Love isn't really blind...just      *
* dnaraghi@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu *  selectively nearsighted"--The Hulk  *
*****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: mcohen@jarthur.claremont.edu (Michael Cohen)
Subject: Re: Bob Newhart to portray comic creator
Organization: Harvey Mudd College
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 01:41:16 GMT

jcastle@ac.dal.ca writes:

>In article <1992Apr7.170057.529@HQ.Ileaf.COM>, tyg@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Tom Galloway) writes:
>> According to today's Boston Globe, Bob Newhart will be doing a
>> sitcom for CBS next season in which he'll portray the creator
>> of a comic book hero called "Mad Dog". Look for a name change
>> when Marvel's lawyers realize they have a character named Mad
>> Dog, namely Patsy Walker's ex-husband most recently seen
>> in SHIELD.

>	I don't think they'll change the name,  DC also
>has a character called Mad Dog, who was a vigilante who
>went undercover and (I believe) took orders from a
>couple of organizer/insiders.  He appeared in
>Action Comics Weekly and got his own mini-series . . .

Actually, the DC character was called "Wild Dog."

And the series was pretty bad. (IMHO, no flames please.)
-- 
Mike Cohen              mcohen@jarthur.claremont.edu
"Heartbreak is where happiness ends and peace begins."
                            --George Bernard Shaw
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
From: acadams@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Arthur C. Adams)
Subject: Re: X-MORDRED(was Re: A new tack on the (Re: X-Men Traitor))
Reply-To: acadams@aplcen (Arthur C. Adams)
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 01:42:56 GMT

>
>What I was wondering is why didn't Storm and Collossus bring down the Baxter
>Building instead of infiltrating and destroying the main computer?  Inside,
>they would have had to fight, but outside, I'm pretty sure that Collossus'
>fists and Storm's monsoons could quite easily have trashed the building
>if they worked hard at it.  After all, they were supposed to destroy the
>computer, which presumably was less well armored than the Sentinels, which
>Kitty might have been able to muck up.
>
>Doug.

I can think of a few reasons.

1) The Sentinels would have automatically attacked massively. They had
to sneak in to avoid the defenses of what I'd presume was one of the
most massively defended buildings on Earth.


2) The Baxter Building was probably massively reinforced to prevent just 
such an eventuality. After all, the main "character  trait" of a Sentinel,
barring the hatred of mutants, is probably paranoia. 

3) The story would have lost most of its impact had the characters   
survived.

-- 
The world is not analog. The world is digital, just
with an incredible number of bits.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Arthur C. Adams - E-Mail acadams@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu
From: adchen@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Anthony D. Chen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: MUTANTS: X-Traitor Theories Disproved
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:50:56 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU

In article <1992Apr14.030331.10794@wpi.WPI.EDU> cbuteau@wpi.WPI.EDU (Christopher W Buteau) writes:
>>	Actually, Rogue would make some sense still.  Yes, she's been an X-Man,
>>but working on the assumption that Charles hasn't really been able to help
>>her fix her power, it is also reasonable to assume that she still is having
>>some personality problems.  If her schizophrenia (sp?) were to remanifest

>	 Actually her schizophrenia or Multiple personalities is gone now.

NIT ALERT:

Schizophrenia is NOT Multiple personality disorder!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Schizophrenia is a *split in reality perception* not a split in personality.
Ask anyone who knows anything about psychology.  This has got to be the most 
misused term in the English language (the American version, anyway 8-).

Schizophrenics have a single personality with a skewed sense of reality.

People with more than one "personality" simply have multiple personality
disorder (MPD).

Back to comics...

-Tony Chen
 adchen@phoenix.princeton.edu
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Friday, 10 Apr 1992 22:46:08 EDT
From: <DCC117@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: Dark Empire - Nagging Question

  So Lucasfilm won't let Zahn kill off any of the "main" characters from
the movies ( Luke & Co. ) , as we can guess from continuity anyway, but
does Lucasfilm's edict apply to characters like Thrawn? In any case, I
suppose Thrawn could suffer some kind of not-death reminiscent of Vader
in the first movie; following some predictable military decimation,
Thrawn could get marooned in deep space or on some exile-world as in
The Wrath of Khan, with everybody believing he's dead, at least for the
time being. Or he could simply "die" in some inconclusive way where no
one actually sees him perish, but just assumes he's been blown to
smithereens, an "ending" that's been used many times in the past by
other stories. I think that Thrawn is too important a character to not
be mentioned in Dark Empire if he is still extant in the SW universe
after Zahn's books, barring death or quasi-death scenarios. C'baoth
could easily live, especially considering his lingering aura of
ambivalence as opposed to true evil. However, that kind of ambivalence
can get you killed by some authors. Maybe C'baoth gets converted, at
some point, back to the side of good, and becomes a sort of neo-Kenobi
figure. After all, how many of us looked at the cover of Heir to the
Empire for the first time and thought, "BEN!!" Thus C'baoth could
possibly return to seclusion as a good Guardian instead of an evil
one; maybe he could become a new instructor for Luke; or, perhaps C'baoth

and Thrawn could have some kind of final confrontation, killing C'baoth
and forcing Thrawn out of the story. Where Mara comes in, I'm not sure;
she could be another convert-and-then-die case. Maybe there is some
connection between C'baoth's clone status and that of the Emperor,
although the whole clone / "Clone Wars" idea is still rather murky at
this point. Possibly the trigger which sets off Luke's darker image in
Dark Empire is a mutual effect due to an association with C'baoth,
swinging C'baoth toward good and Luke slightly toward the dark side.

                                                --THARIZDUN
connection between C'baoth's clone status and that of the Emperor