HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Doctor Who: The OLD Adventures?
Date: 13 Dec 92 20:08:07 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Dec12.110151.468@rivers> ph9991_manfr@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu writes:



>> All right, then, what if your Valeyard story was vetoed by Pip and Jane
>> Baker?  I wouldn't call them eminently qualified to judge the future fate
>> of the program -- especially of that character, since they only wrote
>> about five episodes for him -- but since Robert Holmes is dead and they've
>> got co-author credit, they'd be the final authority now. 

>Neither Pip and Jane Baker nor Robert Holmes can have copyright control
>over the character of the Valeyard since he is just another Doctor, and
>Pip and Jane Baker certainly didn't dream him up.  Everyone knew going
>into "Mysterious Planet" that the Valeyard was going to turn out to be
>the Doctor (well at least Jayston knew), thus making his conception
>either the work of JNT, Eric Saward, or Robert Holmes, and again, none
>of them can have strict copyright control over the Doctor himself.

Oh, come on now.  That was a pretty weaselly answer, don't you think?  If
this is true then we all have the right to write about whatever Doctor we
choose.  All the above tells us is that we have to consult someone other
than the writers--in this case JNT and Eric Saward.  Strict copyright
control or not, in previous postings along this thread, you've repeatedly
said that whoever established the character and/or mood has a right to
approve any story to make sure it fits what has already been done.  In this
case, what has "already been done" with the Valeyard is contained in the
Trial of a Time Lord.  You will be breaking your *own* stipulations if you
write a Valeyard story without first consulting with writers, directors,
actors, or all three.  These people have as much right to see the character
they introduced used properly as the creators of all the previous doctors. 
You're welcome to persist with your rather narrow views regarding creativity
and exploration, but don't make yourself a hypocrite with statements like
the above.

Drewcifer
-- 
***************************************************************************
** Andrew David Simchik, registered Scorpio ************* SCHNOPIA! *******
***************************************************************************
as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
From: evans@ece.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Female Companion
Date: 19 Dec 92 05:04:37 GMT
Reply-To: evans@ece.arizona.edu
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering


Does anyone which one of them appeared in the
British edition of Playboy? and  what year?
From: perl@acsu.buffalo.edu (David T Perl)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: Celery???
Date: 12 Dec 92 16:34:57 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <nv!rn!k@lynx.unm.edu> doctor@polaris.unm.edu (Doc) writes:
>I forgot why the fifth doctor wore a piece of celery on his jacket.  Could 
>anyone out there please tell me?  He never took it off and he always had it on.
>
>
>
>-Josh, The Doctor on his third regeneration
>
> 
>
>       

The fifth doctor was sensitive to certain gases.  The reason here wore the 
celery was because it would turn colors in the presence of the gases that he
was sensitive to.
-- 
			     ---David---
			perl@acsu.buffalo.edu
"If I knew everything that was going to happen, where would all the fun be."
		           ---The Doctor---
From: norbeck@albiero.cs.bucknell.edu (Naughty Nukes NY in her 1999 Nissan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: The Visitation
Date: 11 Dec 1992 21:37:36 GMT
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: albiero.cs.bucknell.edu

In article <1992Dec8.151822.18234@news.cs.indiana.edu> Liz%Eng%Banyan@magnolia.banyan.com writes:
>wilson@cs.ucf.edu (tom wilson) says:
>>While watching The Visitation again, I was reminded of some things, the
>>unfortunate destruction of the sonic screwdriver, for one. Was there any
>>reason for this that anyone knows? 
>
>I remember reading somewhere that the powers that be thought the show had
>become too gadget-oriented; hence the sacrifice of the sonic screwdriver.

Close.  PD didn't mind the actual existence of the screwdriver so much
as the way it was used.  He didn't like the fact that it had gotten to
the point where the Doctor never really had to use his brain as long
as hehad the sonic screwdriver, since it was capable of miraculously
getting him out of almost every nasty situation in just the nick of
time.  So they got rid of it at his request, so the Doctor would have
to think a little more.

>Someone posted something recently about the first season always being the
>worst.  I do believe "The Visitation" was filmed before "Castrovalva", and
>was part of the "settling" of Davison's characterization.  
>

Actually, if I correctly recall, I was under the impression (probably
from _A Celebration_ or some such) that it was _Four to Doomsday_ that
was filmed before Castrovalva (and it was noted that if you check the
hair length, you can tell, since it was shorter in FtD and Castrovalva.

>Liz
>lizb@banyan.com


Nancy
norbeck@bucknell.edu




--
|.."I've heard snappier comebacks from a bowl of Rice..|....Nancy Norbeck.....|
|......Krispies."  Charles Emerson Winchester III......|.norbeck@bucknell.edu.|
From: alumn125@whscdp.whs.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Fenric and other things of mention....
Date: 18 Dec 92 13:47:04 CST
Organization: Washington HS, Milwaukee, WI


      Wow! Go away from your account for a week, and look what happens!
An actual discussion is raging. Cool.


      Anyway, to throw my two cents into the fray, here I go.

      I liked Fenric. I liked the book when I got it and later ,when I
bought the video, I enjoyed that too. I thought it was interesting and
the menace was a truly frightening one. 
      The (I won't spell this right) Hameovoures (not close, right) were
not supposed to be vampires like in 'State of Decay'. The Great Vampire
and his troops are totally detached from the Hameo-things. The Vampire
Wars took place in the dark times when Rassilon was around (and maybe
the Doctor too?????) The Wars started vampire legends all around the 
universe. The Vampires in E-Space were the last of their kind. The Hameos
were vampiric and had the characteristics of vampires but were unrelated
to the Great Vampire. Due to the vampire legends that abound everywhere, 
the Hameos were called vampires.
      Fenric was evil incarnate, pure and simple. His every action was
evil. The question arises, Where is the good force that was created at
the same time as Fenric? Due to the Doctor's extreme change in actions(he 
admits a reason he picked up Ace in the first place was because she would
lead him to Fenric), could he not be possessed by good? Evil manipulates,
why not good? Good needs its goals accompilshed just as much as evil. 
      Then again, it could just be this regeneration. It was said somewhere
(Can't recall where) that the Doctor's regenerating really fouls up his
brain, to the point where he can't remember things and parts of his mind
are closed while others are opened (Perhaps why he doesn't remember
what happens to himself during the times he meets himself). Perhaps 
this regeneration, McCoy, is the Doctor's full potential, the best he
can be. As soon as he regenerates, he won't be as obnoxiously know-it-all
anymore.


     Colin was a decent Doctor, but the writing for him was extremely poor
(Pip and Jane.....DIE!)

     Adric dying was big. They even changed the credits for him. Their 
was no music and the background was his crushed Badge for Mathematical
Excellence. It was very emotional. And interesting. He was the third
companion to die, showing that it does happen. Katrenia and Sara died
in The Dalek Masterplan (That story would make a great pair of movies....)
and then that was it until Adric (Earthshock).


     I like McCoy. I like Ace. I like the TARDIS. I want to see them again.
Soon.  


If I have made myself a target for the angry, I'm sure you will let me know..



-The Doctor


"Death comes to those with narrow minds."



Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: jondr@sco.COM (Karen Silkwood's car)
Subject: Re: Doctor's names
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:38:23 GMT


Philip J. Comins <PJCHC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>it was the MASTER who implied
>that the Valeyard was the Doctor in a future incarnation, and though the
>Valeyard didn't deny it, we KNOW that the Master has *always*been deceitful,
>especially where the Doctor is concerned. It is possible then that the
>Valeyard and the Doctor are in no way created.

except for the fact that the valeyard says later in that same story - "how
else can i be free from your idiosyncracies, operate as a complete entity?"
obviously the valeyard believes that he's part of the doctor and wants the
doctor half dead dead dead so the valeyard half can become the whole.  if
you get my drift.

anyway, yes it is the master who says this, but as the inquisitor points out
"criminals have been known to speak the truth - particularly when their own
interests are not at stake."

-- 
Jon Drukman (God's personal DJ)                 uunet!sco!jondr   jondr@sco.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was an infinitely hot and dense dot.
From: neal@riemann.math.mun.ca (Neal Crossan)
Subject: Re: fanzines, now netzines ?
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1992 15:36:47 GMT

"dale clayton" <dale.clayton@canrem.com> writes:

>Dave Y.:


>-> All ditto to Neal about his questions concerning DWIN.

> I have concerns about DWIN, too. But, they are only relating to that
>outside group that is making false statements about DWIN. I am not
>referring to Neal, btw.

  Which outside group is this?  The same one that ran the campaign for a new
DWIN?  Try living outside the Toronto region for a while then you'll see how
true their statements about DWIN really are.

  -Neal Crossan-

>Regards,
>Dale Clayton
>-----------------------
>dale.clayton@canrem.com
>--
>Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
>World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: tp902821@pine.canberra.edu.au (Scott McLauchlan)
Subject: Re: Book of The Pirate Planet?
Organization: Info Sci & Eng, University of Canberra, AUSTRALIA
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:31:07 GMT

In <1992Dec5.154213.1753@athena.mit.edu> rajiv@athena.mit.edu (Rajiv A Manglani) writes:


>Did Douglas Adams ever make a book of The Pirate Planet? It's the only one that
>I don't have in the Key to Time series.

No, he didn't, and as far as I know he doesn't intend to.

I have heard that someone in the New Zealand Doctor Who Fan Club wrote a
pretty good novelisation of it, which is available through the club. I
don't have the address with me, but check in the Data Coils section of
DWM, and I'll see if I can find the address.

SCOTT McLAUCHLAN.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl (Phil Isherwood)
Subject: Re: daleks
Reply-To: pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl
Organization: ESA/Estec/WMS, Noordwijk, The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 09:36:12 GMT

In article 17426@galileo.cc.rochester.edu, as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik) writes:
>
{mutual flamings deleted}
>
>The remark was entirely unnecessary anyway, and doesn't belong in a
>civilized discussion.  But if you feel you *must* resort to calling people
>"air-heads", why not go whole hog on being childish and cite names?  That
>way, only the people you *meant* to offend will be offended, rather than
>offending *everyone*.
>
>Drewcifer
>
>....who was pretty mad before!
>
>-- 
>***************************************************************************
>** Andrew David Simchik, registered Scorpio ************* SCHNOPIA! *******
>***************************************************************************
>as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu

Point taken. I retract the statement.

It wasn't my original intention to upset anyone (as I clearly have). So, I 
would like to apologise for the remark. It WAS unnecessary and inflamatory
and, as you rightly say, it has no place here. Sorry.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year,

Phil Isherwood
pisherwo@wm.estec.esa.nl





Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: "daniel bishop" <daniel.bishop@canrem.com>
Subject: doctor who: the old adven
Reply-To: "daniel bishop" <daniel.bishop@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 16 Dec 92 01:21:32 EST

Sorry, but I am forced to disagree with you.  The previous Doctors have
not "died", and they certainly are still available to writers.  This has
applied to the series itself, whether or not there are any "Old
Adventures" written.  Witness The Three Doctors, The Five Doctors, and
The Two Doctors.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: price@uclapp.physics.ucla.edu (John Price)
Subject: Re: McCoy Episodes???
Reply-To: price@uclapp.physics.ucla.edu
Organization: UCLA Particle Physics Research Group
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 23:43:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.052600.19919@wam.umd.edu>, timelord@wam.umd.edu (Lazarus Long) writes:
>I would like to know if anyone out there has a list of episodes
>after "Dragonfire".

For those with macs, there's a Hypercard stack containing a Dr. Who episode 
guide available for anonymous FTP on mac.archive.umich.edu.  I won't swear 
to the directory, but I think it's something like mac/hypercard/fun (or 
something like that; I'm sure that a dedicated Whovian could find it...)

           John Price * * * * price@uclapp.physics.ucla.edu
           Where there is no solution, there is no problem.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: rajiv@athena.mit.edu (Rajiv A Manglani)
Subject: Re: Celery
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 21:12:02 GMT

In article <1N7oVB1w164w@admiral.uucp>, sarah@admiral.uucp (Sarah Jane Attridge) writes:
|> The reason he gave was, "It's a powerful restorative" or something like 
|> that....I seem to remember him waving it under Peri`s nose towards the 
|> end of "Caves of Androzani"...
|> Sarah Jane Attridge

The Doctor said that it turns purple in the presence of a certain gas that is
harmful to timelords. He also said something else... anyone out there care
to watch the episode and tell us?

Rajiv
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Christmas scenes and gifts
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 05:29:50 MST
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #1, Edmonton, AB, Canada

1) Scenes:  Does ANYONE have a recollection of "The Feast of Stephen". This was
the DW Christmas episode, but it got lost in the shuffle.  Please post spoilers
anyone.
K9 and Co. is more recent, and does make some humourous comments.  Mind you, a
wrecking dog like K9 is always good to keep in case opf trouble.

2) Gifts: What else this year, get the Shada Video.  That should be worthwjile!
          Any other suggestions?

Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc. (Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) )
 (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca, userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Happy Christmas and Merry New Year to One and All - John Lennon
From: as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: daleks
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:00:31 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Dec16.210715.11593@vela.acs.oakland.edu> jmwojtal@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Wojo) writes:

>I'm not sure about Daleks being that heavy.

>In the "Dalek invasion of earth", when the people broke control by the Doctor,
>they attacked and defeated the Daleks like they were cardboard cutouts.  Heck
>I even seen 2 people running with a dalek over thier heads.  

Hmm...maybe they *were* cardboard cutouts!  :)

But seriously, folks, I tend to think that Daleks being light enough for two
normal humans to lift is a bit less than believable.  OK, yes, it's been
seen (I assume) so it must be canon, but consider that not only must these
shells house a Kaled mutant, but they must also house disruptor weapons,
computers to deal with vision technology and motive technology, speech
synthesizers, the motive unit itself, and (since the Daleks no longer
conduct power through metal floors) a power generator to run all this stuff. 
Even considering that the Daleks' technology is definitely more advanced
than ours, that's still a *lot* of equipment to be light enough for two men
to lift.  So if Daleks were consistently this light, we must be forced to
wonder why!

>I'm not too sure about Daleks being that impennatrable

>In a scene from "the Chase", Frankenstein (a robot) destroyed one with no 
>trouble at all.

Oh, sure they're not impenetrable.  I don't think I ever said they were. 
They seem pretty easy to kill despite the Dalekanium; time to get some
better armor!

>Maybe they were the old ones, and weren't as good then.  The Daleks did levitat
>in the last Dalek episode.

They've certainly developed over the course of the series.  As have the
Cybermen, etc.  It's pretty much a given that the Daleks from "Remembrance"
would be more advanced than the Daleks from "The Daleks".

>-- 
>************************************************************************
>Jeff Wojtalewicz (Wojo)  jmwojtal@vela.acs.oakland.edu
>Oakland University		      Start Hacking
>************************************************************************

Drewcifer

P.S.  I'll get my FASA Role-Playing Dalek supplement over Xmas Break.  It's
not canon of course but it might provide insights on this.  BTW, I think
this is one of the more interesting potential discussions I've seen on this
newsgroup.
-- 
***************************************************************************
** Andrew David Simchik, registered Scorpio ************* SCHNOPIA! *******
***************************************************************************
as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
From: tp902821@pine.canberra.edu.au (Scott McLauchlan)
Subject: Re: Nightshade ending (MAJOR SPOILER)
Organization: Info Sci & Eng, University of Canberra, AUSTRALIA
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:23:14 GMT

Re: Nightshade ending.

It would be TOTALLY out of character for the Doctor to prevent a
companion from leaviny without a *very* good reason. Also, he has left
one companion on Earth about 3000 years before she was born (Vicki), so
I don't think this is the reason he didn't let Ace leave (BTW, in the
novelisation of "The Curse of Fenric" Ace leaves the Doctor to live in
eighteenth or nineteenth century France). I personally think all will be
revealed in "Love and War".

SCOTT McLAUCHLAN.
From: parsonsg@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (gary parsons)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: daleks
Date: 15 Dec 92 21:42:00 GMT
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida

I wonder about the daleks.  Has anyone ever thought of just ducking under 
them, grabbing them by their barrels, and flipping them over?  Gary/ex
save
From: jadair@cs.utexas.edu (John S. Adair)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Shada
Date: 16 Dec 1992 09:16:15 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: cash.cs.utexas.edu

Thanks to Paul Curtis, I have finally seen Shada.
Here's what he had in his pocketses and two excellent quotes:

 *  Sonic Screwdriver
  X medal (Brits would say badge) that he pins on Romana to reward
      her for a very good idea.

First quote:
Doctor:    Was it to do with the voices?
Chronotis: What voices?
Doctor:    Well, when I was on the river, I heard the strange
           babble of inhuman voices. Didn't you Romana?
Romana:    Yes.
Chronotis: Oh, undergraduates talking to each other, I expect.
           I'm trying to have it banned.

And another:
Chronotis: Salyavin, good riddance to him! Salyavin! Good riddance!
           Bah! Undergraduates.

                                         -John
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: kasprj@isaac.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak)
Subject: Re: A RAB symposium?
Reply-To: kasprj@rpi.edu
Organization: The Big Wedge 
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:40:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.231541.29851@crd.ge.com>, kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:

|> James, there are at least two of us here in the home of Uncle
|> Sam, I bet we could have our own rabfest, should we care to.
 
 Indeed, a gathering at Holmes and Watson's, or perhaps the Cape House, 
might be a good idea one of these days. Are there any other r.a.bble 
lurking on here from the Albany/Troy/Schenectady area? (Shame that 
Kent LaCross, rest his soul, can't be with us.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
     __  Live from Capitaland, heart of the Empire State...
 ___/  | Jim Kasprzak, computer operator @ RPI, Troy, NY, USA
/____ *| Sam Adams,Spaten# Life is too short #Hudson Lager,Beck's 
     \_| Pilsener Urquell#to drink cheap beer#Pete's Wicked Ale
      ====  e-mail: kasprj@rpi.edu or kasprzak@mts.rpi.edu 
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:22816 misc.books.technical:1794 alt.internet.services:2052 comp.org.eff.talk:7814
From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,misc.books.technical,alt.internet.services,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: The Online BookStore Announcement: The Internet Companion
Date: 18 Dec 92 22:31:03 GMT
	<BETSYS.92Dec18024936@ra.cs.umb.edu> <billy.724684206@sol>
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston

In article <billy.724684206@sol> billy@sol.acs.unt.edu (Billy Barron - VAX/UNIX Systems Manager) writes:

>I have known about Tracy's book project from the beginning.  This was the
>intent of the book packager (Laura - I can't remember her last name now)
>and Tracy.  In fact, on an interesting note, for a while O'Reilley considered
>publishing both books.  Tracy's book is more likely to get someone excited
>about the Internet and then when they get on and learn a few basic things,
>they will want Krol's or Kehoe's book.

>From when I have spoken to Tracy, she is in 100% agreement with the above
>statement.  The word complimentary came up several times.

Heehee! To tell the truth, I met Tracy on Wednesday at the NEARnet 
seminar, so I probably picked up the word from her also. However, I
had done my bookstore browsing the previous Friday and already decided
to get both books. I didn't actually buy them until today-- I couldn't
buy an exploring the Internet book until my final project was done! I bought
Tracy's book for Dad, and I'm going to get Krol's book with work money
:-) 

--
System Administrator                  Internet: betsys@cs.umb.edu
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston               BITNET:ESCHWARTZ%UMBSKY.DNET@NS.UMB.EDU
100 Morrissey Blvd                    Staccato signals
Boston, MA 02125-3393                      of constant information....
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: rsquires@cyclops.eece.unm.edu (Roger Squires)
Subject: Re: Harry Crewes novel celebrating the big beauty
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 08:06:10 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

> fi@grebyn.com (Fiona Webster) writes:
>
>The topic of erotica about fat women has reminded me of a book I
>wanted to recommend to y'all: _Body_ by Harry Crewes. ...

	This novel was excerpted in Playboy awhile back.
	Based on this, I would certainly not run any read
	lights on your way to the bookstore.  Obey all
	traffic signals:  It will still be still be there
	when you arrive.
	
>
>I like the way he handles violence: hip and serious at the same time.
>

	His article on his reaction to his son's drowning
	was, I thought, pretty good.

>							--Fiona

Roger Squires
rsquires@cyclops.eece.unm.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books