HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wjmc@unix.brighton.ac.uk (-*_Spikey_Tribble_*-)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Starfleet Academy question
Date: 16 Apr 92 16:21:08 GMT
Organization: Brighton Polytechnic, UK

pat@berry.Cary.NC.US (Pat Berry) writes:
> hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke) writes:
> 
> > In article <72886@netnews.upenn.edu> dalisay@widget.seas.upenn.edu (Reynaldo 
> > >
> > >How long (in years, months, etc.) does it normally take to graduate
> > >from the Starfleet Academy?
> > 
> > 4 years, according to the personnel files in Conundrum.
> 
> There's other evidence for this.  In "Datalore", Data mentioned the four
> years he spent at the Academy.  And in "Redemption II", he referred to
> his 26 years of Starfleet experience.  That was 30 years after he was
> discovered and activated, so he only *had* four years to attend the
> Academy.
> 
> In fact, he must have applied, been accepted, and begun attending
> classes almost immediately after he was found.  Obviously, the officers
> who found him made a *big* impression on him.
> 
> 
> Pat Berry                    pat@berry.Cary.NC.US

 Not at all -- he may be including his time at the academy in those 26 years.
-- 
###########################################################################
#  Bill Crawford  aka  *Cuddly_Cactus*     |     wjmc@uk.ac.bton.unix     #
#  BSc (Hons) Computer Science Year One    |     wjmc@uk.ac.bton.vms      #
#  Have you read your Book In Basic Life Education today ? You should !!  #
#  Any views I express are not necessarily those of Brighton Polytechnic  #
###########################################################################
From: mueller@cage.eng.mcmaster.ca (Edna Mueller)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: _Disinherited_ opinions (Re: New TOS Book ... info)
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:22:57 GMT
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:

>Spoilers
^L
>I found the errors in contintinuity distracting.

>Just after Wesley signs off his communications with Kirk on the...
            ^^^^^^
	       WHAT??????

	Has the little weasel gone through a time warp or 
	something?  Please tell me it isn't so.
	Perhaps its Wesely Crusher, Sr. (father of Jack
	Crusher, grandfather of Wesley).  Using similiar
	names from one series in another is just too
	distracting!  Arghhhhhh!

			Edna
			(Just call me Schmeby, everyone else does!)
					    mueller@cage.eng.mcmaster.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                "Oops". -- Jean-Luc Picard, "Pen Pals"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lupin@jetsun.weitek.COM (Edward Lupin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Nintendo 25th Anniv. Game
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:36:55 GMT
Reply-To: lupin@jetsun.WEITEK.COM (Edward Lupin)
Distribution: usa
Organization: WEITEK, Sunnyvale CA

My wife saw Ultra's 25th Anniversary Star Trek Nintendo video game at
the store and bought it.  Before I open it and thus make it
nonreturnable I thought I'd ask if anybody has played this game and if
they liked it.

Judging from the box, it appears that it may be a little juvenile for
my sophisticated Nintendo tastes. :-)

Ed
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"All right, Doctor, you built this thing!  How do you propose to turn it
off?"                                                   lupin@weitek.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: cortese@hepxvt.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: Asimov's cameo lost, too :-(
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:24:50 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.195420.20010@talon.ucs.orst.edu> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>In article <1992Apr08.070328.4537@edsi.plexus.COM> terry@edsi.plexus.COM (Terry Dawson) writes:
>>dsturm@ducvax.auburn.edu writes:
>>
>>>Shame on the TNG staff for not following thru on the script that
>>>had Data talking to a holographic Asimov on the holodeck...
>>
>>>No way to do that one now   :-(
>>
>>What?  Have they repealed acting and make-up?  Sure, they can do it.
>>They just won't be able to use the real Asimov...
>
>Acting? Makeup? Why?
>
>It's a damn holodeck. They can generate whatever and whomever they want.
>They didn't need to zoom back to 19th century England to pick Moriarty,
>they certainly wouldn't need to zoom back to 20th century USA to get
>Asimov.

Excuse me, but what the HELL are you talking about?  There are tons of
people for whom a cameo appearance by none other than the one, the only
Isaac Asimov would have meant intimations of heaven.  Of course, they
can still DO IT on the SHOW, but it would have been nice to get the real
article.

Regards,
Janis C.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: irwin@iago.caltech.edu (Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth)
Subject: Re: SFA in Marin County...YES WAY!
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.current
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.40    
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 00:57:00 GMT

In article <rqmnsINN6n2@agate.berkeley.edu>, jeffski@koala.berkeley.edu writes...
>As for other ST scenes which might input on this, both from ST:TVH
>1) it seems Sulu's comment
>"I was born there" would have been a sort of "no big whup" if they had all
>gone to school there, and 2) Didn't Kirk react with a sort of surprise when
>someone told him there were whales in Saulsalito? Couldn't this be due to 
>his having known Saulsalito "back in his day"? 
> 
I don't see how either of these necessarily implies that SFA would be in
Saulsalito.  Sure, Kirk could have known Saulsalito when he was a cadet,
I'm sure many of the cadets would visit that town on weekends...after all,
it's just a hop, skip and a jump over the bridge :-).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Horowitz                        |
Astronomy Department                  |"Whoever heard of a female astronomer?"
California Institute of Technology    |--Charlene Sinclair, "Dinosaurs"
irwin@iago.caltech.edu                |
ih@deimos.caltech.edu                 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Kobyashi and Kirk
Date: 14 Apr 92 06:49:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr13.205804.24974@uunet.uu.net>, kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes...
>v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
> > The point of the KM test is not to teach the cadets to face
> > death with resignation and dignity!  Not at all.  The point
> > is to put them in a simulated situation in which they can
> > see what their reaction to death and a no-win situation will
> > be - because it's not the kind of thing, no-win and all,
> > that you're gonna get a second chance at in real life.
> 
>I don't think it achieves its objective.  The cadet always
>knows "it's just a simulation."  The simulation Wesley had was
>much better.  It worked because Wes thought it was real.

     I would agree (and I wrote the >> above) that Wesley's
     simulation had more value because he thought it was real,
     but Wesley's simulation tested only HIS reaction to a 
     no-win situation.  The no-win simulations given to the
     cadets in TWOK's days (and I am assuming there is more
     than one variety, because Saavik reacts, "Damn..." when
     hearing that it's the Kobyashi Maru, as if there are
     others and this one is the worst) are different.  They
     test the reaction of a cadet in COMMAND of a starship -
     they have to deal with the same kind of situation, but
     the moves they make (as Wesley pulled the guy out) involve
     giving orders for a whole STARSHIP  - the situation is
     totally different.
     Wes only had to tell himself what to do.  Saavik (and Kirk,
     and the other cadets who took it) had to tell Starship
     what to do.


> > Kirk REFUSED to face death in the simulation.  He refused
> > to take advantage of the net Starfleet was offering him.
> > He paid the price in TWOK.
> 
>Well, in reality, since Kirk had somehow found out about the
>simulation beforehand, it wouldn't have had the desired ewffect
>on him anyway, even if he got so caught up in the simulation that
>he forgot it was a simulation.

     I always wondered if the simulations weren't given like 
     regular tests and many times it's just  a normal simulation
     to test only the cadet's ability to command during regular
     operations.  Once during all those regular simulations they
     would zing the no-win scenario at you.  And if you or they
     felt you could do better, they would zing it at you again,
     maybe more than once - at random.  This explains Kirk having
     been able to take it four times when Saavik is obviously
     at the very end of her Academy years when she FIRST takes it.
     But that's idle speculation...


                ^She's My Cousin But Doesn't She^
                      ^Look Almost Exactly^
           ____________^Like Laura Palmer^____________
          ^Scott Gorcey, v075q5fr@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu^
From: v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: more Kobiyashi
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:10:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr15.004103.1@lure.latrobe.edu.au>, ccmk@lure.latrobe.edu.au writes...
>In article <1992Apr14.063807.16528@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>>...
>>      Okay, you're arguing for the "Look at these horrible situations,
>>      Kirk must have dealt with them and made the realisation then,"
>>      but we never SAW him sit down and say it out loud; and the next
>>      episode he was unchanged.  
>> 
>> In article <1992Apr13.215222.28077@uunet.uu.net>, kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes...
>>>I think the wirter of ST:TWOK missed completely on the
>>>significance or rathr the lack thereof in the Kobiyashi Maru
>>>test.  KM was a ST:TWOK invention, so it isn't all that
>>>surprising that it doesn't fit into the rest of Trek.  It can be
>>>discarded as still leave TWOK as a fabulous movie and clearly the
>>>best of the Trek movies.
>> 
>>      I would ammend that to: I think you choose not to acknowledge
>>      the significance the writer (credited: Jack Sowards; in reality:
>>      Nick Meyer, Harve Bennett and J. Sowards) was portraying because
>>      the way you see Kirk he MUST have made that realisation already.
>> 
>>      That's a valid rejection of part of the premise, I guess.  But
>>      remember that it is rejection of what the movie is telling
>>      us and that my point of view is from accepting what the movie
>>      is telling us.  
>> 
>>      There is no solid (i.e, Kirk sitting down and doing what he
>>      did in the scene with David at some point during TOS) evidence
>>      that Kirk DID make that realisation during the tv episodes because
>>      he never made one during the tv episodes.  
>>      All we have is TWOK telling us that he NEVER MADE ONE.  It's 
>>      believe their word or not.
> 
>Sorry, but there is a sort of example.  More to do with sex, though.
>In REQUIEM FOR METHUSELAH Kirk is emotionally shattered because he lost
>the robot bimbo to Methuselah (I know, sounds stupid if you haven't
>seen it, but it isn't a bad episode).  Kirk moans and groans so much
>Spock takes pity on him and uses a Vulcan mind-meld to make Kirk
>forget the bimbo.  There was every indication Kirk was going to remember
>the bimbo in the worst possible way into the next episode.

     This is an example?  For my side of the discussion, I guess, sure
     it is.  Kirk DIDN'T remember the next epsipde, as you say.  He
     was NEVER changed by the robot bimbo's death.  
     Okay, maybe had Spock let Kirk continue to mourn, he MIGHT have
     realised that how we deal with death is at least as important
     as how we deal with life -- but he didn't.
     That's why it's an example for my side of the debate.

                 ^She's My Cousin But Doesn't She^
                      ^Look Almost Exactly^
           ____________^Like Laura Palmer^____________
          ^Scott Gorcey, v075q5fr@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu^
From: ec120wee@sdcc4.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:42:22 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Apr6.185417.12690@netfs.dnd.ca> bvan@ncs.dnd.ca (Bryan Van Blaricom) writes:
/In article <1992Apr5.221926.12208@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
/>Important Pieces of the Discussion After Spoiler:
/>

/>     BTW, anyone notice the time frame for the ^last^ attempted Culvort
/>     Starburst (spelling?) -- 100 years ago.  Kirk himself?...     
/
/
/Not too likely:  it was also mentioned that all 5 cadets involved died in
/the attempt.
/
/Bryan

So what?  As Kirk said in TWOK, "I've cheated death...  patted myself
on the back for my ingenuity."  Kirk died a number of times, and it
never seems to bother him.  Remember "Amok Time"?  "The Tholian Web"?
"The Enterprise Incident"?  I know I'm forgetting a few here...

:-)

Tony Minkoff
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: aelman@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Adam Elman)
Subject: Re: A few comments THE FIRST DUTY brought up
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:44:48 GMT

farmer@cs.utk.edu (SUSAN FARMER) writes:

>In article <1992Apr7.222819.15352@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> crow@coos.dartmouth.edu (Preston F. Crow) writes:
> 
> >In <1992Apr7.153822.9688@cupnews0.cup.hp.com> runyan@cup.hp.com 
>     (Mark Runyan) writes:
> >
> >>bbrown@willamette.edu (Brian Brown) writes:
> >[...]
> >>>2)	Why is Star Fleet Academy on Earth?  I always had the impression that
> >>>	it was in orbit somewhere...
> >
> >>From the original Technical Manual, we have a diagram of the Star Fleet
> >> and it is a space station ...

>Didn't they tell Wes that he was "grounded" for another year?  I took it to
>mean he would have to stay planetside (perhaps at the planetside portion
>of the academy) for another year before being allowed to go into space 
>(i.e. the space station).  IMHO.

>Susan

No, they revoked his flight permissions.  I'm sure he's free to travel
into orbit if he wants if someone else is flying...

Adam Elman
aelman@cs.stanford.edu
From: Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Michael Rosen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: SPOILING "Cause/Effect" [ltc]
Date: 7 Apr 92 01:16:53 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

In article <1992Mar25.004825.993@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> fal20643@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Capt. Frank A. Lauro) writes:
Possible spoiler:

>
>FINAL CUTESIE COMMENT:
>
>* Boy, it's a good thing LaForge wasn't the one who suggested the shuttle
>  bay maneuver.  No matter how well one stacks the deck, it's awfully hard
>  to deal everybody a 2.5...

I saw the episode again yesterday and noticed that Data has 2.5 pips and
not three.  Although, I feel that they fact that they are on his own
collar rule out any chance he might see his own pips (even though he has
2.5, as I observed).  He is not the same rank as Riker.  Data is a Lt.
Cmdr, Riker is a Cmdr, I believe.

Mike


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones)
Subject: Re: Lacarno = Kirk (Spoilers "1st Duty)
Organization: UUNET Technologies, Inc
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 00:21:03 GMT

kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
 > ......there is nothing special about the truth.  There are only
 > actions and consequences. 
 >  
 > Foo.  It is foolish to expect commanders to take the blame for
 > the actions of their subordinates.  Commanders are not omniscient
 > and omnipotent, and their subordinates are intelligent beings with
 > free wills.

major@shuksan.boeing.com (Mike Schmitt) writes:
 > It's always amusing to me when someone's ignorance is
 > applied to situations in which they know absolutely nothing
 > about.

Please understand, I am not arguing about what Starfleet's code
of honor is, and what is expected of its officers.  All of that
is very clear.  I'm talking about a larger world than that of
Starfleet.  I'm talking about a world in which a young man or
woman might want to get out into space, and could care less about
Starfleet's stupid ideas about behavioral systems.

I agree with every one of the points you made about Wesley's and
Picard's conduct, taken in the context of Starfleet.  But should
Starfleet's wishes be a cadet's only concern?  Should Starfleet's
wishes be an officer's only concern?  Is the system so wonderful
that none of its rules deserve questioning?

Trying to get people to look at things from the point of view of
a bunch of liars during an election year was undoubtedly a bad
choice on my part.  It's not that I'm particularly fond of liars,
honest it ain't.  It's just that I'm not particularly fond of
Starfleet either, even though they do have neat looking uniforms.

Bad people are a lot easier to fix than bad organizations.
From: jlee@smylex.UUCP (Jeff Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: (Spoilers First Duty)
Date: 10 Apr 92 14:25:25 GMT
Organization: Shipbrook Software  (Newington, CT)

In article <1992Apr9.210111.17437@watserv1.waterloo.edu>, jkramer@sunwise.UWaterloo.ca (Viscous Pig Dog) writes:
> 
> Spoil this :

> 
> In article <1992Apr09.150353.546@orionsci> goodwin@orionsci.uucp (Ben Goodwin) writes:
>>
>>2) Kirk=Locarno theory: BS!
>>   You are all basing your theories on no data.  We have almost
>>   no data on Kirk's days at the academy.  As a matter of fact the Kobyashi
>>   Maru is the only reference I've seen to Kirk's Academy Days.
>>
> 
> There is some reference in TOS : Shoreleave (I think that's the name).
> They're on this planet where wierd stuff is happening (that should narrow it
> down), white rabbits, WWII planes, samarai etc.

Gary Mitchell also had a line or two about Kirk at the Academy, in `Where 
No Man Has Gone Before'...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
       Jeff Lee - jlee@smylex.uucp - jlee%smylex.uucp@uhasun.hartford.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  Iron rusts from disuse; stagnant water loses its purity and in cold weather
  becomes frozen; even so does inaction sap the vigor of the mind -- da Vinci
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: mas@aero.org (Marcus A.Shaw)
Subject: Re: Cause & Effect & Sex
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 14:32:46 GMT

>
>> numbers soon to be announced on the bridge (18 killed in engineering from
>> that last hit...   Anyone notice how often the number 18 comes up?) , and
>
>Yes, I have!  When the Borg sliced a section out of the saucer in "Q
>Who", 18 people were lost.  When the Yamato was in the early stages of
>the Iconian computer virus ("Contagion"), an entire engineering team was
>swept out into space and killed because the force field in the shuttle
>bay switched off without warning.  Again, 18 people.
>
>I was going to say that 18 were killed in "The Best of Both Worlds"
>(part 1) when the Borg cut into Engineering, but I wasn't sure, so I
>checked my tape.  Data reports 11 dead, 8 more unaccounted for.  If one
>of the missing people turned up alive and the other 7 were dead, that
>would make 18.  But we don't know what the final tally was.

And if one of the missing people lost half a leg along with both eyes,
there still wouldn't be a pattern!  And if three missing died with one
losing his sight, would the new visor that Geordi would have made have
18 slits on the front?  Maybe 18 silver slits and 17 black ones (with
a final black line on the back to account for 18?  And will future 
aliens have 18 toes?  Come on, I like the idea of seeing how many 18's
you can find as an exercise, but this "if" game is a real stretch.
Not to mention trying to place significance on it like the "666"="18"
letter did....

SHHHHHEEEEEESHHHHHHHHH!!

ice
From: aldo@ips-server.Eng.Sun.COM (Aldo Castillo [CONTRACTOR])
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: ignore this test
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:41:19 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: ips-server

test ...
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current,rec.arts.startrek.misc
From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Subject: Kirk, death, and emotions (was Re: Locarno = Kirk) 
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 19:48:45 GMT

Followups set to r.a.s.misc.

kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
>kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:

> > I admit we didn't see Kirk break down in TOS.  Yes, he did
> > indeed "put on a happy face" after many misadventures and
> > close calls.  _This is what men were supposed to do._

>tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
> > Fine.  I consider that a character flaw.  Yes, it's a product
> > of the viewing times.  Does that somehow mean neither of us
> > can mention it?

>No, but it does mean that you can't assume Kirk shook off
>everything after those episodes because he didn't blubber and
>grow despondent every time something went wrong.

You bet it does.  Jumping outside the rules of the game to explain an 
action is not the only method.  As Scott's already said, both he and I
are working *within* the context of the show and the films to come up with
a coherent character; TWOK built on the TOS-Kirk's "man's manliness" and
revealed the problems it can cause.

I utterly fail to comprehend why this is somehow considered "invalid".

Tim Lynch
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.current:4511 rec.arts.startrek.fandom:573