Timewyrm Series
Azaxyr
Let's discuss the Timewyrm series.
Just some brief observations:
It started out great.
John Peel's Genesys is one of the best NAs.
Terrance Dicks' Exodus was very enjoyable.
Apocalypse was the best book Nigel Robinson wrote.
These people knew what Dr Who is supposed to be about.
But then the last story:
Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
MLee514519
Recent Readings
I'm trying to read my way through some of the older novels that I hadn't
read yet. It means that some of these are a little on the old side. I'll
try not to have any direct spoilers in this one -- I'm more interested in
writing a few, quick impressions.
As always, you can find a whole set of reviews at
http://www.execpc.com/~michaell/who -- check us out!
Cat's Cradle: Witch Mark by Andrew Hunt [7/10]
A neat little adventure; the cover is one of the series best. I'm not an
expert in the mythology that this book covers, so I sometimes wonder
what's nicked from the myth and what's real. There are some nice
characters; for example, we meet Britain's answer to Fox Mulder. [It's not
a direct steal, since the X-Files hadn't started by this point.] It's also
a bit of a Celtic Stargate.
It's odd to read a TV Series Ace after getting used to the one from that
later books.
Cat's Cradle -- as a series -- is not very successful. The books don't
share much of any theme, and it's clear why the direct linkage in the
titles was abandoned after this one. None of the books astounded me [even
if Time's Cruicible is important to the Doctor Who mythos established in
the New Adventures]
Not an astonishing book, but not a terrible one either.
The Highest Science by Gareth Roberts [7.5/10]
The Chelonians, which are introduced in this book, are one of the major
additions to the Doctor Who mythos that Virgin introduced. This is the
first novel that they appeared in, and also the first time I've
encountered them. An interesting race, a classic "Doctor Who" monster
race, and also one that is appropriate for someone with a fondness for the
"frockier" alien races in Who. [One of the soldiers, for example, would
much rather be a flower gardener.]
Gareth Roberts is one of the highlights of the 90s Doctor Who authors.
Like his Missing Adventures, there is nothing dark about his Doctor Who --
it's a Doctor who wants to use the secret weapon of "Diplomacy", a story
filled with aliens with silly names.
State of Change by Christopher Bulis [7.5/10]
Christopher Bulis writes "typical" Doctor Who novels -- while this isn't
as good as "Sorcerer's Apprentice", I enjoyed reading this book a great
deal. It's an easy book tor read. Peri's a little bit more realistic than
she was in the TV series, despite turning back into a giant bird.
I do have a few gripes about the book -- like Timewyrm:Genysis,
Christopher has the Doctor "call up" the ghost of the Third. It may be
easier to put Pertwee's Doctor onto paper than Colin Baker's one,
especially if you want to use the stereotypical Doctor, but I think it's a
cop out. It doesn't bother me if the Doctor uses skills primarily
established with an another Doctor -- after all, the Sixth Doctor is the
most physical after the third, and we really don't know the Sixth Doctor
as well as we could some of the others.
Out of the three, I wouldn't necessarily say any are required Doctor Who
readings; none of them are terrible, but none of them really grabbed me as
excellent books either.
Michael Lee
http://www.execpc.com/~michaell
Saulchurch
>Let's discuss the Timewyrm series.
Oh good, let's.
>
>Just some brief observations:
>It started out great.
>John Peel's Genesys is one of the best NAs.
I disagree, but then, after reading Evolution and then this I've come to
the conclusion that I don't care for John Peel's style. I find his prose
wooden and his characterzations unconvincing. In other words, the Doctor
doesn't sound like the Doctor, and Ace doesn't sound like Ace.
>
snip-I can't speak to the middle two, as I haven't read them yet. I
started Exodous but put it down for some reason and never picked it up
again. I understand that it's great, though.
>But then the last story:
>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
Here again, I completely disagree. I can't say it was the best of the
Timewyrm series-I'd be an uninformed jerk if I said that before reading
the other 2-but I loved it. I think you're right that it was a turning
point for the NA's. But I would say it was in a good way, opening them
up to what the books could present that the series never could.
---SaulChurch
Rather pleased that his Frank Burns/Hawkeye Pierce comparison was picked up by another.
Keith Topping
>>But then the last story:
>>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly, his
books have become crap...
No hidden agenda there then. No. Definitely. not. No way...
Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
like a GIRL.
--
Keith Topping == Net Day 613
Azaxyr
saulc...@aol.com (Saulchurch) wrote:
>
>I disagree, but then, after reading Evolution and then this I've come to
>the conclusion that I don't care for John Peel's style. I find his prose
>wooden and his characterzations unconvincing. In other words, the Doctor
>doesn't sound like the Doctor, and Ace doesn't sound like Ace.
>>
>snip-I can't speak to the middle two, as I haven't read them yet. I
>started Exodous but put it down for some reason and never picked it up
>again. I understand that it's great, though.
>
>>But then the last story:
>>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
>
>Here again, I completely disagree. I can't say it was the best of the
>Timewyrm series-I'd be an uninformed jerk if I said that before reading
>the other 2-but I loved it. I think you're right that it was a turning
>point for the NA's. But I would say it was in a good way, opening them
>up to what the books could present that the series never could.
>
Yes, Revelation is the beginning of the new writing style
and new characterizations of the Doctor and Ace. It's
almost as if the Dr slowly regenerated into another persona.
The first three NA's were more in the style of the original
series, while sometime later they evolved into a true spinoff
that was eventually separate from Dr Who on screen.
Genesys would've made a great historical story, minus some
of the more graphic bits of course. In the tradition of the
Hartnell historicals, the story takes itself seriously in it's
version of Doctor-meddled history, yet presents us with
a cast of non-heroic heroes.
It is interesting to see that there are two clear opposing
views on Exodus. People either think it's excellent, or
that it's the low point of Dick's writing. I thought it flowed
smoothly and it kept my attention throughout. Infact, I read
it in one sitting in about three hours. If the McCoy stories
had been written this way, they would've been a great three
years.
The book is focused; serious, but not entangled in it's own
web of continuity and mystery.
While I think that Apocalypse is Nigel Robinson's best book,
which includes the novelizations and the NAs, I don't think
that's really saying much since I feel none of his books were
all that memorable. This is probably due to that the stories
he novelized weren't all that great to begin with. His best
work was Edge of Destruction, which, like most of the two
episode novelizations, is stunningly better than the film.
Apocalypse is a continuation of Logopolis, which is in itself
a very interesting basis, and promising at that since Logopolis
was such a great story. Somehow, though, the story fails
to be interesting, which proves once again, as with Peter D.
Evans, that the editor should keep to editing and let the
writers write.
Strangely enough, I found Revelation to be disappointing
because it was too obvious. One could guess the basic plot
development and arrive at the ending, unlike the previous
three, which more or less caught you by surprise.
Instead, the book starts off slow and winds down from there.
At the same time, there were too many sidetracks in the story -
bits that were thrown in seemingly just for the heck of it.
Again, this was only a turning point in the NAs, but not what
the NAs would eventually become starting with the Cat's
Cradle series.
Azaxyr
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> babbled like
the drunken British git that he is:
>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly, his
>books have become crap...
>
>No hidden agenda there then. No. Definitely. not. No way...
A. Cornell hasn't even posted to me lately.
B. It's no surprise that I don't find his books enjoyable. I've
made my views on the NAs quite clear previously.
C. *YOU* are the only person here who has called
Cornell's book "crap". Interesting. Been talking to Jon
Blum, have you?
>
>Come on COWARD, post your real name and stop snivelling in >the dark
D. Strange, I thought everyone on this newsgroup knew my
real name by now ... I think you're the one in the dark there.
Why not go back to doing things you know how to do well -
like getting drunk.
I guess that means you haven't been talking to Jon Blum
after all, for then you'd know my name.
E. Besides, how do we know your real name is Keith Topping?
Certainly, if I had written the rubbish you have, I wouldn't
put my name on the cover...
>, like a GIRL
E. Ah, so now you're being a sexist pig by implying that girls
are cowards.
Any "girls" out there wanna comment on this?
DRRUP
>
>>, like a GIRL
>
>E. Ah, so now you're being a sexist pig by implying that girls
>are cowards.
>Any "girls" out there wanna comment on this?
>
>
ok im not a girl. But come now Keith, lets not slight an entire gender.
They do have opinions. Or so i have heard. That didnt help did it?
Ryan
"this may qualify as the worst miscalculation since life crawled out of the seas on this sad planet.
Well, nobodies perfect."
Paul Cornell
In article <19970727191...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, aza...@aol.com
(Azaxyr) wrote:
> But then the last story:
> Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
> the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
Oh piss off.
'Never regret what you don't do. Only what you do.'
Peter Wilton
MLee514519 <mlee5...@aol.com> writes
> the Sixth Doctor is the
>most physical after the third,
The 7th surely. All that running about!
--
Peter Wilton
The Gregorian Association Web Page:
http://www.beaufort.demon.co.uk/chant.htm
Shannon Patrick Sullivan
Whilst vacationing on Gallifrey on 28 Jul 1997 06:55:32 GMT, I overheard Azaxyr say:
> Yes, Revelation is the beginning of the new writing style
> and new characterizations of the Doctor and Ace. It's
> almost as if the Dr slowly regenerated into another persona.
More like the character of the Seventh Doctor developed as the series went
along -- much like the First Doctor did, going from a grumpy, mistrustful
old hermit to grandfather figure in the series' first year and a half.
(Compare "100,000 BC" with, say, "The Romans" if you don't believe me!)
Sure it was a new writing style -- with each new producer, the style of
Doctor Who changed slightly or grandly. Barry Letts brought a new realism
to the series; Graham Williams a more campy, comic edge; Innes Lloyd a
greater emphasis on more straightforwardly *science-fiction* stores. Peter
Darvill-Evans was, in all but name, a new producer for Doctor Who (as was
Rebecca Levene after him -- the style of books they commissioned is very
different). It would have been, I think, a huge mistake for PDE to have
simply continued commissioning books in the same vein as JNT's
producership.
> The first three NA's were more in the style of the original
> series, while sometime later they evolved into a true spinoff
> that was eventually separate from Dr Who on screen.
Sure, absolutely. Inasmuch as Season 7 was "completely separate" from
Sixties Who, Season 18 was "completely separate" from the rest of Tom
Baker's era, and so on. The first three Timewyrm books were to the rest of
the NAs as "Robot" was to the rest of Seasons 12-14 -- holdovers (sort of)
from the previous way of thinking. And while traditionalists (like
yourself, apparently) may hold these three books up as examples of how the
NAs deteriorated over time, IMHO, if the NAs had continued to produce
"knock-off" books like "Genesys", "Exodus", and "Apocalypse" -- even high
quality ones like "Exodus"! -- the series would have swiftly lost interest
readers, doing little more than regurgitating television Doctor Who.
[re: Apoclaypse]
> Somehow, though, the story fails
> to be interesting, which proves once again, as with Peter D.
> Evans, that the editor should keep to editing and let the
> writers write.
What a farcical comment. What makes you think the lack of interest of
"Apocalypse" has anything to do with the editor?
> Strangely enough, I found Revelation to be disappointing
> because it was too obvious. One could guess the basic plot
> development and arrive at the ending, unlike the previous
> three, which more or less caught you by surprise.
Oh, you *guessed* the Ace steps out on the moon but, eh? You're far more
precient than I.
Besides, "Revelation" is a Quest story, and hence is, to a degree, bound
by the hallmarks of that kind of story. I was pretty sure where "The Lord
of the Rings" was going when I first read it at age eleven, but that
didn't mean I enjoyed it any less. I think Paul does an excellent job of
mixing new conventions with an ancient form of storytelling.
Besides, if you're caught up in the plot of "Revelation", then you're
missing the point. Just look at the title -- this is a book about the
*characters*, and about how both the Doctor and Ace have to face up to old
ghosts and (hopefully) come out better for the confrontation. It is this
daring development of the two central characters which not only lends them
added dimensions unheard of for Doctor Who characters, but also sets the
stage for many of the subplots and conflicts that endure throughout the
rest of the New Adventures.
> Instead, the book starts off slow and winds down from there.
If you say so. "Revelation" is the only NA I've ever read twice, and in
both cases it was a matter of sitting down and being enthralled for
however many hours straight, until the last page was turned.
> At the same time, there were too many sidetracks in the story -
> bits that were thrown in seemingly just for the heck of it.
Well, I wish you'd given examples of this, but I suspect that these scenes
seem pointless to you because, again, you're missing the point. There's a
lot of wonderful symbolism and subtext in "Revelation" which has little to
do with the plot, and everything to do with theme and characterisation.
It's what helps make "Revelation" more than just another jaunt in space
and time with the Doctor; it's what makes "Revelation" one of the first
truly mature treatments of Doctor Who.
Paul should be proud. What a great book.
Shannon
--
/--- Shannon Patrick Sullivan -------------------------------------------\
| |
| "I calculated the odds of this succeeding versus doing something very |
| stupid... and I decided to go ahead anyway." |
| Crow T Robot, "Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie" |
| |
| DOCTOR WHO NEWS PAGE: http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sps/whonews.html |
\------------------------------------------ sha...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca ---/
Jac Rayner
Well, I'm not going to rise to the bait, but I must just share this quote
with you:
"Who are these small twits who use 'girly' as an insult?" - Kyla Kane,
'Wavelength'.
(Oh, and if anyone's interested, I love 'Revelation' - but I suppose that's
not really surprising)
Jac (Girly and proud of it)
--
"She knew that it is very silly to shut oneself into a wardrobe, even if it
is not a magic one."
DRRUP <dr...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970728080...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Lisa Gaunt
Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
: like a GIRL.
Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
-- Lisa
Saulchurch
In the midst of his comments on
28 Jul 1997 11:48:40 GMT, Shannon Patrick Sullivan
was heard to reply to Azaxyr:
>[re: Apoclaypse]
>> Somehow, though, the story fails
>> to be interesting, which proves once again, as with Peter D.
>> Evans, that the editor should keep to editing and let the
>> writers write.
>
>What a farcical comment. What makes you think the lack of interest of
>"Apocalypse" has anything to do with the editor?
Shannon-you do know that Nigel Robinson was the editor of the Target
range, don't you? I think that is what Azaxyr meant, that editors of the
range are not always good writers in that range. I agree with almost
everything else you said, though.
Grant Watson
pa...@cornell.demon.co.uk (Paul Cornell) wrote:
>In article <19970727191...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, aza...@aol.com
>(Azaxyr) wrote:
>> But then the last story:
>> Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>> the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
>Oh piss off.
Oooooh!!! Meanie!
Actually I thought it was a fairly passable first novel.
Cheers!
Grant.
___________...@iinet.net.au_______________
"Science fiction is about the future and fantasy
is about the past - the myth of the way things used
to be. Science fiction is, in a sense, trying to
construct a myth of the future."
E.G. Clayton
On 28 Jul 1997, Saulchurch wrote:
#>But then the last story:
#>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
#>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
#
#Here again, I completely disagree. I can't say it was the best of the
#Timewyrm series-I'd be an uninformed jerk if I said that before reading
#the other 2-but I loved it.
Give "Exodus" a try; it is excellent. I wouldn't bother with "Apocalypse"
unless you are a stubborn completist.
Ed
Jonathan Blum
In article <19970728065...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
Azaxyr <aza...@aol.com> wrote:
>Yes, Revelation is the beginning of the new writing style
>and new characterizations of the Doctor and Ace. It's
>almost as if the Dr slowly regenerated into another persona.
>series, while sometime later they evolved into a true spinoff
>that was eventually separate from Dr Who on screen.
I find it *fascinating* that someone who so recently was singing the
praises of Season 7, is now making it sound like new Doctor Who that takes
a radically different style from old Doctor Who is a *bad* thing. :-)
Considering that McCoy and Aldred appeared to reinvent their characters at
the start of each new season, in much the same way Tom or Colin did every
so often, I'd say that taking their characters in another new direction is
hardly unprecedented -- and I found the characters (especially Ace)
presented in "Revelation" to be consistent with what came before, but so
much richer.
[snip]
>It is interesting to see that there are two clear opposing
>views on Exodus. People either think it's excellent, or
>that it's the low point of Dick's writing.
Curiously enough, I don't remember anyone taking the latter view -- the
Terrance-bashers around here seem to have much more of a problem with
"Shakedown" or "Eight Doctors". "Exodus" is still one of my favorite
NA's, which is what makes Dicks' later books so frustrating to me.
[snip]
>Strangely enough, I found Revelation to be disappointing
>because it was too obvious. One could guess the basic plot
>development and arrive at the ending, unlike the previous
>three, which more or less caught you by surprise.
Betcha read "Oedipus Rex" for startling plot twists too. :-) Me, I also
pegged the big plot twist about where they were early on, but this didn't
bother me any more than the shock appearance of a Dalek at the end of
episode 1 of a Dalek story does. "Revelation" is a book that revolves
around character, theme, imagery, and wit, not plot surprises --
complaining that its plot is too obvious is like complaining that a flower
is too obvious...
Regards,
Jon Blum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess... when it was just me playing solitaire!"
D O C T O R W H O : T I M E R I F T
Grant Watson
sha...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Shannon Patrick Sullivan) wrote:
>[re: Apoclaypse]
>> Somehow, though, the story fails
>> to be interesting, which proves once again, as with Peter D.
>> Evans, that the editor should keep to editing and let the
>> writers write.
>What a farcical comment. What makes you think the lack of interest of
>"Apocalypse" has anything to do with the editor?
No, no. I think it means that Nigel Robinson, who used to be an editor
for Target Books, should stick to editing rather than writing. Not
PDE. (Mind you, if we reviewed Deceit...) :-)
mich...@execpc.com
In article <V3hIcGAU...@beaufort.demon.co.uk>,
Peter Wilton <pj...@beaufort.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> MLee514519 <mlee5...@aol.com> writes
> > the Sixth Doctor is the
> >most physical after the third,
>
> The 7th surely. All that running about!
I was thinking more of who would be more (or less) likely to get into a
fight.
Certainly the 7th [and the 2nd] would run around a lot -- but you don't
expect to see them in a physical confrontation. The 4th might, but you
couldn't really predict it.
[The 8th Doctor, I would imagine, would likely be similar to the 4th with
regard to physical confrontations....]
Michael Lee
http://www.execpc.com/~michaell
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Keith Topping
Lisa Gaunt <li...@netcom.com> writes
--
Keith Topping == Net Day 613.
Jonathan Blum
In article <19970728074...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
Azaxyr <aza...@aol.com> wrote:
>Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> babbled like
>the drunken British git that he is:
>>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly, his
>>books have become crap...
>>No hidden agenda there then. No. Definitely. not. No way...
>A. Cornell hasn't even posted to me lately.
[snip]
>C. *YOU* are the only person here who has called
>Cornell's book "crap". Interesting. Been talking to Jon
>Blum, have you?
Considering that I hadn't posted to you for even longer than Paul hadn't
posted to you, if "A" was supposed to suggest that you don't carry grudges
then "C" seems to argue against it. :-)
Keith Topping
In article <01bc9b51$80b17120$6b4ea4c2@default>, Jac Rayner
<jacr...@clara.net> writes
>"Who are these small twits who use 'girly' as an insult?" - Kyla Kane,
>'Wavelength'.
manhood dear old Paul can be at times!
>Jac (Girly and proud of it)
Actually, all joshing aside for a sec (yo, Henry, you can emerge
blinking into the light again, mate...) Every lady of my acquaintance
has always been most insulted if I ever called them a 'girl'. I always
thought 'woman' was a more acceptable descriptive term?
In the end, I don't suppose it makes a great deal of difference, we're
all "people" here, apart, maybe from Henry, who's belonging to the human
race is highly questionable...
(Love, to *all* my sisters and brothers... except Henry)
Keith Topping
Henry (no longer Anonymous) Coward wrote
>DRRUP <dr...@aol.com> writes
>>Ah, so now you're being a sexist pig by implying that girls
>>are cowards.
No, not at all. I am calling *YOU* a coward. Coz you are Henry...
My sister is not my enemy - but *you* are. Henry.
>ok im not a girl. But come now Keith, lets not slight an entire gender.
>They do have opinions. Or so i have heard. That didnt help did it?
They do indeed. They're lovely. All of them... 'Girl's just a generic
term of abuse where I come from (a bit like 'Virgin', and, hey, Henry,
if the cap fits, you know...)
Keith Topping
>Henry (no longer Anonymous) Coward writesHo Ho, Henry, almost Wildeian wit... Magnificent.
Err... By the way, have you reached the age where you can legal drink
yet? Henry?
>>>No hidden agenda there then. No. Definitely. not. No way...
>>A. Cornell hasn't even posted to me lately.
Apart from the lengthy "ventriloquist" series of postings on the
'Slyvester McCrap' thread you mean... During which time you were getting
*very* defensive. Henry.
>>C. *YOU* are the only person here who has called
>>Cornell's book "crap". Interesting.
It is indeed. An interesting example of lying. Please, provide us all
with an example of me having called any of Paul's books *crap* (bearing
in mind I co-wrote five of them, it's hardly a description I'm likely to
have made). Having said that, if I *did* ever describe one of Paul's
books this way - even in jest - then I will publically apologise to Paul
Cornell for having done so.
Now, you have twenty four hours, Henry, using dejanews or any other
means at your disposal, to provide the entire newsgroup with an example
of me having described one of Paul Cornell's books as "crap". Henry.
Failure to do so, Henry, will, I'm afriad, be taken as a further
example, that you are a bullshitting lying coward. Called Henry.
--
Keith Topping
Lisa Gaunt
Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Lisa Gaunt <li...@netcom.com> writes
: >Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: >:Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
: >:like a GIRL.
: >Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
: Lisa, I love you and I want you to have my babies...
Er, those weren't ~exactly~ the words I was thinking about... And sorry,
Keithy-love, but I've donated my biological clock to the newly awakened
"Look, Ma! No more curses!" planet of Gallifrey. :-)
With Chris running around, they're gonna *need* it... ;-)
-- Lisa
Azaxyr
pa...@cornell.demon.co.uk (Paul Cornell) wrote:
>
>> But then the last story:
>> Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>> the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
>
>Oh piss off.
What's the matter? You can dish out criticism, but you can't
take it like a bold British patriot?
Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
treating you as a God, and it's gone to your head, hmm?
In the real world, most of the sci-fi-reading public does
*not* appreciate your writing.
Still, your buddy Keith Topping, as far as I know, is the
only git who's called your work "crap". Not me.
Azaxyr
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> attempted
to disguise the fact that he's a blithering idiot by saying:
>>>C. *YOU* are the only person here who has called
>>>Cornell's book "crap". Interesting.
>It is indeed. An interesting example of lying. Please, provide us all
>with an example of me having called any of Paul's books *crap* (bearing
>in mind I co-wrote five of them, it's hardly a description I'm likely to
>have made). Having said that, if I *did* ever describe one of Paul's
>books this way - even in jest - then I will publically apologise to Paul
>Cornell for having done so.
>Now, you have twenty four hours, Henry, using dejanews or any other
>means at your disposal, to provide the entire newsgroup with an example
>of me having described one of Paul Cornell's books as "crap".
Gee, how soon a snivelling drunk frogets:
[I wrote]
>>But then the last story:
>>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
[Keith Topping wrote]
>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, >suddenly, his
>books have become crap...
Does this mean you'll go jump in the channel and drown
yourself?
[Keith Topping further wrote]
>Failure to do so, Henry, will, I'm afriad, be taken as a further
>example, that you are a bullshitting lying coward. Called Henry.
Well, I guess that means *YOU* are the lying British scum
I always knew you were.
Azaxyr
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> blundered:
>>ok im not a girl. But come now Keith, lets not slight an entire gender.
>>They do have opinions. Or so i have heard. That didnt help did it?
>They do indeed. They're lovely. All of them... 'Girl's just a generic
>term of abuse where I come from
I'm sure the *girls* in your area appreciate you using the
term *girl* as a term of abuse, Keith.
Azaxyr
jb...@Glue.umd.edu (Jonathan Blum) wrote:
>>Yes, Revelation is the beginning of the new writing style
>>and new characterizations of the Doctor and Ace. It's
>>almost as if the Dr slowly regenerated into another persona.
>>The first three NA's were more in the style of the original
>>series, while sometime later they evolved into a true spinoff
>>that was eventually separate from Dr Who on screen.
>
>I find it *fascinating* that someone who so recently was singing the
>praises of Season 7, is now making it sound like new Doctor Who that
takes
>a radically different style from old Doctor Who is a *bad* thing. :-)
>
Where exactly in the paragraph *on which you quoted me
above* do I say anything *bad* about the NAs?
Keith Topping
Good old Anonymous Henry Coward writes
> Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> attempted
>to disguise the fact that he's a blithering idiot by saying:
that you're *not* a blithering idiot? Expert testimony perhaps...?
Maybe some of your friends, Henry, would like to post onto this group
and tell us all what a nice, pleasent individual you are, Henry, and
what a worthwhile contribution you make to society? Henry.
>>>>C. *YOU* are the only person here who has called
Please notice that last word, Henry, it *is* rather important. As you're
about to find out. Henry.
>>>>Cornell's book "crap". Interesting.
>>It is indeed. An interesting example of lying. Please, provide us all
>>with an example of me having called any of Paul's books *crap* (bearing
>>in mind I co-wrote five of them, it's hardly a description I'm likely to
>>have made). Having said that, if I *did* ever describe one of Paul's
>>books this way - even in jest - then I will publically apologise to Paul
>>Cornell for having done so.
>>Now, you have twenty four hours, Henry, using dejanews or any other
>>means at your disposal, to provide the entire newsgroup with an example
>>of me having described one of Paul Cornell's books as "crap".
>Gee, how soon a snivelling drunk frogets:
Once again, a witty retort almost worthy of Whistler, Henry... You do
this sort of thing for a living I take it? Just as a matter of pure
disinterest, Henry, can you please tell me what you *do* do for a
living? Henry.
>[I wrote]
>>>But then the last story:
>>>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>>>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
>[Keith Topping wrote]
>>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly, his
>>books have become crap...
>Does this mean you'll go jump in the channel and drown
>yourself?
No, Henry, it means you've just shot yourself in the foot, in front of
the entire group. You said "you are the only one who *called* Paul
Cornell's book crap". As you have just ably proved, with no prompting
from me, I might add, I did no such thing. Henry. Rather, I suggested
that *you* believed 'Revelation' to be crap. At no stage did I *call*
Paul's books (and Revelation in particular) anything... (And just in the
interests of fairness I'll throw this open to everyone else - can anyone
who believe I did *call* 'Revelation' crap please make their voices
heard...)
So, Henry, since I presume you are now denying that *you* feel this way,
about Revelation, would you care to issue a statement to that effect on
this group: "I do not believe Paul Cornell's book, Revelation to be
crap, despite having called it 'the low point of the series on this
thread'" should do nicely.
Congratulations. Sucker, a textbook example of falling for the oldest
trick in the book.
And, to everybody else, yes I had a pretty fair idea of what he was
going to say.
>[Keith Topping further wrote]
>>Failure to do so, Henry, will, I'm afriad, be taken as a further
>>example, that you are a bullshitting lying coward. Called Henry.
>Well, I guess that means *YOU* are the lying British scum
>I always knew you were.
'Lying British scum'... Wow, big, big words from a small, small man.
I'll tell you what, Henry, I'll be in the States next February, at
Gallifrey. How's about you come out to LA and say that to my face, eh?
Then we can have a reasoned discussion about it. Henry.
John J. Pettigrew
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997 11:22:58 -0600, the incredibly cute
mich...@execpc.com told the entire universe:
>In article <V3hIcGAU...@beaufort.demon.co.uk>,
> Peter Wilton <pj...@beaufort.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> MLee514519 <mlee5...@aol.com> writes
>> > the Sixth Doctor is the
>> >most physical after the third,
>>
>> The 7th surely. All that running about!
>
>I was thinking more of who would be more (or less) likely to get into a
>fight.
>
>Certainly the 7th [and the 2nd] would run around a lot -- but you don't
>expect to see them in a physical confrontation. The 4th might, but you
>couldn't really predict it.
The 7th Doctor's confrontation with the Master in Survival was quite
physical...
- "... and with a strange wheezing, groaning noise, the farmer's favourite tractor suddenly broke down." -
John Pettigrew
Chris Sweitzer
li...@netcom.com (Lisa Gaunt) wrote:
...pardon?
--
Chris Sweitzer tala...@gate.net
Davenport, FL, USA http://www.gate.net/~talavera/
Visit the Jo Grant page http://www.gate.net/~talavera/jo.html
John J. Pettigrew
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997 07:40:46 +0100, the incredibly cute Keith Topping
<ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> told the entire universe:
>>>But then the last story:
>>>Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>>>the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
>
>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly, his
>books have become crap...
>
>No hidden agenda there then. No. Definitely. not. No way...
>
>Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>like a GIRL.
>
>--
>Keith Topping == Net Day 613
Oh great, so this guy's just bitter at Cornell - there was me thinking
he was expressing *real* opinions on the four books.
Will I ever learn?
Doh!
chrisp...@u-net.com
On 28 Jul 1997 19:41:39 GMT, aza...@aol.com (Henry Azaxyr) wrote:
> pa...@cornell.demon.co.uk (Paul Cornell) wrote:
>
>>
>>> But then the last story:
>>> Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
>>> the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
>>
>>Oh piss off.
>
>What's the matter? You can dish out criticism, but you can't
>take it like a bold British patriot?
What is the point?
You have *no* idea what criticism is (which according to my dictionary
is 'analytical commentary'). Saying that Revelation is 'the low point
of the series' is *not* criticism. Its bollocks. As have so many of
your posts been.
I have to disagree with Paul though. I'd have used the word fuck.
I can't see what the problem is here. If someone comes up to me and
says - effectively - 'see your work, that's crap that is.' I'd tell
'em where to go.
Does your mum know you are such a tit?
>
>Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
>treating you as a God, and it's gone to your head, hmm?
>In the real world, most of the sci-fi-reading public does
>*not* appreciate your writing.
I can't believe I'm about to write this as it means you might make
another top post. But, can you justify this?
>Still, your buddy Keith Topping, as far as I know, is the
>only git who's called your work "crap". Not me.
Yeah, right.
GAL
Chris.
--
Perhaps its the Old Bill. They'll soon sort out this fancy dress party.
http://www.patient.u-net.com. Last update 03.07.97.
If you want to reply to me by email, please use the address chris at patient.u-net.com
Jonathan Blum
In article <19970728194...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
>What's the matter? You can dish out criticism, but you can't
>take it like a bold British patriot?
I'm beginning to picture Henry as a little twelve-year-old on a medieval
battlefield, wearing his big brother's chainmail and waving a sword he
borrowed from his uncle, running around screaming "FIGHT WITH ME! C'MON,
FIGHT WITH ME? HOW COME NO ONE'S FIGHTING WITH ME???... YOU'RE UGLY
TOO, YOU KNOW THAT? HUH?..."
NickJVC
In article <33DCA9...@eskimo.com>, Laura Gjovaag <te...@eskimo.com>
writes:
>Lisa Gaunt wrote:
>>
>> Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>>
>> : Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>> : like a GIRL.
>>
>> Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>
>I'll help.
>
>-Laura
_Really_ busted!
Nick Cooper ["A truth that's told with bad intent, beats all the lies you can invent"]
NickJVC
In article <19970728074...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
aza...@sad.prepubescent.nolife.com (Azaxyr) writes:
>E. Besides, how do we know your real name is Keith Topping?
>Certainly, if I had written the rubbish you have, I wouldn't
>put my name on the cover...
Well, in that case, it's a charade he's kept up for the last fifteen years
and has maintained with all his friends, his employers (e.g. if you ring
him at work, _they_ know him as Keith Topping), Guinness Publishing,
Virgins Books, BBC Books, the British Passport Office, and his mother.
And mine.
Incidentally, if by "the rubbish" you mean Keith's published work, all of
it has thus far been co-written with one or two other people. So how come
you have this amazing ability to judge exactly which bits are Keith's? Of
course, if you're judging him on what he posts here, then by the same
standards you don't come off very well.
I suggest you go back to the soft-core porn and box of Kleenex hidden
under your bed.
John J. Pettigrew
On 28 Jul 1997 07:43:52 GMT, the incredibly cute aza...@aol.com
(Azaxyr) told the entire universe:
>Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> babbled like
>the drunken British git that he is:
<There's nothing like a friendly chinwag, is there?>
>>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly, his
>>books have become crap...
>>
>>No hidden agenda there then. No. Definitely. not. No way...
>
>Why not go back to doing things you know how to do well -
>like getting drunk.
Whats wrong with getting drunk?
I suggest you try a round of Topping - that's malibu and orange, vodka
and orange, white wine, more malibu and orange, lager ,lager, lager ,
lager, more white wine, more malibu, more lager and then whatever else
takes your fancy. A curry is optional.
>E. Besides, how do we know your real name is Keith Topping?
>Certainly, if I had written the rubbish you have, I wouldn't
>put my name on the cover...
>
It's HEITH "TOSSER" TOPPINGS!!! Get it right or we won't let you play!
Haven't you been following the threads? Silly bunt.
Hmm, sounds like Henry is checking to see if that tin of petrol is
empty by using a lighted match...
Joking aside, I would gather that Keith isn't going to be baited on
this one. Too many people have enjoyed Devil Goblins, he's currently
co-writing a second title for the range and a third one is on the
cards since BBC Worldwide have expressed an interest in a sequel
featuring the Waro.
He's above such contempt (er, apart from, of course, calling you a
girly...)
(Doh!)
And by the way - on my copy of Devil Goblins - it states that it's
written by Heith *and* Martin Day so perhaps you would like to tell
the other co-author how you feel too?
Backing it up with substantial examples, of course, to prove that
you're not just garbling away on a personal vendetta. (as if!)
NickJVC
In article <lisagEE...@netcom.com>, li...@netcom.com (Lisa Gaunt)
writes:
>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
>: Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>: like a GIRL.
>
>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
Ha-ha! Busted!
NickJVC
In article <BVfnDfAdgN3zEwd$@tooon.demon.co.uk>, Keith Topping
<ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> tried desperately to regain some composure by
writing:
>Lisa Gaunt <li...@netcom.com> writes
>>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>>:Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>>:like a GIRL.
>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>Lisa, I love you and I want you to have my babies...
Too late. Remember: "Name's is for tombstones, baby!"
Azaxyr
john.j.p...@cableinet.co.uk (John J. Pettigrew) wrote:
>Oh great, so this guy's just bitter at Cornell - there was me thinking
>he was expressing *real* opinions on the four books.
>Will I ever learn?
>Doh!
Yeah, if someone says something bad about a Pertwee episode,
he's stating a valid opinion. But if someone says something
negative about the McCoy stories or the NAs, he's obviously
got a personal vendetta against someone or other.
Yeah, Keith, it's too bad you weren't around during the first
five Doctors - maybe then you would've written something
worth reading.
Azaxyr
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> scribbled:
>
>Good old Anonymous Henry Coward writes
>> Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> attempted
>>to disguise the fact that he's a blithering idiot by saying:
>Big talk, Henry... You, erm, got any proof to back up your assertion
>that you're *not* a blithering idiot? Expert testimony perhaps...?
>Maybe some of your friends, Henry, would like to post onto this group
>and tell us all what a nice, pleasent individual you are, Henry, and
>what a worthwhile contribution you make to society? Henry.
>
>
I notice you don't deny that you're a blithering idiot.
Well, that's a start anyway.
Please tell me though; if you know my name, then how exactly
am I being anonymous? Especially since I took no initiative
at all to conceal it... gee, I guess that proves I'm not a coward
either. Care to say something brilliant for a change?
Keith Topping
NickJVC <nic...@aol.com> writes
>>>:Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>>>:like a GIRL.
>>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>_Really_ busted!
Daddy, what does "regret" mean?!!!!
--
Keith Topping == Net Day 614
Andrew McCaffrey
Azaxyr (aza...@aol.com) wrote:
: Gee, how soon a snivelling drunk frogets:
Snivelling drunk? Sometimes I hanker for the good ol' days of a punt
drunk...
--
+------------------------Andrew McCaffrey+[fen...@clark.net]------------+
|Doctor: But I don't exist in your world!|"Anybody remotely interesting |
|Brigade-Leader: Then you won't feel the |is mad in one way or another."|
|bullets when we shoot you. | - The Seventh Doctor |
| Doctor Who - Inferno (1970) | |
+----------------------------------------+------------------------------+
Keith Topping
NickJVC <nic...@aol.com> writes
>Keith tried desperately to regain some composure writing:
>>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>Too late. Remember: "Name's is for tombstones, baby!"
Saulchurch
aza...@aol.com (Azaxyr) typed out:
> if you know my name, then how exactly
>am I being anonymous? Especially since I took no initiative
>at all to conceal it... gee, I guess that proves I'm not a coward
>either. Care to say something brilliant for a change?
Er, no, NOT doing something scarcely qualifies one for a medal for
bravery. Proving you're not a coward would be, in this case:
"My name is Henry Smith (or whatever) and I am proud to stand behind the
things I post."
Ben Varkentine
---SaulChurch
Rather pleased that his Frank Burns/Hawkeye Pierce comparison was picked up by another.
Timothy Ferguson
Azaxyr wrote:
> But then the last story:
> Revelation was the low point of the series, a sign of
> the plunge the quality of the NAs would take.
I liked it...
Can you be more clear as to what about it you found unsatisfying?
Steve Biggs
jb...@Glue.umd.edu (Jonathan Blum) wrote:
>Azaxyr <aza...@aol.com> wrote:
>> pa...@cornell.demon.co.uk (Paul Cornell) wrote:
>>>Oh piss off.
>
>>What's the matter? You can dish out criticism, but you can't
>>take it like a bold British patriot?
>
>I'm beginning to picture Henry as a little twelve-year-old on a medieval
>battlefield, wearing his big brother's chainmail and waving a sword he
>borrowed from his uncle, running around screaming "FIGHT WITH ME! C'MON,
>FIGHT WITH ME? HOW COME NO ONE'S FIGHTING WITH ME???... YOU'RE UGLY
>TOO, YOU KNOW THAT? HUH?..."
Etc.
This is just the kind of thread that gives radw such a bad name.
Please take it all to e-mail, everyone.
I'm *so* bored with these crap post/defence/more crap/heavier defence
arguments, even if (as Jonathan's post was) some of the replies are
somewhat humourous. It just encourages them. (Henry.)
Steve.
Steve Roberts
>Congratulations. Sucker, a textbook example of falling for the oldest
>trick in the book.
Game, set and match to you Keith, I believe......
Now *personally* I thought 'Revelation' was crap - can't remember why
though, it was all such along time ago. It probably had a finale set
in cyberspace, and oh yes, it had that bloody sentient church bollocks
in it too - the whole thing just failed to click with me. This is no
reflection on Cornell's talents,as I thought his 'Love and War' was
superb - merely that he wrote a book that I just couldn't get on with.
Steve
*** Views expressed are my own and should not be taken to represent BBC policy. ***
*** Visit the Doctor Who Restoration Team Homepage for info on BBC restorations.
*** MAIN: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/steveroberts/restorat.htm
*** MIRROR: http://www.geocities.com/area51/vault/2105
Alex
In article <erjAMMAu...@tooon.demon.co.uk>, Keith Topping
<ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> said
>Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>like a GIRL.
>
Alex
--------------------------
What are you assuming now?
Shannon Patrick Sullivan
Whilst vacationing on Gallifrey on Mon, 28 Jul 1997 15:21:41 GMT, I overheard Grant Watson say:
> sha...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Shannon Patrick Sullivan) wrote:
> >[re: Apoclaypse]
> >> Somehow, though, the story fails
> >> to be interesting, which proves once again, as with Peter D.
> >> Evans, that the editor should keep to editing and let the
> >> writers write.
> >What a farcical comment. What makes you think the lack of interest of
> >"Apocalypse" has anything to do with the editor?
> No, no. I think it means that Nigel Robinson, who used to be an editor
> for Target Books, should stick to editing rather than writing. Not
> PDE. (Mind you, if we reviewed Deceit...) :-)
Whoops, right you are. Mea culpa.
Shannon
--
/--- Shannon Patrick Sullivan -------------------------------------------\
| |
| "I calculated the odds of this succeeding versus doing something very |
| stupid... and I decided to go ahead anyway." |
| Crow T Robot, "Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie" |
| |
| DOCTOR WHO NEWS PAGE: http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sps/whonews.html |
\------------------------------------------ sha...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca ---/
p...@who.net
aza...@aol.com (Azaxyr) wrote:
> What's the matter? You can dish out criticism, but you can't
> take it like a bold British patriot?
>
> Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
> treating you as a God, and it's gone to your head, hmm?
> In the real world, most of the sci-fi-reading public does
> *not* appreciate your writing.
I'm sorry, Mrs. Twat, but unless your son is suffering from advanced case
of Sourgrapica Rejecti, which will pass, then he has chronic Insecuria
Untalenta, which I'm afraid is inoperable. Either way, there's nothing we
can do - might I suggest a career in the Civil Service?
___________________________
Rob Stradling p...@who.net
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
R.J. Smith
Michael Lee wrote:
>Cat's Cradle -- as a series -- is not very successful. The books don't
>share much of any theme,
Oh, yes they do.
There's a pretty consistent theme about things falling apart - in TC it's
the Doctor's home, the TARDIS. In Warhead it's the Doctor's other home -
Earth. In WM, it's the fantasy experiment.
In fact, the first two books are quite remarkably similar (although it's a
bit subtle since superficvially they seem quite different). There's a
person with remarkable psi powers in both (Vael and Vincent), Ace is left
on her own for much of the first third (after an 'introductory' scene with
the Doctor, he all but vanishes) and the scenes where we are
'reintroduced' to the Doctor are *incredibly* similar (the Doctor as Wilby
is introduced in almost exactly the same "panning along the details" way
that the television-watching Doctor is in Warhead).
> and it's clear why the direct linkage in the
>titles was abandoned after this one.
Yep - because lots of people didn't see the theme and kept complaining
about it! (Hello DWB! :-) ) :-)
- Robert Smith?
Alex
In article <8701066...@dejanews.com>, mich...@execpc.com said
>
>I was thinking more of who would be more (or less) likely to get into a
>fight.
>
>Certainly the 7th [and the 2nd] would run around a lot -- but you don't
>expect to see them in a physical confrontation. The 4th might, but you
>couldn't really predict it.
>
>regard to physical confrontations....]
>
I keep being surprised by the activity of the Fifth Doctor. It's not how
I remember the character, but he keeps on mixing it. I've just watched
him wrestle a dalek out of a loading window.
Saulchurch
steve....@bbc.co.uk (Steve Roberts)
wrote, on Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:48:44:
>bloody sentient church bollocks
Ay! I resent that!
---SaulChurch
Boyle backed away, stammering. 'That's not what you're supposed to do. You're not playing the game! You're not obeying the rules!'
'No. I'm not,' Ace said. 'Life isn't about games.'
---Timewyrm: Revelation.
Saulchurch
aza...@aol.com (Azaxyr)wrote:
> if someone says something bad about a Pertwee episode,
>he's stating a valid opinion. But if someone says something
>negative about the McCoy stories or the NAs, he's obviously
>got a personal vendetta against someone or other.
Well, let's say Barry Letts was a regular poster to RADW. And he and
another poster got into a flame war on one thread. And a couple of days
later, the poster who'd been fighting with Letts posted a thread trashing
the Pertwee years. One might be forgiven for thinking there was something
personal there.
NickJVC
In article <19970729005...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, aza...@aol.com
(Azaxyr) writes:
>Yeah, Keith, it's too bad you weren't around during the first
>five Doctors - maybe then you would've written something
>worth reading.
Well, considering that Keith is over thirty and British, I'd say he was in
a better position than you to have appreciated more of the first five
Doctors in their original context. Or are you, in fact, a cantakerous old
git in his sixties, whose apparent anglophobia stems from the hard time
(and hopefully lots of good kickings) you received whilst living in the UK
in the sixties and seventies?
Oh, by the way, I was being sarcastic.
The Doctor
In article <5rk0hp$k...@clarknet.clark.net>,
Andrew McCaffrey <fen...@clark.net> wrote:
>Azaxyr (aza...@aol.com) wrote:
>: Gee, how soon a snivelling drunk frogets:
>
>Snivelling drunk? Sometimes I hanker for the good ol' days of a punt
>drunk...
Your wish is my command Guinness Man!!
>
>--
>+------------------------Andrew McCaffrey+[fen...@clark.net]------------+
>|Doctor: But I don't exist in your world!|"Anybody remotely interesting |
>|Brigade-Leader: Then you won't feel the |is mad in one way or another."|
>|bullets when we shoot you. | - The Seventh Doctor |
>| Doctor Who - Inferno (1970) | |
>+----------------------------------------+------------------------------+
--
God, Queen and Country NEVER Satan, President and Republic Hating Bachelor's Living
Republicanism is Satanism: Satan wants to usurp God from his throne just like republicans are out to dismiss monarchies.
http://www.nl2k.ab.ca/~doctor Save the World and Civilization; REPUBLICS DISSOLVE!
mich...@execpc.com
In article <5rkali$j...@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>,
smit...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (R.J. Smith) wrote:
>
>
> Michael Lee wrote:
> >Cat's Cradle -- as a series -- is not very successful. The books don't
> >share much of any theme,
>
> Oh, yes they do.
I'll admit that I missed it! I'm sure this is much because I read the
three books over a period of 18 months, and had read dozens of other
books in between. It may have been easier to notice if you had read them
back-to-back...
> There's a pretty consistent theme about things falling apart - in TC it's
> the Doctor's home, the TARDIS. In Warhead it's the Doctor's other home -
> Earth. In WM, it's the fantasy experiment.
I think the first two work, but it's a stretch on the third... The theme
isn't that unusual -- State of Change, for example, has some pieces in
common with Witchmark as well... I suppose part of it may be that I
didn't feel there was a "climax" to Cat's Cradle in the way there was to
the Timewyrm series...
Michael Lee
http://www.execpc.com/~michaell
NickJVC
In article <WXlCjBA1...@tooon.demon.co.uk>, Keith Topping
<ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>Well, I guess that means *YOU* are the lying British scum
>>I always knew you were.
>'Lying British scum'... Wow, big, big words from a small, small man.
>I'll tell you what, Henry, I'll be in the States next February, at
>Gallifrey. How's about you come out to LA and say that to my face, eh?
>Then we can have a reasoned discussion about it. Henry.
Prayer for today: "Oh Lord, please let me win the lottery so that I can go
to Gallifrey and hold Keith's coat for him..."
Keith Topping
Alex <Al...@chaos-cottage.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>>like a GIRL.
>And then you wonder why women object to being called girls! :-/
>Alex
think about it, and I use that one fairly regularly too, so nobody can
accuse me of sexism. Ageism, I'll accept!!!
--
Keith Topping == net Day 614
Keith Topping
p...@who.net writes
>Henry Coward wrote
>> Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
>> treating you as a God, and it's gone to your head, hmm?
>> In the real world, most of the sci-fi-reading public does
>> *not* appreciate your writing.
>I'm sorry, Mrs. Twat, but unless your son is suffering from advanced case
>of Sourgrapica Rejecti, which will pass, then he has chronic Insecuria
>Untalenta, which I'm afraid is inoperable. Either way, there's nothing we
>can do - might I suggest a career in the Civil Service?
Oh well, guess *that's* just proved a point!!!
NickJVC
In article <19970728192...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, aza...@aol.com
(Azaxyr) writes:
>[Keith Topping wrote]
>>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, >suddenly,
his
>>books have become crap...
>
>Does this mean you'll go jump in the channel and drown
>yourself?
>
>[Keith Topping further wrote]
>>Failure to do so, Henry, will, I'm afriad, be taken as a further
>>example, that you are a bullshitting lying coward. Called Henry.
>
>Well, I guess that means *YOU* are the lying British scum
>I always knew you were.
My God, this guy's thicker than a whale omlette!
Keith Topping
Steve Roberts <steve....@bbc.co.uk> writes
>>Congratulations. Sucker, a textbook example of falling for the oldest
>>trick in the book.
>Game, set and match to you Keith, I believe......
>Now *personally* I thought 'Revelation' was crap - can't remember why
>though, it was all such along time ago. It probably had a finale set
>in cyberspace, and oh yes, it had that bloody sentient church bollocks
>in it too - the whole thing just failed to click with me. This is no
>reflection on Cornell's talents,as I thought his 'Love and War' was
>superb - merely that he wrote a book that I just couldn't get on with.
novel, but one with tons of energy and punch to it) to Love and War
(which is brilliant in places but I do find a bit of a chore at times...
And of course the ironic thing is that my favourite one of Paul's book
is the next one, which he *loathes* ... And when I asked him why
recently, he said because he thought it was, and I quote, "crap"!)
I
NickJVC
In article <Ogj0OMAv...@tooon.demon.co.uk>, Keith Topping
<ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> writes:
>NickJVC <nic...@aol.com> writes
>>Laura Gjovaag <te...@eskimo.com>writes:
>>>Lisa Gaunt wrote:
>>>>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>>>>:Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
>>>>:like a GIRL.
>>>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>>>I'll help.
>>_Really_ busted!
>Daddy, what does "regret" mean?!!!!
Well, son, a funny thing about regret is, that it's better to regret
something you have done, than to regret something you haven't done. And
by the way, if you see your mom this weekend, would you be sure and tell
her....
Straylen
In article <5rk0hp$k...@clarknet.clark.net>, fen...@clark.net (Andrew
McCaffrey) writes:
>Azaxyr (aza...@aol.com) wrote:
>: Gee, how soon a snivelling drunk frogets:
>
>Snivelling drunk? Sometimes I hanker for the good ol' days of a punt
>drunk...
>
>
Oh no it's Selwyn Frogett!
Steve Traylen
Damn it's been only one day and I'm making obscure posts...
DANIEL BEN-ZVI
Straylen wrote:
> In article <5rk0hp$k...@clarknet.clark.net>, fen...@clark.net (Andrew
> McCaffrey) writes:
>
> >Azaxyr (aza...@aol.com) wrote:
> >: Gee, how soon a snivelling drunk frogets:
> >
> >Snivelling drunk? Sometimes I hanker for the good ol' days of a punt
>
> >drunk...
> >
> >
>
> Oh no it's Selwyn Frogett!
>
> Steve Traylen
Steve! It's Steve! Oh joyous day, Steve has returned!!!!!!!
MNS,
Dan Ben-Zvi
Keith Topping
NickJVC <nic...@aol.com> writes
>Keith Topping<ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>NickJVC <nic...@aol.com> writes
>>>Laura Gjovaag <te...@eskimo.com>writes:
>>>>Lisa Gaunt wrote:
>>>>>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>>>>>:like a GIRL.
>>>>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>>>>I'll help.
>>>_Really_ busted!
>>Daddy, what does "regret" mean?!!!!
>Well, son, a funny thing about regret is, that it's better to regret
>something you have done, than to regret something you haven't done. And
>by the way, if you see your mom this weekend, would you be sure and tell
>her....
<Ob Who> There's alleged to an Orbital b-side with a 'Kinda' sample on
it. Or is that omebody else...?
--
Keith
Martin Day
>Daddy,
Yes, son?
>what does "regret" mean?!!!!
Well, son, a funny thing about regret is that it's better to regret
something you have done than to regret something you haven't done. And
by the way, if you see your mom this weekend, you be sure and tell her
SATAN
________________________________________________________________________
Martin <ma...@dial.pipex.com>
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/marty/
________________________________________________________________________
((Not a very good post for a Christian, but Keith knew I'd have to
follow this up!))
DRRUP
>>>>>:like a GIRL.
>>>>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>>>>I'll help.
>>>_Really_ busted!
>
>Well, son, a funny thing about regret is, that it's better to regret
>something you have done, than to regret something you haven't done. And
>by the way, if you see your mom this weekend, would you be sure and tell
>her....
may i just add "i know how much you wanted a puppy. So i bought you one.
But on the way home i got hugry, so i ate it.
Ryan
"this may qualify as the worst miscalculation since life crawled out of the seas on this sad planet.
Well, nobodies perfect."
CKlemow
Steve Roberts wrote (re: Cornell's REVELATION)
>Now *personally* I thought 'Revelation' was crap - can't remember why
>though, it was all such along time ago. It probably had a finale set
>in cyberspace
Sort of, but it was set in the Doctor's mind, and avoided the usual
cliches and pitfalls of your average cyberspace story, instead giving us
what I thought was a very interesting look into the Doctor's character.
Unlike, say, the somewhat more standard "'Puterspace" sequences in...
well, in LOVE & WAR. :)
>as I thought his 'Love and War' was superb
Geoff Weasel
> NickJVC <nic...@aol.com> writes
> >Laura Gjovaag <te...@eskimo.com>writes:
> >>Lisa Gaunt wrote:
> >>>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> >>>:Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
> >>>:like a GIRL.
> >>>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
> >>I'll help.
> >_Really_ busted!
> Daddy, what does "regret" mean?!!!!
"Well son, it's better to regret the things you HAVE done, than the things
you HAVEN'T done...
"Oh, and son, if you see your mother this weekend, tell her
SATAN
SATAN
SATAN!!!"
About damn time I see a Butthole Surfers ref. on rec.arts.drwho :)
--- Geoff We@sel
"'History happens,' said the Doctor. 'Even when I'm not around.'
"Only by accident,' said Kadiatu..." (TRANSIT, Ben Aaronovitch)
http://www.iquest.net/~geoffw/
Saulchurch
nic...@aol.com (NickJVC) writes
in article <19970729172...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
>Well, considering that Keith is over thirty and British, I'd say he was
in
>a better position than you to have appreciated more of the first five
>Doctors in their original context.
Keith's over 30?
Or are you, in fact, a cantakerous old
>git in his sixties, whose apparent anglophobia
That's a strange thing for a Doctor Who fan to be.
Keith Bradbury
NickJVC wrote:
> >>Well, I guess that means *YOU* are the lying British scum
> >>I always knew you were.
> >'Lying British scum'... Wow, big, big words from a small, small man.
> >I'll tell you what, Henry, I'll be in the States next February, at
> >Gallifrey. How's about you come out to LA and say that to my face,
> eh?
> >Then we can have a reasoned discussion about it. Henry.
>
> Prayer for today: "Oh Lord, please let me win the lottery so that I
> can go
> to Gallifrey and hold Keith's coat for him..."
Yes, well, one would do well to remember that there are "lying scum"
on both sides of the Atlantic.
Chris Schumacher
In article <erjAMMAu...@tooon.demon.co.uk>, ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk
says...
>What a surprise - Cornell's taking you to the cleaners so, suddenly,
his
>books have become crap...
Prehaps it wouldn't have been crap if it wouldn't have been the starting
point for all the Sixth Doctor bashing in the NAs for the next six
years. Come to think of it, wasn't it Mr. Cornell who came up with the
lameass 'Sixth Doctor is th Valeyard' theory? Sheesh... He's a decent
author, but all the same, I'm glad he doesn't have Doctor Who to play
with anymore. (Yeah, bite my tounge, it might change....)
--
-==Kensu==-
ke...@pathcom.com
Keeper of the Oz-Men Flame. Member of The Blue Cloaks Corps.
"It's hard to be semi-mythical when there's dirt in your socks."
-=The Doctor/"The Room With No Doors"
"Like Ben Franklin said, bub, only two things certain in life.
And this ain't taxes." -Wolverine/Uncanny X-Men 234
John Long
chrisp...@u-net.com wrote:
>
> Does your mum know you are such a tit?
I'm curious as to why some of you are calling Azaxyr a tit? Do you mean
twit? Or does he resemble a breast in any way? How does a person adopt
the features of a tit? Maybe tit is used in a different context over in
your country perhaps.
John Long
Keith Topping
Saulchurch <saulc...@aol.com> writes
>nic...@aol.com (NickJVC) writes
>>Well, considering that Keith is over thirty and British, I'd say he was
>>Doctors in their original context.
>Keith's over 30?
don't broadcast this, I'm trying to maintain the image of being a hot-
shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie-about-town...
NickJVC
In article <geoffw-2907...@ind-0001-19.iquest.net>,
geo...@iquest.net (Geoff Weasel) writes:
>In article <Ogj0OMAv...@tooon.demon.co.uk>, Keith Topping
><ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Daddy, what does "regret" mean?!!!!
>"Well son, it's better to regret the things you HAVE done, than the
things
>you HAVEN'T done...
>"Oh, and son, if you see your mother this weekend, tell her
>SATAN
>SATAN
>SATAN!!!"
>
>About damn time I see a Butthole Surfers ref. on rec.arts.drwho :)
Snap! Although I was working from the Orbital angle >:-)
ObWho: Er... the Hartnoll brothers - _almost_ like Hartnell. Don't think
Bill was into really bangin' techno, of course....
John Long
NickJVC wrote:
>
> I suggest you go back to the soft-core porn and box of Kleenex hidden
> under your bed.
That's the best idea I've heard all day.
John Long
BFElliott
>Saulchurch <saulc...@aol.com> writes
>>Keith's over 30?
to which Keith Topping replied:
>Sadly. I'm 33. I am, in fact, one month older than Doctor Who... Please
>don't broadcast this, I'm trying to maintain the image of being a hot-
>shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie-about-town...
>
Don't think of age as a bad thing, Keith. Embrace your age. Many people
didn't make it that far. Announce: "I made it yet another year!"
Benjamin Elliott
18 and shooting for 120
Brad Filippone
DRRUP (dr...@aol.com) wrote:
: >
: >>, like a GIRL
: >
: >E. Ah, so now you're being a sexist pig by implying that girls
: >are cowards.
: >Any "girls" out there wanna comment on this?
: >
: >
: ok im not a girl. But come now Keith, lets not slight an entire gender.
: They do have opinions. Or so i have heard. That didnt help did it?
: Ryan
"There's nothing 'only' about being a girl"
-Sarah jane SMith in "The Monster of Peladon"
Brad Filippone
Brad Filippone
Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Lisa Gaunt <li...@netcom.com> writes
: >Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: >:Come on COWARD, post your real name, and stop snivelling in the dark,
: >:like a GIRL.
: >Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
Can't find a babysitter?
christopher j rednour,sa120a cd,244-5012,8
In a previous article, aza...@aol.com (Azaxyr) says:
[snip]
>Yeah, Keith, it's too bad you weren't around during the first
>five Doctors - maybe then you would've written something
>worth reading.
<sarcasm>
You know there's a neat concept. Maybe the Beeb should consider putting
out books containing Doctors 1-6; so all the old Virgin and BBC writers
who are used to writing for the later Doctor's can tackle the classics.
Pity Virgin didn't think of it, they could have called them "Missing
Adventures" and would have made a great companion series to the New
Adventures. We could have been talking about NA's and MA's all these
years. Oh well.
</sarcasm>
-Chris
--
====== Chris Rednour - cred...@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu ======
Brad_T...@ml.com
Keith Topping wrote:
> Sadly. I'm 33. I am, in fact, one month older than Doctor Who...
> Please
> don't broadcast this, I'm trying to maintain the image of being a hot-
>
> shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie-about-town...
>
> --
> Keith Topping == Net Day 614
So let me get this straight: Keith is born, and one month later John F.
Kennedy is shot.
Hmmmmmm.
--Brad "I think I know Who Killed Kennedy"
Geoff Weasel
In article <19970730074...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
nic...@aol.com (NickJVC) wrote:
> In article <geoffw-2907...@ind-0001-19.iquest.net>,
> geo...@iquest.net (Geoff Weasel) writes:
>
> >In article <Ogj0OMAv...@tooon.demon.co.uk>, Keith Topping
> ><ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Daddy, what does "regret" mean?!!!!
> >"Well son, it's better to regret the things you HAVE done, than the
> things
> >you HAVEN'T done...
> >"Oh, and son, if you see your mother this weekend, tell her
> >SATAN
> >SATAN
> >SATAN!!!"
> >
> >About damn time I see a Butthole Surfers ref. on rec.arts.drwho :)
>
> Snap! Although I was working from the Orbital angle >:-)
Well that's what you get for working from a sample and not an original :P
LOCUST ABORTION TECHNICIAN -- great album.
(Hey by the way, is yer .sig from Alien Sex Fiend, Nick?)
ObWHO: Good thing the 8th didn't BECOME the Alien Sex Fiend like the
critics of the TVM said BEFORE they saw the movie...
Geoff Weasel
In article <19970730125...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
bfel...@aol.com (BFElliott) wrote:
> >Saulchurch <saulc...@aol.com> writes
> >>Keith's over 30?
>
> to which Keith Topping replied:
> >Sadly. I'm 33. I am, in fact, one month older than Doctor Who... Please
> >don't broadcast this, I'm trying to maintain the image of being a hot-
> >shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie-about-town...
> >
> Don't think of age as a bad thing, Keith. Embrace your age. Many people
> didn't make it that far. Announce: "I made it yet another year!"
Or, as Minor Threat once put it, "It's not how old I am, it's how old I
feel"...
Keith Topping
Brad Filippone <al...@chebucto.ns.ca> writes
>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>:Lisa Gaunt <li...@netcom.com> writes
>:>Keith Topping (ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>:>:like a GIRL.
>:>Ooooooh boy, are *we* gonna have some words at Gallifrey!!
>:Lisa, I love you and I want you to have my babies...
>Can't find a babysitter?
--
Keith Topping == Net Day 615
Keith Topping
Henry Coward writes
>>Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
>>treating you as a God,
Nobody around here treats me as "God" or anything like it, Henry, and if
they did I'd tell them to stop. Examples of this please...
>and it's gone to your head, hmm?
>>In the real world, most of the sci-fi-reading public does
>>*not* appreciate your writing.
Examples of *this* please...
Thanks, Herny.
--
Keith
Keith Topping
Henry Coward writes
>>E. Besides, how do we know your real name is Keith Topping?
>>Certainly, if I had written the rubbish you have, I wouldn't
>>put my name on the cover...
Then you must, of course, contact all of the three book companies and
three magazine publishing companies that I regularly write for and tell
them that I'm gaining (lots of) money under dubious talent, Henry. I'm
sure they will sack me instantly...
Oh, and please come back here and let us all know exactly *what*
reaction you got from the BBC, Virgin, Guinness, et al...
Thanks Henry
By the way, how is Georgia at this time of year? Quite warm, I expect...
Saulchurch
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> writes:
>I'm trying to maintain the image of being a hot-
>shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie
Your only chance, Keith, is to join that hot-shot-rock-and-roll combo, The
Unlicensed Virgins.
---SaulChurch
"This is so cool I have to go to the bathroom!"-Calvin, Homicidal Psycho Jungle Cat (Page 7)
Keith Topping
BFElliott <bfel...@aol.com> writes
>>Saulchurch <saulc...@aol.com> writes
>>>Keith's over 30?
>to which Keith Topping replied:
>>Sadly. I'm 33. I am, in fact, one month older than Doctor Who... Please
>>don't broadcast this, I'm trying to maintain the image of being a hot-
>>shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie-about-town...
>Don't think of age as a bad thing, Keith. Embrace your age. Many people
>didn't make it that far. Announce: "I made it yet another year!"
Then, one day, you'll be right...
Keith Topping
Brad_T...@ml.com writes
>Keith Topping wrote:
>>Sadly. I'm 33. I am, in fact, one month older than Doctor Who...
>>shot-rock-and-roll-kiddie-about-town...
>Kennedy is shot.
26th October 1963, for anybody interested... The tickets going on sale
for a Beatles gig at the City Hall was the front page of the local paper
that day and, erm, United got beat 3-2 at home to Northampton Town. If
I'd known what lay in store for me over the next 33 years (in football
terms at least), I'd have crawled back in!!!
Azaxyr
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Then you must, of course, contact all of the three book companies and
>three magazine publishing companies that I regularly write for and tell
>them that I'm gaining (lots of) money under dubious talent,
What, you mean like John Lydecker?
Or perhaps David Agnew, Robin Bland,
or Norman Ashby?
Plus a large number of actually good writers who use
pen names to keep their true identities hidden from
the public? (non DW)
Oh yeah, they're a bunch of cowards so who cares, eh?
Azaxyr
Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
>>>treating you as a God,
>Nobody around here treats me as "God" or anything like it, Henry, and if
>they did I'd tell them to stop. Examples of this please...
>
>
Hey moron, I wasn't talking to you.
(What, now everything I say is aimed at you?)
Azaxyr
cred...@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu (christopher j rednour,sa120a
cd,244-5012,8) apparently tried to say
something funny:
>You know there's a neat concept. Maybe the Beeb should consider putting
>out books containing Doctors 1-6; so all the old Virgin and BBC writers
>who are used to writing for the later Doctor's can tackle the classics.
>
>Pity Virgin didn't think of it, they could have called them "Missing
>Adventures" and would have made a great companion series to the New
>Adventures. We could have been talking about NA's and MA's all these
>years. Oh well.
But you know, I think these...what did you call them?
"Missing Adventures"? (Ha, what a silly name!)
I think they would probably end up being more like
the NAs than the original Dr Who series.
Azaxyr
cred...@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu (christopher j rednour,sa120a
cd,244-5012,8) tried to be clever by saying:
>
>That's funny. I assume you've polled most of the sci-fi-reading public
then?
>Can I see the raw data?
The uncooked data can be acquired from most booksellers
in the form of sales figures. There are also newsletters
printed about "bestselling books". You're welcome to
whatever data you can carry. Please take the initiative
and contact every bookseller in the world and prove
me wrong.
Jonathan Blum
In article <19970730183...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Azaxyr <aza...@aol.com> wrote:
>What, you mean like John Lydecker?
>Or perhaps David Agnew, Robin Bland,
>or Norman Ashby?
[snip]
>Oh yeah, they're a bunch of cowards so who cares, eh?
IIRC, Terrance Dicks used the name "Robin Bland" because he hated the
rewritten script for "Morbius" so much that he didn't want it to be
associated with his name. He felt it wasn't his words anymore. Ditto
Haismann and Lincoln as "Norman Ashby" for "The Dominators". Steve
Gallagher left his name on his Who scripts, but didn't want his name --
that of an "adult" SF/horror author -- on the kiddie Target novelizations
based on them. Other pseudonyms, like Letts and Sloman as "Guy Leopold"
for "The Daemons", or Graham Williams and his script editors as "David
Agnew", were done for legal reasons, because the various unions would have
had a fit about a producer writing episodes if they'd found out.
So yes, I guess you could say that all these writers didn't want to stand
behind their words once they'd had their meaning distorted by someone
else, or didn't want to sully their good name by having a product they
considered beneath them associated with it, or just had something to hide.
One wonders what you're trying to prove by bringing this up, though.
Regards,
Jon Blum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess... when it was just me playing solitaire!"
D O C T O R W H O : T I M E R I F T
Paul Shields
On 28 Jul 1997 12:56:37 -0400, jb...@Glue.umd.edu (Jonathan Blum)
shared the following with us all:
>Considering that I hadn't posted to you for even longer than Paul hadn't
>posted to you, if "A" was supposed to suggest that you don't carry grudges
>then "C" seems to argue against it. :-)
I've had Axaxyr in my Twat-File for so long he's been made a director.
And with my lovely new Agent software I can even filter any e-mail he
might send me as a result of this.
Paul
('Xaxy's witty reply follows after these words)
------------------------- ------------------------
( Paul Shields, Leeds, UK )( Hasta La Vista... )
( www.korova.demon.co.uk )( Doodyhead )
( "COLD BLOOD WARM HEART" New 50 minute sci-fi film )
( GET THE DOWNLOADABLE VIDEO PREVIEW OFF MY WEBSITE )
---------------------------------------------------
Paul Shields
On Tue, 29 Jul 97 09:48:43 GMT, s...@mfltd.co.uk (Steve Biggs) shared
the following with us all:
>This is just the kind of thread that gives radw such a bad name.
>Please take it all to e-mail, everyone.
No, please don't. It's like the wrestling on tv. I'm considering a
temporary reprieve from my Twat-File for Henry just so I can watch all
this.
Paul
Keith Topping
Azaxyr <aza...@aol.com> writes
>Keith Topping <ke...@tooon.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>Perhaps you've gotten too used to people around here
>>>>treating you as a God,
>>Nobody around here treats me as "God" or anything like it, Henry, and if
>>they did I'd tell them to stop. Examples of this please...
>Hey moron, I wasn't talking to you.
angry and nervous - what's the matter, the devastating Wildian wit of a
few days ago deserting you?
You know, some would argue that I am a moron for putting up with
rubbish like this, but actually I find it really funny that somebody who
hides behind a false name can create such bad feeling on something as
potential wonderful as a newgroup talking about an old television
programme.
Henry here, is from Georgia and is, seemingly, frightened of what is
outside the self-imposed walls of his little world. I'm actually quite
sad about that as he's probably got a few redeeming features (most
people, even the most objectionable, have in my experience). Sadly,
instead of coming onto a forum like this and learning about how much fun
there can be in the world he's content to squat in his hole, his abuse
growing fatter and more rancid with each passing day. He's tried every
trick in the book to annoy me (insulting my writing ability (or lack of
it), my nationality, my drinking habits for goodness sake!), but they're
so hilariously awful insults that I can't even annoyed by them, and
that's *really* got under his skin... you can almost hear the vein
throbbing in his temple ("Must get Topping, must get Topping...") Sad.
I've resisted kill-filing him so far because I dislike the idea of
excluding somebody from *my* world. I like to hear other people's
opinions - no matter how mad they may be.
Of course, the daft thing is this is a passing thing. In a couple of
weeks this thread will have died and he'll skuttle off into a dark
corner somewhere to lick his wound and then come back a few weeks later
to have a go at another target (he's been through half of radw already
looking for people to alientate)...
So, Henry, mate, consider yourself laughed at, considerably by this
"crap writer" from England who thinks your pathetic attempts at baiting
him are some of the funniest things he's seen in years.
You've cheered me up after a bad weekend. Thanks a lot. It *really* is
appreciated.
>(What, now everything I say is aimed at you?)
If the cap fits Henry... You reap what you sow...
Oh, just one tiny final point. You called me "stupid" a couple of
posts back. Fair comment i may well be; for most of the last seven
years, a large part of my job has entailed sitting in my gaff watching
old episodes of television series, writing down what I think about them
and getting paid for it. Very well. Now, which between us is the
stupider...?
Henry Vizi - *this is yer life*...
Love, from merrie England.
--
Keith Topping