ANNOUCEMENT: B5 party at Worldcon
Cheryl L Martin
Yes, I know it's early. However, I just wanted to let folks know ahead of
time. We, the Grey Council are throwing a party at Chicon 2000. We will
have food and drink and fun! Costumes are welcome. The theme this year
will be a Centauri feast day.
More info as our plans are made. For more info about Worldcon see:
http://www.chicon.org or http://www.worldcon.org
Cheryl
% Grumpy Moderator rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated %
% newsgroup posting address: b5...@deepthot.org %
% moderator contact address: b5mod-...@deepthot.org %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Friar Chuck
Cheryl L Martin wrote:
Great....I will come, but only if Halren is not invited. If Harlen is invited
then you have to invite Jerry Pournelle. Have fun
FC
Jms at B5
>then you have to invite Jerry Pournelle. Have fun
This does not make any sense because Harlan had something to DO with B5, where
Jerry did not. Why would these two have to be linked at the hip?
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
Gharlane of Eddore
Some Bozo Unable To Appreciate Ellison's Excellence, And
>
> Great....I will come, but only if Halren is not invited.
> If Harlen is invited then you have to invite Jerry Pournelle.
> Have fun
>
In <20000425234431...@ng-fg1.aol.com>
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) writes:
>
> This does not make any sense because Harlan had something to DO with B5,
> where Jerry did not. Why would these two have to be linked at the hip?
>
SINCE you asked......
Several reasons:
(1) JEP wasn't involved with "B5," but *should* have been; since
B5 had a critical, unfulfilled need for a *MILITARY* advisor ---
the writers never even got something as simple as ranks figured
out, had no understanding of military protocols and behavior,
no ability to portray military officers and troops in a
believeable way, no slightest concept of strategy and tactics
over interstellar distances; and consequently limited ability to
add to the believeability and coherence of the product;
(2) JEP wasn't involved with "B5," but *should* have been; since
B5 had a critical, unfulfilled need for a *TECHNICAL* advisor ---
no one on the staff had any grounding to speak of in astronomy,
junior high school physics, or general technology.
and....
(3) You could have gotten both for the price of one, at the minor
expense of putting up with a partly-deaf guy who Talks Very Loud
and occasionally fails to worship the concept of sobriety, but
tends to be right quite often.
(4) And most important, "Pournelle" is already *IN* the series, if
I recall the name featured on the side of a relatively large
military spacecraft seen near Mars in an early episode!
You just don't like Jerry because he's bigger, louder, better educated,
and vastly too justifiably egotistical for a gentle, shy, retiring
diffident fellow such as yourself to cope with, that's all.
*evil grin*
P.S. When you get to his age, if you live that long, the only real
difference between you and JEP will be that you're not a drinker,
and never commanded troops in combat. So your hearing will be
better, and a bit more of your central nervous system will probably
survive; but you'll be *just* as insufferable. I have faith in you.
( No offense intended, I've voted for Hugo Awards for both of you. )
orso steven n
More to the point, will (1) Gharlane of Eddore, and (2) Jan Potts be in
attendance?
As those who have followed this newsgroup over the years doubtless
realize, the first face-to-brain meeting of Lt. Potts and the Eddorean
would be the sort of event to which one could sell tickets to benefit
some worthy, but hideously expensive, charitable cause. (A brain
transplant for Sen. Trent Lott comes to mind . . . but I digress.)
Memo to Gharlane: Take the advice of one who has met Lt. Potts in
person on several occasions. Before they wheel your tank into the
room, make sure your underlings have upgraded its refrigeration
capacities. Otherwise, the slurry in which you float will vaporize at
the first encounter.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* s-o...@uiuc.edu * * Faith manages. Hope cooks. Charity waits the tables.*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
--
Corun MacAnndra
>
>More to the point, will (1) Gharlane of Eddore, and (2) Jan Potts be in
>attendance?
>
>As those who have followed this newsgroup over the years doubtless
>realize, the first face-to-brain meeting of Lt. Potts and the Eddorean
>would be the sort of event to which one could sell tickets to benefit
>some worthy, but hideously expensive, charitable cause. (A brain
>transplant for Sen. Trent Lott comes to mind . . . but I digress.)
Sell tickets? Hell, Steve, I'd *buy* tickets to that event.
>Memo to Gharlane: Take the advice of one who has met Lt. Potts in
>person on several occasions. Before they wheel your tank into the
>room, make sure your underlings have upgraded its refrigeration
>capacities. Otherwise, the slurry in which you float will vaporize at
>the first encounter.
I've never met the Lady except electronically, but I've seen that glamour
shot of her. Did the camera and cameraman (if man it was behind the
camera) survive the encounter I wonder.
Corun (who is trying to be good and not wonder what it would be
like to _serve under_ such an officer as Ms. Potts)
P.S. Jan, I mean that in the most complimentary way.
Mike Van Pelt
Gharlane of Eddore <ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu> wrote:
> (3) You could have gotten both for the price of one, at the minor
> expense of putting up with a partly-deaf guy who Talks Very Loud
> and occasionally fails to worship the concept of sobriety, but
> tends to be right quite often.
One part of this no longer applies.
Jerry Pournelle has written in a number of places about having
quit drinking some years ago. To the best of my knowledge,
he's still "on the wagon."
He said either on his web page or his GEnie RT that one of the
major motivations for quitting drinking was being asked why he
did something, and having no better answer than "It seemed like
a good idea at the time," or worse, "It must have seemed like a
good idea at the time."
(I'm pretty sure some of the more outrageous "Jerry Pournlle"
stories, like some of the more outrageous "Harlan Ellison" stories,
are complete fabrications. See, they have something in common!)
--
Yes, I am the last man to have walked on the moon, | Mike Van Pelt
and that's a very dubious and disappointing honor. | m...@netcom.com
It's been far too long. -- Gene Cernan | KE6BVH
Gharlane of Eddore
In <7fEN4.11606$nb2.2...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>
s-o...@uiuc.edu (orso steven n) writes:
>
> More to the point, will (1) Gharlane of Eddore, and (2) Jan Potts be in
> attendance?
>
> As those who have followed this newsgroup over the years doubtless
> realize, the first face-to-brain meeting of Lt. Potts and the Eddorean
> would be the sort of event to which one could sell tickets to benefit
> some worthy, but hideously expensive, charitable cause. (A brain
> transplant for Sen. Trent Lott comes to mind . . . but I digress.)
>
> person on several occasions. Before they wheel your tank into the
> room, make sure your underlings have upgraded its refrigeration
> capacities. Otherwise, the slurry in which you float will vaporize
> at the first encounter.
>
Not a chance; for several reasons. The most major one is financial;
I've collected far too many rejection slips this last year, and can't
afford the drain on an exchequer which is already heavily debilitated;
Secondly, at my age it wouldn't be *safe* for me to be in the same room
with Ms. Lt. Jan Potts; the pheromones alone could engender a massive
stroke.
Thirdly, don't you think it's a bit presumptive to theorize about me
being willing to contribute to Chicago's financial base?
Chicago -- noted for the presence of Mayor Daly; noted for the enactment
of some of the most disgustingly offensive assaults on the Bill of Rights
in history; noted for filing a spate of lawsuits intended to deplete
the operating funds of legitimate industries by making them responsible
for their *customers*' behavior? When is Chicago going to file suit
against Ford Motor Company for building "unsafe cars" because someone
proves that you can die if you drive into a brick wall at 100 MPH ???
If I'm going to spend money in support of a socialist oligarchy, it'll
be in Ireland, where at least the redheads occur with a bit greater
frequency, and the land is more beautiful.
Friar Chuck
Jms at B5 wrote:
> >Great....I will come, but only if Halren is not invited. If Harlen is invited
> >then you have to invite Jerry Pournelle. Have fun
>
> This does not make any sense because Harlan had something to DO with B5, where
> Jerry did not. Why would these two have to be linked at the hip?
>
> jms
>
> (jms...@aol.com)
> B5 Official Fan Club at:
> http://www.thestation.com
> (all message content (c) 2000 by
> synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
> to reprint specifically denied to
> SFX Magazine)
That was a joke Joe.
You obviously didn't attend the Worldcons in the 70s-80s....Harlen and Jerry
together were always good for an "interesting discussion."
FC
Mark Dowling
> If I'm going to spend money in support of a socialist oligarchy, it'll
> be in Ireland, where at least the redheads occur with a bit greater
> frequency, and the land is more beautiful.
Well, we're not actually socialist anymore... we're rampant capitalists now.
Only problem is, now that people actually are *immigrating* to Ireland for
economic reasons we're busily inventing our own flavour of racism by burning
down hotels that agree to house asylum seekers...
Mark
--
______________________________________________
Mark Dowling, 2 Marlboro Mews, Wellington Road, Cork
+353-21-4508865, +353-87-2260861, dowl...@iol.ie
FDC Business Systems, FDC House, Wellington Road, Cork
+353-21-4509022, +353-21-4509272, bus...@fdc.ie
These aren't FDC's opinions as they don't pay me royalties.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> (2) JEP wasn't involved with "B5," but *should* have been; since
> B5 had a critical, unfulfilled need for a *TECHNICAL* advisor ---
> no one on the staff had any grounding to speak of in astronomy,
> junior high school physics, or general technology.
For those of you with similar concerns... What did you think of JPL's
job on Crusade? Did they make a difference?
--
Donate free food with a simple click: http://www.thehungersite.com/
Pål Are Nordal
a_b...@bigfoot.com
Mark Maher
<390A14C9...@bigfoot.com>...
Gharlane of Eddore wrote:
>
> (2) JEP wasn't involved with "B5," but *should* have been;
since
> B5 had a critical, unfulfilled need for a *TECHNICAL*
advisor ---
> no one on the staff had any grounding to speak of in
astronomy,
> junior high school physics, or general technology.
>For those of you with similar concerns... What did you think of
>JPL's
>job on Crusade? Did they make a difference?
Actually it was a little too soon to tell, but what was shown of
the "science" in Crusade was consistent with what we know, given
two major significant exceptions: technomancy and hyperspace.
Oh, and the occasional inertia snafu, given that they are
filming at 1 "g", not rocketing up and down through planetary
atmospheres. There's also a couple of scenes where they show
medical personnel obviously exposing themselves to unknown alien
contamination without just.
Pretty consistent with what we've seen of most decent Sci-Fi and
on par with Babylon 5, for the most part. They did contribute
some really neat "OOH AAH!" background shots and the idea of the
nanotech virus screen is very valid. They seemed to have
contributed in a bigger sense when it came to exactly what
colors to use given a particular kind of atmosphere.
As for needing a technical advisor, it might be helpful to
remind everybody that ST:TNG did have a Ph.D.. physicist as
technical advisor and story editor and that show had a number of
scientific gaffs. Not that the good doctor was necessarily at
fault (they don't have to listen to one's advice, after all) but
I think that Babylon 5 did a much better job, overall. Sure
there were things that didn't feel "real" to the everyday
person, but that's why they call it "fiction."
__!_!__
Gizmo
Gharlane of Eddore
>
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>* s-o...@uiuc.edu * * Faith manages. Hope cooks. Charity waits the tables.*
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
This is not quite correct; Faith, at least, is currently in L.A.,
and having abrogated a contract assignment granted by Wolfram & Hart,
is most likely in the deep end of the Problem Pond management-wise.
The Nuclear Marine
[ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
Mark Maher wrote:
>
> Pål Are Nordal wrote in message
> As for needing a technical advisor, it might be helpful to
> remind everybody that ST:TNG did have a Ph.D.. physicist as
> technical advisor and story editor and that show had a number of
> scientific gaffs. Not that the good doctor was necessarily at
> fault (they don't have to listen to one's advice, after all) but
> I think that Babylon 5 did a much better job, overall. Sure
> there were things that didn't feel "real" to the everyday
> person, but that's why they call it "fiction."
>
> __!_!__
> Gizmo
The ironic part is that most of us are well versed in Junior High and
High School physics, when we see something that flies in the face of
what we know we act like we have Ph. D (piled higher and deeper). The
true facts of physics are deeper than can be taught in high school so we
might miss what advisors would tell as possible then raise the BS flag.
Certain complaints about the nanotech shield, cybernetics, gravitics and
even spacing come to mind.
The other problem is we want to apply societal norms today to a culture
200 years from now. Oh well, damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Besides, every Greek knows Perseus could not catch the turtle.
Nuke
Shaz
"The Nuclear Marine" <nuke-...@home.com> wrote in message
news:390A219A...@home.com...
>Besides, every Greek knows Perseus could not catch the turtle.
Do you mean Achilles and the tortoise (Zeno's paradoxes)?
Shaz <confused>
Gharlane of Eddore
In <BqoO4.27846$PV.19...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
"Mark Maher" <marka...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
...<deletia>
>
> As for needing a technical advisor, it might be helpful to
> remind everybody that ST:TNG did have a Ph.D.. physicist as
> technical advisor and story editor and that show had a number of
> scientific gaffs. Not that the good doctor was necessarily at
> fault (they don't have to listen to one's advice, after all) but
> I think that Babylon 5 did a much better job, overall.
>
Bullcragglies. For one thing, the Franchise hanger-on you mention
was notorious for making comments like "Sometimes the science has
to take a back seat to the story," or "There are times when you
have to ignore scientific reality if you want to make a TV show."
In other words, he had no slightest concept of what "science fiction"
is, or how to go about writing, creating, or validating such a thing.
He was only there for the weekly check, and the occasional windfall
of a script sale. ( And his scripts weren't anything to write home
about, either. )
Worse, he had no general scientific competence, and was even more
useless in *any* sort of script-consultative or technical advisory
capacity when dealing with any sort of science outside his putative
specialty. ( He liked to make jokes about how he knew nothing about
biology, for example, and presumably giggled on his way to deposit
his checks. )
Nice work, if you can get it, but certainly not grounds for asserting
that *OTHER* shows should function at an equally incompetent level.
>
> Sure there were things that didn't feel "real" to the everyday
> person, but that's why they call it "fiction."
>
Please don't put on airs in support of incompetence. If it doesn't
feel "real," it's either fantasy, or the writer is incompetent.
If you can't elicit willing suspension of disbelief on the part of
the audience, you need to be in some other line of work.
And asserting that "it's only fiction" is no defense for sloppy work.
====================================================================
|| ||
|| "It's Science Fiction if, presuming technical competence on ||
|| the part of the writer, he genuinely believes it could ||
|| happen. Otherwise, it's Fantasy." ||
|| --- John W. Campbell, Jr. <1937> ||
|| ||
====================================================================
Mark Maher
<8ef61m$n...@news.csus.edu>...
>
>In <BqoO4.27846$PV.19...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
>"Mark Maher" <marka...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>
>...<deletia>
>
mention
>was notorious for making comments like "Sometimes the science
has
>to take a back seat to the story," or "There are times when you
>have to ignore scientific reality if you want to make a TV
show."
>
Scientific "reality" is always subject to change as new things
are discovered, but the one constant in science is the tedious
work needed to gather that knowledge. In arguable one of the
greatest publick relations/scientific endeavors of the last
century, the abortive exploration of the moon, people were bored
of it after the very first mission was completed. The bottom
line is that good science doesn't usually make for good
television which is, by design, entertainment - not education.
>In other words, he had no slightest concept of what "science
fiction"
>is, or how to go about writing, creating, or validating such a
thing.
>He was only there for the weekly check, and the occasional
windfall
>of a script sale. ( And his scripts weren't anything to write
home
>about, either. )
That is a matter of opinion. The Farscape episode "The Way They
Weren't" was, in my opinion, one of the best so far in that
series. The down side is that since signing on as an AP, the
series has a decidedly strange look-and-feel to it. I'm not sure
who's responsible for that and only time will tell if this very
unsettling ambiance is there to stay or not.
>Worse, he had no general scientific competence, and was even
more
>useless in *any* sort of script-consultative or technical
advisory
>capacity when dealing with any sort of science outside his
putative
>specialty. ( He liked to make jokes about how he knew nothing
about
>biology, for example, and presumably giggled on his way to
deposit
>his checks. )
>
>Nice work, if you can get it, but certainly not grounds for
asserting
>that *OTHER* shows should function at an equally incompetent
level.
While I'm no master of the sciences, I can claim to have at
least a passing knowledge of biochemistry, having gotten my
degree in it. The one thing that I learned about it is that it's
*way* too complex for one given individual to know all there is
to know about it. If your gripe is that someone admits that they
don't have any particular knowledge of a given discipline of
science, then your gripe is that they're part of the human race.
While there have been some extraordinary individuals who
understand a *bit* more than the rest, *nobody* comprehends
everything. Biology is at the opposite end of the spectrum from
physics, so I'm not surprised in the least that a Ph.D.
physicist would consider themselves uneducated in that
particular area.
> Please don't put on airs in support of incompetence. If it
doesn't
> feel "real," it's either fantasy, or the writer is
incompetent.
> If you can't elicit willing suspension of disbelief on the
part of
> the audience, you need to be in some other line of work.
> And asserting that "it's only fiction" is no defense for
sloppy >work.
Each show has its own level of scientific accuracy that it
adheres to. Some go to great lengths to be accurate and others
deliberately side-step addressing the "science" behind the
scene. The truth of the matter is that one simply cannot be
completely accurate in portraying events like future space
travel or even present day air-to-air combat. It's either too
difficult to stage or impossible to understand without making
some reasoned leap of faith. As long as that reasoning is
acceptable to the viewing audience, then it works.
__!_!__
Gizmo
Mark Maher
<8ef61m$n...@news.csus.edu>...
>
>In <BqoO4.27846$PV.19...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
>"Mark Maher" <marka...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>
>...<deletia>
>
>Bullcragglies. For one thing, the Franchise hanger-on you
mention
>was notorious for making comments like "Sometimes the science
has
>to take a back seat to the story," or "There are times when you
>have to ignore scientific reality if you want to make a TV
show."
>
Scientific "reality" is always subject to change as new things
are discovered, but the one constant in science is the tedious
work needed to gather that knowledge. In arguable one of the
greatest public relations/scientific endeavors of the last
The Nuclear Marine
historical correction.
about what, high gasoline prices or my dog, Huggy Bear?
==================
Nuke