Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Rumor: New ST series will be prequel series

33 views
Skip to first unread message

Dan Tropea

unread,
Feb 22, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/22/00
to
Ok this is from scifi.ign.com and i know for videogames ign is an
excellent source but i did notice this tidbit in their SF section. I
really do not know how reliabe their SF section but if it like their
videogames section then this could be reliable. (ign has multiple
sections)

It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the original TOS
which may have established characters. My bet right now is that this
will be another Enterprise series featuring either Captain Pike preSpock
or the Captain before Pike. If i recall Pike was Captain for many years.

I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They really
need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way to get viewers
back that dropped Voyager.

The info is from:
http://scifi.ign.com/tv/3833.html


starcro1

unread,
Feb 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/23/00
to

Dan Tropea wrote in message
<5265-38B...@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...


Will *any* Enterprise do?
You realize, of course, that a prequel series would have to have an all-new
cast? That, in all likelihood, Paramount will have Rick Berman amd Michael
Pillar as executive producers and Jeri Taylor & Brannon Braga as chief
writers? These are the same people responsible for viewers allegedly tuning
out "Voyager." How would the same team have greater success with young,
unknown actors as Kirk, Spock, Pike, et al, on a ship called Enterprise?
The success of the original "Star Trek" was the result of an intangible
chemistry between a unique blend of cast and crew. If it were a formula that
could be replicated simply by invoking a magical ship's name, don't you
think they would have done it by now?.


David Levy

unread,
Feb 23, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/23/00
to
Dan Tropea wrote:

> It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the
> original TOS

You frequently use that term, and it's redundant.


> which may have established characters. My bet right now is
> that this will be another Enterprise series featuring either
> Captain Pike preSpock or the Captain before Pike. If i recall
> Pike was Captain for many years.
>
> I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They
> really need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way
> to get viewers back that dropped Voyager.

This has been reported by several reliable sources. Frankly,
I'm disappointed. Out of all of the various rumors for
potential storylines that have been floating around, this is
probably my least favorite. It seems extremely constraining, as
the producers will be completely bound by previously established
facts. Can you imagine how difficult it will be to maintain
continuity? Science fiction fans (particularly "Star Trek"
fans) are bothered by even the tiniest slip-up. Not only will
the writers have to worry about past events, they'll also have
to consider the events which will take place within the later
timelines of four separate series.

Part of the "Star Trek" charm has always been the introduction
of new technologies and civilizations. I don't see how either
will be possible in this case, and just think of the innovations
that we'll be giving up. (holo-projection, for example)

These are just a few of the questions that will need to be
answered. What about the Klingons? If they decide to use the
current style of makeup, this will anger more than a few long-
time fans. If they're just humans with goatees, this will
confuse fans of the recent series. What about the uniforms and
electronic devices? "Star Trek" is supposed to futuristic for
the present-day viewing audience. Are they going to have the
female crew members trotting around in those short skirts?
(Yes, I know that this would please as many viewers as it would
annoy.) Are they going to use communicators that appear to be
less sophisticated than today's cellular telephones? I just
don't see how they're going to pull this off.

In my opinion, "Star Trek: Voyager" has undergone an enormous
surge in quality. Even with too much focus on Seven of Nine,
this season has arguably been better than any two previous
seasons combined. (I'm assuming that this is due to "Star Trek:
Deep Space Nine" coming to an end.) Unlike the vast majority of
fans, I have never been terribly fond of Borg-related episodes.
Lately, I've found even those to be terrific. Heck, they
managed to work a professional wrestler into a recent episode,
and still have it turn out wonderfully. Rather than introducing
a new series, I would like to see this series stick around
longer than currently planned. After five seasons of
unbelievably inconsistent writing, (ranging from brilliant to
laughable) everything has finally fallen into place. It seems a
shame to begin wrapping things up, when there are so many
possibilities left unexplored.

Why should all "Star Trek" series receive a maximum of seven
seasons? While "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" ended at the
perfect time, "Star Trek: The Next Generation" had plenty of
life left in it. A few extra seasons would have been greatly
preferable to a series of mediocre movies.


David Levy


* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


Flint

unread,
Feb 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/24/00
to
In article <3FKs4.1188$Wl.3...@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net>,
"starcro1" <star...@gte.net> wrote:
>

>
> Will *any* Enterprise do?
> You realize, of course, that a prequel series would have to have an
all-new
> cast? That, in all likelihood, Paramount will have Rick Berman amd
Michael
> Pillar as executive producers and Jeri Taylor & Brannon Braga as chief
> writers? These are the same people responsible for viewers allegedly
tuning
> out "Voyager." How would the same team have greater success with
young,
> unknown actors as Kirk, Spock, Pike, et al, on a ship called
Enterprise?
> The success of the original "Star Trek" was the result of an
intangible
> chemistry between a unique blend of cast and crew. If it were a
formula that
> could be replicated simply by invoking a magical ship's name, don't
you
> think they would have done it by now?.
>
>

They don't need to get that "formula" -- they produced The Next
Generation, which was the most widely-watched and successful "Star
Trek". So they just need to get *that* formula back.

And the show won't "in all likelihood" involve Piller or Taylor.
They've moved on, and Piller's working on his own television
properties. Berman and Braga alone are the honchos on the fifth series.
--
"...Happy Meals with legs."


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

krom...@my-deja.com

unread,
Feb 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/24/00
to
In article <2627ce6c...@usw-ex0106-046.remarq.com>,

David Levy <d_levyN...@mail.com.invalid> wrote:
> Dan Tropea wrote:
>
> > It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the
> > original TOS
>
> You frequently use that term, and it's redundant.
>
> > which may have established characters. My bet right now is
> > that this will be another Enterprise series featuring either
> > Captain Pike preSpock or the Captain before Pike. If i recall
> > Pike was Captain for many years.
> >
> > I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They
> > really need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way
> > to get viewers back that dropped Voyager.
>

AICN reported a little while back (and seemed fairly reliable) that
there are (or were) 3 different options they are pursuing. One is this
one, the second is the tales of a renegade group of spies from Section
13, and the third is the dreaded 'Starfleet Academy, 90210' scenario.

> This has been reported by several reliable sources. Frankly,
> I'm disappointed. Out of all of the various rumors for
> potential storylines that have been floating around, this is
> probably my least favorite. It seems extremely constraining, as
> the producers will be completely bound by previously established
> facts. Can you imagine how difficult it will be to maintain
> continuity? Science fiction fans (particularly "Star Trek"
> fans) are bothered by even the tiniest slip-up. Not only will
> the writers have to worry about past events, they'll also have
> to consider the events which will take place within the later
> timelines of four separate series.

Nah. It will be set sufficiently in the past that only very major
events will have to be kept aware of. I dont think it would be a
problem.

>
> Part of the "Star Trek" charm has always been the introduction
> of new technologies and civilizations. I don't see how either
> will be possible in this case, and just think of the innovations
> that we'll be giving up. (holo-projection, for example)

Well, they would have to rely on something else. I suspect that it
would be primarily Vulcans and Klingons. I think there is lots of
material there, getting a chance to focus in on just a few races,
instead of the 'bumpy-forehead-guy-of-the-week'.

And I'd gladly give up holo-projection if it meant I wouldnt ever have
to watch another 'holodeck-goes-berzerk' episode :-)

>
> These are just a few of the questions that will need to be
> answered. What about the Klingons? If they decide to use the
> current style of makeup, this will anger more than a few long-
> time fans. If they're just humans with goatees, this will
> confuse fans of the recent series. What about the uniforms and
> electronic devices? "Star Trek" is supposed to futuristic for
> the present-day viewing audience. Are they going to have the
> female crew members trotting around in those short skirts?
> (Yes, I know that this would please as many viewers as it would
> annoy.) Are they going to use communicators that appear to be
> less sophisticated than today's cellular telephones? I just
> don't see how they're going to pull this off.
>

Instead of considering TOS, consider Movies 1-6. By ST6, there wasnt
much of that kind of thing *anyways*. So the precident for revamping
the look is already there.

Andy K.

WWS

unread,
Feb 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/24/00
to

David Levy wrote:


>
> Dan Tropea wrote:
> >
> > I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They
> > really need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way
> > to get viewers back that dropped Voyager.
>

> This has been reported by several reliable sources. Frankly,
> I'm disappointed. Out of all of the various rumors for
> potential storylines that have been floating around, this is
> probably my least favorite.

Agreed. Although "Star Trek 90210" didn't look too promising either.

Best new ST series? Andromeda. Give it up, Paramount.

> It seems extremely constraining, as the producers will be
> completely bound by previously established facts.

You haven't watched much of Star Trek for the last 5 years, have you?

> Can you imagine how difficult it will be to maintain
> continuity? Science fiction fans (particularly "Star Trek"
> fans) are bothered by even the tiniest slip-up.

Not after Voyager! Braga has spent 5 years conditining all the
remaining fans to accept 5 major continuity errors per episode.

> Not only will
> the writers have to worry about past events, they'll also have
> to consider the events which will take place within the later
> timelines of four separate series.

Brannan Braga - "What, me worry? When I've got Babe of Borg
waiting for me to bang her brains out every night? Don't you
puny fans try to tell me anything until you get your own show
and bang your stars brains out every night like me!"


>
> Part of the "Star Trek" charm has always been the introduction
> of new technologies and civilizations. I don't see how either
> will be possible in this case, and just think of the innovations
> that we'll be giving up. (holo-projection, for example)

Did you see last nights holo-episode? GIVE IT UP!! GIVE IT UP!!!!

(snip specific problems, as if anyone at Paramount will even
give a damn or will ever bother watching any old episodes to
see what they should be doing)


>
> In my opinion, "Star Trek: Voyager" has undergone an enormous
> surge in quality. Even with too much focus on Seven of Nine,
> this season has arguably been better than any two previous
> seasons combined.

Repeat - did you see last night's episode? You can't have.

> Unlike the vast majority of
> fans, I have never been terribly fond of Borg-related episodes.

Actually, I loved them until TPTB decided to totally emasculate
them and make them pathetic shadows of the force they were when
they first showed up. Remember how one Cube nearly destroyed
all of Starfleet? And yet now the Delta Flyer can fly into
Borg Central and get back out and the Borg can't do anything
about it. Pathetic.

> Lately, I've found even those to be terrific. Heck, they
> managed to work a professional wrestler into a recent episode,
> and still have it turn out wonderfully. Rather than introducing
> a new series, I would like to see this series stick around
> longer than currently planned. After five seasons of
> unbelievably inconsistent writing, (ranging from brilliant to
> laughable) everything has finally fallen into place. It seems a
> shame to begin wrapping things up, when there are so many
> possibilities left unexplored.

Yes, like finding out whether or not Beltane has the ability to
do anything besides the "wooden indian" that's his specialty.


>
> Why should all "Star Trek" series receive a maximum of seven
> seasons? While "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" ended at the
> perfect time, "Star Trek: The Next Generation" had plenty of
> life left in it. A few extra seasons would have been greatly
> preferable to a series of mediocre movies.

Someone once made a "Fiscal Repackaging" post about this, that was
perfect and dead on the money. Of course, that someone didn't like
it much when the logic came back to haunt him.
--

__________________________________________________WWS_____________

But that's a whole 'nother long, long, story.

recook77

unread,
Feb 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/24/00
to
Dan Tropea <tro...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:5265-38B...@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net...

> Ok this is from scifi.ign.com and i know for videogames ign is an
> excellent source but i did notice this tidbit in their SF section. I
> really do not know how reliabe their SF section but if it like their
> videogames section then this could be reliable. (ign has multiple
> sections)
>
> It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the original TOS
> which may have established characters. My bet right now is that this
> will be another Enterprise series featuring either Captain Pike preSpock
> or the Captain before Pike. If i recall Pike was Captain for many years.
>
> I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They really
> need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way to get viewers
> back that dropped Voyager.
>
> The info is from:
> http://scifi.ign.com/tv/3833.html
>
Berman and Braga already submitted a series idea about the birth of the
Federation and it was turned down. Considering that both of them dislike
the original series, a prequel couldn't be a worse idea.

Of course, who's to say Paramoney *wants* Berman and Braga working on the
new series? Originally, Braga was supposed to leave Voyager by the end of
this season to begin work on the series, but as of now, there is *still* no
show in development.

Berman, meanwhile, is worried about his job. A journalist asked him an
innocuous question about the future of the franchise and Berman replied,
"Why? Do you want it? You can have it!"


--
"God is a very busy god. He may not be there when you want him, but he's
always on time."

Curtis Mayfield
1942-1999


David Levy

unread,
Feb 24, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/24/00
to
WWS wrote:

> Agreed. Although "Star Trek 90210" didn't look too promising
> either.

I'm not terribly fond of the "Starfleet Academy" idea, but I
consider it superior to this one, and marginally better than
the "Section 31" concept. (I found those episodes of "Star
Trek: Deep Space Nine" to be unoriginal and poorly written.)

I would be thrilled with an Excelsior series. (unlikely) *THAT*
would be worth giving up the newer technological advances for.


> > It seems extremely constraining, as the producers will be
> > completely bound by previously established facts.

> You haven't watched much of Star Trek for the last 5 years,
> have you?

I have, and that was my point. I should have said, "The
producers will wind up butchering the previously established
facts, even more than they already have."


> > Can you imagine how difficult it will be to maintain
> > continuity? Science fiction fans (particularly "Star Trek"
> > fans) are bothered by even the tiniest slip-up.

> Not after Voyager! Braga has spent 5 years conditining all the
> remaining fans to accept 5 major continuity errors per episode.

That's a slight exaggeration, slight being the key word.


> Did you see last nights holo-episode? GIVE IT UP!! GIVE IT
> UP!!!!

I have not yet seen this episode. I watch other programs on
Wednesday nights. I see "Star Trek: Voyager" on either Saturday
(WPSG's replay) or Sunday. (WWOR's replay)


> (snip specific problems, as if anyone at Paramount will even
> give a damn or will ever bother watching any old episodes to
> see what they should be doing)

I agree, and it's truly unfortunate.


> Repeat - did you see last night's episode? You can't have.

Assuming that the show in question is a dud, it will be only the
second episode of the season that I don't at least deem
reasonably entertaining. That's a much better track record than
any previous season.


> Yes, like finding out whether or not Beltane (Beltran) has


> the ability to do anything besides the "wooden indian" that's
> his specialty.

He isn't one of my favorites, but his performance is
acceptable. I am, however, a big fan of both Robert Picardo and
Ethan Phillips. I don't dislike any of the cast.

Thomas Bagwell

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
David Levy wrote:
>
> Dan Tropea wrote:
>
> > It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the
> > original TOS
>
> You frequently use that term, and it's redundant.
>
> > which may have established characters. My bet right now is
> > that this will be another Enterprise series featuring either
> > Captain Pike preSpock or the Captain before Pike. If i recall
> > Pike was Captain for many years.
> >
> > I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They
> > really need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way
> > to get viewers back that dropped Voyager.
>
> This has been reported by several reliable sources. Frankly,
> I'm disappointed. Out of all of the various rumors for
> potential storylines that have been floating around, this is
> probably my least favorite. It seems extremely constraining, as

> the producers will be completely bound by previously established
> facts. Can you imagine how difficult it will be to maintain

> continuity? Science fiction fans (particularly "Star Trek"
> fans) are bothered by even the tiniest slip-up. Not only will

> the writers have to worry about past events, they'll also have
> to consider the events which will take place within the later
> timelines of four separate series.

Unfortunately, you're wrong. They won't care in the least if they
follow established continuity. They'll ignore it entirely "for the sake
of the story". If they've proven anything in the last decade or so,
it's that continuity is low on their list of priorities...just ahead of
scientific accuracy (or even a nod in its direction....)

Tom B.

o_d...@my-deja.com

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
I think we can very safely rule out any Enterprise or prequel show, the
Series V rumor mill is going and producing only garbage. Neither Braga
nor Berman have any interest in Trek's past, they don't even
particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff they're not
driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either. The show will be set
in the future, they're going to tamper with the format and it will be
sort of set on a starship but definetly not on the Enterprise. To know
more we'll just have to wait and see.


In article <5265-38B...@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,


tro...@webtv.net (Dan Tropea) wrote:
> Ok this is from scifi.ign.com and i know for videogames ign is an
> excellent source but i did notice this tidbit in their SF section. I
> really do not know how reliabe their SF section but if it like their
> videogames section then this could be reliable. (ign has multiple
> sections)
>

> It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the original
TOS

> which may have established characters. My bet right now is that this
> will be another Enterprise series featuring either Captain Pike
preSpock
> or the Captain before Pike. If i recall Pike was Captain for many
years.
>
> I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They really
> need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way to get viewers
> back that dropped Voyager.
>

> The info is from:
> http://scifi.ign.com/tv/3833.html
>
>

Captain Infinity

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
Once Upon A Time,
In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
o_d...@my-deja.com wrote:

>I think we can very safely rule out any Enterprise or prequel show, the
>Series V rumor mill is going and producing only garbage. Neither Braga
>nor Berman have any interest in Trek's past, they don't even
>particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff they're not
>driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either. The show will be set
>in the future, they're going to tamper with the format and it will be
>sort of set on a starship but definetly not on the Enterprise. To know
>more we'll just have to wait and see.

Wow, what a load of...information.

Tell me, what do you use to polish your crystal balls?

**
Captain Infinity

Stanley Kowalski

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to

Dear Sir,

I want to object to the insensitive way that you make fun of people of
Polish descent in that post, Implying that haveing Crystal Balls is
somehow some defect peculiar to Polish people, when in fact although
I have heard many many valid slurs against those of Polish descent I
have never heard that particular one before so I for one do not believe
that the incidence of Crystal Balls in Poles is any greater than in
the population at Large.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

- Stanley Kowalski

David Stinson

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
In article <38B6B8FF...@snd.net>, Stanley Kowalski <t...@snd.net> wrote:

Say Hi to Stella for me....


--
David A. Stinson Web Page: http://www.procom.com/~daves/index.html
E-Mail: dsti...@ix.netcomz.com da...@procomz.com dast...@aolz.com
* NO ELECTRONS WERE HARMED DURING PRODUCTION OF THIS MESSAGE *
REMOVE Z FROM ADDRESS IN POST TO EMAIL.

Stanley Kowalski

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to

> Say Hi to Stella for me....

Sure thing, I need another beer anyway. Damn, where is she?

STELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!

- Stanley Kowalski

Robert Wolfe

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, o_d...@my-deja.com
wrote:

>[Berman and Braga] don't even


>particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff
>they're not driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either.

Hey, Odeus, pull my finger.

BLLLLLWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAPPPPP

Ah, much better.

I doubt very much that any other Star Trek writing staff had as
much affection for the original series as we did. We LIKED
Kang, Kor and Koloth. That's why we brought them back and gave
them one last ride. We LOVED the Gorn, that's why we said
Kasidy's brother lived on the planet where Arena took place. I
dare say we followed up more plotlines from the original series
than anyone else (Mirror Universe, tribbles, Eugenics War, birth
of the Federation, pirates of Orion, Fizzbin). If we'd been
allowed to, I guarentee we'd've put an Andorian on the show so
fast your head would've spun. (Speaking of which, the ONLY
thing I know for a fact that Berman dislikes about the original
series - Andorians. He hates the antenae.)

I mean, think of what you're saying. Ron Moore "driven by an
obsessive desire to deface" the original series. Have you been
sniffing glue? Rene Echevarria, ditto? When he was in high
school the man owned his own TOS uniform. Hans Beimler was
raised on TOS (in Spanish, the way God intended it to be
heard). Frankly, since I'd only seen ever episode five or six
times growing up, I sometimes felt TOS deficient.

Geeze, someone light a candle in here or something.

Robert

Paul Vader

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
Robert Wolfe <robert.wol...@att.net.invalid> writes:
>Kasidy's brother lived on the planet where Arena took place. I
>dare say we followed up more plotlines from the original series
>than anyone else (Mirror Universe, tribbles, Eugenics War, birth
>of the Federation, pirates of Orion, Fizzbin). If we'd been
~~~~~~~

I'm fairly sure I've seen the entire run of DS9 (and liked it, mostly), and I
don't remember this ever coming up. Do you have an episode reference
stashed away in your brain somewhere?

Get back to work! *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.

Matt Ackeret

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
In article <894o7r$vc3$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>,

recook77 <reco...@you-spam-you-die.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Of course, who's to say Paramoney *wants* Berman and Braga working on the
>new series? Originally, Braga was supposed to leave Voyager by the end of
>this season to begin work on the series, but as of now, there is *still* no
>show in development.

Brannon Braga did a talk at De Anza College on 2/11/2000 in association
with the UC Santa Cruz Alumni Association.

He said there *is* a show in development. He couldn't/wouldn't give any
details. I did ask/bug him about the cutting-several-minutes-on-new-episodes-
of-Voyager issue in the autographed photo line, but he didn't really have
much of an answer. (That's not meant to be negative towards him.. Basically
he seemed to think "that's just business".)
--
mat...@area.com

recook77

unread,
Feb 25, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/25/00
to
Travers Naran <tna...@direct.ca> wrote in message
news:FvHt4.144005$B6.9...@quark.idirect.com...
> "Robert Wolfe" <robert.wol...@att.net.invalid> wrote in message
> news:0837ccde...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com...

> > In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, o_d...@my-deja.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > >[Berman and Braga] don't even
> > >particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff
> > >they're not driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either.
> >
> > I mean, think of what you're saying. Ron Moore "driven by an
> > obsessive desire to deface" the original series. Have you been
> > sniffing glue? Rene Echevarria, ditto? When he was in high
> > school the man owned his own TOS uniform. Hans Beimler was
> > raised on TOS (in Spanish, the way God intended it to be
> > heard).
>
> I heard Beimler also had some interesting notions on driving.

*I* heard Beimler's grand-dad was a war hero. True or false?


>
> > Frankly, since I'd only seen ever episode five or six
> > times growing up, I sometimes felt TOS deficient.
>

> Pffft! Not enough. Unless you can recite entire TOS scripts from memory,
> you just aren't Trek enough for me.
>
>
Does it count if you know the number of times Kirk's shirt was ripped?

Jason Seaver

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to

Paul Vader wrote in message <896pgg$6hv$1...@Mercury.mcs.net>...

>Robert Wolfe <robert.wol...@att.net.invalid> writes:
>>Kasidy's brother lived on the planet where Arena took place. I
>>dare say we followed up more plotlines from the original series
>>than anyone else (Mirror Universe, tribbles, Eugenics War, birth
>>of the Federation, pirates of Orion, Fizzbin). If we'd been
> ~~~~~~~
>
>I'm fairly sure I've seen the entire run of DS9 (and liked it, mostly), and
I
>don't remember this ever coming up. Do you have an episode reference
>stashed away in your brain somewhere?

Quark was being transported to testify against The Orion Syndicate in "The
Ascent", and O'Brien later went undercover with them.

Klyfix

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
In article <0ef3a162...@usw-ex0103-023.remarq.com>, David Levy
<d_levyN...@mail.com.invalid> writes:

>
>I'm not terribly fond of the "Starfleet Academy" idea, but I
>consider it superior to this one, and marginally better than
>the "Section 31" concept. (I found those episodes of "Star
>Trek: Deep Space Nine" to be unoriginal and poorly written.)
>

(Klyfix sees an indication that a flippant suggestion he made months
ago is actually being considered, and is taken aback)

Wait, they're actually considering a "Star Trek: Section 31" series?
Whatever the flaws of the writing on the DS9 episodes, the notion
of a group that is the _real_ reason the Federation has survived and
that accomplished it by violating many Federation principles is
appealing. Well, to me.
-----------------------------
V. S. Greene : kly...@aol.com : Boston, near Arkham...
Eckzylon: http://members.aol.com/klyfix/eckzylon.html
RPG and SF, predictions, philosophy, and other things.


Travers Naran

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
"Robert Wolfe" <robert.wol...@att.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:0837ccde...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com...
> In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, o_d...@my-deja.com
> wrote:
>
> >[Berman and Braga] don't even
> >particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff
> >they're not driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either.
>
> I mean, think of what you're saying. Ron Moore "driven by an
> obsessive desire to deface" the original series. Have you been
> sniffing glue? Rene Echevarria, ditto? When he was in high
> school the man owned his own TOS uniform. Hans Beimler was
> raised on TOS (in Spanish, the way God intended it to be
> heard).

I heard Beimler also had some interesting notions on driving.

> Frankly, since I'd only seen ever episode five or six

Gharlane of Eddore

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
Apparently responding to some of the Tropea Plague's wafflings,

In <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com> o_d...@my-deja.com writes:
>
> I think we can very safely rule out any Enterprise or prequel show,
> the Series V rumor mill is going and producing only garbage.
>

You can't rule out ANYTHING coming from ParaMush.
Asserting otherwise is the act of someone who's already forgotten
history.

These are the same people who would probably *never* have put
"TREK" back into production if they hadn't seen George Lucas
doing $300 million gross on "STAR WARS."

They have *NO* idea what they're doing, and never have had.
Making any sort of prediction, in advance of the actual insanity,
is a waste of lifespan.

>
> Neither Braga nor Berman have any interest in Trek's past, they

> don't even particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9
> staff they're not driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either.
>

"Deface?" Presuming that's the word you intended to employ
( always a dangerous presumption when dealing with subliterate
Treknoids ) you haven't been paying attention; to either
the work coming *out* of Paramount, *or* to the public
pronunciamentos coming from the ex-porn king or the overpromoted
intern boy riding on his coat-tails...... *NEITHER* of them
has any love/respect/appreciation for the Franchise, outside of
a paycheck and access to Desperate Chickadees.

>
> The show will be set in the future, they're going to tamper with
> the format and it will be sort of set on a starship but definetly
> not on the Enterprise. To know more we'll just have to wait and see.
>

"Will be?" "definetly" < sic > ???

Since you're nobody, know no one, know nothing, and apparently
can't even read or write English, you are hardly in a position
to know anything about what may or may not lie in the future
of the Franchise. Since Berman and Braga themselves have no
idea what's going to happen next, and are feeling the draft,
for you to start announcing in public what is, or is not,
going to be.... would be laughable, if it weren't just slightly
too offensive to be pitiable.

It's a free country; post whatever you like on the subject, but
from now on I won't be reading anything from you.

You're boring, you're inept, you're beneath contempt, you're a
complete waste of my, and everyone else's, time.

You've just been *plonk*ed, and I will now get back to paying
attention to people whose thoughts may have some remote bearing
on something of interest.

*PLONK*

>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.
>

Someone *REALLY* ought to tell your big brother you're using
his DejaCom account.


Geoduck

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
On 26 Feb 2000 01:53:49 GMT, kly...@aol.comedy (Klyfix) wrote:

>In article <0ef3a162...@usw-ex0103-023.remarq.com>, David Levy
><d_levyN...@mail.com.invalid> writes:
>
>>
>>I'm not terribly fond of the "Starfleet Academy" idea, but I
>>consider it superior to this one, and marginally better than
>>the "Section 31" concept. (I found those episodes of "Star
>>Trek: Deep Space Nine" to be unoriginal and poorly written.)
>>
>(Klyfix sees an indication that a flippant suggestion he made months
>ago is actually being considered, and is taken aback)
>
>Wait, they're actually considering a "Star Trek: Section 31" series?
>Whatever the flaws of the writing on the DS9 episodes, the notion
>of a group that is the _real_ reason the Federation has survived and
>that accomplished it by violating many Federation principles is
>appealing. Well, to me.

If I remember correctly from the AICN report, the series as presented
to the test groups wouldn't be about Section 31 per se, but a motley
group of S31 escapees/rejects.
--
Geoduck
geo...@usa.net
http://www.olywa.net/cook

Geoduck

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
On 26 Feb 2000 03:49:19 GMT, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of
Eddore) wrote:

(snip)


>You've just been *plonk*ed, and I will now get back to paying
>attention to people whose thoughts may have some remote bearing
>on something of interest.

(snip)

You expect to find people who fit this criteria here on Usenet?

Robert Wolfe

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to

"recook77" <reco...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:897i1i$2fa$1...@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net...


> *I* heard Beimler's grand-dad was a war hero. True or false?

Yes. True. Spanish Civil War.

Gharlane of Eddore

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to

On 26 Feb 2000 03:49:19 GMT, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu
(Gharlane of Eddore) wrote:
>
(snip)
> You've just been *plonk*ed, and I will now get back to paying
> attention to people whose thoughts may have some remote bearing
> on something of interest.
(snip)

In <38b75e8b...@news.olywa.net> geo...@usa.net writes:
>
> You expect to find people who fit this criteria here on Usenet?
>


"This" is a singular referent; "criteria" is plural.

I do not respond to ungrammatical postings from Large Ducks.


Klyfix

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to

Oh, the wash-outs and wusses. Well, that's no fun. :)

Klyfix

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
In article <897qtm$e...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane
of Eddore) writes:

>
>In <38b75e8b...@news.olywa.net> geo...@usa.net writes:
>>
>> You expect to find people who fit this criteria here on Usenet?
>>
>
>
>"This" is a singular referent; "criteria" is plural.
>
>I do not respond to ungrammatical postings from Large Ducks.
>

But it's a clam...

Geoduck

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
On 26 Feb 2000 08:51:44 GMT, kly...@aol.comedy (Klyfix) wrote:

>In article <897qtm$e...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane
>of Eddore) writes:
>
>>
>>In <38b75e8b...@news.olywa.net> geo...@usa.net writes:
>>>
>>> You expect to find people who fit this criteria here on Usenet?
>>>
>>
>>
>>"This" is a singular referent; "criteria" is plural.
>>
>>I do not respond to ungrammatical postings from Large Ducks.
>>
>
>But it's a clam...

Which is why he responded to my comment. Ungrammatical posts from
large saltwater clams obviously *are* worth his attention. I'm not
sure if I should be dismayed or pleased by this.

All of this leaves us with a single burning question: what does
Gharlane have against large ducks?

Terry L. Smith

unread,
Feb 26, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/26/00
to
Geoduck <geo...@usa.net> wrote:

? Who knows. Ducks are kewl. Almost as kewl as cats.

Frank Todd once had a "massive Steamer Duck," which he let
me see, although he did not let me play with it, because, he
said, it was "bad-tempered." I would have thought that sort
of thing would have appealed to mr ofEddore, but one never knows.

It was, however, impressively massive.


"What's the difference between a duck?"
- pertinent question


- M.Q.S., Cdr' C'mell KPS AKA The Lady in Green

(posting and emailing to no effect whatsoever, and this one won't
show either, so wotthehell;
I do not like MS2K.
The reason why I cannot say; But this I know,
- there's Hell to pay -
I do not like MS2K. [- moi ])


...Frank did let me play with "Rudolph," AKA "Pops," the *really*
massive spur-winged goose, and even let me pet the penguins,
and I quite regularly got to play with the Cuban Whistling
Ducks and the Nenes. Nenes are actually quite stupid.


... I wish Frank were still around. He was pretty kewl too.
He never let me play with any clams, though. But then, I never
asked.

--
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
| M.Q.S. c/o T.L.S | "Don't play with that! You have no idea where |
| tls...@netcom.com | it's been..." -- Speaker to Elevators |
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*

Neil Strawbridge

unread,
Feb 27, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/27/00
to
Well, then... they'd better get Gene Roddenberry back on the case!
;-)

-N


On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 16:30:52 GMT, Flint <janos...@my-deja.com>
wrote:

>They don't need to get that "formula" -- they produced The Next
>Generation, which was the most widely-watched and successful "Star
>Trek". So they just need to get *that* formula back.
>
>And the show won't "in all likelihood" involve Piller or Taylor.
>They've moved on, and Piller's working on his own television
>properties. Berman and Braga alone are the honchos on the fifth series.
>--
>"...Happy Meals with legs."


>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.

Food for spambots - the FCC Board wants your SPAM:
bken...@fcc.gov (chairman)
sn...@fcc.gov (commissioner)
hfur...@fcc.gov (commissioner)
mpo...@fcc.gov (commissioner)

The FTC wants to learn about pyramid schemes:
pyr...@ftc.gov
consum...@ftc.gov

And the IRS would learn how much you REALLY made SPAMming:
net-...@nocs.insp.irs.gov

Doby

unread,
Feb 27, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/27/00
to
Neil Strawbridge wrote:
>
> Well, then... they'd better get Gene Roddenberry back on the case!
> ;-)
>
even though he is dead that is a good idea!
======================
http://www.doby-tv.com

o_d...@my-deja.com

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
Oh I'm certainly not denying the DS9 staff like TOS trivia and loved
the campier aspects of TOS, but some on the staff especially Behr
increasingly came to demonstrate what can only be described as a need
to vandalize the ideas TOS stood for. It's hard to look at Ds9's final
seasons, their philosophy and agendas any other way. On a more obvious
level Ds9 suggested with Section 31 that the Federation was
fundamentally, with that dumb Risa episode that the Federation was
decadent. We saw the supposed destruction of Starfleet Headquarters and
supposedly Behr even wanted to destroy Earth.

I'm sure that many on the staff remember TOS fondly and I'm just as
sure that they ignore the ideals and principles of Star Trek. Focusing
on its camp and trivia aspects of course makes it easier to ignore
those ideals, after all you can't spell trivialize without...


In article <0837ccde...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com>,


Robert Wolfe <robert.wol...@att.net.invalid> wrote:
> In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, o_d...@my-deja.com
> wrote:
>

> >[Berman and Braga] don't even


> >particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff
> >they're not driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either.
>

> Hey, Odeus, pull my finger.
>
> BLLLLLWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAPPPPP
>
> Ah, much better.
>
> I doubt very much that any other Star Trek writing staff had as
> much affection for the original series as we did. We LIKED
> Kang, Kor and Koloth. That's why we brought them back and gave
> them one last ride. We LOVED the Gorn, that's why we said

> Kasidy's brother lived on the planet where Arena took place. I
> dare say we followed up more plotlines from the original series
> than anyone else (Mirror Universe, tribbles, Eugenics War, birth
> of the Federation, pirates of Orion, Fizzbin). If we'd been

> allowed to, I guarentee we'd've put an Andorian on the show so
> fast your head would've spun. (Speaking of which, the ONLY
> thing I know for a fact that Berman dislikes about the original
> series - Andorians. He hates the antenae.)
>

> I mean, think of what you're saying. Ron Moore "driven by an
> obsessive desire to deface" the original series. Have you been
> sniffing glue? Rene Echevarria, ditto? When he was in high
> school the man owned his own TOS uniform. Hans Beimler was
> raised on TOS (in Spanish, the way God intended it to be

> heard). Frankly, since I'd only seen ever episode five or six


> times growing up, I sometimes felt TOS deficient.
>

> Geeze, someone light a candle in here or something.
>
> Robert
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>

o_d...@my-deja.com

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
Which of course makes him a hero to a lot of people in La La Land who
wouldn't do too well under a Communist regime, tanks in the streets,
Starbucks reserved for Party Members and Powerbooks confiscated for the
war effort. Not to mention constant episodes dedicated to praising the
leader leadership...though that could have only improved DS9 S7.


In article <897i1i$2fa$1...@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net>,


"recook77" <reco...@you-spam-you-die.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Travers Naran <tna...@direct.ca> wrote in message
> news:FvHt4.144005$B6.9...@quark.idirect.com...

> > "Robert Wolfe" <robert.wol...@att.net.invalid> wrote in
message
> > news:0837ccde...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com...

> > > In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, o_d...@my-deja.com
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >[Berman and Braga] don't even
> > > >particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff
> > > >they're not driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either.
> > >

> > > I mean, think of what you're saying. Ron Moore "driven by an
> > > obsessive desire to deface" the original series. Have you been
> > > sniffing glue? Rene Echevarria, ditto? When he was in high
> > > school the man owned his own TOS uniform. Hans Beimler was
> > > raised on TOS (in Spanish, the way God intended it to be
> > > heard).
> >

> > I heard Beimler also had some interesting notions on driving.
>

> *I* heard Beimler's grand-dad was a war hero. True or false?
> >

> > > Frankly, since I'd only seen ever episode five or six
> > > times growing up, I sometimes felt TOS deficient.
> >

> > Pffft! Not enough. Unless you can recite entire TOS scripts from
memory,
> > you just aren't Trek enough for me.
> >
> >

> Does it count if you know the number of times Kirk's shirt was ripped?
> --
> "God is a very busy god. He may not be there when you want him, but
he's
> always on time."
>
> Curtis Mayfield
> 1942-1999
>
> >
> >
>
>

Neil Strawbridge

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
Yes, I was thinking just sort of prop him up behind a desk and put a
pen in one hand, lean his head in the other and make him look like
he's thinking really hard. He'd work cheap, too! ;-)

-N

Food for spambots - the FCC Board wants your SPAM:

Allie

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
In article <38b9bf46...@news.mindspring.com>,
neil.str...@tvsgreatesthits.com (Neil Strawbridge) wrote:

> Yes, I was thinking just sort of prop him up behind a desk and put a
> pen in one hand, lean his head in the other and make him look like
> he's thinking really hard. He'd work cheap, too! ;-)
>
> -N
>
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:37:11 +0000, Doby <no...@noone.com> wrote:
>
> >Neil Strawbridge wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, then... they'd better get Gene Roddenberry back on the case!
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >even though he is dead that is a good idea!
> >

Won't work, he was cremated and shot into space.

Believe it or not, I'm not kidding.

--
Allie (just...@earthlink.net)
--

ser...@my-deja.com

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
In article <5265-38B...@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
tro...@webtv.net (Dan Tropea) wrote:
> Ok this is from scifi.ign.com and i know for videogames ign is an
> excellent source but i did notice this tidbit in their SF section. I
> really do not know how reliabe their SF section but if it like their
> videogames section then this could be reliable. (ign has multiple
> sections)
>
> It appears that the new ST series will be a prequel to the original
TOS
> which may have established characters. My bet right now is that this
> will be another Enterprise series featuring either Captain Pike
preSpock
> or the Captain before Pike. If i recall Pike was Captain for many
years.
>
> I can almost guarentee this will be about the Enterprise. They really
> need to get some continuity back. Enterprise is the way to get viewers
> back that dropped Voyager.
>
> The info is from:
> http://scifi.ign.com/tv/3833.html
>
>

Yes. The report at IGN is substantially true; the rumors about
Paramount repeatedly rejecting premises from Berman and Braga are not,
nor are rumors that Berman's job is in danger. The "focus group" and
premises reported at AICN are fabrications.

Mojo Jojo

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 00:00:28 -0500,
just...@earthlink.net (Allie),
doing dastardly deeds for Earthlink,
publicly revealed 26 lines of trade secrets:

>In article <38b9bf46...@news.mindspring.com>,
>neil.str...@tvsgreatesthits.com (Neil Strawbridge) wrote:
>
>> Yes, I was thinking just sort of prop him up behind a desk and put a
>> pen in one hand, lean his head in the other and make him look like
>> he's thinking really hard. He'd work cheap, too! ;-)
>>
>> -N
>>
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:37:11 +0000, Doby <no...@noone.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Neil Strawbridge wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Well, then... they'd better get Gene Roddenberry back on the case!
>> >> ;-)
>> >>
>> >even though he is dead that is a good idea!
>> >
>
>Won't work, he was cremated and shot into space.

Sounds like a job for those resurrectionist aliens.


Mojo Jojo
*
Stressed teen: "What is this damn PEBKAC"?

Techie: "Oh thats a term we use when we can't be bothered answering
someones questions either because we don't like them or because the problem
was their fault."

Stressed teen: "Great, but what does it mean"?

Techie: "Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair"
---------------------------
for email, drop the chalupa

David Mitchell

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
In article <38b9bf46...@news.mindspring.com>, Neil Strawbridge
<neil.str...@tvsgreatesthits.com> writes

>Yes, I was thinking just sort of prop him up behind a desk and put a
>pen in one hand, lean his head in the other and make him look like
>he's thinking really hard. He'd work cheap, too! ;-)
>
>-N
>

Yep. Sit him in a small room with a big microphone covering his mouth.

That should do it.
--
==========================================================================
David Mitchell ===== A life spent making mistakes is not only
================================ more honourable but more useful than a
da...@edenroad.demon.co.uk ===== life spent doing nothing. - GBS
==========================================================================

Eric D. Berge

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to

Robert Wolfe wrote:
>
> "recook77" <reco...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:897i1i$2fa$1...@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net...
>

> > *I* heard Beimler's grand-dad was a war hero. True or false?
>

> Yes. True. Spanish Civil War.

The grandfather was Hans Beimler, the German Communist who took
a bullet during the war? Wow.
--
Eric Berge
---------------------------------------------------
Clay lies still, but blood's a rover
Breath's a ware that will not keep
Up, lad! When the journey's over
There'll be time enough to sleep.
- A.E.Housman, "Reveille"
---------------------------------------------------

Gharlane of Eddore

unread,
Feb 28, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/28/00
to
In <38b75e8b...@news.olywa.net> geo...@usa.net writes:
>
> You expect to find people who fit this criteria here on Usenet?
>

In <897qtm$e...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu


(Gharlane of Eddore) writes:
>
> "This" is a singular referent; "criteria" is plural.
>
> I do not respond to ungrammatical postings from Large Ducks.
>


In <20000226035144...@nso-fx.aol.com>

kly...@aol.comedy (Klyfix) writes:
>
> But it's a clam...
>

From my species' point of view, a "clam" is just a Wingless Duck
that burrows in wet sand.... the species differences may appear
massive to you locals, but we've got a bit more experience with
the variability of life forms in several universes, and trust me
on this, there's not much difference between "Geoducks" and
"Mallard Ducks."

After all, I had to have one of the Acolytes *explain* to me why
the line about "...being nibbled to death by cats" was funny.

o_d...@my-deja.com

unread,
Feb 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/29/00
to
Simple deducation, Watson


In article <38b889ce...@news-f.std.com>,
Infi...@world.com (Captain Infinity) wrote:
> Once Upon A Time,
> In article <8959nn$5em$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>


> o_d...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >I think we can very safely rule out any Enterprise or prequel show,
the

> >Series V rumor mill is going and producing only garbage. Neither
Braga
> >nor Berman have any interest in Trek's past, they don't even


> >particularly like TOS very much and unlike the Ds9 staff they're not

> >driven by an obsessive desire to deface it either. The show will be


set
> >in the future, they're going to tamper with the format and it will be
> >sort of set on a starship but definetly not on the Enterprise. To
know
> >more we'll just have to wait and see.
>

> Wow, what a load of...information.
>
> Tell me, what do you use to polish your crystal balls?
>
> **
> Captain Infinity

Klyfix

unread,
Feb 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/29/00
to
In article <89eoel$c...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane
of Eddore) writes:

>
>In <20000226035144...@nso-fx.aol.com>
>kly...@aol.comedy (Klyfix) writes:
>>
>> But it's a clam...
>>
>
>From my species' point of view, a "clam" is just a Wingless Duck
>that burrows in wet sand.... the species differences may appear
>massive to you locals, but we've got a bit more experience with
>the variability of life forms in several universes, and trust me
>on this, there's not much difference between "Geoducks" and
>"Mallard Ducks."
>

Is this sort of like barnacles being geese? :)

Geoduck

unread,
Feb 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/29/00
to
On 28 Feb 2000 21:13:57 GMT, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of
Eddore) wrote:

>In <38b75e8b...@news.olywa.net> geo...@usa.net writes:
>>
>> You expect to find people who fit this criteria here on Usenet?
>>
>

>In <897qtm$e...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu


>(Gharlane of Eddore) writes:
>>
>> "This" is a singular referent; "criteria" is plural.
>>
>> I do not respond to ungrammatical postings from Large Ducks.
>>
>
>

>In <20000226035144...@nso-fx.aol.com>
>kly...@aol.comedy (Klyfix) writes:
>>
>> But it's a clam...
>>
>
>From my species' point of view, a "clam" is just a Wingless Duck
>that burrows in wet sand.... the species differences may appear
>massive to you locals, but we've got a bit more experience with
>the variability of life forms in several universes, and trust me
>on this, there's not much difference between "Geoducks" and
>"Mallard Ducks."

"...You may call him Jim or Frank or Nell,
It's all the same to the clam.
Or make an ashtray of his shell,
It's all the same to the clam...

Yes, the world may stop or the world may spin,
It's all the same to the clam.
And the sky may come a-fallin' in,
It's all the same to the clam.
And man may sing his endless songs
Or wronging rights and righting wrongs,
The clam just sets- and gets along,
It's all the same to the clam."

-Shel Silverstein

(But I have to ask- when did disembodied brains achieve 'distinct
species' status?)

Neil Strawbridge

unread,
Mar 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/1/00