From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #155
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume98/155
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
------------------------------
Content-Type: text/plain
blakes7-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 155
Today's Topics:
RE: [B7L]Lost In Space
[B7L] Re: Warlord
[B7L] safe space ships
[B7L] Personality types and love
[B7L] Re: The tape saga continueth...
Re: [B7L] Re: Warlord
[B7L] rings
[B7L] The Web
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:39:14 +-200
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: "Blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L]Lost In Space
Message-Id: <01BD8E0A.514A8FA0@cmg71700449>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
-----Original Message-----
From: captjohns@iw.edwpub.com [SMTP:captjohns@iw.edwpub.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 1998 11:05 AM
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: RE: [B7L]Lost In Space
Date forwarded: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:09:04 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L]Lost In Space
Date sent: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:07:42 +-200
Forwarded by: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Judith Proctor [SMTP:Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 11:09 PM
> To: Lysator List
> Subject: Re: [B7L]Lost In Space
>
> On Wed 27 May, Julie Horner wrote:
> > Does anybody know for sure which day the B7 Lost in Space
> > will be going out?
>
> I believe it will be the last in the series. Thus 12 June is the most likely
> date. I make the probable order to be Star Trek this week, X-files next week,
> then Blake's 7.
>
> [Jacqueline Thijsen] Star Trek was last week, so there must be something else this week or B7 will be earlier
>
Could someone please tell me what the devil your talking about?
[Jacqueline Thijsen] Sure: Lost in space is a series of interviews with science fiction fans which focuses on a different series every week. It's on BBC2 every friday after Star Trek. Last week they did the thunderbirds and before that Star Trek. They have interviewed several members of this list and we are now eagerly anticipating that particular show. Could be any time now, so be home at friday!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 02:43:37 PDT
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Warlord
Message-ID: <19980602094338.16004.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
With regard to "Warlord", I believe that Deborah Rose is quite right.
The Federation troops were very likely to shoot civilians merely out of
boredom as for any other reason. Blake, if I remember correctly, says
something about how it is typical for the Federation to value things
over people in "Countdown", and this seems to be yet another callous
example.
Having said that, I think that I should introduce myself. My name is
Joanne MacQueen, and I've been reading the archived digests for months.
I think I should congratulate everyone on the list who has contributed
over the past year, for having been so entertaining. <grinning, but
completely serious>
I'd been reluctant to join the list due to limited internet access, but
I thought now was a good time, due to the fact that I'm about to start
in a new position in Sydney shortly (a full-time job - glory
hallelujah!), which might just allow me more regular access. Another
reason for being reluctant is that I've not seen all of the episodes.
With no pay TV access in Newcastle, no screenings since the early-to-mid
1980s, and no videos to buy unless you are prepared to send overseas for
them, I've felt at a disadvantage compared to the apparently
encyclopedic knowledge of Judith (just to name one). The first episode I
saw of the series was "Traitor", and I didn't have the opportunity to
see anything of the previous three years of the show until the early
1990's when the ABC Shops started selling the videos. This led to
situations like:
Taping an episode of The Bill for a family member who had gone out on a
Saturday night, and seeing in the end credits that a mugging victim had
been played by Jan Chappell. Winds tape back and says, "Oh, so that's
basically what Cally looked like!"
So, please forgive me if I make any mistakes based on something from an
episode I haven't seen.
Regards,
Jo MacQueen
Curtsey while you're thinking what to say. It saves time.
-- Lewis Carroll.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:13:44 +1000
From: Roger the Shrubber <darrenro@ozonline.com.au>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] safe space ships
Message-Id: <199806021513.BAA26352@budapest.ozonline.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve R wrote
The top ten were:
>
> 1. Millennium Falcon (Star Wars)
> 2. White Star (Babylon 5)
> 3. The Liberator (Blake's 7)
> 4. The Tardis (Dr Who)
> 5. Shadow ship (Babylon 5)
> 6. The Enterprise (ST: TOS)
> 7. The Enterprise D (ST: TNG)
> 8. Star Destroyers (Star Wars)
> 9. Nostromo (Alien)
> 10 The Defiant (ST: DS9)
***********
Well I wouldn't feel very safe cavorting about the galaxy in the Falcon. Sure
it was fast but it was so poorly maintained & unreliable it nearly got them
killed more than once.
The Enterprise D would be a great place to live out your life peacefully, and
you could hop into the Liberator whenever you felt like having a decent
adventure.
The Star Destroyers are pretty impressive, but have defensive blind spots
that need to be looked at.
I'm not sure what the appeal of the Nostromo would be, perhaps somebody could
explain why the voters liked it.
The Tardis would be great fun but its nav is so unreliable you wouldn't ever
see your family & friends again. It's interiors would need some cosmetics for
general living purposes for humans.
___________________________________
from Darren r ..... Comments are welcome !
powerplay@cheerful.com
____________________________________
"OK, here's a disc sander, maybe ratchet up the manliness just a tad."
______________________________________
"The Administration is out to get me"
_______________________________________
"In the end, winning is the only safety"
_________________________________________
"While not detracting in any way from this store's right to examine all
baggage, I am
prepared to concede that our security man may have exceeded his authority in
napalming your grandmother"
________________________________________
________________________________________
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Spa/2634
Anxiety & Panic
_________________________________________
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Spa/2634/powerplay.html
Blake's 7 FAQ & free screen savers
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 17:34:05 +0100
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "Lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Personality types and love
Message-Id: <E0ygu1e-0001MU-00@post.mail.demon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I know opinion about this whole thread is very mixed - but some people
liked it last time, so I thought you might like to read it. Obviously skip
it if you don't.
This is from another list. It is supposed to be the definitions of 'love'
as given by different personality types. I have inserted the B7 characters
who correspond to each type because it makes amusing reading.
Oh - and I've put myself in because I'm a raving egoist :-)
> ENFJ ***Blake
> Love is my decision to share my life, and that decision is always right.
>
> INFJ ***Cally
> Love is my deep, intense, and private decision to share my life, and that
> decision is private--but always right, or at least right for *me*.
> The pursuit of love is a high and mysterious calling. Enough said.
>
> INTP ** Orac
> Love may or may not be any number of things or decisions, and the
> rightness of those things or decisions is unable to be determined,
> necessarily, based on the usually incomplete data. This matter would
> be clarified by further thought and conceptual analysis.
>
> INTJ *** Avon
> Love is unquantifiable and very private. I choose not to discuss it. Do
> not waste your breath trying to change my mind with pointless and
> ill-reasoned analysis.
>
> ENTJ *** Servalan
> Love is a complex issue, and I'll tell you right now that should I choose
> to share it, I will do it the right way (*my* way, of course), and if I
> get burned, so be it.
>
> ENTP- *** (Me)
> Who's to say what love is? I challenge you to give me an absolute
> definition. And since no one can really say definitively what love is,
> how
> can you really know if you've shared it, or if *I've* shared it, or what
> it all means? No one is *always* right.
>
> ISTJ- *** worried list member
> Shouldn't we be getting back to work and staying on task? What is the
> relevance of this thread? You people are *weird*.
It fits well doesn't it?
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:21:16 -0400
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Re: The tape saga continueth...
Message-ID: <199806021321_MC2-3EEA-E876@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Una, can you give out the Fabulous Films phone number?
I couldn't care less whether my covers are shiny or not as long as they're
all the same. I've seen the two together and the difference is going to
show up if I have a mixture on my shelf. So far I happen to have been
getting shiny, but if they're going to be discontinued in favour of
non-shiny and Fab Films can do non-shiny covers for the earlier ones I'll
want those.
And if we keep irritating them by ringing up about it they may realise how
irritating the situation is in the first place.
Harriet
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:40:27 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Warlord
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0602124027-06cRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Tue 02 Jun, Joanne MacQueen wrote:
> I've felt at a disadvantage compared to the apparently encyclopedic knowledge
> of Judith (just to name one).
Don't worry <grin>. I cheat sometimes. Having a copy of the Sevencyclopaeia to
hand is very useful. Actually, now it's on the web, it's proving to be one of
the most popular parts of my page, so I guess others are cheating too <bigger
grin>.
> So, please forgive me if I make any mistakes based on something from an
> episode I haven't seen.
Don't worry about it. New blood is always welcome. Dive right in.
All you really have to remember is that Avon is sexy, Tarrant is pretty, Vila is
kinda cute, Gan is undervalued and Gareth Thomas is adorable!
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 12:42:03 -0600 (MDT)
From: The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] rings
Message-Id: <199806021842.MAA28547@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Love it!!!
Here is a Web URL for your bookmarks:
http://www.bomis.com/rings/blakes7/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 08:58:01 +0100
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "Lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] The Web
Message-Id: <E0yh8W0-0006TM-00@post.mail.demon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Watching 'The Web' last night, my companion says 'Isn't that Gazza in the
little bottle?' And by gum he was right. No wonder Hoddle thinks he isn't
match fit.
I enjoyed the episode - its a long time since I saw it last - but I am
puzzled about the script: it doesn't seem to have any logical consistency.
For example, they are sitting on the bridge discussing why they won't tell
Blake about the pursuit ships, and then not long afterwards Blake is down
on the planet telling Avon they have to hurry up before the pursuit ships
get there. I don't understand why they had the first scene at all. It was
as if two people had written the script without properly discussing it with
each other.
Alison
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #155
**************************************