From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #15 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume00/15 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 00 : Issue 15 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Many many people... Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Re: [B7L] socks Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Re: [B7L] Teleportation? Re: [B7L] socks Re: [B7L] Idle curiosity prompted by last night's episode of The Bill... [B7L] Re: socks Re: [B7L] socks Re: [B7L] GSP and Oppression [B7L] Re: b7spin: Re: Heinlein (was Re: FC: RSI) [B7L] Height [B7L] following the Orbit thread... [B7L] The Limiter [B7L] Re: Too Quiet RE: [B7L] Gallery Re: [B7L] socks Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Re: [B7L] Idle curiosity prompted by last night's episode of The Bill... Re: [B7L] Many many people... Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Re: [B7L] The Limiter Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V00 #11 Re: [B7L] Many many people... [B7L] Re: Gan's Limiter ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 01:25:28 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people... Message-ID: <008201bf604a$bdc03540$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mistral wrote: > Neil Faulkner wrote: > > >we might as well all agree to hate each other > > Sounds good. I'll let you start:) > No, after you, I insist. Very well. I hate you, and I hope that something really nasty happens to you, like an onion falling on your head. Your turn. > > Rubbish yourself. This is the whining rhetoric of bourgeois cowards who > > endlessly argue the case for change but live in perpetual dread of anything > > ever really changing. > > etc..... No, Neil, you really don't know me well enough to > assume that I'm spouting empty platitudes. Then perhaps, ma cherie, I should get to know you better, mais non? I don't dispute that you believe what you say, and I presume you have good reasons for saying it. Hopefully I made it clear that I've come across a fair few types who peddle talk about ends justifying means as an excuse to empty their frustrations (if not their unalloyed aggression) into counterproductive exercises in futility. But that doesn't mean that such talk is always the 'cop out' you seem to be making it out to be. It can be a carefully considered decision (and in Blake's case, I think it was). > > > Why should the 'less ethical' path be 'easier'? > > It isn't always; but then, there's no temptation to cave in, > ergo no caving in, ergo no need to justify the means. O Lord, deliver us from temptation, and spare us the woes of accountability. Guide us instead to the long and tortuous path of unstained moral purity. Chances are it won't take us anywhere, but by golly we can enjoy getting the blisters. I think Moorcock was right about the misanthropy. > You must have severely limited experience, then. Personally, > I don't care two pins for the law for its own sake. Sometimes > doing the right thing means breaking the law. Sometimes not. > The trick is in knowing where you are comfortable believing > that point to be--preferably before you come up against it. Comfort breeds complacency. A strong point in Blake's favour for his intended destruction of Star One was his own misgivings (expressed in 'Voice', and implied in his determination to destroy it rather than seize it). That 'many many people' scene with Cally also suggests (to me at any rate) that he still feels the need to justify his actions *to himself* as much as to her. He is not a comfortable bunny secure in the delusions of his own conviction. > > He has > > committed himself to the ends, which in turn binds him to what appears to be > > the only effective means. He is not setting out to destroy Control for the > > sake of doing so, so this is not a case of ends justifying means. It is a > > case of ends determining means. (Largely because Nation/Boucher rigged it > > that way.) > > Disagree. It is exactly a case of Blake saying the ends > (overthrow of the Federation) justify the means (the losses > caused by the destruction of Star One.) It isn't the only > method; his dialogue in 'Voice' (?) is more supportive of the > idea that it simply wasn't happening fast enough for him. I doubt if it could ever have happened fast enough for him. When choosing a strategy for, let's say, overthrowing an evil galactic empire, there are a number of things you have to take into account. (a) the resources you have to hand. Blake was lucky on this count, what with the Orac and the Liberator and a trusty crew who'd stand by him through thick and thin no matter what etc. (b) the likely effectiveness of the strategy. Will it achieve its goal? In Star One's case, Blake believes the answer is yes and no one tries to gainsay him. (c) the collateral damage. Many many people, however many that might be. Difficult to assess, in any case. (d) the cost of *not* pursuing the strategy. Also difficult to assess, so I won't bother to try. (e) time. This is directly related to (d). If a long-term strategy means that (d) exceeds (c) (assuming the costs can be quantified in the first place) then a short-term option is preferable. If (d) is unlikely to exceed (c) then a long-term strategy becomes more viable (and ethically preferable). I think it's clear that *in Blake's assessment* (c) could never exceed (d), therefore destroying Star One was justifiable as the quickest and most certain means of bringing down Uncle Feddy. Any other strategy would take too long (allowing (d) to mount up by the day) and would be less likely to succeed (calling into question the investment of time and resources needed to carry it out). Of course, all those various factors are up for debate regarding how they are measured and the relative weighting given to each one. If - as some people seem to suggest - there is an imperative to keep collateral damage to a minimum then the value of (c) approaches infinity and can never be exceeded by (d). An assessment of Blake's intentions on this basis can only come down against him. > > All those not against Blake are for him. > > Hmm. But I thought you objected to my characterization > of Blake as a messiah-type? I won't even dare to suggest you omitted to append the smiley. On an off-topic note: >> (Totally off-topic trivia quiz: which total >> has-been of a band used this sad practice to get a title for one of their >> more desultory albums?) >Hmm. I'm ashamed to say I don't know. Unless it's punk. >I don't know anything about punk. Do tell. If I say the album was 5317704 you should be able to work it out. Now, which of their hits might have been written for 4th Season Avon? Neil "The only good alien is a dead alien" - Ursula LeGuin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 17:47:37 +0000 From: Julia Jones To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Cc: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Message-ID: In message <3881FCAD.EAD5A729@ptinet.net>, mistral@ptinet.net writes >Something's been nagging at me about Gan for a couple of days. >Breakdown makes it seem as if installing a limiter might be a >tricky, expensive process. Why did they put one in Gan if they >were just going to ship him off to a penal colony? experimental subject for technology still under development? -- Julia Jones "Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!" The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 19:44:12 -0000 From: "Julie Horner" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] socks Message-ID: <00d001bf605a$27bec4c0$ae9abc3e@orac> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Tigerm1019@aol.com >Well, since my socks never seem to achieve odd-sock equilibrium, >I've concluded it's demons. They steal pens and paperclips too.. Yikes! Do you think it is also demonic influence which causes all the biros I leave in my desk drawer to turn red overnight? Julie ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 14:57:29 -0500 From: Susan Beth To: blake7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Message-Id: <3.0.4.32.20000116145729.013cf25c@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" mistral@ptinet.net wrote: >Something's been nagging at me about Gan for a couple of days. >Breakdown makes it seem as if installing a limiter might be a >tricky, expensive process. Why did they put one in Gan if they >were just going to ship him off to a penal colony? I've always thought that Gan was a lab rat for a new procedure: they did the op, collected the data they wanted (I suspect they knew it was a failure in at least some ways-- back to the drawing board), then tossed him back into the ordinary legal process for dealing with criminals. If you want to make the Feds a bit less cynical in their use of him, Gan may have "volunteered" for the operation. As in, he was sentenced to death originally, but if he volunteered (and survived it), they would commute it to exile. Susan Beth (susanbeth33@mindspring.com) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 20:43:06 -0000 From: "David A McIntee" To: "Helen Krummenacker" , Subject: Re: [B7L] Teleportation? Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- > From: Helen Krummenacker > > > I'm pretty sure that particular futuristic phenomenon was in existence even > > > 23 years ago. > > > > Nah, that's just demons stealing them from the dryer. I'll leave it to you > > to figure out what the forces of darkness want with all those unmatched > > socks. > > > > Tiger M > Making a new dress for Servalan. One of my associates has a theory that the mechanisms inside dryers actually create miniature wormholes that link two machines operating simultaneously. One sock from each machine is then transmitted along the wormhole, creating two pairs of odd socks in two houses... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:48:03 EST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] socks Message-ID: <20000116214803.97923.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Tigerm1019@aol.com >Well, since my socks never seem to achieve odd-sock equilibrium, I've >concluded it's demons. They steal pens and paperclips too. I think Helen >may be right about Servalan's new gown. ;-) Paperclips?!?!? You mean Servalan's about to receive one of those Versace-as-worn-by-Elizabeth-Hurley numbers? Regards Joanne ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:05:22 EST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Idle curiosity prompted by last night's episode of The Bill... Message-ID: <20000116220522.48262.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Una McCormack" >Well, from where I stand (on my toes, usually) Oh, don't do that, Una, we'll be picturing you in a tutu next... >although thinking back to 'Kinda' he is pretty tall. That explains something - I haven't seen that one for years. > > The GITHOG people will be overjoyed to know he was extremely >recognisable! >Hurrah! Well, he was for me. We taped the episode so that my brother could see it - the real test is whether or not Andrew recognises him... Regards Joanne ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 22:40:35 -0000 From: "Ebony" To: "Lysator" Subject: [B7L] Re: socks Message-ID: <004701bf6072$e31b0400$62947dc2@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil said: >WHY are they called 'jumpers'? Mine never jump. My socks - at least the >remaining ones - are reported to have crawled around by themselves on >occasion. This reminds me of an episode of "Dennis The Menace", in which Dennis' socks were given the status of Secret Government Weapon. So Neil, maybe your socks haven't teleported into oblivion after all, and maybe the crew *can* persuade Servalan to hand over her power ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist it! Ebony ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 23:14:43 +0000 From: Nicola Collie To: Lysator Subject: Re: [B7L] socks Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Joanne said: >Paperclips?!?!? You mean Servalan's about to receive one of those >Versace-as-worn-by-Elizabeth-Hurley numbers? Brace yourself, boys... ;) Nicola ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 22:47:34 -0000 From: "Andrew Ellis" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] GSP and Oppression Message-ID: <000001bf6077$bd4a4880$3d8501d5@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner Was musing .... > how do we >cope with the futuristic aspects of B7 that have become reality (or near >reality) in the real world? Other examples (and just the ones I'm aware >of): Which were all very interesting. However >- holographic conferencing - not actually in the series, but it should have >been because we've got it here and now. Last week a class of students was >given a maths lesson by a life-size hologram of a teacher several miles >away. Rather wipes out the need for all those governors to go to Atlay, >dunnit? Or for Bercol/ Rontane/ Joban to drop in on Servalan. Well I have had video conferencing available to me for years. I use it. I use audio conferences (phone calls to you and me) a lot more. But I've just flown back into Europe from my fourth visit to the USA in 12 months. Why ? Because you still can't beat that handshake, the pint in the bar etc etc. >And my socks have perfected >teleportation. Well, one in every pair seems to have... > Which is closely related to the recent demonstration of the "teleportation" of a quantum state between identical pairs of particles ! The second sock KNOWS you have found the first, the act of observing one sock makes the other invisible. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:58:22 EST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: b7spin: Re: Heinlein (was Re: FC: RSI) Message-ID: <20000116235823.5126.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Una McCormack" >We're not counting Dr Who Target novelizations here, I take it? In my case, yes. And the Scorpio Attack novelisation. Well, there *was* that children's book with illustrations heavily influenced by Sgt Peppers, and the evil octopus that was bound to end up in a bind due to grab, grab, grabbing, and the malevolent mood organ...what was that called? And what were the writer, illustrator and the person who bought it for the library at the primary school I went to on at the time? Regards Joanne (shaking her head in disbelief) ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:30:08 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Height Message-ID: <388270A0.7EE1@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Realizing that Michael Keating was actually slightly taller than Paul Darrow > was one of the biggest surprises of my life. > > > Una I felt the same. They're good actors... Michael was shrinking into himself, and Paul projecting himself larger. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:39:53 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] following the Orbit thread... Message-ID: <388272E9.1CEC@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Ah. I never think of Vila as subservient. But in any close > relationship one partner is dominant (although it sometimes > trades off, in the more equal ones.) I don't think you can > really say that in A-V, Vila is the dominant one. > > Grins, > Mistral I find myself pondering scenes that belong on The Other List. Thanks, Misral. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:45:54 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] The Limiter Message-ID: <38827452.18CC@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Why did they put one in Gan if they > were just going to ship him off to a penal colony? Do you suppose > he committed another crime later? Because the prison guards, baliff, etc. were terrified of him? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 22:23:41 -0500 From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" Subject: [B7L] Re: Too Quiet Message-ID: <200001162223_MC2-94FC-2D54@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Una wrote, re the provisional government in exile: >I'm going to swipe that shamelessly for the story I'm plotting. I'm flattered... Harriet ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 19:49:09 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: RE: [B7L] Gallery Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Sun 16 Jan, Jacqueline Thijsen wrote: > > > > > After the "Which loo do I use" incident at Redemption, I'm sure the > > gallery loos need a separate opening ceremony of their own. > > What do you mean, "Which loo do I use"? Servalan always uses the executive > loo, of course. So Judith should really have one of those added to the loos, > in case the supreme commander chooses to visit. No, we really haven't got space for any more loos. We have got somewhere reserved for Servalan though - I'm just not saying where at present. Judith PS. Just in case anyone's been looking, the new version of the gallery isn't up yet and is still a couple of weeks away. -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight ) Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 19:24:00 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: Re: [B7L] socks Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Sun 16 Jan, Neil Faulkner wrote: > > For goodness sake, hasn't anyone here heard of conservation of odd-sock > parity? > > > > It's *physics*, not demons. > > This might explain why people avoid me whenever I wear a loud jumper. It's > the Pulloveri Exclusion Principle. > > (WHY are they called 'jumpers'? Mine never jump. My socks - at least the > remaining ones - are reported to have crawled around by themselves on > occasion. But the jumpers just lie there. And I know they're not doing any > leaping when my back's turned, unless they know I'm watching them through > the keyhole.) My first guess was that it might derive from 'jumbuck' (aussie slang for a sheep), but in fact, it comes from 'jump' a 19C loose jacket, which comes from the French 'jupe' which comes from the Arabic 'jubbah' - a long cloth coat. Judith PS. I bet you really wanted to know that . -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight ) Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:12:02 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Message-ID: <000801bf60c0$d29daf80$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mistral wrote > Something's been nagging at me about Gan for a couple of days. > Breakdown makes it seem as if installing a limiter might be a > tricky, expensive process. Why did they put one in Gan if they > were just going to ship him off to a penal colony? Do you suppose > he committed another crime later? Or did he have some important > status where he had to remain on Earth for a time, say, to train a > job replacement, before being shipped out? Who's thought about > this? You could always try reading 'A Casting of Swords' in Stadler Link (complete with typos, coz I'm double-lazy when it comes to proofreading my own stuff...) Neil "The only good alien is a dead alien" - Ursula LeGuin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:18:24 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Idle curiosity prompted by last night's episode of The Bill... Message-ID: <000901bf60c0$d54ddb60$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sally wrote: > Does anyone know how tall Our Heroes actually are? I know > Tarrant and Gan are, and Vila is more than he seems (his > Uriah Heep stance notwithstanding), but even the women seem > to me to be above average (of course, this could be the > shoes.) Going by those members of the cast that I've met FTF, at 5'7'' I'm marginally taller than Jan Chappell and a good bit shorter than David Jackson, who is in turn taller than Gareth Thomas but by how much I wouldn't like to say. Neil "The only good alien is a dead alien" - Ursula LeGuin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 03:16:29 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people... Message-ID: <3882FA0D.A2C2ADF3@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner wrote: > Very well. I hate you, and I hope that something really nasty happens to > you, like an onion falling on your head. > > Your turn. Hmm. I suspect that hating you might be taking the easy way out. I'll have to pass. If it makes you happy, I could wish that you look out of your window and see a live dodo bird, when you have neither a camera nor witnesses. > > etc..... No, Neil, you really don't know me well enough to > > assume that I'm spouting empty platitudes. > > Then perhaps, ma cherie, I should get to know you better, mais non? Careful, Neil, I have a flamingo. > I don't dispute that you believe what you say, and I presume you have good > reasons for saying it. Thank you for that, at least. > But that doesn't mean that such > talk is always the 'cop out' you seem to be making it out to be. It can be > a carefully considered decision (and in Blake's case, I think it was). Did I say a cop out couldn't be carefully considered? > > > Why should the 'less ethical' path be 'easier'? > > > > It isn't always; but then, there's no temptation to cave in, > > ergo no caving in, ergo no need to justify the means. > > O Lord, deliver us from temptation, and spare us the woes of accountability. > Guide us instead to the long and tortuous path of unstained moral purity. > Chances are it won't take us anywhere, but by golly we can enjoy getting the > blisters. Piffle. I am neither a masochist nor an idealist, but a pragmatist. Sometimes, however, accountability lies in knowing which actions you don't have a right to take. > I think Moorcock was right about the misanthropy. Hmm. Do you really think I'm more misanthropic than you? Perhaps we should get your friends and my friends together and let them discuss it. > > You must have severely limited experience, then. Personally, > > I don't care two pins for the law for its own sake. Sometimes > > doing the right thing means breaking the law. Sometimes not. > > The trick is in knowing where you are comfortable believing > > that point to be--preferably before you come up against it. > > Comfort breeds complacency. A clever riposte, but illogical. You would prefer that people wait until they are drowning to learn to swim? > A strong point in Blake's favour for his > intended destruction of Star One was his own misgivings (expressed in > 'Voice', and implied in his determination to destroy it rather than seize > it). That 'many many people' scene with Cally also suggests (to me at any > rate) that he still feels the need to justify his actions *to himself* as > much as to her. A point in favour of his character; not of Star One's destruction. Seizing it is the more rational and less destructive choice. > He is not a comfortable bunny secure in the delusions of > his own conviction. But he is. We never see him question his basic assumption that the Federation should be destroyed; or that he should be the one to do it. He chooses his goal, his value, and never deviates from it, never reconsiders. The very behaviour you seem to decry when the goal or value is not one you agree with. Personally, I think all of one's values should be reconsidered frequently. It's a habit I practice diligently. > I think it's clear that *in Blake's assessment* (c) could never exceed (d), > therefore destroying Star One was justifiable as the quickest and most > certain means of bringing down Uncle Feddy. Yes. I agree completely with your analysis of the situation, and of Blake's assessment. Obviously, I am in the (c) approaches infinity camp. > > Hmm. But I thought you objected to my characterization > > of Blake as a messiah-type? > > I won't even dare to suggest you omitted to append the smiley. I can adapt. > If I say the album was 5317704 you should be able to work it out. Now, > which of their hits might have been written for 4th Season Avon? I can only think of a title that might refer to Servalan. TTFN, Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 03:05:22 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Double Jeopardy??? Message-ID: <3882F771.6C8ADE20@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner wrote: > You could always try reading 'A Casting of Swords' in Stadler Link (complete > with typos, coz I'm double-lazy when it comes to proofreading my own > stuff...) It's a pity you didn't tell me that yesterday, before I spent my entire year's zine budget. :( Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 20:23:22 +1100 From: Kathryn Andersen To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] The Limiter Message-ID: <20000117202322.A13078@welkin.apana.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 06:45:54PM -0700, Helen Krummenacker wrote: > > Why did they put one in Gan if they > > were just going to ship him off to a penal colony? Do you suppose > > he committed another crime later? > > Because the prison guards, baliff, etc. were terrified of him? > Tranquilizers would be cheaper. -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen / \ | http://home.connexus.net.au/~kat \_.--.*/ | #include "standard/disclaimer.h" v | ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:41:45 +0000 (GMT) From: Iain Coleman To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V00 #11 Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Helen Krummenacker wrote: > > I like Moorcock. > > > > Neil > > I don't. > I may have to completely give up my claims to being a cynic. Not that I > don't agree with him on some of his points. But I wish the Eternal Hero > would be Eternally placed in suspended animation and sent on a > completely uneventful journey through the depths of space. Ah. So you've read "The Black Corridor", then? Iain ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:29:29 PST From: "Hellen Paskaleva" To: Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people... Message-ID: <20000117152929.69015.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >-----Original Message----- >From: Julia Jones > > >I am not aware that there was large scale compulsory use of pacifying > >drugs in the Soviet Union. ...But I am. They just weren't described as such. People, who dared to voice their disagreement with the system, had been sent either into concentration camps (as criminals), or in mental clinics (as suffering from mental diseases). Moreover, you do not need any complicated drugs for that - a bit higher quantities of anyu simple Bromide salt works perfectly for suppressing the will. Hellen ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:12:39 GMT From: Murray Smith To: Lysator Subject: [B7L] Re: Gan's Limiter Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Some have been wondering whether Gan's limiter was implanted as an experiment. An answer is found in Trevor Hoyle's novelisation of the first four episodes, when Jenna asked Gan 'Was the implanatation ordered by the Court?' 'No, it was done before my trial,' Gan replied blandly, and went on as if he were reconnting an incident that had happened to someone else. 'They needed humans for their research, so I was just handed over. Most of the time it has no effect, only if I'm involved in a situation where there is violence and aggression. That's when it operates.' Murray -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #15 *************************************