Blakes7 May 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

84 participants
897 discussions

Re: B7 production process and apologies
by Steve Rogerson 20 May '01

20 May '01

Stephen Date said he too had never noticed the boom mike shadows or wobbly walls. I must add a me too here. It was only when I read the list of bloopers posted online somewhere that I started noticing them. I printed it out and kept it by the telly so whenever I watched an episode I would look out for them. Didn't agree with all of them though. One I recall comments on the Liberator being upside down. This is in space, there is no upside down. Another mentions Avon's slip when they burst into Justin's lab in Animals. Why is that a cock up? It just adds to the reality. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption 03, 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent Celebrating 25 years of Blake's 7 and 10 years of Babylon 5 http://www.smof.com/redemption

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Orbit
by Alison Page 20 May '01

20 May '01

Steve said - >Re what I said earlier about Vila's professional attack on Arlen in Blake, if he >had those skills, why didn't he go for Avon, or was he too gutted at the betrayal? Michael Keating said Vila was crying because he was trying to get his act together to put *himself* out the airlock. That is, he was going to sacrifice himself, as you think Blake would. it's an interesting idea, and it does provide a different answer to your question Alison

4 3

Re: [B7L] Re: Vila the vegetable
by Ashton7＠aol.com 20 May '01

20 May '01

In a message dated 5/20/01 6:25:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, steve.rogerson(a)mcr1.poptel.org.uk writes: << Gan strikes me as a potato, but don't ask me to explain why cos I haven't a clue. >> I think "potato" fits, too, and I also can't tell you exactly why. My favorite "Gan" moment in fan fiction is an old, old story (I think it was in an early issue of "Fifth Season" where Gan is shot and it takes him pages and pages to get out a complete sentence to tell everyone. It was brutal to poor Gan, but it was hilarious. The story itself was a parody, anyway, so they were "picking" on everyone, not just Gan. Annie

1 0

Re: Federation political hierarchies & comparisons
by Steve Rogerson 20 May '01

20 May '01

Harriet wrote: "Servalan, of course, was a hardworking and principled administrator, too." I've often wondered about the coincidence of the early 1980s. THe above sentence works just as well with Thatcher instead of Servalan. The early 1980s were also a period were the IRA was getting some sympathy as a result of the hunger strikes. Thatcher was also threatening at the time to make the BBC a commercial station and/or restrict the licence fee (the main source of its income). The BBC at the time cancelled a show that was getting between 8 and 10+ million viewers about a group of terrorists who were treated as heroes and giving the strong female government leader (ok she was by now sleer, but was still seen in her Servalan role) a hard time. Was this all coincidence? I'd love to hear from someone in the know at the BBC at the time whether this was all coincidence. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption 03, 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent Celebrating 25 years of Blake's 7 and 10 years of Babylon 5 http://www.smof.com/redemption

1 0

Re: [B7L] [B7L]Back on topic, methinks? (now heading back to costumes)
by Jenny Kaye 20 May '01

20 May '01

"Sally Manton" wrote: Avon looks best is >silky >shirts IMO. IMO=Ignore Manton's Oratory. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: [B7L]Back on topic, methinks? (was warning, camoflague etc)
by Sally Manton 20 May '01

20 May '01

Stephen wrote: <I can't see Servalan letting Blake claim to be saviour of the galaxy and she'd have to explain the presence of the Liberator on the front line somehow.>

1 0

Re: When "Animals" camouflage and other Stuff
by Rita d' Orac 20 May '01

20 May '01

"Jenny Kaye" <jennycat55(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > SLASHER Rita d' Orac wrote: No, you are wrong: By definition "I'm not a slasher" means...guess what... "I'm not a slasher!" > > >Subject: [B7L] Re: When "Animals" camouflage and other Stuff > > > > > > > > >jennycat55(a)hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > >{huuuge snip} > > She has made this "huuuge snip" because she doen't want to discuss most of > the issues I have brought up. No, you are wrong: Snip was made because I had no comment to make on any thing you wrote above the snip - if you or anyone else want to see that part of your message, just look in the archive. > > > > Everyone on Freedom > > > > City is by definition a slasher, but on this lyst there are people who > > >are > > > > not. It's those people that are > > > > my concern, the ones you are after. It's petty, it's small minded, but > I > > > > suppose it's power of some kind. > > >{snipped rest of message} > > > > > >Actually no - I'm not a slasher, but I am a member of Freedom City. > > Then by definition you are a SLASHER. No, you are wrong: By definition "I'm not a slasher" means...guess what... "I'm not a slasher!" > > >If I see something on that list that I don't want to read, I don't read > it. > > Freedom City is a SLASHER lyst. No, you are wrong: It is not. Check archives for Tiger's earlier message which explains this for you. > > > Apart from a few misdirected email's that weren't meant for the > >> > list, I don't recall having come across any posts that attacked > >> >> > individuals viewpoints the way I've seen them attacked here - such > >> > behaviour is not tolerated by the list's administrator. > > That is true. Debate on Freedom City is stifled. That "misdirected email" > comment though is interesting. On the surface it seems Freedom City has a > relaxed atmosphere, but behind people's backs they are all sniping at each > other. See? No, you are wrong: Debate is not stifled and I have no interest in commenting on (or even reading) messages accidently sent to the list. There is a clearly defined policy for what to do if/when this happens. > > > What I have enjoyed on that list is reading the many > > >different opinions of people on several aspects of B7 that I might > >> > not otherwise have had an opportunity to listen to or discuss (I am > > >mostly an active lurker). > > She is now stating that there is debate on Freedom City which contradicts > what she has previously stated. No, you are wrong: I never stated that there wasn't debate on the list - you did - and I therefore cannot have contradicted myself. To clarify for you - there is plenty of debate on that list. > I > > >suggest that you try being a member of that list before you knock it. > > Even I wouldn't want to spend too much time on Freedom City. The programming > techniques being used there are extremely powerful. Scared of being proved wrong? > > >There are several issues that I agree with you and Fiona/Shane/Whoever > on, > > Smart. You can see that what Fiona (an anthropologist) Shane (a gay male) > and I (???) are saying, come down basically to the same thing, SLASH is a > dangerous conditioning device. No, I have already made my views clear to this list (check the archive if you can be bothered, or speak to Shane or Fiona) and you will see exactly which issues I agree on. The archives (or any conversation you have with either Shane or Fiona) will prove that I have never indicated in any way that I believe slash is a dangerous conditioning device. I don't believe that it is. > > > >most > > >of which I have debated offlist > > Why offlyst? Also, this person has never contacted *me* offlyst. By offlist, I simply mean face to face conversations held at various places I have had the good fortune to run into other B7 fans (conventions, theatre trips, Beer & B7 meetings etc). Of course I haven't contacted you offlist - Is there any reason I should have done so? > > > at some time or another with several of my B7 friends (and that > >> > >includes my B7 friends who are "slashers") > > They are all SLASHERS. No, you are wrong: As most people on this list are already aware (and most of them are by now probably quite rightly sniggering at your above comment!), a large number of my B7 friends are violently (and in some cases very publically) opposed to slash. Others are not. I am perfectly happy to have friends with views that oppose mine. > > - nobody could > > >accuse me of being less than seriously opinionated on some of these > topics! > > I agree there. > > > >But our debating remains reasonably civilised because we respect the fact > that we are all B7 fans. > > These debates never took place. No, you are wrong: They did. Why would you presume to know in any case? - you weren't there!! > > >Despite broadly agreeing with your views on some of the issues you have > raised, > > Notice she doesn't specify which views she broadly agrees with. Another > conditioning device. That is because my views are already a matter of public record within the archives and I have no reason to repeat them - take a look. If you aren't able to work out from this which views we have in common, I can spell them out for you. > > > >I do not condone some of the tactics > > Here's another old favourite. Attack the posting style, avoid the issues. That is because it is in fact your posting style that I object to. I have no issues to avoid. > > >you/Fiona/Shane/Whoever > > Now look here. There is a subtle difference. She is trying to suggest now > that Fiona, Shane and myself and "whoever" else may be saying the same thing > are all the same person. This equates to basically saying that this view is > being held by only one person. Wrong. No, you are wrong: This equates to me not being clear about how many of these people you actually speak for. To clarify further for you, I refer to yourself AND Fiona AND Shane AND anyone else you care to name that you feel you speak for. I really don't care if you are all one person or several individuals. > > >have used in raising these issues and then responding to the view > >of > others on this list without allowing for any proper debate of these > > >important issues. > > She is agreeing that they are important issues. However what she is saying > is that my posting style is preventing the SLASHERS from dealing with and > stifling what it is I am saying here. However also note that this letter is > a very sophisticated programming device. They've upped the ante. Yes, I am on record in the archives as stating that they are important issues. That is why I used those very words. As to whether your posting style is the reason for people not debating with you - yes, I believe it is. My evidence for this is the many postings from people whom you have tagged as slashers saying that this is the case. Again, look in the archives if you want to confirm this. > > >Neither can I condone in any way the actions you/Fiona/Shane/Whoever have > taken or > > >incited > > >others to take against Annie's website. It is wrong. > > Again look what she is saying. Shane left this lyst six weeks ago but now > she > is saying that he has attacked Annie's evil website. I think Fiona's attack > on Evil Annie's website was wrongheaded, but it was not done through malice, > it was done through desperation. Fiona is an anthropologist. Secrecy > surrounds SLASH because they don't want it debated. They say people who > attack SLASH are homophobic, but Shane was gay. He described **SLASH** as > **homophobic**. It is. It was incorrect of me to add Shane's name to that list. A copy/paste error, nothing more. I have no knowledge as to whether Shane was involved or not. The "whoever" part covers anyone else who was involved - I have no interest in knowing their identities. > > >Please don't assume that you speak for all non slash fans, Jenny - > > Interesting that you use my name here. I use it because I am referring to you. It is common practice in the English language to name the person you are referring to. > > >you don't speak for me. > > No I don't, you are a SLASHER. Also note what she is now saying, earlier she > said that she broadly agreed with what I was saying, now she says that she > doesn't. No, you are wrong: As stated earlier, I am not a slasher. I stated earlier "There are several issues that I agree with you and Fiona/Shane/Whoever on". There is nothing in that statement that implies that you may speak for me on any issues. To clarify once again - you may not. > > >Please don't presume to tell me whether or not it is "safe" > > >for>me to be a member of this or the Freedom City list - that decision is > mine > > YOU ARE A SLASHER No, you are wrong: By definition "I'm not a slasher" means...guess what... "I'm not a slasher!" > > >to > > >make and I choose to stay on both lists. > > YOU ARE A SLASHER. No, you are wrong: By definition "I'm not a slasher" means...guess what... "I'm not a slasher!" > Why do you think this person is attacking me? Why not just ignore me or > Killfile me? Why am I attacking you? - I am not. Please indicate where you think my post attacks you. Why don't I just ignore you? - I had something to add to one of the posts on this mailing list - so I posted it! I never ignore a message I want to reply to. Why don't I killfile you? - Why do you think I should? I have never killfiled anybody I disagree with and I have no wish to start doing so now. > I'll tell you why. She is trying to discredit what I am saying. > They don't what you to listen. This person is a PROGRAMMER. No, you are wrong: I replied to a public post on a public mailing list. It is reasonable to expect people to reply to your post if they have something to add to the topic you are posting on. You posted on a topic, and I replied to it. If what you said in your post was correct, I would not be inclined to comment on it at all, never mind attempt to discredit it in any way. You are correct in calling me a programmer because I program in VB as part of my job. > > PLEASE LEAVE THIS LYST AT ONCE. No. Shan't. Won't. Can't make me. So there. ===== rita d'orac "If you think of this mouse as a space captain..." http://www.vilaworld.com ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

1 0

[B7L]Back on topic, methinks? (now heading back to costumes)
by Sally Manton 20 May '01

20 May '01

Stephen wrote: <(As far as leather is concerned I always preferred Jenna :))> <grin> as far as *red* leather is concerned, hers suit as a whole is better, I must admit (this is not hard. Lobster Top.) Avon looks best is silky shirts IMO. But 'tis an interesting (well, to me :-)) point that the *only* character we see in thigh-length boots is one of the *male* crew ... (fashion as social history: what *do* the admittedly small changes in fashion over the 4 series give us?) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Space Fall
by Tavia 20 May '01

20 May '01

Ellynne wrote: >Leylan's character: I think he represents the full tragedy of what the >Federation can do to the good - or potentially good - people under its >control. He _knows_ what's right and he's willing to make some gestures >towards it, but with a great sense of futility. One of the weapons of any wrong-headed administration is just that sense of futility, of cynicism, of apathy. Many will see the injustices and the corruption, few will take any action. And Carol Mc wrote: >... heroism is an impulsive act. Time and again, the honorees state that they don't consider >themselves to be heroes. They saw and they reacted. I think that happened a number of >times in B7. A character saw someone in danger and reacted to save him/her. Which is >heroic, because some people wouldn't react; they'd slink the other way or freeze. True. The really interesting part, to me at least, is that to oppose the injustices and corruption of the Federation administration requires heroic action(s), but it's not of the impulsive sort, it's considered and premeditated. I would guess that the proportion of people who would risk their life impulsively, say, to save a child from drowning would be much higher than the proportion who would risk their job to oppose a multinational corporation that, say, abuses child labour. Tavia

2 1

Re: [B7L] Avon worship
by Tavia 20 May '01

20 May '01

Sally asked: >For the Avon fans - I know there's a few of us around - just what *is* it >about him that you find makes him that much more interesting? As I said earlier, he's a geek with dress sense. Tavia, the psycopathic kitten

5 6

← Newer
1
...
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
...
90
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Blakes7 May 2001