From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #87
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/87
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 87
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] horizon
Re: [B7L] collectors lot
Re: [B7L] horizon
Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Re: [B7L] Horizon
Re: [B7L] Re: Guest Stars
Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Re: [B7L] horizon
Re: [B7L] Cally and Vila (was Avon and That Image)
[B7L] Horizon 1.9
Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
[B7L] A:ATA
Re: [B7L] RPG Female Fans
Re [B7L] Horizon
Re: [B7L] Horizon
Re: [B7L] Re: Guest Stars
[B7L] Room at the Top
Re: [B7L] Re: Guest Stars
[B7L] Horizon 2.0
Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Re: [B7L] Horizon 2.0/*Wild* accusations!
------------------------------
Date: 28 Mar 2000 17:29:30 +0200
From: Calle Dybedahl <calle@lysator.liu.se>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] horizon
Message-ID: <86em8vnmed.fsf@tezcatlipoca.algonet.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>>>> "Emily" == Emily Darby <emilydarby@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> This lyst has always been an open forum for debate unless anything
> has changed , Calle?
Nothing has changed. As long as the discussion is about Blake's 7 or
its fandom, I have no objection (others may object, of course). A
discussion about the conduct of the official B7 fanclub clearly falls
within these limits, in my opinion.
--
Calle Dybedahl, Vasav. 82, S-177 52 Jaerfaella,SWEDEN | calle@lysator.liu.se
"I like darkness, because it shows us light" -- Victoria McManus
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:29:44 GMT
From: "Mat Shayde" <dorian17@hotmail.com>
To: emilydarby@yahoo.co.uk, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] collectors lot
Message-ID: <20000328152944.55712.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>--- Mat Shayde <dorian17@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Sounds good to me Emily - when's it on? It's good
> > to see someone drawing
> > attention to Blake's 7. Shame the BBC haven't
> > advertised the repeats! :)
>
>
>It is 3.30 on either the 3rd or 4th april on channel 4
>
>Emily
Cool - thanks Emily, I look forward to seeing it. (I may even feel inspired
to make another teleport braclet out of a squash bottle nad a rubber!) :)
Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:11:02 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Emily=20Darby?= <emilydarby@yahoo.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] horizon
Message-ID: <20000328151102.29099.qmail@web4001.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Judith replying to Mat (I think)
> I'm not defending/explaining anything. I'm not on
> the "Horizon" committee.
> I'm merely stating facts: the names "Emily Darby",
> "David Fielding" and
> "Matt Shayde" do not match those of any club member,
> or attendee at
> "Deliverance".
> And like you, I'm well aware that people are not
> using their real names in
> this (and other) debates.
>
> Judith
I which case i would question why you feel the need to
mention it and why if you are not a member of the
Horizon committee do you have access to the member
records ? or are these public property and available
on request
I don't mean this to sound as if i am attacking you i
just cannot understand why you felt the need to say
that we were not members.
Emily
____________________________________________________________
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
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:37:30 GMT
From: "Mat Shayde" <dorian17@hotmail.com>
To: emilydarby@yahoo.co.uk, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Message-ID: <20000328153730.76683.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>--- Diva <diva@tn.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> > I'm surprised and disappointed that no-one else has
> > commented on what is
> > going on here. Do you really think it's acceptable
> > to say incredibly
> > personal (and untrue) things about Diane Gies on a
> > public list of which she
> > is not (AFAIK) a member? For example, David Fielding
> > asked:
> >
> > >How does Diane Gies’s fallopian tubes, stop the
> > Horizon committee from
> > carrying on
> > >and doing the NL in her absence?
>
>I don't know thati would clarify this comment as
>amazing offensive and insensitive, Diane presuamably
>chose to include in 39.5 the anture of her incapacity
>as 'ladies bits' , now i am female and that does not
>leave a lot of the imagination
as I said just now - if you're going to raise the subject (and take all the
control) then you must expect comments. As far as I can see the whole point
of having a committee is that if one member is incapacitated then it doesn't
imapir the function of the group overmuch.
<snip>
> > If you want Horizon to have better
> > content, why don't you write
> > for the magazine? If you live near enough to a
> > committee member, why not
> > help with the practical side of things? Or are you
> > just armchair critics,
> > eager to put down other people's efforts, but
> > unwilling to contribute? I
> > realise a number of people on Lysator run websites,
> > but none of the people
> > who have been bitching seem to have a url at the
> > bottom of their emails, and
> > as has just been pointed out on this list, there are
> > still lots of B7 fans
> > who aren't online. For those people, Horizon may be
> > their only source of B7
> > info. If you think it should be better, why sit
> > around complaining? That
> > won't achieve anything for anyone. If you think you
> > could do better, DO IT.
> >
> > Diva@tn.prestel.co.uk
>
>
>I agree and i think there are a lot of people who
>would love to be involved but it does seeem a little
>'cliquey' at Horizon towers and perhaps some of the
>in jokes and comments in the newsletters put people
>off, i don't know for sure but it would certainly
>dissuade me
>i personally have no axe to grind against
>Diane or anyone in particular at horizon i just wanted
>to stimulate some debate which i appeared to have
>succeeded in rather the wrong way
>
>Emily
you should be careful what you stimulate Emily! ;)
Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: 28 Mar 2000 17:50:27 +0200
From: Calle Dybedahl <calle@lysator.liu.se>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Message-ID: <868zz3nlfg.fsf@tezcatlipoca.algonet.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>>>> "Diva" == Diva <diva@tn.prestel.co.uk> writes:
> If Andy chooses not to answer those questions here I suggest you all contact
> Horizon before criticising Diane any further.
If Diane or any other representative of Horizon would like to post
here, I'll gladly put their addresses on the list of non-subscribers
allowed to post.
> In the meantime, a few remarks which are meant for those of you who have
> been making personal remarks about Diane behind her back.
As you pointed out at the beginning of your post, this is a public
forum. It's also a reasonably well-known one, that has been around for
a while. If Diane can't stand being talked about in a public forum,
she should not hold such a public office as President of Horizon.
Anyone here is free to either point Diane at the relevant postings in
the archive (I designed the archive so that one can give away URLs to
single posts), or, if she does not have any sort of net connection,
print them out and give them to her.
> If you want Horizon to have better content, why don't you write for
> the magazine?
Speaking as just another fan, I don't do that because I've seen
behaviour from Horizon that I really don't like, and as a consequence
of that I will never lift a finger to help them.
> there are still lots of B7 fans who aren't online. For those people,
> Horizon may be their only source of B7 info.
Which just makes Horizon's censorship even worse than it already is.
> That won't achieve anything for anyone. If you think you could do
> better, DO IT.
I do, I run this list. What have *you* done? Do you even dare reveal
who you are?
--
Calle Dybedahl, Vasav. 82, S-177 52 Jaerfaella,SWEDEN | calle@lysator.liu.se
"English has rules in the same sense the computer industry has standards."
-- Chris Adams, scary.devil.monastery
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:34:05 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Emily=20Darby?= <emilydarby@yahoo.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon
Message-ID: <20000328153405.1784.qmail@web4001.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
--- Neil Faulkner <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> wrote:
> Unless things have changed drastically in the past
> few years, Diane Gies
> *is* Horizon and without her next to nothing gets
> done. Especially the NL,
> since she seemed to insist on rubber-stamping every
> page with her approval
> before it was allowed anywhere near a printers.
>
> I think my favourite NL was the one with the blank
> page at the end, that the
> 'stupid' printers conveniently 'forgot' to print.
> Just so happened to be
> the page exhorting all Horizon members to make their
> own pirate copies of
> the Shakedown video...
>
This is what concerns me, why is a 20 year old fan
club which has had a very good reputation with the
actors and has sustained itself over this length of
time being solely controlled by one person ?????
Horizon is supposed to be a club with a committee ,
does the committee get any say in anything ?
Just out of intrest are any of the committee on line
and would they be intereested in answering, i belong
to several committees, i am a school governor and
chairman of a sci fi group and we take committee
appoval before doing anything and we all have a say in
posters, newsletters , websites, i woud never do
anything without consulting at least one other
committee member.
I wonder who else is directly activly involved with
Horizon anymore? or if perhaps Diane is struggling to
manage it on her own and perhaps it is time that if
she really cannot cope it does die a quiet death, i do
not want to see this and i i don't want diane to see
this as a direct insult as i am sure she is able to
cope however each newsletter does seem to contain a
crisis or two to explain the inevitable delays!!!
Emily
____________________________________________________________
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
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:51:13 +0100
From: "David A McIntee" <Master@allisurvey.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Guest Stars
Message-Id: <E12ZyLG-0005Yk-00.2000-03-28-16-55-43@cmailg2.svr.pol.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----------
> From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bsfiles.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
> > 1) Years ago, I came across a thing saying you couldn't survive more
than
> > ten seconds in space. This was used in at least one fairly cheesey
story
> > to get the hero (apparently dead at the end of part one) out alive (but
> > not until the villain had been celebrating for some time in part two
[ten
> > seconds being very relative in some texts]).
>
> There's a summary of the effects of space exposure at
>
> http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/2355.shtml
>
> To summarise the summary, you have about fifteen seconds of
consciousness.
> If you reach safety in that time, you should suffer no serious injury,
> although there may be some frostbite and chapping. If you do pass out,
> then you soon die of anoxia.
It's about a minute and a half all told.
Bizarrely, the only film I've seen which handles this accurately is, of all
things, Event Horizon.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:46:02 +0000
From: Una McCormack <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Message-ID: <38E0E1CA.3F20E410@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Diva wrote:
> Andy Hopkinson, please could you explain why you are no longer part of
> Horizon?
> Also, could you tell us what happened to the material that was to be used in
> the next Horizon newsletter?
Presumably, within the confines of copyright law, it remains the
property of the authors to do with as they see fit.
In the case of my own article, about which there was a query from David,
it wasn't completed. Part way through I was told that it would not be
published since a new policy had been introduced: non-members were no
longer eligible to write for the Horizon newsletter. This was
communicated to me by Andy and Alan. Diane has not contacted me
personally at any point to say that my services are no longer required,
so if any member of the committee would like to confirm or deny this
policy, I'd be interested to hear what they have to say.
Fortunately not too much of my time had been wasted writing the damn
thing.
Diva continued:
> There are plenty of people who write regularly on
> this list, presumably because you feel you have something interesting to say
> about B7. If you want Horizon to have better content, why don't you write
> for the magazine?
<snip>
> If you think you could do better, DO IT.
I did. All it left me with was a sour taste in the mouth and a profound
regret that I had gone anywhere near Horizon again.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:57:58 +0200
From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] horizon
Message-ID: <004c01bf98d6$c61743e0$b8ed72c3@marian-de-haan.multiweb.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Troy:
>Connection is now free and with games consoles, digital TV, set top boxes,
>Web Terminals etc offering cheap alternative to PC's cost now really isnt
>that much of an issue an issue.
I don't know about the rest of the world but my connection is not free and
here in the Netherlands PC's are quite expensive. I know more than a few
people who can't afford to buy one.
Marian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:07:47 +0200
From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Cally and Vila (was Avon and That Image)
Message-ID: <005f01bf98d8$240f3ec0$b8ed72c3@marian-de-haan.multiweb.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jacqueline Thijsen wrote:
>Oh, and Ellynne: Cally and Vila did hug in Aftermath (or was it Powerplay?)
>Since that was the most explicit physical contact any of our heroes ever
had
>on screen (except for Avon dragging Blake away from exploding things), I'm
>afraid I have to agree with Mistral about them having feelings for each
>other. At the very least Sister-Brother feelings, but I'm sure Vila
wouldn't
>mind a bit more.
I'm sure Cally would mind more than a bit :-)
Marian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:51:43 GMT
From: "David Fielding" <davidft10@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Horizon 1.9
Message-ID: <20000328175143.50639.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>>At 14:11 28/03/00 , Mat Shayde wrote:
>>
>>Dear, dear Judith, feeling defensive are we? It's a shame that you can't
>>defend Horizon's inadaquacies rather than attacking our arguements. What
>>are you trying to say here? That because we don't show up on your records
>>that our opinions are not valid, that we aren't entitled to a say? Hhhm,
>>maybe you should be working for the Federation rather than the rebels.
>>
>>Mat Shayde is not my real name, I have created the address and the name
>>solely for the Lysator list, as is my perogative, (I'm sure that several
>>of the people here aren't using their real names.) so that my main mail
>>in-box didn't get filled up with Blake's 7 stuff.
>>I was a member of Horizon for nearly 10 years. I was at several of the
>>Who's 7 conventions and at Deliverance (I have the photos and memories to
>>prove it!) Any information that I have given the club about my identity
>>and address at the time were given in confidence, not for you to ferret
>>through at a later date to prove or question my validity. (Does the Data
>>Protection Act mean anything to you?)
>>
>>This is typical of Horizon's attitude; when in doubt attack others, blame
>>others for failings, call the validity an oppinions of others into
>>question, never try and actually respond to criticism or accept it in any
>>way. Nice to know that the club is still being run for the fans!
>>
>>As David Fielding said - so muych for freedom of speech!
>>
>>Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?"
Hi everyone.
Looks like the NKVD have arrived, Anyway here goes...
Judith said
>I'm not defending/explaining anything.
No your not Judith, but perhaps you should be.
>I'm not on the "Horizon" committee.
>I'm merely stating facts: the names "Emily Darby", "David Fielding" and
>"Matt Shayde" do not match those of any club member, or attendee at
>"Deliverance".
If you are not a member of the Horizon committee, how the hell did you get
access to the Horizon database? I may not be a member of Horizon because I
don't wish to be pay out money simply so that I can be patronised by Diane
Gies's shrill editorial voice.
By the way, **HAPPY BIRTHDAY**
I'd just like to congratulate the Deliverance 98(!!!?) tech crew on the
professional way they recorded the event. Its exactly two years to the
day...
Well done guys.
Davif F.
"Shall I kill him?"
"No, a little surgery on the brain will remove these stupid criticisms, and
still allow us to make use of his £5.00 deposit."
>From "Genesis of Horizon"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:03:18 +0100
From: "Diva" <diva@tn.prestel.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Message-ID: <007801bf98e1$0d22a0e0$f793fea9@diva>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mat Shayde asked:
>How do you know what is true and what isn't?
As I made clear, I don't know all the facts. I do, however, know what
Diane's health problems were. Naturally, I'm not going into details, but I
do object to David Fielding trivialising it, especially when he doesn't
appear to know what was wrong. Calle stated that:
>As long as the discussion is about Blake's 7 or
>its fandom, I have no objection (others may object, of course). A
>discussion about the conduct of the official B7 fanclub clearly falls
>within these limits, in my opinion.
I think that's fair enough, but doesn't address my objection which is that
snide comments about Diane's health are not a necessary part of that
discussion especially when she is not on this list to defend herself. I'm
not suggesting this list should be censored; I'm suggesting that people
ought to have the decency to refrain from trivialising someone
else's health problems.
Calle also said:
>I run this list. What have *you* done? Do you even dare reveal
>who you are?
Calle, I made it quite clear that my remark about doing things was *not*
addressed to Lysator as a whole, and I think you are choosing to ignore that
because you want to turn this into an argument. Two other people have
already stated on this list that they use a pseudonym and common sense
suggests plenty of others do too, and yet you choose to attack me and only
me for this. Is this attack just because you disagree with me? As list
owner, it is your choice whether or not to allow people to post anonymously.
If you choose to let them, you can hardly complain when they do.
Mat says:
>the fact this Diva, that Diane *is* Horizon and, I'm afraid, not in a good
>way. As David pointed out, she takes sole responsibility for producing the
>newsletter and seems to desire to control everything herself.
As I understand it, Andy Hopkinson and Alan Stevens were given
responsibility for some or all of the production of Horizon 40. It is for
this reason that I asked for Andy's comments, as I had hoped we could
clarify this point. I also felt that if Horizon are choosing to discuss
their side of the story in public then Andy ought to have an opportunity to
do the same. As I said, I am not interested in a slanging match, but I agree
with Calle that Horizon can reasonably be discussed in this forum - provided
that that discussion is about facts rather than abuse.
>I'm afraid that if you are going to take total control you must be the one
>to receive the brickbats as well as the bouquets.
I have yet to hear or see any proof that Diane takes "total control". If
people have anything of substance to say, and can support it with proof then
fair enough. Otherwise, this has no real value to anyone. In response to
Calle's points, I don't know how Diane feels about being discussed behind
her back, but I do think that when people stoop to nasty remarks about her
health or when they say things like "I've seen behaviour from Horizon that I
really don't like, and as a consequence of that I will never lift a finger
to help them" then that is inappropriate and also that the people reading it
are unlikely to take your point of view too seriously. It just sounds like
the kind of bitching and rumours that are all too pervasive in fandom right
now. It is for exactly that reason that I chose not to repeat here the
rumours I have heard about Andy - I recognise that they are merely rumours,
and I'd prefer that he posted his own point of view so that we can discuss
something more concrete than gossip.
Mat asks:
>Are you suggesting that it should be immune from
>criticism?
No! That's why, in my last mail, I suggested that the people who had been
criticising got involved. Unsubstantiated nastiness is unlikely to persuade
anyone and not "lifting a finger" is a lazy kind of stance; if you don't
like the way Horizon is, start the revolution! Don't tell me that a group of
determined B7 fans can't change anything - history shows that they can. All
I suggested is that if you have
problems with Diane's involvement in Horizon you discuss it with Diane
rather than discussing it behind her back, and that you leave her personal
life out of it.
Diva@tn.prestel.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:00:19 +0100
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] A:ATA
Message-ID: <$WjY8AADiF44EwPX@jajones.demon.co.uk>
In message <20000327213415.87516.qmail@hotmail.com>, David Fielding
<davidft10@hotmail.com> writes
>What does A:ATA mean?
Avon: A Terrible Aspect, informally known as Avon: A Terrible Novel.
Proof that Paul Darrow is a better actor than he is a writer. Source of
annoyance to zine editors, who can see that he could have been a much
better writer with some relatively minor editing.
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:33:13 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] RPG Female Fans
Message-ID: <000201bf98e4$602a17c0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dorian wrote:
> Hhhm, I'm glad I have my players and not yours. :) I tend to find it's
the
> other way round, in my experiece players are more than happy to absorb
> background in order to create a fun character but don't want to spend time
> learning dull rules and game mechanisms.
*Every* group I've ever played with has been dominated by players who don't
want to know anything more than (a) what's this place called? and (b) who
can I kill while I'm here?
Players contradict themselves. They demand more background, but give it up
as too much effort when it's handed to them. Not completely
incomprehensible when only the GM has read the sourcebook and everyone else
is itching to roll dice.
And even when players do look at background notes, there's no guarantee
they'll understand them. I once had a player in my Heptovania fantasy
campaign who expressed a desire to play an Azamban (Azamba correlating to
Africa). I told him clearly enough that the small Azamban population in the
temperate north went back centuries, had been thoroughly assimilated into
the local culture, spoke the same language, worshipped the same gods, so
what did he roll up? A Zulu warrior, with leopardskin loincloth and assegai.
(In the middle of winter, too.)
Players, in my experience, do not by and large want their characters to be
part of the game world society. They do not even want their characters to
originate from that society and be outcasts or self-imposed exiles from it.
They want total disconnection, total freedom of action without even
considering the constraints that might make such freedom desirable in the
first place. GMs, again in my experience, aren't much better - they either
don't want to offer a coherent world background, or they haven't the
faintest clue about how to devise one (thinking of one GM's world where a
400-mile long paved road had a small village at each end and one tavern
somewhere in the middle. I tried to convince him there are such things as
settlement patterns but he wouldn't have none of it).
The only background I've played in that had unanimous player understanding
and support was Star Wars. But then we'd all seen the movies countless
times, and had plenty of opportunity to absorb the ambience of that
particular milieu.
> I'm not saying that rules *aren't* important, God knows, I've played Amber
> the diceless, free-form roleplaying game and it was a complete and utter
> shambles, it's just that I think that plot and characterisation are more
> important. If my players just wanted to roll dice and kill things I'd get
> them to play a war-game. (not that there is anything wrong with war-gaming
> either!)
Plot and characterisation are heavily dependent on world background, so if
that's underdeveloped or undercomprehended then they're not going to be
fully realised.
> >But B7 is open to more individual interpretation than most F/SF
> > >backgrounds (far more so than say Star Wars or Star Trek) which >makes
it
> >harder to use as a rolegame setting.
>
> Hhhm, I'm not sure that's really the case. The characters and politics are
> certainly more 'grey' than either Wars or Trek, but the basis of the game,
> at it's simplest, is that the Federation is 'the enemy' and that you are
> fighting them, whatever your reasons may be. I suppose it depends upon
> whether or not your players are fans. Only fans are as obsessive about
> interpretation as we are! :)
The trouble with B7 is that it does not function within any clearly
definable idiom. It has elements of Flash Gordon and Star Trek whilst
subverting both. It leans towards hard core space opera, even cyberpunk on
occasion, but lacks the technological awareness of both and the sociological
awareness of the latter. B7 is a melting pot of conventional SF idioms
which variously reaffirms, questions, denies and destroys the values of
each. This is a strength in some ways, since it makes the series open to
individual interpretation (consider the sheer variety of fanfic derived from
the series), but a weakness from a rolegaming point of view because there is
precious little chance of a group of players sharing a consensual
understanding of the ambience which a particular B7 game might aspire to.
One player might be treating it as space opera, another as cyberpunk, a
third as romantic science fantasy, and whilst each could find evidence for
the validity of his/er approach within the matrix of the series, the result
woould be a conflict of compatibilites rooted within the players (as opposed
to their characters) which would probably destroy the game before the end of
the first session. I've seen it happen, many times (and not just with B7).
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:44:08 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re [B7L] Horizon
Message-ID: <00da01bf98ee$208b4620$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ho hum, here we go again...
Rather than make lots of posts replying to various comments, I'll try and
slap it all down in one go.
First off, the comment about Diane's fallopian tubes was, IMO, rather below
the belt. But in a way Diane is asking for this sort of thing with a vague
and typically coy reference to 'ladies bits'. It's the sort of thing that
invites speculation. Why can't she either state the nature of her
complaint, or if she doesn't want to do that just refer to unspecified
health problems?
As for people attacking her behind her back (as Diva claims), they are not.
This list is archived, Diane has internet access, she can read through the
archives any time she wants. And Calle has made it plain that she is
welcome to post to the Lyst if she chooses. I doubt if she will, though.
She never responded to the 'Lightergate' thread last October, which she must
have been aware of, and enough people were sticking the boot in then.
The fact that so many people have publicly voiced their dissatisfaction with
Horizon (David, Mat, Emily, Una, Calle and I readily add myself) suggests
that there is something wrong with the way the club operates. Despite less
than constructive references to dancing chimps, I agree with those who
assert that Diane attempts to exert a more or less total control over
Horizon and especially the content of its publications. That was certainly
the impression I received from my stint as Letterzine editor. When I
mentioned to either Steven Allen or Alan Stevens (I forget who's who) at
Redemption that I had had a falling out with Diane, the response was along
the lines of "You too, huh?". Diane's dicatatorial attitude has driven a
lot of people out of Horizon, and more sadly out of fandom altogether. It
seems that Andy Hopkinson might only be the latest of a long line of
casualties (though I would echo Diva in that it would be helpful to hear his
side of the story - and Diane's - if only to give us a basis on which to
make informed opinions).
There definitely seems to be a 'blame culture' at work within Horizon, and
it further seems that much of this emanates from Diane herself. The
editorial tone of the newsletters is indeed self-congratulatory (something I
found quite nauseating right from the start), and to describe Diane's
editorial voice as 'shrill' is quite appropriate for someone who uses lots
*italics* and CAPITAL LETTERS and not infrequently *BOTH AT THE SAME TIME*
when slagging off anyone who upsets her, especially printers who 'stupidly'
omit to print pages exhorting people to break the law (to satisy Diane's
desire for revenge over Garry 'Dreamwatch' Leigh, who ultimately took
Horizon to court and effectively won in an out-of-court settlement - not
that Horizon's publications made any mention of these legal wranglings,
though I believe such silence was part of the settlement).
Whilst Deliverance (the con) was hardly a flop, I couldn't help but feel
that the convention was intended to be a Giesian ego-trip, the Con of All
Cons, Diane's ultimate vindication of her status as Supreme Empress of B7
fandom. Fortunately it didn't all collapse around her ears in chaos, but
certain events (Gawd bless ya, Sally Knyvette) led to a very
uncomfortable-looking Diane squirming through her farewell address at the
end of the con. (Though Deliverance was, perhaps, doomed from the start.
As a 20th Anniversary event it was obliged to be the Supercon, which meant
its necessarily over-reaching ambition prevented it from ever being all that
super.)
Basically, my own experience of Horizon and Diane leads me to believe that
all the accusations of her dictatorialism re Horizon are well founded, that
criticism of the way the club operates is equally well founded and perfectly
legitimate, and that exhortations to start a 'revolution' and wrest control
of Horizon from Diane are just so much wasted hot air - Diane is Horizon,
and unless she backs off to let other people play an active role in the club
(without her presiding interference in whatever they produce), then we are
stuck with either Diane's Horizon or no Horizon at all.
Neil Faulkner (my real name)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1990 00:22:16 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon
Message-ID: <000101b41fb3$c6872a40$328f01d5@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
David, Troy, Mat et.al.
We obviously have no common ground here I have already said my piece and
won't repeat it again, and people will obviously split into two opinions. I
am not able to do any better than Diane and the committee, so I'm not
complaining.
Actually I did have something to say, but I've just deleted it, 'cause I
think we should concentrate on the positive side of things, especially with
these excellent repeats around, and fascinating "first impressions" to read.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1990 23:55:50 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Guest Stars
Message-ID: <000001b41fb3$bfda2e40$328f01d5@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ellynne G.
>On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 21:08:23 -0000 "Andrew Ellis"
>> But going back to the main point. We didn't SEE Raiker die. So if
>> you want
>> to bring him back, it would be somewhat easier than bringing Blake
>> back from
>> GP.
>
>So, here's how some other
>writers did it.
>
>1) Years ago, I came across a thing saying you couldn't survive more than
>ten seconds in space.
>2) In 3001, it was pointed out how dying in a vacuum is a lot like freeze
>drying
>3) Space suits with force field helmets
>4) The Agatha Christie solution: Raiker didn't die,
Wow. Just goes to show there are no new idea's.
I spotted 1 and 3 (HHGTTG & SW-TESB) but 2 sounds interesting for some
universes. Unfortunately of course, we have subsequent Canon to go by. In
Cygnus Alpha, it takes about 10 milliseconds for a teleported individual to
explode, not fail to materialise cause there is no dirt around to form into
matter, but fully materialise and explode. So in the B7 universe we are left
with 3 and 4.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:08:48 -0500
From: "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet.att.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Room at the Top
Message-ID: <000501bf98f1$702b7620$37604e0c@dshilling>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I feel impelled to disagree with the implied underlying analysis of the
class struggle on the Liberator. Canonically, Blake is an Alpha, and Vila
passes himself off as a Delta but is something else (presumably, a Beta).
It's simply assumed that Avon is an Alpha because of his not-inconsiderable
opinion of himself.
But he seems to me to be exactly the kind of person formerly referred to as
a "grammar-school oik," and I think much of his initial hostility to Blake
comes from the conflict between a public school/Oxbridge type and a
scholarship boy with a double first from the direst red brick university in
the entire Federation.
Blake of course doesn't notice--he's a true democrat, willing to order
everyone around as if they were the footmen at his ducal estate. (Tarrant
shares the characteristic of walking downstage and issuing orders without
paying the slightest attention as to whether anyone is listening.)
Interestingly, Travis II drops hs but Vila doesn't, and one out of two
cliches left unturned in the entire series is that Gan is NOT a
Yorkshireman. (The other one is that Kerril, who fills the Dead Girlfriend
of the Week slot, does not in fact die.)
-(Y)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:17:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Claudia Mastroianni <cmastr@fas.harvard.edu>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Guest Stars
Message-Id: <200003282017.PAA21978@is06.fas.harvard.edu>
"Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com> wrote:
: I spotted 1 and 3 (HHGTTG & SW-TESB) but 2 sounds interesting for some
: universes. Unfortunately of course, we have subsequent Canon to go by. In
: Cygnus Alpha, it takes about 10 milliseconds for a teleported individual to
: explode, not fail to materialise cause there is no dirt around to form into
: matter, but fully materialise and explode. So in the B7 universe we are left
: with 3 and 4.
I've never had the impression that Vargas exploded because that's what
happens to one in a vacuum. Rather, it had to do with the teleport
range. Hence the handy bit of of exposition earlier in the episode:
JENNA: What would happen if you teleported somebody beyond the
maximum range?
AVON: I would imagine that they would appear momentarily in
space, and then that their atoms would be scattered to
the solar winds.
I've always thought that what happened is they teleported him back
to the same coordinates they had before for Cygnus Alpha. However,
the ship had moved in the meantime and they were out of range.
This probably doesn't bear close up under close examination as regards
whether the teleport uses an absolute or relative coordinate system--perhaps
Blake teleported Vargas to some *other* distant destination--but it's
the only reason for the Jenna/Avon exchange to exist in the first place.
Claudia
--
"It pleases me that you care for what I have become, but
never forget who I was, what I am, and what I can do."
-- Delenn, Lines of Communication, Babylon 5
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:19:37 GMT
From: "David Fielding" <davidft10@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Horizon 2.0
Message-ID: <20000328201937.29926.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
“Diva” – I recognise that manner, that trick of highlighting certain words
for emphasis, that vindictive tone. It’s *you* isn’t it? It’s *you*, DIANE
GIES. Welcome Diane, welcome to the list.
The idea that all of this is taking place “behind Diane Gies’s back” is
quite obviously farcical. If this were the case, then how did Judith Rolls
get access the Horizon database? And then there is of course that intimate
knowledge of Diane’s “ladies bits”. How else would “Diva” have known that
it isn’t Diane’s fallopian tubes that are giving her gyp? Unless of course
“Diva” is Diane’s gynaecologist, or lover.
Anyway it’s you Diane, who keeps banging on about your “ladies bits” all the
time.
Way back in H39 you were asking people to ring up, so that you could tell
them in greater detail! As for accusing me of saying things about you,
Diane, that aren’t true, well, I don’t think that’s far at all. You are a
major power freak. I thought that was common knowledge!
As for dragging Andy Hopkinson into this, what’s it got to do with him? I
think he did a smashing job on H39, and the fact that he is not going to do
issue 40 is very sad indeed.
Neil Faulkner said yesterday, that you, Diane, like to stamp your imprint
onto every page of Horizon. If that’s true, then perhaps that’s what drove
poor Andy away.
David F.
“YOU *MUST*, YOU *WILL* OBEY ME!!!!”
>From “Genesis of Horizon”
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:26:26 -0500
From: Meredith Dixon <dixonm@pobox.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon/Andy Hopkinson
Message-ID: <ti32esk1d0uhlql82q7f2sq7skq8d7og73@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Calle said:
> If Diane can't stand being talked about in a public forum,
>she should not hold such a public office as President of Horizon.
and Diva answered:
> In response to Calle's points, I don't know how Diane feels about being discussed behind
>her back, but I do think that when people stoop to nasty remarks about her
>health
Since I was one of those who criticized Calle for choosing to
repost personal e-mail to the list the last time there was a fuss
about Diane Gies here, I feel it's especially important for me to
state that I agree with his comments here.
This is a well-known public forum, so by definition Diane is not
being discussed behind her back. She is free to join the forum
or to read its posts without joining.
Likewise, she chose to be President of Horizon, and I gather from
the comments here that she chose to bring up the subject of her
health in the course of explaining why the latest newsletter was
over a year late.
When you choose to take on a job with a high profile, in which
your name is personally associated with whatever product you're
delivering, you've got to expect people who're making use of your
product to talk about you and to criticize your work. If someone
else, not Diane, had brought up her health problems first, I'd
probably agree that that was in questionable taste, but since she
brought them up, she can hardly blame people for mentioning them
when the matter of the newsletter's being late is discussed.
And, yes, since it seems to be important to you, I've done what
I'm saying Diane should be able to do. I spent three and a half
years volunteering as a Sysop on a large Internet BBS. The other
Sysops and I were insulted individually and collectively on a
daily basis, in far harsher terms than I've seen anyone level at
Diane yet. Everything we did and a fair number of things we left
undone were criticized by members of our userbase, and I mean
everything. Usually, in fact, half the userbase would be
screaming that we were fascist pigs who rode roughshod over them
and continually abused our Sysop powers, taking action at the
drop of a hat, and the other half would simultaneously be
reviling us for being lazy no-goods who never did anything to
justify our Sysop flags.
Admittedly, I deliberately made as little known about my personal
life as possible while I was a Sysop, so very few of the comments
hit home. (Usually, in fact, people tended to send me mail
inquiring about the size of my penis, which, since I'm female,
missed the mark entirely.) So I can see that Diane might indeed
be distressed by the health-problem comments. On the other hand,
though, as I said, if she didn't want them to be discussed
publicly, she really shouldn't have brought them up.
and Diva also said, quoting Calle again:
>or when they say things like "I've seen behaviour from Horizon that I
>really don't like, and as a consequence of that I will never lift a finger
>to help them" then that is inappropriate.
*blinks* Now you're saying that Horizon's management team as a
group should not be criticized? Why ever not?
Oh, and to save you the trouble of checking Horizon's membership
records; this is my real name, and I am not and have never been a
member of Horizon.
--
Meredith Dixon <dixonm@pobox.com>
Check out *Raven Days*, for victims and survivors of bullying.
And for those who want to help.
http://www.pobox.com/~dixonm/raven.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:52:36 +0100
From: "Diva" <diva@tn.prestel.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon 2.0/*Wild* accusations!
Message-ID: <005201bf98f7$8edaa0e0$f793fea9@diva>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Nice try, but I'm not Diane and I'm not her lover - ROTFLMAO - I think
you've been reading too much slash mate! That really is funny though...While
we are on wild guesses, are you and Emily the two secret identities of Andy
Hopkinson?
Oh, and btw Neil, when I said start the revolution, I wasn't meaning people
should take over Horizon, but that if they had criticisms then they should
turn them into practical action. Before anyone asks, I wasn't advocating
Dana-style bomb-throwing either!
Diva@tn.prestel.co.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: David Fielding <davidft10@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Date: 28 March 2000 21:33
Subject: [B7L] Horizon 2.0
“Diva” – I recognise that manner, that trick of highlighting certain words
for emphasis, that vindictive tone. It’s *you* isn’t it? It’s *you*, DIANE
GIES. Welcome Diane, welcome to the list.
The idea that all of this is taking place “behind Diane Gies’s back” is
quite obviously farcical. If this were the case, then how did Judith Rolls
get access the Horizon database? And then there is of course that intimate
knowledge of Diane’s “ladies bits”. How else would “Diva” have known that
it isn’t Diane’s fallopian tubes that are giving her gyp? Unless of course
“Diva” is Diane’s gynaecologist, or lover.
Anyway it’s you Diane, who keeps banging on about your “ladies bits” all the
time.
Way back in H39 you were asking people to ring up, so that you could tell
them in greater detail! As for accusing me of saying things about you,
Diane, that aren’t true, well, I don’t think that’s far at all. You are a
major power freak. I thought that was common knowledge!
As for dragging Andy Hopkinson into this, what’s it got to do with him? I
think he did a smashing job on H39, and the fact that he is not going to do
issue 40 is very sad indeed.
Neil Faulkner said yesterday, that you, Diane, like to stamp your imprint
onto every page of Horizon. If that’s true, then perhaps that’s what drove
poor Andy away.
David F.
“YOU *MUST*, YOU *WILL* OBEY ME!!!!”
>From “Genesis of Horizon”
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #87
*************************************