From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #336
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/336
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 99 : Issue 336
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] Re: ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Re: [B7L] Re: ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Re: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Re: [B7L] Re: Avon:ATA
RE: [B7L] Realities of combat
Re: [B7L] Re: Avon:ATA
Re: [B7L] Re: ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Re: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
[B7L] Update: Rare B7 Photo Auction
Re: [B7L] Re: Avon:ATA
[B7L] optimism and pessimism
[B7L] TLA Buster
RE: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
[B7L] :ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism
[B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Re: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 23:54:11 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: avona@jps.net, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Message-ID: <19991202075411.25657.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Re Avona's reply to my email -
I'm not (heaven forbid!) saying that Tarrant is a failure. What
I'm puzzled about is his statement, not that "I *was* a success,
you were a failure," but "I *am* a winner, you *are* a failure.
As of right now." What has either of them to show for their past careers,
more than the other? It can't be all those skills you
mention - Avon is as skilled in his own area (probably moreso
by canonical evidence). It can't be his military high-flyer glory
- as I said, it was tainted and he threw it away anyway.
Yes, Avon got caught and Tarrant didn't (lucky for him too - they exile
embezzlers, they probably shoot deserters, slowly and painfully.) That
doesn't precisely make him a winner unless he
has something to *show* for his mercenary career - which he
doesn't any more.
By my reading, Avon *was* a failure (the bank fraud) but at least
his attempt was on a grand scale, and he made up for it by
being (okay, reluctantly) a member of one of the most successful resistance
groups against the Federation (though the only part
*Avon* would have seen as success was the fact that he helped
keep himself, Blake and the others alive and the Liberator in
one piece). Tarrant hasn't failed, but he hasn't succeeded at
much either - not anything more than Avon (or Dayna, or Vila, or...)that
*has lasted*.
Back to the above. What he *should* have said was "I've been a success. I've
*done* this, even if I've bugger-all to show for
it now <g>. Just like you have, Avon." (And I wish he had said something
like this, because - by virtue of being the truth - it
would have annoyed Snarly even more than the flagrant silliness
of what he *did* say...)
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 00:05:14 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Message-ID: <19991202080514.62347.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
I forgot to mention one other, external reason why this tirade
of Tarrant's makes me wince, the same one as for Avon's equally
silly jibe at Blake at the start of Deliverance. Both are uncharacteristic
pieces of conceit (they're both arrogant,
they're neither quite this stupidly conceited) clearly written
in to set up Tarrant (Sargophagus) and Avon (Deliverance) for
a fall later in the episode.
But we have to find an internal excuse, don't we..?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:19:21 +1100
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Message-ID: <19991202081921.A21779@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Nov 30, 1999 at 10:53:41PM -0700, Ellynne G. wrote:
[on Tarrant]
> Jarrierre got stuck on Freedom City]). At the time of the war, his help
> seemed to be accepted quickly enough (although, anyone who could prove
> they weren't a shape-changing alien or a black market organ seller was
> probably welcome). I may have completely misunderstood (I do that,
> sometimes), but I had the impression he was given the Federation uniform
> under battle conditions, in which case the insignia may have also been
> given him (a sort of 'field commission' acknowledgement of a mercenary
> ally's rank when his own clothes had an accident. I understand some
That wasn't the impression I got. I thought he stole the clothes off
of a dead officer when everything was going kaput, and they happened
to be the clothes of a higher-ranking officer. Let's see...
(ah those transcripts are wonderful)
TARRANT: I've been on the Federation wanted list for quite a
while. I had my own ship. I was running contraband,
getting myself mixed up in other people's wars - you
know the sort of thing. Naturally I heard something of
what Blake and the rest of you were doing.
AVON: We tried not to keep it a secret. How did you get here?
TARRANT: Like you, I went in against the aliens, unlike you I
barely survived the first salvo. I was picked up by a
Federation ship - that's how I came by the uniform.
When she was hit and we abandoned my life capsule
homed in on the Liberator. She was still in bad shape
but the repair circuits were beginning to make
headway.
AVON: Were Klegg and his men already here?
TARRANT: Yes, so I had no choice but to bluff it out and
pretend I was Federation. The man I got the uniform
from outranked Klegg and I trained as a Federation
Space Captain so it wasn't too difficult.
Hmmm, this is ambiguous. "The man I got the uniform from outranked
Klegg" is what made me think the uniform was not issued - if the
uniform was *issued*, the rank of the person *giving* you the uniform
wouldn't mean anything, since the rank insignia would be whatever
was issued. However, if the uniform was taken from the body of an
officer, then the rank insignia on the uniform would be those of that
officer.
I think that's the logic I was using.
--
_--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
/ \ | http://home.connexus.net.au/~kat
\_.--.*/ | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
v |
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:05:22 +0000 (GMT)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bsfiles.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: Neil Faulkner <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
Cc: b7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Avon:ATA
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.991202100358.1693B-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Neil Faulkner wrote:
> Mistral wrote:
> >Interestingly, I read somewhere recently that a study had been
> >done that showed that pessimists actually have a more accurate
> >view of reality than optimists do.
>
> But does this mean they're more likely to be right because they're
> miserable, or more likely to be miserable because they're right?
The latter. Pessimism seems to be the lack of that wonderful ability to
rationalise ones woes away, and come up with implausible reasons to expect
future happiness.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 00:35:48 +0100
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: b7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-ID: <39DCDDFD014ED21185C300104BB3F99F95BB9F@NL-ARN-MAIL01>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Neil wrote:
> Thinking on how you might avoid getting into such a situation
> in the first place, however, strikes me as eminently sensible.
> Recommendations for good avoidance practice:
> - Don't be a rebel.
Vila wasn't, and look where it got him.
> - Don't do anything Blake suggests (unless it seems
> reasonably safe, like
> doing a stock check of Liberator's light bulbs).
The way they were going, doing a stock check of anything at all on that ship
would probably have resulted in uncovering some slumbering danger that had
been waiting there all season for some idiot to come along.
> - Don't visit anything guarded by Federation troopers (or
> anyone else known to carry guns).
Yeah, but then they come after you, anyway.
> - In fact, don't ever set foot on the Liberator at all.
Stay on the London? But the guards there had guns, too.
> - If Blake or any of his crew are known to be anywhere in the
> vicinity, find
> some pressingly urgent task to attend to, like ascertaining
> illumination levels in broom cupboards.
I think Nova tried that. Although I'll grant you that he didn't get shot.
> Just don't expect any sizable fan following, or memorable
> lines, or your name in the end credits.
Nova's still fondly remembered on this list, and he got his name in the end
credits for one episode. As for memorable lines: "Noooooo!!!!" comes to
mind.
Jacqueline
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 03:07:12 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Avon:ATA
Message-ID: <19991202110712.12948.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> >Interestingly, I read somewhere recently that a study had been
> >done that showed that pessimists actually have a more accurate
> >view of reality than optimists do.
>
>But does this mean they're more likely to be right because they're
>miserable, or more likely to be miserable because they're right?
It's probably more a case of "Argue enough for your weaknesses and they're
yours." After all, saying "I can't" makes one feel an awful lot less guilty
about not going for it.
I mean, if I'd adopted a defeatist attitude with regards to Neil's goldfish,
the blasted thing would have caught up with me and killed me by now. And I
would have been very smug in the knowledge that I was right, if I hadn't
been dead.
-- Rob
[Neil, am I *still* on your goldfish's s**t list?]
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 06:22:22 EST
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Message-ID: <0.b606809f.2577b06e@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Joanne requested:
> Should prove its worth, in that case! Though I am suitably grateful, just a
> favour, though: can I exchange it for dark red, a colour I like more?
Red.... Well, okay. Sifting through image of Joanne as "The Lady in Red."
> Unfortunately, that would mean it's more likely to match Vila's eyes
(after
> a night on the grog) or, possibly, Avon's after yet another argument with
> Tarrant.
:)
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 06:22:21 EST
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Message-ID: <0.7a4e10a7.2577b06d@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathryn wrote:
> Hmmm, this is ambiguous. "The man I got the uniform from outranked
> Klegg" is what made me think the uniform was not issued - if the
> uniform was *issued*, the rank of the person *giving* you the uniform
> wouldn't mean anything,
Along with Elynne I've considered the possibility that Tarrant was "given"
the uniform to replace tattered clothes, but I don't think it was a case of
being given the rank along with the uniform. It was just that the person
nearest his size, who provided him with the outfit, happened to hold the rank
of captain. The insignia were already there, and Tarrant realized that it
was to his advantage not to remove said insignia.
While I tend to think "stole" the uniform better fits Tarrant's tone of voice
when he tells the story, it also makes the story more complicated. There
would have to be a reason for Tarrant to steal the uniform; he can't predict
that he's going to end up on Liberator with the Death Squad. Wearing a
stolen uniform is as likely to get him in trouble as to help him, if someone
recognizes that he's impersonating an officer.
Then there is the question of when would he have stolen the uniform?
Presumably it would have been when the Federation ship that picked him up was
going belly up. (There would have to be a good reason for him to want/need
to steal it earlier since he's already been identified as a civilian to this
crew.) Would there have been time and opportunity to steal a uniform when
one would more likely be thinking about getting off the damaged Fed ship
while the getting was good? We'd have to presume that (a) Tarrant found a
dead officer who just happened to be his size, (b) the ship was in good
enough shape for Tarrant to risk staying on board long enough to strip off a
uniform, (c) he had the privacy to do that without being caught in the act by
a bonafide member of the crew, and (d) he had a reason to want a uniform as
opposed to remaining a civilian participant in the battle. Those are a lot
of "ifs." It's not impossible, but it requires a more complex back story
than the simpler "he was given the uniform to replace tattered clothes."
Given the pace of the battle, I don't think they were taking the time to
assign battlefield commissions to civilians, and especially not taking the
time to assign battlefield commissions =and= uniforms to match the
commissions. Temporary promotions were undoubtedly occurring within the
Federation ranks, with subordinates being upped to "acting" next level if the
ranking officer above them was killed or incapacitated, but even then they
aren't taking the time to update uniform insignia.
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:03:38 +0000 (GMT)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bsfiles.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: Neil Faulkner <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
Cc: b7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.991202100016.1693A-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Neil Faulkner wrote:
> Mistral wrote:
> >Neil Faulkner wrote:
> >
> >> In a real life-or-death situation
> >> armed with a Ray Gun (TM), you would surely still shoot to hit and assess
> >> the consequences afterwards.
> >
> >A prescription for disaster if I ever heard one. Even if the bullet/ray
> >kills, the target doesn't drop immediately; that's a TV fiction.
>
> There's enough live footage and stills from actual combat to show that a
> target can drop instantly when hit. But it can't be relied on. A single
> slug from an AK-47 can kill outright. There are cases of people taking two
> or three such slugs and remaining on their feet. There are just too many
> variables.
It's my understanding that the SAS doctrine is to shoot the target twice,
and then evaluate the situation. I presume they know what they're doing.
Mind, you, it would also appear to be their practice to empty a magazine
or two into any incapacitated/dead enemies as soon as possible: something
we don't see any of our heroes doing. Not even the eminently pragmatic
Avon.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 09:04:18 EST
From: Bizarro7@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se, freedom-city@blakes-7.org
Subject: [B7L] Update: Rare B7 Photo Auction
Message-ID: <0.ad2c9672.2577d662@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This is a weekly reminder that our auction of rare out-takes and shots from
B7 is still taking place on eBay at: <A
HREF="http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/ashton7/">eBay View About Me for ashton7
</A> (http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/ashton7/).
Among many other goodies from our 25-year-plus combined collections in
fandom, you'll spot photos including Tarrant, Avon, Soolin, Vila, Dayna,
Cally, Servalan and many more. Check them all out, even if it's just to view
and enjoy some rare goodies.
In case you would like to bid on any of these items, simply register on ebay
as a bidder. It's free and takes only a couple of minutes. Good luck!
Leah
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 19:14:54 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Avon:ATA
Message-ID: <084b01bf3cf9$8c803940$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Iain wrote:
> Pessimism seems to be the lack of that wonderful ability to
> rationalise ones woes away, and come up with implausible reasons to expect
> future happiness.
Sig file beckons that one, Iain.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:53:26 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] optimism and pessimism
Message-ID: <006c01bf3d07$7c9b9660$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> Mistral wrote:
>> >Interestingly, I read somewhere recently that a study had been
>> >done that showed that pessimists actually have a more accurate
>> >view of reality than optimists do.
However there is an interesting paradox. If you take an optimistic stance
you are less likely to give up, and you are more likely to succeed: this is
true even if in fact your chances are not good.
Has anybody been watching Ray Mears' series on 'Survival'? - it is one of my
favourite programs. In following the stories of people who have survived
predicaments which have killed other people he repeatedly stresses that they
reacted confidently and with optimism, while the more 'realistic' and thus
more pessimistic people lapsed into passivity - and unfortunately had much
less chance of surviving.
Therefore optimism may be less accurate but it is more rational - well,
rational if you want to survive anyway.
IMHO this also applies to less extreme circumstances, such as getting a job,
hitch-hiking home when your car breaks down etc. etc.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 22:18:17 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] TLA Buster
Message-ID: <000001bf3d08$ca78a480$34268cd4@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm starting to pick up all the TLA/FLA's, but what is this one ?
>
>Note to Joanne: LOL!
>
Andrew (COI)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:13:48 +0100
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Message-ID: <39DCDDFD014ED21185C300104BB3F99F95BD79@NL-ARN-MAIL01>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Carol wrote:
>
> While I tend to think "stole" the uniform better fits
> Tarrant's tone of voice
> when he tells the story, it also makes the story more
> complicated. There
> would have to be a reason for Tarrant to steal the uniform;
> he can't predict
> that he's going to end up on Liberator with the Death Squad.
> Wearing a
> stolen uniform is as likely to get him in trouble as to help
> him, if someone
> recognizes that he's impersonating an officer.
He didn't have to wear it. All he had to do was walk past an officer's empty
quarters on his way to the escape capsule and nick a uniform out of the
closet because it might come in handy wherever he'd land. That's as easy and
quick as picking up any kind of luggage and doesn't require a conveniently
dead or unconscious officer of the right size. If he'd landed somewhere
where the uniform was a liability, all he'd have to do is leave it and keep
wearing his civvies.
Jacqueline
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 21:17:28 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] :ALert! "Avona" is actually going to DEFEND Tarrant.
Message-ID: <007c01bf3d19$3e982ba0$34268cd4@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Yes, Avon got caught and Tarrant didn't (lucky for him too - they exile
>embezzlers, they probably shoot deserters, slowly and painfully.) That
>doesn't precisely make him a winner unless he
>has something to *show* for his mercenary career - which he
>doesn't any more.
>
So, does anybody think that Tarrant's brother was in on his desertion, and
so fled to the nearest neutral planets to avoid going into "slavery" ? Or
did he leave whilst the grey clad one was still on active service.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 21:27:42 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism
Message-ID: <007d01bf3d19$3f7a0020$34268cd4@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>> Mistral wrote:
>>> >Interestingly, I read somewhere recently that a study had been
>>> >done that showed that pessimists actually have a more accurate
>>> >view of reality than optimists do.
>Therefore optimism may be less accurate but it is more rational - well,
>rational if you want to survive anyway.
>
>IMHO this also applies to less extreme circumstances, such as getting a
job,
>hitch-hiking home when your car breaks down etc. etc.
>
Who ever said you needed an accurate view of reality to be successful in
your career, or survive in a hostile environment ?
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:55:47 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Message-ID: <19991202.225549.10262.0.Rilliara@juno.com>
On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:13:48 +0100 Jacqueline Thijsen
<jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl> writes:
>He didn't have to wear it. All he had to do was walk past an officer's
>empty
>quarters on his way to the escape capsule and nick a uniform out of
>the
>closet because it might come in handy wherever he'd land. That's as
>easy and
>quick as picking up any kind of luggage and doesn't require a
>conveniently
>dead or unconscious officer of the right size.
It just requires an officer with an open door who was the right size.
And for Tarrant to know he was the right size (or maybe Tarrant was in
his lifepod a long time and he spent it doing alterations? I always knew
he had hidden talents!).
Oh, who am I kidding? I'll go with whatever version of events best fits
whatever story I may be working on. As in the following, which goes with
the "Tarrant only planned to wear it if he landed in Federation
controlled territory" theory.
Tarrant's lifepod arrives on Liberator. The goon patrol quickly
surrounds it.
Goon: All right, in there, come out with your hands up!
Tarrant: Er, just a minute, the lock's stuck. Say, are you guys
Federation or something else?
Goon: Federation.
Tarrant: Military?
Goon: Military, psychotic killers' subdivision, special decorations for
wanton destruction of unarmed civilians and a commendation for our
advances in torture under field conditions. Why?
Tarrant: Oh [pause]. So coming out dressed as a civilian would be a bad
thing?
Goon: Oh, not really. Me and the lads haven't had any fun since we wiped
out an Amish community last week. Hey, have you got that lock fixed yet
or not?
Tarrant: [Lifepod begins to rock from hasty movements inside. There's a
clear sound of a zipper] No problem. No problem at all. [Door opens.
Tarrant's head pops out. He pauses] Say, you're commanding officer
wouldn't outrank a [checks insignia] captain, would he?
Goon: No.
Tarrant: [Coming out of pod with confident swagger] Good. Then I'm
assuming command.
Goon: [Checking pod] You don't happen to have anyone else we can torture,
do you?
Tarrant: No.
Goon: So, whose clothes are these?
Tarrant: A prisoner's. I, er, had to disintigrate him.
Goon:Oh. Funny, he was the same size as you. And look, here's his ID. He
looked just like you, too.
Tarrant: [Thinking fast] Er, uhm, yes. He was my brother.
Goon: Your brother? [Out of earshot] Lousy officers get _all_ the fun.
___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 23:50:51 -0700
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Sarcophagus
Message-Id: <4.1.19991202234139.0092e800@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Tarrant: [Lifepod begins to rock from hasty movements inside. There's a
>clear sound of a zipper] No problem. No problem at all. [Door opens.
>Tarrant's head pops out. He pauses] Say, you're commanding officer
>wouldn't outrank a [checks insignia] captain, would he?
Ellynne G., you slay me!
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 02:19:15 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] optimism and pessimism
Message-ID: <19991203101915.56762.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Alison/Andrew:
>>Therefore optimism may be less accurate but it is more rational - well,
>>rational if you want to survive anyway.
>>
>>IMHO this also applies to less extreme circumstances, such as getting a
>>job, hitch-hiking home when your car breaks down etc. etc.
>>
>
>
>Who ever said you needed an accurate view of reality to be successful in
>your career, or survive in a hostile environment ?
Absolutely no one. This is a desperately simple scenario:
(1) Optimists are more likely to succeed than pessimists. [Alison]
(2) Pessimists are more likely to be proved right than optimists [Mistral's
study] -- because pessimism is, very often, a self-fulfilling prophesy.
There's no contradiction at all between the statements. In fact, they are
almost different ways of saying the same thing.
I'm reminded of one of my favourite Avon/Blake moments:
<PARAPHRASE>
AVON: Let me tell you something, Blake. Change is inevitable.
BLAKE: Why else do we fight?
</PARAPHRASE>
Blake *is* the man!!!
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #336
**************************************