cwayne@unm-cvax.UUCP (04/09/85)
>From: root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) >Date: 29 Mar 85 19:16:29 GMT >Organization: TRW Advanced Technology Facility, Merrifield VA. > >>> <A final question directed to trekkie-porno fans>: How many >>> actresses who have appeared in one or more episodes, have appeared >>> in centerfolds; specify the actresses, episodes, magazines, and >>> issues for those of us who may want to do some checking (innocent >>> of course). >> >> The only one I can think of is the girl who played Magda Kovas in >> "MW". Her name is Susan Denberg. She appeared in a british movie >> in 1967, so assuming that her centerfold made her "famous enough" >> to appear in that movie, I'd check the 1966-67 issues. > >Don't forget whatshername in "The Gamesters of Tri-skelion." After >this episode she did two posters. One in her Tri-skelion fighting >outfit, and another without .... > Her name is Angelique Pettyjohn, her character name was shahna (sp?). what about Teri garr? She may have never been in Playboy, but in most of her movies, she's always in her nightie ("Oh, GOD") or in a low-cut dress ("The Young Frankenstien"). And Joan Collins is all most always in some provocative type dress. Probably a dozen other female guest stars have done the same. > >> Her grandfather is played by >> John Hoyt, Dr. Phillip Boyce from the first pilot episode "The Cage". The >> daughter asks him the question which goes as follows,"The five letter name of >> a character, with long pointed ears, in a long running SI-FI TV show?" > >I thought the doctor for both the "The Cage" and the pilot episode >was Paul Fix. (?) >UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith NO!, Look and read credits!! >Article 1574 of net.startrek: >From: ugthomas@sunybcs.UUCP ( Timothy Thomas) >Subject: Re: Re: inconsistencies >Date: 31 Mar 85 15:01:36 GMT >Organization: State University of New York @ Buffalo,NY > >How come in 'I Mudd', nobody seems to know Harry except Kirk; even >though they have already met him in 'Mudds Womem' ? (or it could >be the other way around, nobody knows Harry in m.w. even though >they already met him in i.m.) Oh, they Knew him alright! They were not that impressed in seeing him again, that soon. >>...The Enterprise is dead, let her rest in peace!... >>You name houseboats or yachts "<whatever> II", but not starships!!!!!! >[About Kirk getting a new ship called "Enterprise" or "Enterprise II"] > >I'm under the impression that once a ship is destroyed/scrapped in the >present day navy, the ship's name is free to be used again. This would >permit Kirk's new ship the be christened "Enterprise" since no other >ship in the fleet has this name. Personally, I prefer names like the >"Vincible", the "Pervious", or the "Pregnable" (I mean, calling a ship >the "Indestructable" is asking for trouble :-). > >Wasn't there a carrier in WWII named "Enterprise"? Was this decommissioned >(scrapped) before the current nuclear version? This is true, but the captain of the CV-6 did not become the captain of the CVAN-65! I do not recall that at anytime, a captain that had lost his ship and was lucky enough to get a new command, had the same ship name. Ship names come from (where else) the Pentagon and not captains. >From: m1b@rayssd.UUCP >Message-ID: <683@rayssd.UUCP> > > In STII, right before the Reliant ambushes the Enterprise, >Khan quotes a Klingon proverb: "Revenge is a dish best served cold" >or some such. My question is: How did Khan come by this proverb? >His only previous encounter with the 23rd century was with the >Enterprise 15 years before. I would imagine that Khan and his people were given some "modern conveniences", like tape libraries and viewers, which would probably include Klingon literature. >From: m1b@rayssd.UUCP >Message-ID: <682@rayssd.UUCP> > > Hope no one minds if I try to introduce a new (hopefully) >topic. Having just watched STII for the umpteenth time, I started >to formulate alternative actions that Saavik (or whoever was taking >the test) could have taken in the Kobayashi Maru Scenerio. (I know >that it is a no win situation, but why not suppose...) For instance, >why not load all the shuttles with medical and engineering personnel >to help the ship without endangering the entire crew. If things >seemed kosher, the Enterprise could then follow. Ah ha! Using shuttles is the right idea, but not manned! The following is one of my favorite tactics!!! In this no-win scenario, you'll want to either get out of there or if you can't do that, take as many klingons with you as possible. No, I don't think you could use the Corbomite Maneuver in this one, but try a variation! Knowing that this is a Klingon trap, they may also want to capture the ship if they can. Therefore, take a few hits. shut down systems throughout the ship release radiation in selected parts of the ship and outside (i.e. play crippled). Tell the Klingons that the ship may "blow" any minute and request they take aboard your crew. Tell them that you must hurry, but the transporters are out. Convince them to use your shuttles. However, load your shuttles with drones (scatter-pack) and launch one shuttle to each Klingon (there may be more Klingons than shuttles so choose your targets wisely). At the moment the shuttles release thier drones transport transporter bombs "in front" of the Klingon's possible evasive routes. This will cause enough comotion that you can get away, at the same time your bound to cripple if not destroy at least one Klingon. >The term "bread and circuses" refers to the ancient Roman policy of >providing enough food and gory entertainment to keep the masses >happy. Sorry I don't know who coined the phrase. > >I always thought that the Bread referred to Jesus Christ >(remember the believers were "Son Worshipers") and the >Circuses referred to the cruel Roman arena. The followers >of Christ (bread of life) were thrown into the arena as >happened on Earth in the days of old. > >Just watching A.D. which showed the cruelty of the Caeser >reinforces this. I do believe that the first definition is what was meant, but I have this hunch that it is ALSO the second. When dealing with biblical events, there are usually two or more meanings meant (invovled). The Bible is structured that way for a purpose. And this purpose is also, usually beyond most understanding. >From: joe@ut-sally.UUCP (Joe Hitchens) >Subject: starship names >Date: 8 Apr 85 04:43:19 GMT >Organization: University of Texas at Austin > > I am casually making a list as I watch the episodes of the names of all >the starships in the fleet that were of the same type as the Enterprise. >their captains and (serial?) numbers. >So far I have the following: > >Enterprise NCC - 1701 James T. Kirk >Lexington Robert Wesley >Hood >Potemkin >Exeter Ron Tracey >Defiant > > Can anyone complete this list or add to it? > Ckeck the Concordance!!! "Shipyard Report: Federation Ship Names" in one of the issues of Nexus may also help. Chris Wayne @ UNM