WordWolf

It's actually an old story. It wouldn't surprise me to see that twi heard of this recently. http://www.seekgod.ca/trfactor2.htm http://www.lebtahor.com/truth/trimm/plagiarisms/HRVAveryPaper.htm Looks like twi was plagiarized. That they broke the law doesn't mean others are justified in doing so. If someone else is engaging in a fraud, that's wrong, too.

It was small of him to make a comment like that.

"The Outrageous Okona." Data tried to learn how to be funny. (A suitcase shaped like a fish is NOT funny. At best, it's amusing.) The main plot involved Okona, and 2 societies that wanted to bring him in for supposedly committing a crime- 2 societies that were all but at war with each other, and their technology was far below that of the Federation. (Thus, their ships didn't pack weapons that could damage a Galaxy-class ship, let alone knock down its shields.)

Oh, in hindsight, it's not only believable, it's OBVIOUS. vpw HIMSELF didn't really respect JE Stiles until Stiles was rude to his own wife and "put her in her place." vpw enforced his world-view and indoctrinated the Corps and the other insiders (staffers, etc). As he planned, his views-including his carnal, unChristian, devilish ones- became widely embraced.

lcm spoke of it in his autobiography: "vp and me." We discussed it in the thread, "vp and me in Wonderland." http://www.greasespotcafe.com/main2/waydale/waydale-corps-notes/vp-and-me.html

Good point. As soon as he heard about the young, naive, idealistic, casual-about-sex Christians of the House of Acts, he rushed out to Haight-Ashbury to win them over. Of course, while he was there, he asked about orgies and supposedly spent enough time in San Francisco's "adult" bookstores and so on to get the pornographic photos and video he used for the CFS class. All in all, he managed to get a lot done in one trip..... The House of Acts Christians he subverted (which was "some of them") became the sales force he needed, as the bookend to Leonard's class and Bullinger's books. Now he had something to sell and people to advertise it. After that, it was just a matter of printing books, making appearances, and, eventually, taping classes on audio and video. Other people, to a sociopath, are insignificant insects. Other people only gain meaning when the sociopath can get something out of them- then they become a COMMODITY. And that's what twi's people were- they were sources of income, sources of adulation and "worship" for vpw, both the ego-stroke and the money. People paid him for lording over their lives. No, this is a common misconception- she never said that. http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/dubiousquotes/a/antoinette.htm http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/550/did-marie-antoinette-really-say-let-them-eat-cake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake

I keep confusing the Brattain with the Bozeman, which is why I keep thinking the ship reappeared. "As mentioned in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion, this episode is considered to be one of the weakest of the fourth season and many members of the production staff were unhappy with it. The scenes with Troi "flying" were said to be a "terrible" mistake by Jeri Taylor and Robert Legato described them as "horrible". Marina Sirtis commented that her desire for more action scenes had backfired; she had to grapple with an intense fear of heights in order to film them. Michael Piller noted that the pace of the show was so slow that the episode ran nine minutes over and had to be severely cut."

That's it- "Night Terrors." The crew of the Brattain-and then the Enterprise- are trapped on one side of some sort of gravity-like well. On the other side, they can't see another ship trapped. The other ship wants to generate an explosion to blow their ships clear-since the anomaly has shut down their engines. So, they try to communicate with the Federation ship. The result on both ships is people slowly going crazy, and a Betazoid managing limited communication. The message "one moon circles" was their request for the Enterprise to release Hydrogen into space so the other ship could detonate it with their own supplies and so on. A lot of staffers were dissatisfied with this episode. Me, I thought it was noteworthy for 2 things: 1) the re-appearance of the USS Brattain 2) the scene in 10-Forward. When some of the crew is starting a fight that can escalate into a riot, Guinan handles it like an experienced bartender. She pulls a weapon out from behind the bar, and activates it- making a loud noise and a bright lightshow. She got EVERYONE's attention and stopped the fight. Your turn!

"This is a little souvenir I picked up from Magus III. That was setting number one. Anyone wanna see setting number two?" "We're examining the Brattain for clues -- but this man is the only one left who knows what happened there." "Thirty-four people were found dead on this ship. That could make anyone uneasy." "Eyes... in the dark... one moon...circles.."

Well, stand it on its head. IF the location is poor for actually serving people, but good for saving money, THEN the priority is saving money. Period. All the talk about people being more important was just that-talk.

When one takes a hard look at what went into it. it's obvious that the program would flop. It was concocted by a man who had no experience whatsoever in ANY sort of training program. It was supposedly based on the Marines-by a man with no military service and an exemption from the draft as a minister. It employed no experts in training for Christian ministry. The only real training ever employed was some of the outdoors/LEAD/rockclimbing, and the entirety of the DALE CARNEGIE SALES TRAINING. (The only professional training the "Christian leaders" got was in SALES!!!) Blow away all the hype, and the "successes" that DID result are the testimony to wonderful hearts on behalf of many of the early entrants.

I'm pretty sure that's the correct title and artist.

"This is a little souvenir I picked up from Magus III. That was setting number one. Anyone wanna see setting number two?" "We're examining the Brattain for clues -- but this man is the only one left who knows what happened there." "Thirty-four people were found dead on this ship. That could make anyone uneasy."

I agree. Twi was (and is) supposedly about doing God's Will, as determined by an understanding and application of the content of the Bible. Those people that believed that and did so-without twi's involvement- actually helped people. Those who used the structure for their own lusts and vices hurt people, destroying some. (I include those that vpw and lcm PERSONALLY drove to commit suicide.) Those that were affected by the people in one or the other category helped and/or hurt people, depending on the level of involvements, and who they were involved with. I don't have access to nearly enough information to come CLOSE to knowing what the NET results were. From what I've heard, more people have said "I would have been dead if not for...." than people who committed suicide due to twi. So, I'd suspect that twi was used for more good than evil DESPITE ITS DESIGNED REASONS. SOME of the people may have done good or evil in other venues, but not every venue puts you where you can make a critical difference in someone's life so easily. I'm reluctant to blithely wave away what they did at certain places and times, saying "Someone else would have done the same". We know that THEY DID, we do not know what MIGHT or might NOT have happened. DESCRIBING good and evil on an axis (or a linear scale) suggests they are goals and drives in opposition to one another. Not everything necessarily orients with either direction of the axis, but it's clear and able to be discussed. ========================== http://easydamus.com/alignment.html "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit. "Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others. "Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master. People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships." ========================== That's not perfect, but it's a basis for discussion and easy to apply while still being accurate.

I Corinthians 9:20-22.

"This is a little souvenir I picked up from Magus III. That was setting number one. Anyone wanna see setting number two?"

Get out! The AUDITORIUM has SHOWERS in it now? (Or always did and they were hidden when I was there, either-or.) What COULD they have been used for? The mind boggles!

Actually, IIRC, it was an allergy to "bromelain." Every time I see the name appear somewhere, I flash back to Dr Phlox mentioning it. I liked him mentioning how they couldn't just "scan his tastebuds to find out what he likes" because "medically speaking, there's no accounting for taste." Okay, the next episode, let's see...

Since this quote has no responses, I'm suspicious the quote and movie are not that well-known. If no one can get this one, can we move on?

http://easydamus.com/alignmenthpc.html Actually, Harry Potter, as a Neutral Good, would find Chaotic Neutrals to be loose cannons, and unpredicable as allies-if they were ever on his side. They would have avoided the "unnecessary" effort of joining the DA (Defense Association/Dumbledore's Army) and practicing defense for all those months outside of class. They also would have avoided the battle at the Ministry of Magic, because it didn't immediately affect THEM. Chaotic Neutrals are not "big picture" or "long-term" types- "What's in it for me?" is a typical sentence from one. On the other hand, he's been rather clear on this thread that he considers words like "good" and "evil" to be meaningless in anything except a philosophical discussion, that they don't exist in and of themselves. "There is no good or evil: only power and those too weak to seek it."- Book One, HPatSS/HPatPS. So, the imaginary character Harry Potter may not be proud of Bolshevik, but the imaginary character Lord Voldemort would certainly appreciate his sentiments. (This would concern some people, the people MOST concerned would be the ones who worry about what imaginary characters think of them.)

That's a lot like saying that the Police and the Fire Dept never saved YOUR life, so they accomplish "absolutely nothing." A lot of people's lives WERE changed for the better BY people in twi who meant to do good. If twi had actually been designed to DO good, it would have been a lot more effective for those people, but that in no way invalidates the good that WAS done. A number of people have honestly said that if it wasn't for someone in twi who cared and reached out to them, they would have undoubtedly have DIED. I don't question you for saying that people in twi screwed you over unmercifully, and I don't question them for saying that people in twi rescued them. It would have been nice if twi people had never traumatized you, or if some of them had rescued you FROM twi, but that doesn't mean the ones who did good did "nothing." A lot of people died 9/11 when the buildings fell. A lot of people survived 9/11 when they got out of the buildings, and some of those got out solely because emergency responders GOT them out fast- Police, Fire, EMS. To point to the dead and say "the emergency responders did nothing" would be considered highly foolish.

http://easydamus.com/alignment.html

If you'd taken a moment and followed the link, you would have seen an answer in less time than it took to post the question. "Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral rather than good or evil. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior." That may not be a PERFECT answer, but it is a decent working definition and is not only clear but concise and to the point. No. The fellow who posted the website had no "ulterior motives or concerns." Preteens playing RPGs can grasp this system fairly well and apply it. It's just adults who are "too smart" to manage it. Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Hebrews 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Ecclesiastes 12:14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Let me get back to you in a few days. I don't have time to give this the attention it warrants right now.

I agree. All this sophistry and dancing around just to avoid saying someone did a "good deed." Heck, any Boy Scout in the USA should be able to give you examples of a "good deed" or of "doing a good deed every day." Perhaps it's all because the person who's so reluctant to call an action "good" is covering a reluctance to do good to others, or to face one's one moral standing. Being able to explain "good" vs "evil" really isn't that hard for a lot of people, even without bringing in any religion into the explanation. http://easydamus.com/alignment.html "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit. "Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others. "Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master. " ============= For those who are curious where their own personality might rank on good-evil, law-chaos axes, they can take this "alignment" quiz: http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html For those who are curious where their own personality would fall among D&D characters, they can try this character quiz: http://easydamus.com/character.html