There are 21 messages totalling 867 lines in this issue. Topics in this special issue: 1. ATTN: All Fan Fic writers (11) 2. "Endgame" video question. 3. OT: Do not go gently.... (5) 4. HL Store (2) 5. Peter Wingfield, Stargate and such... 6. Belated ADMIN: Endgame Spoiler lifetime is over ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:31:42 -0700 From: J Raumo <jraumo@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers John Mosby wrote: >>A question though: if an actor encourages a fan-writer to continue, the writer will do so with added zeal. But if an actor asked the writer to stop, would that be honoured completely or would the writer of that particular fanfic simply continue but keep it low-key and away from the actor? << I can honestly say that an actor's opinion of my work would have no more or less effect on my desire to write than the opinion of any other person. I am not going to stop writing because people on this list have expressed their opinions against what I am doing and I would not stop writing if an actor asked me to. I'm not writing for the feedback of other fans either. Considering the miniscule amount of feedback I've gotten, I'm glad it's not my driving concern. But then, I'm not really intrigued by the cult of personality surrounding the actors. I'm not interested in attending a convention to meet the actors, ask them a question or collect an autograph. I do understand the desire to meet with friends you might have only met online to discuss mutual interests but my interests lie with the existing six seasons of Highlander and not with the making of those six seasons. If I were to receive a Cease and Desist letter from the copyright holders I would take my work down. Not because I believe my activities are wrong: I don't. Not because I believe my activities are actionable, again, I believe my use is covered by the Fair Use provision. I would remove my work because I do not have the money to enter into litigation. Often matters of law are decided not by who has the moral right, or who has the legal right but by who has the most money, and I can guarantee you, I haven't got the most money. Jo Raumo __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 23:04:42 EDT From: Ashton7@aol.com Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers In a message dated 7/12/01 8:22:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, a.j.mosby@btinternet.com writes: << ie: a postive actor reaction has been mentioned here as a valid/taciturn permission to carry on, but would you consider a negative actor reaction a reason to stop? If not, isn't that a double-standard? >> Actually, I don't think I ever said that an actor's positive reaction constituted some sort of "permission" to carry on. I simply pointed out that many of them don't mind fan fiction and some of them even like it. The "anti" faction is always so quick to point out actors who *don't* like fan fiction, after all. To answer the question bluntly: no. An actor's opinion, pro or con, has absolutely no effect on whether or not I choose to write or publish fan fiction. I don't really care, either way. I write and read fan fiction about *characters*, not about actors. Annie CWPack ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 20:32:40 -0700 From: Diana DeShaun <ddeshaun@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers I don't believe fanfic is illegal or immoral. I don't believe many of TPTB including those involved with HL, B7, Star Trek, etc. think that either. Some on this list believe the same. Some don't. eh. I can live with that. I love fanfic. I love reading it. I love writing it. Some on this list are the same. Some aren't. I can live with that too. A valid argument on legality might at least make me think twice, but an argument based on morality? Please. I'll save my morality for _real_ issues like hate crimes and child abuse, and let others worry about the minutia. Diana ===== my webpage: http://www.geocities.com/ddeshaun/index.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:44:34 -0400 From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers At 11:32 PM 07/12/01, Diana DeShaun wrote: >A valid argument on legality might at least make me think twice, but an >argument based on morality? Please. I'll save my morality for _real_ >issues like hate crimes and child abuse, and let others worry >about the minutia. Did you miss all the recent discussion about copyright infringement? Not that I care about fanfic one way or the other, but the legality or lack thereof has been discussed quite a bit here recently. -- Sandy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 21:52:55 -0700 From: Diana DeShaun <ddeshaun@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers --- Sandy Fields <diamonique@EARTHLINK.NET> wrote: > At 11:32 PM 07/12/01, Diana DeShaun wrote: > > >A valid argument on legality might at least make me > think twice, but an > >argument based on morality? Please. I'll save my > morality for _real_ > >issues like hate crimes and child abuse, and let > others worry > >about the minutia. > > Did you miss all the recent discussion about > copyright infringement? Not > that I care about fanfic one way or the other, but > the legality or lack > thereof has been discussed quite a bit here > recently. > Nope, I didn't miss it. I didn't miss it the last time this topic came up either. There were a lot of conflicting opinions, many of them from people I consider to be quite learned. Seems to me this issue is still in flux. Do I want to be the test case to establish once and for all the legality? Nope. Do I think that's going to happen? Again, nope. I could be wrong, of course. It happened twice last year. Diana ===== my webpage: http://www.geocities.com/ddeshaun/index.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:37:05 -0700 From: Lesley Currie <llcurrie@pacbell.net> Subject: Re: "Endgame" video question. Stephen Bryce wrote: > I was looking for "Endgame" at one of my local video > stores, the other day. They had the DVD version, but > when I'd asked about the VHS tape, the guy at the > counter said that it wasn't available, as far as he > knew. Does anyone know when it's going to be out for > sell-through VHS? > Stephen Bryce - Author, "Highlander: The Legacy" Check out http://www.half.com I bought it thorugh them for $5.00 plus postage...total was $7.20 And just checked before I posted and they still have more at that price... Just enter a serch under DVD/Movies - Highlander: Endgame -- @ Lesley Currie (AIM: Ladyhlndr) / llcurrie@pacbell.net @@@@@@@====((]//////////////////////////////////>>>>> \ "May love remain to guide our way, til the @ day we are reborn..." Duncan ~ Endgame Galleries: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=285347 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:38:10 +0200 From: Marina Bailey <fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers Wendy wrote: >This is a fascinating attitude. I'm not saying you're "wrong"..I'm just bemused ><g> I think I've bemused you a lot, Wendy. :) I think your argument has already been answered by Trilby: >... I see it, by and large, as a "victimless crime". [snip] >If I'm not harming myself or someone else, or decreasing someone's >material gains, my guilt quotient is very low. Annie also wrote: >An actor's opinion, pro or con, has absolutely no effect on whether >or not I choose to write or publish fan fiction. I don't really care, >either way. I write and read fan fiction about *characters*, not about >actors. Exactly. And some of us have been in fandom of one kind or another for so many years (23 years for me) that the *shock!* *horror!* that some (relative) newbies to fandom display is... I dunno... amusing. >What if everyone was posting doctored nude pictures of movie stars on >their web sites....no one is getting arrested....some actors think it >is funny. [snip, sorry] Actually, I have seen those (not on purpose, of course) with actors' heads pasted onto other bodies. I think in that case the actor could conceivably sue. But since (as someone else said) the actor doesn't own the character, I feel I can write about that character. I'm NOT writing about Adrian, I'm writing about Duncan. And I'd hope that Adrian, of all people, knows the difference between fantasy and reality. >If PW said a few years from now.."Hey, I've got a son who loves the >Methos character and he's old enough to surf the Net...I don't want >him finding all that slash fanfic .." I would probably take down any >slash I had up. ..because I wouldn't want to be the one who "ruined" >a kid's image of his Dad. The only thing I can get from this argument is that parents should not let their kids surf the Net unsupervised. I have a 13 year-old cousin whose father still will not let her use the Net, even if her 18 year-old brother is with her. Of course, this is a different argument. People always want society to do their jobs for them. "It's not the fault of lazy parents that their kid saw porn on the Net, no, porn is evil and people shouldn't show it!" I've actually seen this argument, and it's ridiculous. When Edan is 18, I'd hope he'd know the difference between fantasy and reality and could handle finding slash stories about a *character* his father played. (Plus, let's not forget, slash does carry warnings. If he chose to ignore the warnings, it's his own fault if he sees something he wouldn't like.) Of course, by the time Edan is 18, all the slash fans will probably be slashing totally new shows. (Tanith and Apophis? <g>) >(I've been rewatching Season 4)( I should be rewatching Raven.)(Maybe later.) I missed a lot of Raven discussion early on, but since I've seen all the eps, I find I really like it. Nick is a babe. :) - Marina. (This is my last post on the topic.) (I mean it this time.) (Wendy, stop rolling your eyes.) (I really mean it!!) \\ "I can read a story where Jim shows his affection ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // // with words, and one where he'd rather build a || R I C H I E >> \\ \\ bookshelf, and one where he secretly likes to ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // // wear frilly underwear." - Livia || \\ \\==fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za==Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie==// "We're members of Clan Denial, not the Borg." - Misha ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 04:45:15 -0400 From: Elaine Nicol <ElaineN@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: OT: Do not go gently.... I've put some spoiler space in because I do talk about something that happened. S P O I L E R S P A C E S >> Hmmm. Only the 'some of us' who didn't see The Body...one of the most powerful pieces of television I've seen in ten years of reviewing? << You should have been there when we were discussing that at Nocturnal. I didn't particularly like that episode. But someone I was talking to said 'ah you'll find out how you will react when you lose your Mother' Nocturnal was two after I lost my Mother. Talk about seeing that look of wishing the ground would open up and swallow them. Thing is I wonder if that is why I didn't particularly like the episode, be interesting to go back and watch it in a few months and see what I feel about it. I did get the feeling with that episode that there was very much an element of the Emperor's New Clothes about. I think there were many better episodes in the season. Elaine. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:27:39 +0100 From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: OT: Do not go gently.... I WAS at Nocturnal. Dang. Which vampire/Darla/Dru were you? :) John (went as a journalist....scary) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elaine Nicol" <ElaineN@compuserve.com> To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 9:45 AM Subject: Re: [HL] OT: Do not go gently.... > I've put some spoiler space in because I do talk about something that > happened. > S > P > O > I > L > E > R > > S > P > A > C > E > S > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Hmmm. Only the 'some of us' who didn't see The Body...one of the most > powerful pieces of television I've seen in ten years of reviewing? << > > You should have been there when we were discussing that at Nocturnal. I > didn't particularly like that episode. But someone I was talking to said > 'ah you'll find out how you will react when you lose your Mother' > Nocturnal was two after I lost my Mother. Talk about seeing that look of > wishing the ground would open up and swallow them. > > Thing is I wonder if that is why I didn't particularly like the episode, be > interesting to go back and watch it in a few months and see what I feel > about it. > > I did get the feeling with that episode that there was very much an element > of the Emperor's New Clothes about. I think there were many better > episodes in the season. > > > Elaine. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:30:27 +0200 From: Tarryn Zank <Zankt@nu.ac.za> Subject: HL Store Seeing as I'm going to be in the states for a reasonable amount of time.. is there a walk-in store that sells HL stuff, or is it only through on-line? With the on-line one - how reliable is it that what is advertised on the web is the same stuff they've got. I'm asking because when i was last there ('98), I checked out the stuff on-line, and tried to phone it through,and they said those items/order numbers didn't exist!! So a friend had to get a catalogue sent, and pick out stuff, and some things she bought were not what I wanted. Will the store be selling at the Con? How can I get a catalogue before I get to the states? ANyone want to send me a recent spare copy they've got lying about? <yeah, right> *G* I really wanted one of the wind-chimes, but the postage overseas was horrendous, & now you can't get them anymore. Thanks T. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:36:01 -0400 From: Elaine Nicol <ElaineN@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: OT: Do not go gently.... >> I WAS at Nocturnal. Dang. Which vampire/Darla/Dru were you? :) John << I know you were, we spoke for long enough. You just weren't there when that conversation came up. >> (went as a journalist....scary) << I spent most of that con with journalists which is even more scary...<EG> Elaine. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:59:12 EDT From: Bizarro7@aol.com Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers In a message dated 7/13/01 4:41:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za writes: << The only thing I can get from this argument is that parents should not let their kids surf the Net unsupervised. I have a 13 year-old cousin whose father still will not let her use the Net, even if her 18 year-old brother is with her. Of course, this is a different argument. People always want society to do their jobs for them. "It's not the fault of lazy parents that their kid saw porn on the Net, no, porn is evil and people shouldn't show it!" >> Amen. What's even worse is a proponent of a particular faith with a particular attitude about sex in general and homosexual sex in particular, behaving as if it were the 'parent' morality over the entire American population with the aim of preserving its own particular brand of prudery, completely ignoring the fact that much of the population of this country is NOT and never has been of that particular religion. This country was founded on freedom of religion. Trying to legislate it into general use because the individual believers are do damned *lazy* to practice it within their own community or family is morally questionable. To those who do not *belong* to that religion (or indeed any organized faith), it's downright obnoxious and oppressive, and it casts that faith (and by association, its founder) in a very bad light--certainly not what the founder originally intended. But then, a lot of folks regard themselves as appointed 'deputies' of God, with all the attendant rights to bludgeon everyone around them with a moral billyclub. Leah CWPack ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 08:06:19 EDT From: Bizarro7@aol.com Subject: Re: OT: Do not go gently.... In a message dated 7/13/01 4:47:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ElaineN@compuserve.com writes: S P O I L E R S ok << You should have been there when we were discussing that at Nocturnal. I didn't particularly like that episode. But someone I was talking to said 'ah you'll find out how you will react when you lose your Mother' Nocturnal was two after I lost my Mother. Talk about seeing that look of wishing the ground would open up and swallow them. >> Joss Whedon and company performed a tremendous public service by writing and airing THE BODY, for just that reason. The realities of Death are one of the last taboos in our society; the attitude that it's so scary and unpleasant that we shouldn't discuss it in front of children often leaves them completely unprepared to deal with it, particularly when it's staring you right in the face (in Buffy's case, very literally). Whedon was demonstrating the difference between the fantasy death that pervades his series and the Real Thing. He shows what *really* happens, and gives some guidelines of what needs to be done. He provides realistic reactions. In short, many young people will be a touch more prepared, if the very worst should ever happen in their presence. And he did it in as tasteful a manner as could be provided within a format designed for entertainment, not unpleasant education. As far as I'm concerned, this and the performances involved were more than enough to walk away with an Emmy. Leah CWPack ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:56:48 EDT From: Ashton7@aol.com Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers In a message dated 7/13/01 4:41:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za writes: << Of course, by the time Edan is 18, all the slash fans will probably be slashing totally new shows. (Tanith and Apophis? <g>) >> That would be toooo sick. After all, Apophis is a false god... a DEAD false god. LOL. (The Stargate fans will know what I mean!) Annie CWPack ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:22:11 +0200 From: Marina Bailey <fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers Annie wrote: ><< Of course, by the time Edan is 18, all the slash fans will probably be > slashing totally new shows. (Tanith and Apophis? <g>) >> >That would be toooo sick. After all, Apophis is a false god... a DEAD false >god. LOL. (The Stargate fans will know what I mean!) Hey, I haven't seen any new eps of SG-1 yet! But he wasn't dead in the cliffhanger of the 4th season... (I think Tanith got blown up, but I hope not!) - Marina. (Got the DVD of the Stargate pilot ep. Sheesh. Naked women everywhere! <g>) \ "But then, we saw that Obi-Wan doth look upon ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // // Qui-Gon with lust, and that Mr. Lucas was not || R I C H I E >> \\ \\ likely to include that in the next movie, so we ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // // said screw it and wrote it ourselves." - Warning || \\ \\ page of the 'Master & Apprentice' slash site || // //==fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za=Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie==\\ I want to go back to my home planet - if someone would please tell me where it is! - Tarryn ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:41:15 -0400 From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers At 09:56 AM 07/13/2001 -0400, Ashton7@aol.com wrote: >That would be toooo sick. After all, Apophis is a false god... a DEAD false >god. LOL. ROFL!!! Corpse slash? Has that been done yet? -- Sandy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:40:36 EDT From: Ashton7@aol.com Subject: Peter Wingfield, Stargate and such... In a message dated 7/13/01 10:23:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za writes: << Hey, I haven't seen any new eps of SG-1 yet! But he wasn't dead in the cliffhanger of the 4th season... (I think Tanith got blown up, but I hope not!) >> Ooops. Sorry for the lack of spoiler spaces... here are some... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Apophis is *apparently* killed at the end of the 5th season opener when the ship he is on is overrun by replicators and the SG1 people (and Jacob Carter) crash it to kill the "bugs." Tanith, however, is probably alive for two reasons. The Tok'Ra reported a ship leaving Apophis' mother ship before the sun went nova at Vorash and I believe Peter Wingfield has confirmed that he will be in some episodes of Stargate this year. Also, one of the producers confirmed that Tanith would be back this year. Tanith did not appear in the 5th season opener. There is some talk in the 2nd episode of the season "Threshold" regarding Apophis being a "false god... a DEAD false god" that is very relevant to Teal'c and the others. ;-) Annie CWPack ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:55:18 -0700 From: Lynn <lloschin@sprynet.com> Subject: Re: HL Store From: "Tarryn Zank" <Zankt@NU.AC.ZA> > Will the store be selling at the Con? No, the official HL store will not be at Reunion. Holzheimer's will be there and they are the Store's licensee, and can get hold of many of their items. If you are interested in something in particular I recommend contacting them ahead of time as they don't bring every item to every con, but can probably bring something in particular upon request. Their web site is http://www.holzheimers.com/. You can look in the online catalog at http://highlander-official.com to see what's currently available. Hope that helps Lynn ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:40:30 -0400 From: Debra Douglass <ddoug@catrio.org> Subject: Belated ADMIN: Endgame Spoiler lifetime is over It just dawned on me that I never ended the Spoiler lifetime on "Highlander: Endgame". Sorry. I do believe that it has been released in most if not all of the countries of people who belong to this list and that ten months should definitely have covered it for most people. The last release that the Internet Movie Database shows was in Lithuania on May 25th. So this is the official end of abiding by the Spoiler Rules for Endgame. The Spoiler Rules -do- apply to all current non-Highlander movies and tv programs. 'Current' includes last season and current season for tv programs and releases in the last six months for movies. -Debbie (List Goddess) -- .------------------------------------------------------------------. |Debra Douglass ddoug@catrio.org http://www.catrio.org| `------------------------------------------------------------------' ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:32:20 +0100 From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: OT: Do not go gently.... Sorry. Brainfart. (Still recovering from Nocturnal ) ;) I mean on the Saturday night! We spoke on the Friday ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elaine Nicol" <ElaineN@compuserve.com> To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 12:36 PM Subject: Re: [HL] OT: Do not go gently.... > >> I WAS at Nocturnal. Dang. Which vampire/Darla/Dru were you? > > :) > John << > > I know you were, we spoke for long enough. You just weren't there when > that conversation came up. > > >> (went as a journalist....scary) << > > I spent most of that con with journalists which is even more scary...<EG> > > Elaine. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 18:23:25 +0100 From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers Well, I've never considered myself to be God's right hand, not even his right finger or right fingernail. Not even his hang-nail. Actually I'm no expert on religion of any kind and often find that too many people speak at length about religion, often confusing a repetition of facts (or supposed facts often garnered from arguable sources) with a true understanding of the values behind it. ie: it's not important to state things, it's more important to live your life the best way you can. I find it futile and insulting when people try to tell me that their way is the only way, as I'm sure they would if I did the same. I've met a ton of people who think they have an answer to every question or a solution for every problem. Boring as hell. Me? I have very few answers, but always enjoy asking the questions. I think everyone learns more by discussing rather than pontificating. If I'm asked my view, I'll give it - but frankly, I'm more interested in why someone else holds a belief. A stick can be a billy-club, a crutch or a pointer... just the same as a faith and value system can be a way-of-life, a poor/convinient excuse or a worthy challenge. As long as people respect my right to disagree with them - then we have no problem. I'll respect anyone as long as they show the same respect for me. The only time this can get iffy is when someone's belief system doesn't fit in with an exisiting democratic law or rule of that country. Debating law and debating beliefs / morality is often as confusing as they are fascinating, but they are forever on-going issues. Now if I had the answer for all those...I'd have the Nobel Peace Prize and war, conflict and Britnety Spears would be things of the past. I'll settle for the friendships I've made by never giving advice, only looking at the options and asking 'Why?' rather than 'How?'. John ----- Original Message ----- From: <Bizarro7@aol.com> To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [HL] ATTN: All Fan Fic writers > In a message dated 7/13/01 4:41:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za writes: > > << The only thing I can get from this argument is that parents should > not let their kids surf the Net unsupervised. I have a 13 year-old > cousin whose father still will not let her use the Net, even if her > 18 year-old brother is with her. Of course, this is a different > argument. People always want society to do their jobs for them. "It's > not the fault of lazy parents that their kid saw porn on the Net, no, > porn is evil and people shouldn't show it!" >> > > Amen. What's even worse is a proponent of a particular faith with a > particular attitude about sex in general and homosexual sex in particular, > behaving as if it were the 'parent' morality over the entire American > population with the aim of preserving its own particular brand of prudery, > completely ignoring the fact that much of the population of this country is > NOT and never has been of that particular religion. This country was founded > on freedom of religion. Trying to legislate it into general use because the > individual believers are do damned *lazy* to practice it within their own > community or family is morally questionable. To those who do not *belong* to > that religion (or indeed any organized faith), it's downright obnoxious and > oppressive, and it casts that faith (and by association, its founder) in a > very bad light--certainly not what the founder originally intended. > > But then, a lot of folks regard themselves as appointed 'deputies' of God, > with all the attendant rights to bludgeon everyone around them with a moral > billyclub. > > Leah CWPack ------------------------------ End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 12 Jul 2001 to 13 Jul 2001 - Special issue (#2001-194) *******************************************************************************