Red Shirt Volunteer

Oh, I have a friend who lives near Cambridge. Interesting.

Blalock, or rather, T'Pol: Cold and in control. I like her voice the best among the characters in the series. But, outside of Trek, I'd have to go with Nimoy - he's great in documentaries.

I agree with Bolivar. They're pointless. I come here mostly to talk Trek, though I'll get involved in discussions on other topics I'm interested in. The games feel like spam to me. There are so many other things I could do that would be way more fun that it's hard to even start to compile a list.

Ent-Undies-Blue.

I went for seatbelts. I'm tired of seeing poor redshirts thrown all over the place just for effect every time the ship gets hit by the wimpiest of attacks. Airbags would be a nice option, too. I was also thinking they should put soft, rubber corners on all sharp objects such as control panels, seats and railings so that nobody loses an eye.

Are you guys talking about Enter the dragon

 

or a movie called Dragon(i have not seen this movie)Is it BAD?

"Dragon" is a different film. It's a biography (drama) of Bruce Lee's rise to fame and he is played by Scott Lee in the film. Naturally it also contains quite a few scenes featuring martial arts.

I think it's a really good movie. I really like Bruce Lee films because he had such a strong presence and knew how to get the most out of a shot. He was not only a great martial artist, but a fine actor. And yet, I still think even those movies are slightly cheezy since the characters are portrayed in so painfully simple a manner as either pure good guys or villains.

Yeah, it was definately a vicious, cheap shot by Bertuzzi. And he needs to be punished so this kind of thing isn't repeated. I'm just saying it's not entirely one-sided and the severity of an injury from a hit has a degree of randomness to it. Players need to be careful, but we also can't judge what happened solely based on the injury.

Jack Bauer,

I kind of agree and I kind of don't. You wouldn't have seen Gretzky or Lemieux taking a shot like that... ever. I'm not saying Naslund is at that level, but he's up there. Players have to protect their teammates and rookies need to show more respect to the players who've established themselves. It makes a difference who gets nailed because losing an elite player can take a team out of the playoffs whereas losing a nobody makes almost no difference.

Naslund should've known better than to put himself in that position, but everybody knows what happens when you take out the other teams start. It's just bad luck that the injury was as bad as it was.

And yes, you did mention Naslund at the start. Sorry, I skipped your original post after you got into the article because I knew the story already.

RSV

Yup, only Scotty can do it.

Hmm, I've lived in two of them (Manitoba/Saskatchewan), but my family is in a third now (BC), though I'm not actually from any of them. I checked Sask. because I was there the longest.

No. He lacked charisma and confidence. He got better as the series went on, but never proved himself comfortable with taking the role of an authority figure in my opinion. I think if he hadn't been in the Delta quadrant, yes, because his experience would have put him ahead of new recruits; however, there really weren't any on Voyager.

First off, it's unfortunate Moore sustained such a severe injury. No player deserves that, but I don't think it was Bertuzzi's intent.

But nobody seems to have brought up the fact that Moore kind of cheap-shotted Markus Naslund a few weeks before, causing him a concussion with a hit that could have just as easily led a similar injury as he received. There's no doubt that what Bertuzzi did was a cheap shot, but until about 10 years ago nobody would've hit a star player like Naslund like that for fear of retribution. Bertuzzi and Naslund are also good friends off the ice, so it may have gotten a little personal, which is unprofessional - but, let's face it, most athletes are anything but professional, unless you define professional as simply making loads of money.

Bertuzzi obviously didn't intend to break Moore's neck because the punishment would clearly have been (and is) severe. It's just bad luck that that's what happened. If there was no broken neck and just a concussion, most people would probably be saying the shot was a little cheap but fair payback given what Moore did. I really feel sorry for Moore because I've fractured my back myself in sports, but he should never have hit Naslund like he did in the first place. You just can't go around trying to injure the top player (or at least one of the top 10) in the league with no fear of punishment.

I would like  to ask a question here that is very important to me.  I am not a very conservative thinker in my views about life, people and situations.  So very often statements that I make, when I mean no harm or disrespect, have gotten me in a lot of trouble..............such is the case at this moment......So I want your honest opinion........If you make the statement that someone knows how to use their looks to get what they want.....does that always have to mean something negative or disrespectful?.........Thanks :)

It may just be a true statement. There may be no intent of negativity on the part of the speaker.

And do not most people try to look their best in situations such as interviews, competitions,and so forth? That is at least taking into account your appearance. Some people may be better at maximizing the use of their appearance than others, hence know how to use their looks. Statement of fact.

I agree. Everybody has to make use of their "looks," whatever looks they may have, in situations like interviews and business meetings. Not making an effort on appearance is the first thing that people notice about you and can lead to a downward spiral when people lack the knowledge/personality to carry themselves. Looking professional (or whatever look is required depending on the situation) is the first and best way to make a successful start to relationship whether it be work or private.

It seems I often meet people who like moaning about the fact that people they meet are superficial and judge primarily based on appearances instead of really "getting to know someone." I find this philosophy somewhat laughable as it takes months to truly know people and see how they behave/react to a variety of situations. It's a bit wishy-washy to me to make such statements and suggests not that the person with good looks is superficial, but that the person saying so lacks confidence in their own appearance. So even though there may be no negative intent on the part of the speaker, I feel that it's a reflection of how they perceive themselves, not others.

I recently finished conducting interviews with candidates for a job and one basically blew himself out of the water by making too many comments about appearance. He was very self-conscious about his own appearance, felt uncomfortable trying to look good/confident in the interview and made a pointless reference to my co-interviewer's appearance. All of our questions were focussed on the job and if he had been more comfortable with himself, he probably would've picked up on the fact that we really weren't worried about appearance at all as long as the person came across as competent and professional.

"Enter the Dragon" was the best in the kung-fu genre I'd have to say, though "Dragon" was a much better flick - I consider it more of a docudrama than an action movie.

Dragon was a total Farse.

 

Yes I know that its Dramatic licence and I have no problem with it.

My Objection is to the Long beach scene.

the people in the front row did not act like Kenpo Stylests. They whore a Badge that I myself have worn and I know that the we are taught from the first to respect other Arts and there stylests. this gose double when there teacher is in the ring with the man they a jeering and allso Sifu Lee was a very good Friend with Master Parker.

Would you mind explaining that in a little more detail? I don't remember the film that well now (I haven't seen it in a long, long time) and so your comments were a bit vague. Also, what badge are you referring to - can you post a link to an example? Were the people in that scene supposed to be Kenpo practitioners?

At any rate, this is one of the only martial arts films I've seen with half-decent acting. If I want to see completely authentic martial arts etiquette, I'll go to a dojo and practise or go and see a competition, not go to the cinema.

This is my first fast reply.

I couldn't take wearing the silly uniforms so I don't think I could cope with Starfleet of the TOS or TNG era (or anything after). Ent would be fine - I especially like the blue undies, though I can't find any. I think I'd like to be a Decon Chamber Technician. :huh:

Good luck, man. I often find a change of scenery can take my mind off problems and put things in a new perspective.

Deja vu?

Not really. I won't say I hate flying because I'm pretty indifferent to it. I tend to make two or three long-haul flights a year which is more than enough to put me off hanging out at airports. There's not much charm to it for me anymore, just frustration: with the ill-mannered security guards, throwers (baggage "handlers") and bad, overpriced food, there are few places I'd rather avoid more than an airport.

They do have a certain ambience about them that make them exciting and I have to admit I wanted to be a pilot when I was younger. I didn't have enough money to go for a pilot's license so I briefly took up skydiving instead. Trust me, getting off the plane is a lot more exciting than being in the airport.

So FIFA has just recently unveiled plans to resurrect the World Club Championship. Is this man for real? Just a few weeks ago I seem to remember him moaning about the excessive number of games that premiership clubs have to participate in. I guess his ultimate goal was to cut down on domestic play and coerce players into some overblown and unnecessary international showpiece to bring attention to himself and what he "can do" for soccer. I truly wish this man would step down.

"Enter the Dragon" was the best in the kung-fu genre I'd have to say, though "Dragon" was a much better flick - I consider it more of a docudrama than an action movie.

Oh, good idea Mjham. We do have taxes here but I only have to pay about 5% of my salary (4.6 to be more exact) on income tax and about 3% to city tax. I feel so bad paying this little I never bother to think about deductions and just prefer to make the whole process go as smoothly as possible (this usually isn't a factor, but can become one when you're doing it in another language). Thanks for the tip - I'll keep the receipts in case I have a change of heart or gain some mystical insights into how to fill out my tax forms next year.

I'm about to move to the other side of the city I live in (Kyoto) and am wondering in which fashion I'll attack this mammoth undertaking. I'm considering the three options above.

Right now I'm leaning to the bottle in hand approach. I've done this once before and can tell you that sitting back, sipping on a few drinks and watching other people sweat has a certain satisfaction to it that doing your own work never could. The only problem is that it'll cost me quite a lot more. I call this the "bottle-in-hand-move."

Under option 2 I would get boxes a couple of weeks in advance, prep the stuff and the movers would haul it away on the day. This way I could avoid any heavy lifting but would still put in quite a few hours as the actual packing is bound to take a lot longer than the loading and driving.

Option 3 is nearly free, but I would be obliged to help friends anytime they needed it for at least a year. Since I would help them anyway, it doesn't seem like such a bad idea but the real problem would be organising everyone and getting it done in a reasonable amount of time without getting crusty.

EDIT: The poll messed up and the costs were deleted for the first 2 choices. # 1 will cost me $1000, #2 will cost $500.

You know you've been here too long when you start a "You-know-you've-been-here-too-long" thread.

Hay, I was searching the web the last nite for "all things Star Trek" and came across a paper with that very same idea.....but it was a very long.....long....long paper.  I could probably go find it again if you're interested.

 

http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm

That was an interesting little piece. The point the writer made about militarism on Trek and the mixing of families and military personnel was well put. Time and time again Starfleet vessels are faced with hostile aliens or destructive natural phenomena. It's absolutely ludicrous to raise children under those circumstances and one wonders who would voluntarily subject their family to the trials the Enterprise had to face unless they were unaware of what they were signing on for. As the author wrote, seeing a child assimilated by the Borg would have been a disturbing image. They must be duped to some degree by the Federation.

Trek could, and should, deal with some of these things but relies on the ability of fans to suspend disbelief along with common sense at times to make its point. It's like a manual to put together the ideal world, but they only include the picture of what it looks like when it's finished, not the steps leading up to that perfection. It's the lack of explanation that keeps Trek optimistic enough to enjoy but vague enough to lack credibility as a viable future.