Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Confusion
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 1994 17:18:23 -0600
Ok, let me see if I cn clear up this confusion.

_The Lawnmower Man_ is one movie.
_Bladerunner_ is a DIFFERENT movie.

Both of them are available in the standard theatrical release AND a
'directors cut'.

Lawnmover Man, starring Pierce Brosnan (Remington Steele) is just plain
bad if you watch the theatrical release, but is actually pretty good
with the additional 20 minutes or so of footage the DC adds in. If you
rent this movie, look down at the bottom for the words 'Uncut Directors
Edition' or words to that effect.

Bladerunner, directed by James Cameron (Alien, Aliens) and starring
Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Indiana Jones), was filmed back in the mid-80's
and is generally considered one of the few cinematic works that capture
the essence and feeling of true cyberpunk. The DC doesn't change much
over the original release, except to change some scenes around and remove
the 'happy-smilie ending', leaving a more open-ended story. Either 'cut'
is watchable and I don't particularily recommend one over the other.

Prototype X29A is a shitty, no-budget, no-name flick showing on HBO this
month and available on video. I recommend watching it only if you are
bored or want some good examples of simsense and apocolypic futures. It
has no plot or social redeeming value.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> To flame me, log on to ICBMnet and
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> target 44 09' 49" N x 93 59' 57"
W
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 2
From: Richard Pieri <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Confusion
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 1994 11:59:49 -0500
>>>>> On Fri, 21 Jan 1994 17:18:23 -0600 (CST), "Robert A.
Hayden"
>>>>> <hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu> said:

RAH> Bladerunner, directed by James Cameron (Alien, Aliens)

Umm... Riddley Scott directed ``Alien'' and ``Bladerunner;'' James Cameron
directed ``Aliens'' and the two ``Terminator'' movies.

|||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||
| Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> WWW Page: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/USER/ratinox |
| GAT d@ -p+ c++ !l u+ e+(*) m-(+) s n---(+) h-- f !g(+) w+ t- r+ y+ |
|...kcab nrut ,kcab nrut ,kcab nruT .ton si emit tub elbisrever si cisum ehT|
| ``hgiH nO eriF'' ,OLE-- |
|||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||
Message no. 3
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Confusion
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 1994 12:56:11 -0600
On Mon, 24 Jan 1994, Richard Pieri wrote:

> RAH> Bladerunner, directed by James Cameron (Alien, Aliens)
>
> Umm... Riddley Scott directed ``Alien'' and ``Bladerunner;'' James Cameron
> directed ``Aliens'' and the two ``Terminator'' movies.

Argh! You're right. I'm wrong. *sigh*

I've never been good with names. At least I got Harrison Ford right.

In any case, Bladerunner is a good movie and you should see it if you
haven't.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> To flame me, log on to ICBMnet and
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> target 44 09' 49" N x 93 59' 57"
W
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 4
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Confusion?
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 17:32:10 +1100
It seems to me (from reading the recent flame wars, personal
introductions, urgings of people trying to convince other people
that magic should be used in music concerts, etc. and so on),
that some misunderstanding of the purpose of this mailing
list has developed.

Some of those posts read like remarks from a character _in_
the game to another character _in_ the game, rather than a
remark from one player _of_ the game to another.

This discussion list is _about_ Shadowrun. It's not a place
to _play_ Shadowrun. This is supposed to be mainly
a discussion of just the _rules_ of Shadowrun. (Even though we
often stray a little farther afield than that.)

The reason I'm pointing this out is that I don't want to just
hit the delete button as soon as I see a posting from XXYZYX
(not mentioning any real names). But for me, at least, it's
getting close to that point.

If you want other people to take the time to read what you have
written (and I assume that's why we all write, occasionally) -
then try to stick to the subject.

Please?

luke
Message no. 5
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Confusion?
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 17:21:58 +1000
luke writes:

> Some of those posts read like remarks from a character _in_
> the game to another character _in_ the game, rather than a
> remark from one player _of_ the game to another.

Nah, those people are actually like that, in real life :-) [Not meaning to
offend anyone if you really _are_ like that, in real life.]

> This discussion list is _about_ Shadowrun. It's not a place
> to _play_ Shadowrun. This is supposed to be mainly
> a discussion of just the _rules_ of Shadowrun. (Even though we
> often stray a little farther afield than that.)

Yeah, but we also discuss all those associated topics that go with it (I
can't remember just what the big list is), and I think things like
discussions on societies reactions to new technology and magic are perefctly
within the list specs.

Otherwise you are all too correct, yes.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+)('') !tv(--)@ b++ D+
B? e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 6
From: the holy Entombed <rasputin@***.UMD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Confusion?
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 10:52:05 -0400
On Wed, 26 Oct 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> Some of those posts read like remarks from a character _in_
> the game to another character _in_ the game, rather than a
> remark from one player _of_ the game to another.

I've noticed this, too. It seems more prevalent among the newbies, or
perhaps it's a group of lurkers that have burst forth at around the same
time.

> This discussion list is _about_ Shadowrun. It's not a place
> to _play_ Shadowrun. This is supposed to be mainly
> a discussion of just the _rules_ of Shadowrun. (Even though we
> often stray a little farther afield than that.)

I have to disagree, and it's probably with not much more than your
wording. This list would be cold and dull if all that were supposed to
be discussed were the rules. While it definitely isn't s place to -play-
(although, I have to admit, I haven't really seen anything of this nature
lately), the discussions are supposed to be able to cover all aspects of
the game, even fighter jets of the late twentieth century. Rules,
adventure ideas, personalities, critical reviews, theories of the time, etc.

> If you want other people to take the time to read what you have
> written (and I assume that's why we all write, occasionally) -
> then try to stick to the subject.

I think this is a bit too all-encompassing. I, personally, haven't
'killfiled' anyone for not sticking to the subject; just for posting too
often, having posts so badly punctuated they're a strain to attempt to
read, etc.

> luke

--thE--rasputin@***.umd.edu---"It must be the pretzels."- - - - -
Message no. 7
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Confusion
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 19:17:03 -0700
Faux Pas wrote:
|
|At 12:13 PM 11/25/96 +0100, Gurth wrote:
|
|>David Buehrer said on 19:51/24 Nov 96...
|
|>> Anyone else out there have a player that's confused by the
|>> rules, and ends up confusing you too? :)
|
|>Not really, but then I'm the only one who really knows the rules, the rest
|>of the players being mostly newbies... and that can be frustrating at
|>times :)
|
|Same here. Although I've got a player that *thinks* he knows the rules...
|which seems to confuse the other players even more. *sigh*

<chuckle> My confused player thinks he knows the rules
too. Even after the entire group points out his error,
backed up by rules, he stubbornly maintains his confusion.
But, he's a good roleplayer and a good friend so... :)

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 8
From: Mark McLaughlin <mmclaugh@*******.EENG.DCU.IE>
Subject: Re: Confusion
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 10:48:11 -0800
David Buehrer wrote:
>
> Faux Pas wrote:
> |
> |At 12:13 PM 11/25/96 +0100, Gurth wrote:
> |
> |>David Buehrer said on 19:51/24 Nov 96...
> |
> |>> Anyone else out there have a player that's confused by the
> |>> rules, and ends up confusing you too? :)
> |
> |>Not really, but then I'm the only one who really knows the rules, the rest
> |>of the players being mostly newbies... and that can be frustrating at
> |>times :)
> |
> |Same here. Although I've got a player that *thinks* he knows the rules...
> |which seems to confuse the other players even more. *sigh*
>
> <chuckle> My confused player thinks he knows the rules
> too. Even after the entire group points out his error,
> backed up by rules, he stubbornly maintains his confusion.
> But, he's a good roleplayer and a good friend so... :)
>
> -David
>
> /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
> "His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
> alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
> ~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~

When it looks like my players are confusing me, I just bullshit them
until they stop!!

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Confusion, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!