Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Firepower <DVANDERS@*****.VINU.EDU>
Subject: Some new topics...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 10:03:27 EST
All this discussion about the nature of Elves and reality is well and
good. However, I feel that I should inject a little more of my fave
topics into this esteemed <snicker--soft, I'm in a library> forum.

1. Collateral damage from focused magical attacks.
Case in point. I tend to play Vampires. With an essance that
can be raised to double the human norm, a vampire is a magic
machine--and by using fetishes and spell exclusivity, the power level
of combat spells can be raised to terrifying levels.
Say I pump a hellblast through the doors of a warehouse that a
gang uses for a headquarters. Human targets are plainly visible--the
target is them, NOT the building itself. How much damage would a
force 10+ hellblast do to that warehouse?
The spell's duaration is instant. How long is an instant in this
case? Would the heat have time to melt metal? Glass? Gold
fillings? CREDSTICKS?

2. The introduction (and my purchase) of "Fields of Fire" has
introduced my gamers to the ultimate in weaponry--the laser. Even
worse, the laser weapon is in reach of almost any moderately--well
heeled character!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <Incoherent Screaming>
This weapon is so far beyond the scope of the game that it terrifies
me. THIS WEAPON DISREGARDS BALLISTIC ARMOR. In other
words, a single firing of the FIRELANCE vehicle laser WILL take down
a Banshee. And even a !$#@^#!!! Yellowjacket can mount one of
these monsters. Currently, I've just made it damn tough to
obtain---like illegal as all hell. The top cops jump you for mentioning
it in your sleep. Any other ideas for countermeasures???


<BANG!>

Firepower
Message no. 2
From: Erik S Jameson <esj@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 12:26:26 -0700
1) Remember that old stand-bys like Fireball and Hellblast are combat
spells and suffer from the LOS requirement. Any extra damage to
buildings, windows, even (-gasp-) credsticks I should think would be
incidental and up to the GM to decide. If he wants you to blow up the
building (or butte outside Chicago [sorry, inside joke]) then the you
will blow it up with the Hellblast. But if you need to get that optical
chip, then maybe you don't blow it all up.

2) The laser is not th end all be all weapon. Yes, it disregards
ballistic armor, but you do get I believe half impact. Okay, not much
protection. But I think it really is not as powerfull as some people
believe. I would rather have a panther assault cannon. And as far as a
pansy-ass Yellowjacket (why were those things EVER made?) taking out a
Banshee with the Firelance Vehicle Laser, I don't think that it very
feasible. First of all, remember that vehicle armor is VERY different
from personal armor. The way I read it, the vehicle would get at least
half of its armor, and for a Banshee, that is still a lot of protection.

Erik, a.k.a. the Whistler
Message no. 3
From: Kevin Ragan <kragan@***.UVIC.CA>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 15:39:07 PDT
Hi there. What I do when new supplements come out is to review each of the
items very carefully. Take the Firelance vehicle laser, or items out of
Shadowtech. The campaign I run started in 2050, so each of these items is
cutting tech. In general, I double the availability or cost of each item,
and allow one ettiquette(Street) check at the beginning of each session.
The highest number rolled on the skill is the highest availability "new" item
that is available. In my campaigns, not even all of the equipment out of
the Street Samurai Catalog is available. And finally, the availability
number of the equipment continues to stay doubled until the "theoretical date"
that the book is published.


Just my thoughts,
Blackest Knight
AKA Tom Hirt.

"... 3 million years into deep space, and there's only one after-eight mint
left, but everybody's too polite to eat it." Holly, Red Dwarf.
Message no. 4
From: Nightfox <DJWA@******.UCC.NAU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 16:14:12 -0700
>From: IN%"SHADOWRN%HEARN.BITNET@*******.ccit.arizona.edu" "Discussion
of the Fantasy game ShadowRun" 28-OCT-1994 12:24:40.15
>To: IN%"SHADOWRN%HEARN@*******.ccit.arizona.edu" "Multiple
recipients of list SHADOWRN"
>CC:
>Subj: Some new topics...
>
>Return-path: <@*******.ccit.arizona.edu:owner-shadowrn@*****.BITNET>
>Received: from ARIZVM1.ccit.arizona.edu by NAUVAX.UCC.NAU.EDU
> (PMDF V4.3-8 #2384) id <01HIT5SH6JM8006SL4@******.UCC.NAU.EDU>; Fri,
> 28 Oct 1994 12:24:28 -0700 (MST)
>Received: from ARIZVM1.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU by ARIZVM1.ccit.arizona.edu
> (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7887; Fri, 28 Oct 94 12:24:20 MST
>Received: from ARIZVM1.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@*******)
> by ARIZVM1.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7061; Fri,
> 28 Oct 1994 08:18:28 -0700
>Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 10:03:27 -0500 (EST)
>From: Firepower <DVANDERS@*****.VINU.EDU>
>Subject: Some new topics...
>Sender: Discussion of the Fantasy game ShadowRun
> <SHADOWRN%HEARN.BITNET@*******.ccit.arizona.edu>
>To: Multiple recipients of list SHADOWRN
> <SHADOWRN%HEARN@*******.ccit.arizona.edu>
>Reply-to: Discussion of the Fantasy game ShadowRun
> <SHADOWRN%HEARN.BITNET@*******.ccit.arizona.edu>
>Message-id: <01HIT5SWESBE006SL4@******.UCC.NAU.EDU>
>Organization: Vincennes University, Shake LRC
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
> All this discussion about the nature of Elves and reality is well and
>good. However, I feel that I should inject a little more of my fave
>topics into this esteemed <snicker--soft, I'm in a library> forum.
>
>1. Collateral damage from focused magical attacks.
> Case in point. I tend to play Vampires. With an essance that
>can be raised to double the human norm, a vampire is a magic
>machine--and by using fetishes and spell exclusivity, the power level
>of combat spells can be raised to terrifying levels.
> Say I pump a hellblast through the doors of a warehouse that a
>gang uses for a headquarters. Human targets are plainly visible--the
>target is them, NOT the building itself. How much damage would a
>force 10+ hellblast do to that warehouse?
> The spell's duaration is instant. How long is an instant in this
>case? Would the heat have time to melt metal? Glass? Gold
>fillings? CREDSTICKS?
>
>2. The introduction (and my purchase) of "Fields of Fire" has
>introduced my gamers to the ultimate in weaponry--the laser. Even
>worse, the laser weapon is in reach of almost any moderately--well
>heeled character!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <Incoherent Screaming>
>This weapon is so far beyond the scope of the game that it terrifies
>me. THIS WEAPON DISREGARDS BALLISTIC ARMOR. In other
>words, a single firing of the FIRELANCE vehicle laser WILL take down
>a Banshee. And even a !$#@^#!!! Yellowjacket can mount one of
>these monsters. Currently, I've just made it damn tough to
>obtain---like illegal as all hell. The top cops jump you for mentioning
>it in your sleep. Any other ideas for countermeasures???
>
>
> <BANG!>
>
> Firepowe
Message no. 5
From: "Wow, Reality. That's a switch" <MHILLIARD@****.ALBION.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 21:39:49 -0500
>Any other ideas for countermeasures???
Make it unreliable. It breaks down if you look at it funny.

Phelan
Message no. 6
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Some new topics...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 21:45:17 -0400
>>>>> "Wow" == Wow, Reality That's a switch
<MHILLIARD@****.ALBION.EDU>
>>>>> writes:

>> Any other ideas for countermeasures???
Wow> Make it unreliable. It breaks down if you look at it funny.

Already been done; look at MacTCP sometime. Carefully, though, because it
/does/ break if you look at it funny.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> |Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox|of skin.
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 7
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 18:47:24 +1000
Firepower writes:

> Case in point. I tend to play Vampires. With an essance that
> can be raised to double the human norm, a vampire is a magic
> machine--and by using fetishes and spell exclusivity, the power level
> of combat spells can be raised to terrifying levels.

Um, just why does a high essence let you be a superior mage? I seem to be
missing something, but I cannot see why a vampire mage would be better than
a human mage, except that they have natural vampire abilities, and can live
for ages so they can become extremely powerful.

> Say I pump a hellblast through the doors of a warehouse that a
> gang uses for a headquarters. Human targets are plainly visible--the
> target is them, NOT the building itself. How much damage would a
> force 10+ hellblast do to that warehouse?
> The spell's duaration is instant. How long is an instant in this
> case? Would the heat have time to melt metal? Glass? Gold
> fillings? CREDSTICKS?

I'd go and make object resistance tests for anything important to what's
going on (like the building, and the data file the runenrs are trying to
obtain or whatever) and just fake up the rest for special effects.

[FireLance Lasers are TOUGH!!!]

Well, the laser is billed as an armour-piercing weapon, but one which
receives the normal -1 damage level when used against vehicles. Now, a
normal armour-piercing weapon has its power reduced by half the vehicles
armour rating (pg 99 SR II), and does not have its damage level reduced by
one, such as normal weapons do normal weapons (pg 108 SR II). So if you
fired a FireLance Laser at a Banshee, the Banshee would be taking 6M, and
would have 15 dice to resist it, assuming the firer only acheived a single
success to hit with. Now with a half competent gunner, you could completely
maul a Banshee, but they aren't quite as an effective weapon as it looks at
first glance. An AVM is still way better at taking out a vehicle.

> FACT--you cannot silence a pistol heavier than a .22 with any true
> operational effectiveness.

That excludes most all SR pistols then, sinse Hold-outs are usually large
calibre weapons with a couple of shots, Lights are about 9 mm, and Heavys
are 9 mm and up. Just what weapons in SR could use a silencer effectively?

> FACT--a silencer on an automatic weapon will be torn apart after about
> 20 to 30 rounds.

Really? I knew they wore out rather fast, but that's only about 1 clip! Hmm,
I'll have to remember this next time my runners pull out their HK-227S's. :-)

> One idea though--military and SWAT tend to use subsonic
> loads--since the bullet doesn't break the sound barrier, it is vewy,
> vewy quiet. BUT NOT SILENT. Everyone remember that when the kill
> has to be quiet.

So would subsonic rounds be easier to silence with a silencer? What I mean
is would it be possible to silence a larger pistol if you used subsonic
ammunition?

Erik writes:

> I would rather have a panther assault cannon. And as far as a pansy-ass
> Yellowjacket (why were those things EVER made?) taking out a Banshee with
> the Firelance Vehicle Laser, I don't think that it very feasible.

As for the A-cannon, I reckon they're next to useless against vehicles. No
armour-piercing. That makes them suckful against anything with half
reasonable armour (such as citymasters, or suped up PC bikes). Also remember
that all you need to completely toast all but the toughest vehicle is a
single AVM, even Banshees cop it big time with these. And Yellowjackets are
rather tough now that they have the upgrade and can pack armour 9.

--
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. 8
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 19:31:58 +1000
Blackest Knight writes:

> The campaign I run started in 2050, so each of these items is cutting
> tech. ... In my campaigns, not even all of the equipment out of the Street
> Samurai Catalog is available. And finally, the availability number of the
> equipment continues to stay doubled until the "theoretical date" that the
> book is published.

I think that this is a very good idea. Be a bit difficult to implement
though, you'd have to have a looong campaign to do it. And it would have to
be one with lots of breaks in it to soak up the time, not like lukes (I
think) game, where if the runners even stopped for a break for a week their
enemies would get 'em. But I still like it none the less.

--
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. 9
From: Kevin Ragan <kragan@***.UVIC.CA>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 12:42:10 PDT
Hello again. I actually have been thinking lately that after they have heard ofa new
technology item, that the availability of the item should be only 1.5
times the old. As well, my campaign is currently in mid 2053, (I think July
18th), and by having them roll at the beginning of each session, the odds
aren't too bad for the players. I also make the items less available for the
NPCs, not every Corp Sec Guard gets cutting tech.

Just my thoughts,
Blackest Knight.
AKA Tom Hirt.
Message no. 10
From: Shadowdancer <BRIDDLE@*****.VINU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 1994 18:26:32 EST
Whistler writes:

> pansy-ass Yellowjacket (why were those things EVER made?)
taking out a
> Banshee with the Firelance Vehicle Laser, I don't think that it very
> feasible. First of all, remember that vehicle armor is VERY different
> from personal armor. The way I read it, the vehicle would get at
least
> half of its armor, and for a Banshee, that is still a lot of protection.
>
The Firelance is an anti-armor weapon. In the AV and AP rules for
vehicles, vehicle armor counts as a barrier rating. There for, the
armor is one-half effective against the Firelance. If the armor is at
least 42 or higher, the laser cannot penetrate it. It can, however,
degrade it, albeit to slowly for any effect. That is why it is very
effective against Great Dragons. Just about anything else cannot
penetrate.



Many people run the shadows, praying that whatever gods they worship will smile upon them.
I waltz through shadows with my gods, and I lead!

-SHADOWDANCER-
Message no. 11
From: Alex van der Kleut <sommers@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 1994 23:23:39 -0500
Going for Silenced Weapons and other forms of havoc for 200, Alex.
Any firearm produces sounds from three different actions. To be
completely silent, as in NO sound, all three have to be eliminated. The
first sound is from the action of the weapon itself. This is the firing
pin hitting the round, the bolt sliding back, and inserting a new round.
Firing from a closed bolt on single shot, i.e. manually chambering each
round will cut down on most noise there. The next sound comes from gases
expanding in the weapon and leaving the barrel. Silencers (semi-auto) and
Suppressors (burst fire in SRII, SA in real life) disperse this gas from
a larger area, thereby slowing it down and quieting it. The third sound
comes from the bullet itself breaking the sound barrier and creating
sonic-booms. To be completely silent, get yourself a one shot pistol with
a large silencer firing subsonic. If anyone has the Infantry Weapons of
the World supplement for Twilight 2000, thats what the OSS assasination
pistol is. In my game, the silencer gives the standard +2 to target #'s
to hear, but a +6 if they use subsonic.
Message no. 12
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1994 21:35:41 +1100
Shadowdancer writes:

> The Firelance is an anti-armor weapon. In the AV and AP rules for
> vehicles, vehicle armor counts as a barrier rating. There for, the
> armor is one-half effective against the Firelance. If the armor is at
> least 42 or higher, the laser cannot penetrate it. It can, however,
> degrade it, albeit to slowly for any effect. That is why it is very
> effective against Great Dragons. Just about anything else cannot
> penetrate.

> You are a little off. When you are firing at said banshee, the assult
> cannon(18d) would bounce off the armor(18 basic scout model). This
> is because you are trying to hit the banshee, a shoot-through. But
> since the assult cannon is explosive, trying to damage the armor will
> be easier, since the armor ramains the same. The only time you add
> body to armor is when the vehicle is resisting damage, and that is
> body+1/2armor. The armor also reduces the power of the weapon by
> its rating. The assult shell has no power left. THe laser, on the other
> hand, is armor-piercing. Only 1/2 armor counts if it is a
> shoot-through. 15m vs a 9, laser gets through with a 6m, vehicle
> resistes with a 15. It may not do damage, but the damn thing
> penetrated. Plus the armor will degrade by 1, making it easier next
> time.

eh? I always thougth vehicle armour worked in the following way, but I would
like to hear different interpretations (note that this is an identical
message to what I posted a month or two ago):

As of the last discussion, maybe a couple of months ago, we worked out
vehicle armour like this:

Case 1: Base Power <= Vehicle armour rating

Jack snot & bugger all happens. You don't get to damage the armour,
you do not reduce it like a barrier rating, you do shit all.

Case 2: Base Power > Vehicle

A] If the weapon is a normal (non-armour piercing) weapon

i) Reduce Damage catagory by one. If the weapon is rated at
light, it does no damage.
ii) Subtract Vehicle Armour rating _plus_ Body rating from
the weapons power. Minimum of 2. (It is likely here that
near on all weapons will have a resultant of 2)
Power-(Vehicle Armour+Body)
iii) Roll Body+1/2Armour against the target number determiend
above. Round down.
Body+(1/2Armour) vs. target determined above.

B] If weapon is an armour piercing variety (eg, AVM/R, or half the
weapons out of FoF)

i) Do not Reduce damage catagory by one.
ii) Subtract 1/2 the Vehicle Armour Rating from the Power of
the weapon. Round down.
Power-(1/2Armour)
iii) Roll Body+1/2Armour against the target number determined
above. Round down.
Body+(1/2Armour) vs. target determined above.

Note that the rules seem contradictory, on page 108 it says, in reference to
armour piercing weapons "Those weapons have a semiarmor-piercing warhead and
do not have their Damage Level reduced, but the Power is reduced by the
vehicle's armor." While on page 99, it says "Against AVRs, the Barrier
Rating of a barrier is halved (round down), as is the Armor Rating for
vehicles (round down)." Now, we decided to make use of the rule on page 99,
but it does get a bit deadly if your vehicle gets hit with an armour
piercing weapon.

--
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+


--
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. 13
From: Shadowdancer <BRIDDLE@*****.VINU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 12:57:55 EST
I am unsure about this armor thing. I guess I read the rules wrong.
But what is this 2 thing in relation to TN#? I have played that if the
armor is sufficient to block the round, it does not go through. I have
reread the rules on page 99, and feel that these are satisfactory.
Otherwise, no weapon will take down the Banshee unless you can hit
it enough times to reduce the armor. Starting to sound a lot like
Btech. Here is the question: If AP rounds halve the barrier ratings,
does the vehicle get the half-full armor rating when resisting or
quarter?



Many people run the shadows, praying that whatever gods they worship will smile upon them.
I waltz through shadows with my gods, and I lead!

-SHADOWDANCER-
Message no. 14
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 18:28:49 +1100
Shadowdancer writes:

> But what is this 2 thing in relation to TN#? I have played that if the
> armor is sufficient to block the round, it does not go through.

This is true for barriers yes. Vehicle armour is not a barrier. It is only
similar in its workings.

> I have reread the rules on page 99, and feel that these are satisfactory.
> Otherwise, no weapon will take down the Banshee unless you can hit
> it enough times to reduce the armor.

This is as I used to beleive. Upon reading FoF and finding that vehicle
armour is reduced in the same manner as regular character armour, I was
forced to conclude that what The Nightstalker had told me must have been
correct. That vehicle armour, just the same as character armour, does not
get degraded in combat. (This was the case until _both_ of them were subject
to degredation rules in FoF.)

> Here is the question: If AP rounds halve the barrier ratings, does the
> vehicle get the half-full armor rating when resisting or quarter?

I assume you are taking this from the "Break Through" rules? Vehicle armour
doesn't follow the barrier rules as they are written. About the only
similarity that I can see is that attacks do not penetrate if the power is
lower than the rating. There is no "Firing Through" or "Break Thorugh"
or
any of the "double the barrier vs" or "halve the barrier vs" that can
be
found under the barrier rules. The only thing is is that AP weapons halve
the effective vehicle armour rating.

I'm still a tad unhappy with my rules interpretation when it come to vehilce
armour, and I think it would be a good question for the soon to be
(already?) departed DLoH.

--
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. 15
From: Shadowdancer <BRIDDLE@*****.VINU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 22:12:21 EST
Damion writes:

> This is true for barriers yes. Vehicle armour is not a barrier. It is
only
> similar in its workings.
>
I play that this is true in all armor.

> I assume you are taking this from the "Break Through" rules?
Vehicle armour
> doesn't follow the barrier rules as they are written. About the only
> similarity that I can see is that attacks do not penetrate if the power
is
> lower than the rating. There is no "Firing Through" or "Break

I was refering to when the operator gets to resist damage. The
normal formula is body+ 1/2 armor rating. Is this 1/2 full armor, or 1/2
the 1/2 of armor when using AP rounds?
Message no. 16
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Some new topics...
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 17:04:10 +1100
Shadowdancer writes:

> I was refering to when the operator gets to resist damage. The
> normal formula is body+ 1/2 armor rating. Is this 1/2 full armor, or 1/2
> the 1/2 of armor when using AP rounds?

I'd go with 1/2 the full armour. The one half armour addition is in there
because armour adds bulk (body) to the vehicle. The bulk still has it's
normal effects at absorbing the damage, otherwise we would halve the body of
the vehicle when it was hit with AP weapons too.

--
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+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Some new topics..., 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!