From:   IN%"traveller@engrg.uwo.ca"  8-JUN-1994 21:06:10.81
To:     IN%"traveller@engrg.uwo.ca"
CC:     
Subj:   TML biweekly: Msgs 7909-7915 V46#4

Return-path: <jamesp@engrg.uwo.ca>
Received: from engrg.uwo.ca (nova.engrg.uwo.ca)
 by delphi.com (PMDF V4.3-7 #6563) id <01HDBAMYWVU88ZEP3X@delphi.com>; Wed,
 8 Jun 1994 21:06:03 EDT
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 1994 21:00:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Admin)
Subject: TML biweekly: Msgs 7909-7915 V46#4
To: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Submissions)
Errors-to: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca
Reply-to: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Submissions)
Message-id: <9406090103.AA11523@engrg.uwo.ca>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Approved: by traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Admin) Wed Jun  8 21:00:03 EDT
 1994
Precedence: bulk

TML biweekly    Wed Jun  8 21:00:03 EDT 1994    Volume 46 : Issue 4

Today's topics:

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 629  7910 07-Jun-1994 James Kundert    VDES,NE,GEN: Armor, Editing & Coyns << 
 629  7911 08-Jun-1994 Dave Kennard     FFS: TL16 laser pistol << To hell with 
 630  7912 08-Jun-1994 "Potter, Thomas  Change of address <<      My company ha
 630  7913 08-Jun-1994 "Les Howie"      Battleship Armour -- A Can Openner << S
 630  7914 08-Jun-1994 Steven M Bonnev  Re: Coyns << I like it that someone is 
 630  7915 08-Jun-1994 Steven M Bonnev  Re: Fleet Armor << More on Big Fleet Ac
 629  7909 08-Jun-1994 William White    Feudal Technocracy << I tried to post t

This is a passively moderated mailing list. All messages sent to the
submission address will be distributed. The biweekly digest is currently
distributed each Wednesday and Sunday at 9:00pm.

Submissions: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca -or- uunet!engrg.uwo.ca!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (James Perkins)

The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bundle: 629
Archive-Message-Number: 7910
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 94 23:03:38 PDT
From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
Subject: VDES,NE,GEN: Armor, Editing & Coyns

In response to Tuesday's batch of messages:

 "Les Howie"  <lhowie@Prograph.Com> says:

 >This is a good analysis.  To tell you the truth, I like the feel of being
 >able to armour my dreadnaughts in proper Fisher fashion.

 I'm afraid I don't get the Fisher reference.

 ...
 >Thats fine.  If there is no magic "torpedo" for frying big ships, torpedo
 >boats do not serve a lot of purpose.

 But your own paragraph on tactics indicates part of their role:
Overloading point-defenses and scrubbing surface features.  The standard
missile in TNE is capable of a lot of mayhem, and will scrub surface
bits off of _any_ ship.  The more ships (of any size) you've got firing
these things at the enemy, the less capable the enemy will be to
respond.
 The levels of armor described in Steven M Bonneville's
(bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu) post almost, BUT NOT QUITE, return
us to the days of MT, when anything without a meson gun was harmless
above a certain level.  In TNE, with all of a ship's surface features,
it is quite possible to get a mission kill without penetrating the
armor.  Nothing is completely invulnerable.


 In the "Death Star" post, Les provides the following numbers:

 >Lets assume that we can design the weapon with an ROF of 100.
 >
 >This gives us a discharge energy of 2.26e24 Mj.  Working at 
 >TL 14 and selecting a tunnel length of 250 m (to give a short 
 >range of 10 hexes, the other calculations fall out:
 >
 >3a Effective Tunnel Length 300m
 >3b Tunnel Volume           5.62e24 m^3
 >3c Cross Sectional Area    2.25e22 (a diameter of 8e7 km !!)
 ...

 Even the Ringworld Meteor Defense System is only twice this diameter,
and that's only if you consider the Ringworld itself as the barrel...


 djohnson@geds01.jsc.nasa.gov (David Johnson) then asks, in response
to my request for editing:

 >>   All I ask is that the participants start editing in a more
 >> ruthless fashion
 >
 >How am I doing?  :-)

 Much better.  Thank you.  (-:


 Finally, Hans Rancke (rancke@diku.dk) asks at great length about
Droyne Coyns:

 >Now, going down the list here are the symbols I came up with for each coyn:
 >
 >Void      Nothing engraved. A blank disc.
 >Soil      A massive cliff. 
 >Air       A white cloud (ie. the outline of a cloud).
 >Gas       A black cloud (ie. a filled-in outline of a cloud).
 >Water     A foam-flecked wave.
 >Fire      A flame.
 >
 >(Except for the Void and the Fire I'm pretty dissatisfied with these, but
 >they are the best I can come up with. Any suggestions?)

 Perhaps an irregular dirt clod or a symbolic plant growing from the
ground for Soil.  The few Coyn faces we've seen suggest an extremely
symbolic style, IMHO.  The more this can be followed, the more mystified
your players will be.

 >Beast     A ferocious six-limbed carnivore in mid-jump[6].

 Or perhaps just a paw-print.  Save the ferocious carnivore for the
most dangerous (in your opinion) of the major races that replaced
the animals.

 >Achievement  A brimful cup.
 >Defeat       An empty, tipped-over cup.

 Or a mountain pinnacle with a tiny figure, and a chasm into which a
figure is falling.  The various ways of showing these two are boggling.

 >The Hissayt, Emissyob, Ayvaylk, Bestoy, Nebbay, and Hayyarm are various
 >six-limbed herbivores and omnivores once important to Droyne hunters. I
 >had descriptions of them all worked out, but those notes seems to have
 >dissappeared.

 Since the major races eventually replaced these, they may also represent
specific forms of danger, or specific concerns that the Droyne must
watch for.  Grandfather replaced the original Coyns with new ones that
had different pictures but meant much the same things.  Perhaps the
Droyne once had to worry about the overbearing habits of a particular
omnivore.  This animal had a ever-expanding territorial sense, and was
forever competing with others of its kind to expand that individual
territory.  The Coyn depicting this beast was replaced by the Humaniti
Coyn (or perhaps the Aslan Coyn) as Grandfather's warning.
 Looked at in this way, the Major Race Coyns might also represent
personalities: the Militant (K'Kree), the Meddler (Hivers), the
Curious (Humaniti), the Random (Vargr), and the Migrator (Aslan).
These may still have been represented by animals from Eskayloyt who
embodied these (or other) personality arch-types.


James Kundert <j.kundert@genie.geis.com>
              <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>

There was a young lady named Bright,
Whose speed was much faster, much faster than Light.
She departed one day in a relative way,
And returned on the previous Night.
   --Albert & the Heart of Gold

------------------------------

Bundle: 629
Archive-Message-Number: 7911
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 1994 11:16:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dave Kennard <D_KENNARD@unhn.unh.edu>
Subject: FFS: TL16 laser pistol

To hell with TL12...


TL16 laser pistol

focal array: 4mm  , pulse: 0.0064 Mj , ammo: 4x18 CLC
empty weight: .571 kg , loaded weight: .702 kg
ruggedized to melee standards
bulk: 1  , cost (empty): Cr256
grip magazine: 35   weight: .053/.131 kg   cost:  Cr1 / Cr8.14

ROF: SA  ,  damage: 4 ,  pen: nil  ,  range: 80

options:
 laser sight .5kg,  Cr300 (range 240m)
 optic sight .1kg,  Cr150 (range increases to 92)
 tunable combuster +Cr187

comments:

Small arm Tl16 focal arrays are effectively free & miniscule. The above
4mm FA is sufficient to give no attenuation out to extreme range for a
pistol (including optic sights) in standard atmosphere. It has a nominal
volume of 0.008 cc and a cost of Cr0.004

Of the options, the laser sight is nice but nearly doubles the empty
weight, the optic sight doesn't give enough extra performance to be
expecially worth it, and any of the options add enough to the cost to
take the weapon out of the cheap "Saturday Night Special" market for
which it's intended.


- ----------------------------------
Dave Kennard
dave@unh.edu

------------------------------

Bundle: 630
Archive-Message-Number: 7912
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 94 16:45:53 EST
From: "Potter, Thomas" <tpotter@smtp-rockville.dynamac.com>
Subject: Change of address


     My company has changed mail services.  My new E-Mail address is :
     TPOTTER@dynamac.com.  If you could change my address in the TML.   
     Also if you could subscribe me on the _OTHER_ TML (the non-TNE). 
     
     Thank you
        Thomas Potter @ DYNAMAC
     

------------------------------

Bundle: 630
Archive-Message-Number: 7913
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 94 19:30:11 ADT
From: "Les Howie"  <lhowie@192.219.29.90>
Reply-To: "Les Howie"  <lhowie@Prograph.Com>
Subject: Battleship Armour -- A Can Openner

Steve Bonneville <bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu> Wrote
[ Brilliant Analysis Deleted]
> If one is willing to armor an expensive battleship a little better 
> than a DE, at 1.77 % of ship volume you can have 71.5 cm of bonded
> superdense armor plating, and an armor rating of 2002.  This is just
> sufficient to stop a TL15 500 kT nuclear detonation x-ray laser dead.
> 
> Note that either value is sufficient to stop any of the "pea-shooter"
> class PAWS in _Brilliant Lances_.
> 
> These armor ratings are very definitely not ridiculous.  If anything,
> they may turn out to be conservative.

I would say quite conservative.  At TL 14 you can construct a 9.5m bay laser
(there is no point in building much larger) feeding 6000 Mj (only 4* a standard
barbette laser) which will throw a penetration over 2000 out to 80 hex
range.  That will not a lot of Damage after pen (about 15 points), but it
is not zero.

Note also there are some trade-offs we can do to get a small ship with a 
laser that has 2000+ pen at very close ranges. 

> It looks to me like the lighter weapons are really only useful for 
> anti-missile fire or to try and scrub the communications and sensory
> antennae off a ship. 

True for the smallest weapons, but is it such a bad idea? Also, you are
going to want to protect your own antennae.
 
> The only other thing I can think of doing with
> them is to try to saturate a big ship's anti-missile defenses and get
> a fusion weapon right up next to it.  So I suppose the *really* big 
> ships like the _Tigress_-types will depend more on what we'd currently
> consider very heavy weapons to do any real damage to the enemy line.
> I have no idea what sort of power the TNE equivalent to the meson-T
> delivers on target, but it is probably massive.  The big ships will
> need to depend on heavy bays to back up the main gun, though, since
> the turrets and "pea-shooter" spinal mounts on escorts won't do much 
> good.  I'm not sure if the 100-ton bays can cut it; I haven't checked.
> 

I think what we may have here is a classic race between armour and armament.
I am not sure how to develop any sort of "optimal" solution for a given
tech level, I guess its the sort of thing that would have to "come out in the
wash" in a given campaign.

While you would depend on the "big gun" spinal mounts to deliver ship-killing
critical hits, I think correct use of Light units (properly designed
for doing damage against armoured targets) would be an important tactical 
consideration.

> As for the _Chrysanthemum_ in a fleet action, well, I guess it really
> is a cheap "tin can".  I suppose it's supposed to be an SDB hunter
> and commerce cutter.
> 
And anti-whatever screen...

I presume BL is built around small combatants (a sort of Mayday on Steroids?)


Les Howie
Prograph International


------------------------------

Bundle: 630
Archive-Message-Number: 7914
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 1994 18:39:24 -0500
From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Steven M Bonneville)
Subject: Re: Coyns

I like it that someone is trying to come up with symbols for coyns.
I wonder how much artistic unity they have -- and why some Droyne are
crazy enough to make some sets out of uranium!  Good luck, Hans!

The concept for an Ancient-era coyn for Eskayloyt is interesting, but
it should probably be expressed as "Homeworld", since presumably at
that point it had not yet been lost.  Also, the Ancient period lasted 
long enough that it's possible that the "Human" and "Vargr" coyns were 
added before the Final War; humans, at least, were fairly well 
integrated into quite a number of Ancient societies -- about half, if 
the figures for the 3rd Imperium discovering evidence for some 90+ human 
minor races and charting some 200+ Ancient sites are accurate.  The old 
symbolic implications of those coyns were probably fairly interesting....

I'm not quite sure about the "native beast" replacements, but I don't have
a better suggestion.  "Innocent bystander" races from the Ancient period
that got wiped out by collateral fire in the Final War?  No, that's not
it either.

Hans Ranke <rancke@diku.dk> writes:

>3) Grandfather modified the coyns on later visits and introduced the Aslan,
>   Hiver and K'kree coyns (at least). [_Secret of The Ancients_ p 32].

Note that all six species represented on the coyns are important powers.
Yaskoydray didn't accidentally pick a "minor" race that didn't make it.
And of those six, five developed hyperdrive independently.  It makes one
wonder if he didn't use something like the Zhodani core artifact to peer
into the future.  Or tamper with _TRS Pathfinder_ so that the Aslan got 
jump drive just before they could blow themselves into oblivion.  Either
way, it suggests that all this "Six Races" nonsense is literally a self-
fulfilling prophecy.

>Voyages         A sailing ship.

Or a STL starship -- the pre-Ancient Droyne did have tech-10 without jump
drive for thousands of years before the Ancient period; they even had a
couple of interstellar colonies.  


Also, note some interesting coyn relationships from the table:

Genesis | Aspiration | Sacrifice | Defeat | Death | Achievement
  The life cycle.  Observe the droyne lesson; one is born, dreams,
  makes sacrifices (for the common good?), meets eventual defeat,
  then death, but *then* attains true achievement.  Defeat and death
  are not the victor.  Is this droyne philosophy peeking out?  Or
  even a droyne concept of the after-life?  Interesting.

Darkness | Cold | Noise | Signal | Heat | Light
  A progressively more positive line of "energy" or "positive entropy".
  Note how the pairs work.  The "Void--Fire" series also may work like
  this.

Beast | Mercenary | Voyages | Justice | Chance | Phoenix
  Think of this like the "energy" sextet.  It would then pair from
  closest to most extreme as:  Voyages/Justice, Merc/Chance, Beast/Phoenix.
  
  Steve Bonneville
  <bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu>
  

------------------------------

Bundle: 630
Archive-Message-Number: 7915
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 1994 18:40:57 -0500
From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Steven M Bonneville)
Subject: Re: Fleet Armor

More on Big Fleet Actions and Armor:

Les Howie <lhowie@Prograph.Com> writes:

>Steven M Bonneville (bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu) wrote:

[part deleted]

>> As for the _Chrysanthemum_ in a fleet action, well, I guess it really
>> is a cheap "tin can".  I suppose it's supposed to be an SDB hunter
>> and commerce cutter.
>> 
>
>Thats fine.  If there is no magic "torpedo" for frying big ships, torpedo
>boats do not serve a lot of purpose.

Well, as I mentioned there might be a possibility of using them in very
large numbers as nuclear missile launchers, and try for a direct hit on
the battleship.  Somehow, I doubt even factor 2000 armor would take well
to having a nuke go off next to it.  Of course, the target solution is
fairly simple once the missiles get that close, so you'd have to fire 
a *lot* of them and concentrate your fire on one enemy target.

Of course, there's a counter-tactic.  For MCr12.5, you can overwhelm a
single standard 150MJ laser turret using standard power, with ten missiles.
It has an ROF of 10 in a thirty minute round, maximum.  (This assumes,
unlike normal space combat, that all shots are effective and destroy one
incoming missile in the zero hex.)  But using FF&S, it is possible to 
build a rapid-fire laser with an ROF of 800 (two shots every five seconds)
which would probably nicely solve the problem.  I don't know what the
power requirements of such an anti-missile laser would be.  Arming the
little fleet escorts with "pea-shooter" meson weapons would probably be 
a better bet if you're trying for serious internal damage.


  Steve Bonneville
  <bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu>


------------------------------

Bundle: 629
Archive-Message-Number: 7909
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 94 0:31:15 EDT
From: William White <whitew@eden.rutgers.edu>
Subject: Feudal Technocracy

I tried to post this last week, but it was a no-go.  Since there's still some
discussion re:  feudal technocracies, I thought I'd try again.  Here goes:

                            FEUDAL TECHNOCRACY

     I have been following the Sword Worlds debate with only mild
interest, but a line in one of the posts struck my attention. 
What follows is entirely tangential to that discussion, however.

     One of the participants in the SW thread said, concerning
feudal technocracies, that he or she thought there should be
"something feudal" about them.  That set me to thinking about
what a feudal technocracy is, at least in Traveller terms.

     First, some purely hypothetical statistics as background. 
How often do feudal technocracies occur within the Imperium?  The
number of worlds in the Third Imperium is given as 11,000:  I
don't know where that came from, but I will use it here.  That
means, using the world generation routine given in the rules --


             THIRD IMPERIUM FEUDAL TECHNOCRACIES BY POPULATION

Pop  Freq  Feud Tech:   %Occur     #Occur
 0    2.7%     DR 12     .001         11
 1    5.5%     DR 11     .003         33     
 2    8.3%     DR 10     .007         77
 3   11.1%     DR 9      .012        132 
 4   13.9%     DR 8      .019        209
 5   16.6%     DR 7      .028        303
 6   13.9%     DR 6      .019        209
 7   11.1%     DR 5      .012        132
 8    8.3%     DR 4      .007         77
 9    5.5%     DR 3      .003         33     
 A    2.7%     DR 2      .001         11

               TOTAL =   .112       1227

Pop:           UWP Population Code
Freq:          Population code frequency within Imperium
Feud Tech:     Die roll required for UWP gov code 5
%Occur:        Frequency of UWP gov 5 worlds @ pop code
#Occur:        Number of UWP gov 5 worlds @ pop code     

Thus, approximately one-tenth of the worlds within the Imperium
may be feudal technocracies.  A majority of these are small
communities under one million in population, though a very few
high-pop feudal technocracies exist.  Interestingly, UWP Gov Code
5 may be the mode of the government type data set -- that is, the
most frequently occuring value.  I haven't done the math on that,
but it is intuitive given the results above.
     The above chart implies that feudal technocracies are a
common category of government throughout the Imperium.  It can be
inferred from the above that a feudal technocratic government is
best suited to an intermediate-sized community, for reasons which
may or may not be clear.  I would argue that feudal arrangements,
by defining the relationships among the individual members of a
society, grow too complicated above a certain population size or
density.

     It may be helpful, at this point, to elaborate upon what a
feudal technocracy is.  In a discussion of the concept of
feudalism, a historian named Morris Bishop said that it is "one
of those words that have taken on so many extended and figurative
meanings that the original [one] has been obscured."  Bishop goes
on to say that feudalism "is a total organization of society,"
specifying the status of individuals within its purview, and
establishing implicit and explicit responsibilities among them. 
     In medieval times, this feudalism centered around land,
agriculture, and military service.  In terms of the Third
Imperium, a feudal technocracy may focus on very different
elements.

     The central idea of a feudal society, in any event, is the
codification of the complex web of social, legal, and economic
interrelationships among its members.  The term "government" is
therefore somewhat of a misnomer.  (I suspect that many a feudal
technocracy may appear to be a balkanized world to the untrained
observer.)  UWP Gov Code 5 refers to feudal *societies*.

     If we accept the definition of a "technocracy" to be "a
government by an elite controlling some aspect of the application
of the society's technology", then the worlds to which we assign
UWP Gov Code 5 must meet two criteria.  
     First, the legal rights, responsibilities, and roles of
individuals must be defined in terms of their socioeconomic
status (thus, "feudal").  
     Second, an elite class which controls some critical
technology must make up a privileged, ruling class (ergo,
"technocracy").
     This critical technology may be military technology -- the
lance, armor, and warhorse of the medieval knight, for example --
but does not have to be.  Nor is it necessarily a single
technology:  access to more advanced technical knowledge and
resources may be sufficient.
     However, the existence of a critical technology helps to
differentiate a feudal technocracy from an oligarchy.  It occurs
to me as well that, whereas oligarchies may tend to be relatively
homogeneous ("monolithic" in World Builder's Handbook terms),
feudal technocracies admit more possibility for conflict, as the
elites may sometimes work at cross-purposes -- though within the
social bounds established by the feudal arrangement.

     How many different types of social systems can be posited
which fit the first half of this definition?  I could think of
five; there are probably more.

1.  Traditional Feudalism:  An elite, usually military, ruling
over a producing "proletariat" of farmers and laborers.  A
separate intellectual class may exist, as well as a small
mercantile class.

2.  Corporate Feudalism:  A complex arrangement consisting of
individual economic organizations within which "employees" and
"managers" have certain specified tasks.  "Owners" in one form or
another may serve as the ruling class, but the managerial elite
will, by virtue of their expertise, have considerable power.  The
corporations themselves are bound by a web of economic alliances
and buyer-seller arrangements.

3.  Contract Feudalism:  Within this type of society, economic
relations between individuals are defined in terms of "contracts"
which may be implicit or tacit but which, by certain behaviors,
all parties acknowledge to be legally binding.

4.  Arcological Feudalism:  The society is arranged as one or
more arcologies; that is, self-contained and economically self-
sufficient communities.  As with corporate feudalism, an elite
managerial class of technical experts holds considerable power
within the society.

5.  Caste Feudalism:  All economic roles are hereditary and
confer a greater or lesser degree of social status upon the
possessor.  The highest caste controls the society's critical
technologies.

     It is difficult, perhaps, to imagine a society wherein the
critical technology is not military.  It might help, therefore,
to do some brainstorming on this issue.  Some of the following
may be reasonable:

1.   MEDICAL - The society's elite are the doctors who can extend
or deny life-saving treatment, including anagathics.  Rather than
the Hippocratic Oath, their credo is to advance the interests of
society as a whole by their efforts.

2.  TRANSPORT - In a world where communities are isolated and not
self-sufficient, those who control transport technology exert a
great deal of influence upon other members of the society.

3.  COMPUTER - In a complex economy, those who control the
computers and telecommunications technology that enable it to run
smoothly hold considerable power to direct resources as they see
fit.  In some places, highly advanced AI-like "expert systems"
may be the elite.  ("The Computer is your friend.")

4.  ENERGY - By controlling an industrial society's sources of
energy, those who build, maintain, and direct a world's power
grid can gain considerable political influence and economic
advantage.

5.  ENVIRONMENT - In a hostile environment, the engineers who
control and maintain life support systems are of critical
importance, and may be able to extract political power from their
position.  Alternately, the toxin-removing, food-preparing
"shugilii" of the Vilani may fall into this category.

     The above elements can be combined to provide the referee
with some inspiration when obliged to detail a UWP Gov Code 5
world.  For example, a Pre-stellar world with caste feudalism and
medical technocracy may require the genetic typing of children to
determine their "proper" function in society.  The highest caste
may be the Eugenes, who manipulate the breeding of the lower
castes to achieve their ends.  Lower castes accept the system
with the belief that adherence to "Wedding Protocols" will result
in higher caste offspring, and thereby advancement.
     Travellers to this planet will be struck by its unusual
social structure.  Alien, indeed.  Possibilities for patrons and
adventures exist here, as well.  The Eugenes may wish to improve
the breeding stock by gaining some high-quality off-world genetic
material, and commission the PCs to find suitable donors.  A rich
but low-caste trader might desire the PCs to use their High
Stellar computer expertise to falsify her son's genetic record so
that he will be declared suitable for high caste upon reaching
maturity.

     The point of this admittedly lengthy post is that worlds in
a science fiction adventure should be to some degree alien or at
least exotic, and should serve as gateways to adventures that are
not just "cowboys with rayguns".  Or Star Vikings with assault
rifles.  
     Feudal technocracies, to continue the metaphor, do not have
to be barons with blasters.  

     All the above is IMHO, of course.  I know there are some
holes in my argument.  Any comments, gripes, protestations,
modifications, exhortations, helpful hints, complaints, or
accusations will be greatly appreciated.


Bill White
whitew@eden.rutgers.edu

------------------------------

End of TML Biweekly
******************
