<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #1471</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	12/9/99 6:09:30 PM Pacific Standard Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Thursday, December 9 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1471<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
Re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
RE: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
Re: Mass communication, the nobility and epistemology (LONG)<BR>
Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
Re: Deadfall Ordnance and Falling Rocks (long)<BR>
Re: the stresses of being a grunt (was electronic warfare)<BR>
Re: your mail<BR>
Paintball and morality (was Re: OT/Flamebait ...)<BR>
Re: Mass communication, the nobility and epistemology (LONG)<BR>
Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
re:  Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
OT-Soviet Death Stars(sorta)<BR>
Re: OT-Soviet Death Stars(sorta)<BR>
Re: OT/Flamebait: Starship Troopers revisited<BR>
[none]<BR>
Re: Australia reclassified to type 3 Government<BR>
Re: Kenji's inventions<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:27:15 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> This reminds me of rhetoric that I've read from 16th<BR>
> and 17th Century pirates living in the Caribbean and<BR>
> Madagascar.  Some considered themselves sovereign<BR>
> states at war with the rest of the world, entitled to<BR>
> take any ship as a prize.  That argument won't fly in<BR>
> an Imperial Admiralty Court any better than it did in<BR>
> the London admiralty court.<BR>
<BR>
"You are a devilish conscience rascal, I am a free prince and I have as much<BR>
authority to make war on the whole world, as he who has a hundred sail of<BR>
ships at sea and an army of 100,000 men in the field; and this my conscience<BR>
tells me: but there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow<BR>
superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."<BR>
<BR>
 - Captain Bellamy, upon hearing the refusal of the captain of a captured<BR>
ship to join his crew on the grounds that he could not go against his<BR>
conscience and break the laws of man and God, from Daniel Defoe's "A General<BR>
History of the Robberies and Murders of the Most Notorious Pirates"<BR>
<BR>
Just in case anyone wanted to see an example. ;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:27:28 -0500<BR>
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
>>>>>>>><BR>
BlackIce has pointed out the most important<BR>
distinction between salvage and prizes, which I did<BR>
not state as clearly in my earlier post on this<BR>
subject:  Ownership of the ship changes when it<BR>
becomes a prize, but does not change when it becomes<BR>
salvage.  <BR>
>>>>>>>>><BR>
I think the confusing part was when civilian ships were<BR>
mentioned as taking prizes while a state of war did not<BR>
exist. I think it was pretty clear that if you're at war<BR>
with the Senlis Foederate, and one of their DE's captures<BR>
one of your Subsidized Merchants, you're not getting it<BR>
back with a lawsuit.<BR>
<BR>
You might, however, get it back with a treaty.<BR>
<BR>
Walt Smith<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 14:35:09 PST<BR>
From: "Brandon Cope" <copeab@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
<BR>
>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU><BR>
<BR>
>Now, how about when two private parties are involved, rather than a<BR>
>bank vs a planetary (or Imperial) government? Sunbeard steals my ship,<BR>
>you capture it when he attacks you, have you seized a prize that is<BR>
>yours free and clear, or have you recovered my stolen property?<BR>
<BR>
The property _probably_ reverts to the legal owner. However, if you had the <BR>
chance to report the property stolen but didn't, the government may think <BR>
that you lent the property and are now trying to keep yourself out of <BR>
trouble. However, any damages to your property would probably be the legal <BR>
responsibility of the thief, not anyone who legally defends themselves from <BR>
actions taken by said thief (which means you better have good insurance).<BR>
<BR>
A generous and sadistic GM,<BR>
<BR>
Brandon Cope<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:45:26 -0500<BR>
From: "Charles Prevatte" <prevattec@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Glenn Goffin<BR>
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 2:47 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> >From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net><BR>
><BR>
> >Dan Roseberry wrote:<BR>
> > Here's a question thats confused me:  How would the<BR>
> > 3I characterize the difference between 'salvage<BR>
> > rights' and 'prizes'? Do the terms overlap, or are<BR>
> > they meant to distiguish between craft recovered by<BR>
> > civilians vs. craft recovered by the<BR>
> > military?<BR>
><BR>
> >The term "prizes" refers to ships and/or cargo<BR>
> >_seized_ through legitimate means.<BR>
><BR>
> >Neither the original owner of the prize ship or<BR>
> >cargo, nor any creditors of the prize ship's or<BR>
> >cargo's owner, have any claim to the prize.<BR>
><BR>
> >"Salvage rights", OTOH, refers to the right of a<BR>
> >civilian ship's captain and crew to monetary gain in<BR>
> >exchange for _finding_ a ship or cargo in<BR>
> >distress, and assisting that ship and/or cargo in<BR>
> >reaching a safe port.  The original owner of the ship<BR>
><BR>
> >or cargo, as well as any creditors of the<BR>
> >ship or cargo in question, may have rights, in<BR>
> >accordance with Admiralty law.<BR>
><BR>
> BlackIce has pointed out the most important<BR>
> distinction between salvage and prizes, which I did<BR>
> not state as clearly in my earlier post on this<BR>
> subject:  Ownership of the ship changes when it<BR>
> becomes a prize, but does not change when it becomes<BR>
> salvage.<BR>
><BR>
> --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm speaking only from hear say but here goes...<BR>
<BR>
Acording to what I understand about maritime law a ship can be claimed as<BR>
salvage if not in the possesion of 'some persons' for a given period of<BR>
time.  After that time it is considered abandoned and is fair game to be<BR>
claimed by anyone.  Possesion is the tricky part.  If it is part on land<BR>
belonging to the ships owner it is in his possesion.  If on the land of a<BR>
third party the third party has claim to it after the time has expired.  If<BR>
on the high seas (space) or under them it's up for grabs BUT the first<BR>
person there can claim it for a curtain period of time without actually<BR>
moving it.<BR>
<BR>
All of this can get real sticky if the salvage is in someones territorial<BR>
waters and wants to make an issue of it but if the finders get it out of<BR>
there fast enough most other countries will honor their claims.  Just don't<BR>
ever plan to return to that country!<BR>
<BR>
Take this with a grain of salt though.  It's from a half remembered book on<BR>
treasure hunters trying to claim sunken treasure.  Many of them lost most or<BR>
all of the goods to the local government including our US of A and the IR of<BR>
S. (Grin)<BR>
<BR>
Charles L.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:28:39 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Mass communication, the nobility and epistemology (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
From: Glenn M. Goffin <gmgoffin@pacbell.net><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
> What a great title.  It's even better than Four Arguments for the<BR>
> Elimination of Television (by Gerry Mander (his real name), written<BR>
>in the early 1970s).<BR>
<BR>
The cover of the book, at least in the printing I have, is excellent as<BR>
well. There's a typical nuclear family, mother, father, toddler boy and<BR>
young girl who are all watching television without the benefit of heads.<BR>
<BR>
> You are missing the mark.<BR>
<BR>
It turns out that I was missing the mark in that portion of Postman's<BR>
argument as well. I looked over the chapter earlier... not that I missed the<BR>
mark in general, but that I missed the mark on the precedent issue.<BR>
<BR>
> (Even your hypothetical of the tribal leader reviewing his internal<BR>
>library suggests that he may have been thinking in part, "how did our<BR>
>ancestors handle this?")<BR>
<BR>
It's possible, but somewhat dubious, as proverbs usually have their origins<BR>
in "everyday" sorts of experiences. I would think that it would be difficult<BR>
for prior judgements to take the form of proverbs.<BR>
<BR>
<useful information on law snipped><BR>
<BR>
> I don't think that the concept of law -- at least as actually practiced,<BR>
> as opposed to perceived -- has changed significantly as a result of<BR>
> any of these technologies.  None of them are well suited to<BR>
>reasoned discourse,<BR>
<BR>
Which is really the crux of his argument anyway. ;)<BR>
<BR>
>and that is still the essence of the modern practice of law.<BR>
> Sensational cases have always been with us, but they have only<BR>
> tangential effects on the practice or development of the law.  Those<BR>
> tangential effects are limited to legislative response to public<BR>
> perception.  None of the cases you mentioned has had any effect on<BR>
>the law itself.<BR>
<BR>
Well, no, while they may not have an effect on the law itself, one could say<BR>
they have had an impact on law in general. After all, if in any one of those<BR>
cases a legal decision was "set up" in order to attain a specific result, no<BR>
matter what the goal, then the practice of law *has* changed.<BR>
<BR>
> This is really interesting problem, because, as you note,<BR>
><BR>
> > The Xboat system, in a sense, is a "new medium". It's kind of like a<BR>
strange<BR>
> > mixture between the telegraph and "a slow boat to China".<BR>
><BR>
> In the Far Future -- which is the present day as far as the Ziru Sirka<BR>
> is concerned (I think Vilani scouts got our recent Mars probes) --<BR>
> communication within a star system is essentially instantaneous for<BR>
>huge volumes of information.  On the other hand, communication >within an<BR>
interstellar polity takes weeks.  How does this affect public<BR>
> discourse?  I'm not sure, and I have to go back to work.<BR>
<BR>
What I'm leaning toward, at least in theory, is that for the nobles in the<BR>
Imperium, discussions are written and sent back and forth. While it may be<BR>
acceptable to send a holovid as a Holiday greeting, it is a breech of<BR>
etiquette to send a holovid discussing anything of importance.<BR>
<BR>
In this sense, entering into the ranks of the nobility means more than just<BR>
the right to add a prefix or suffix to one's name. It is a very direct<BR>
invitation to be part of learned debate in the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
I'm even considering the use of a noble language, sort of like Latin in the<BR>
medieval period, but more like the French language during the Enlightenment.<BR>
Your own mileage may vary, of course, since I'm diverging from standard<BR>
canon for my own Traveller universe.<BR>
<BR>
> > Perhaps the Imperium is the direct descendant of an organization along<BR>
> > the lines of the WTO ( or maybe the um... ITO: Intergalactic Trade<BR>
> > Organization?).<BR>
><BR>
> "Intragalactic" maybe, but more likely "interstellar".<BR>
<BR>
The name wasn't supposed to be taken seriously. Just what I managed to come<BR>
up with on the spur of the moment. Last night, I was much more concerned<BR>
with not getting my Fauvists and Expressionists mixed up. ;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:53:50 -0600<BR>
From: "Kurtis Rodgers" <kurtis@fastlane.net><BR>
Subject: Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 14:28:26 -0500<BR>
> From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU><BR>
> Subject: Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
<snip><BR>
> Here's one version:<BR>
> http://www.hut.fi/~vesanto/link.fun/players.txt<BR>
<BR>
Here is an HTML version of the same thing (a little easier to read).<BR>
<BR>
Real Men, Real Roleplayers, Lunatics and Munchkins<BR>
http://home.mira.net/~tosh/humour/realmen.htm<BR>
<BR>
Kurtis<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 17:23:53 -0500<BR>
From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Deadfall Ordnance and Falling Rocks (long)<BR>
<BR>
>> So, where can I go to get the correct formulas for calculating what damage<BR>
>> a falling rock will do from space and a piece of "streamlined" deadfall<BR>
>> ordnance.<BR>
<BR>
I tried doing this for GT a while back, with some drastic simplifying<BR>
assumptions:<BR>
<BR>
1) No energy lost on re-entry.<BR>
<BR>
2) No energy _except_ gravitational potential energy. (Ie. just the energy<BR>
from dropping the rock, nothing added for orbital velocity, rotation of<BR>
location on planet, etc.)<BR>
<BR>
I'm not at all convinced I'm right in these assumptions. (OK, I know they<BR>
are off, but I don't know if it's a significant inaccuracy or not.  The<BR>
most useful thing about this post (I think) is the formula for computing<BR>
damage, based on altitude and world information.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard, feel free to improve the formula. I know you can do it :-)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
============================<BR>
<BR>
I've been playing around with deadfall ordinance. I started out with the<BR>
assumption that DO is essentially a mass driver (electromag gun) that spits<BR>
out shells from orbit. I may be totally off base here, but figured that at<BR>
least I'd start the ball rolling.<BR>
<BR>
Quoting from Striker II (p.36):<BR>
<BR>
"Bombs and missiles dropped from orbit are actually fired at the planetary<BR>
surface with a respectable initial velocity (in the order of 800 to 1200<BR>
km/h), but still take time to reach the planetary surface from high orbit."<BR>
[The actual delay is size code x 5 minutes.]<BR>
<BR>
I designed a series of very short electromag guns (which seem to have the<BR>
right muzzle velocity, assuming that the KE damage from missiles and the KE<BR>
damage from shells is equivalent). I put the gun(s) in a bay, along with<BR>
two roomy crewstations and a power plant slice, and filled teh rest of the<BR>
bay with ammo. Here's what I got for a 250mm gun. (Note: I used tabs, so<BR>
you may have to play a bit with the formatting.)<BR>
<BR>
250mm	EMass	LMass	Volume	Cost	Magazine<BR>
GTL9 (1 gun battery)	239	1,620	100	94.71	5531 rounds<BR>
GTL10 (4 gun battery)	200	2,019	100	21.33	6891 rounds<BR>
GTL11 (4 gun battery)	200	2,019	100	11.96	6891 rounds<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The rounds themselves are, other than the solid shot, quite expensive. Cost<BR>
would be only 1/4 if these were regular rounds, not electromag. At GTL9 the<BR>
power plant slice is so large I can see the ships using conventional<BR>
cannons (just like in "Space Viking"!).<BR>
<BR>
KE multiplier should be inserted into the following equation to determine<BR>
actual KE damage dice:<BR>
<BR>
KE = KE Multiplier x Sqrt(ghR/(h+R))<BR>
<BR>
where: g = gravity (Earth=1), h = altitude (miles), and R = planetary<BR>
radius (miles).<BR>
<BR>
This models the conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy, then uses<BR>
that velocity with the missile KE damage equation to get GURPS damage dice.<BR>
This approach ignores frictional braking (which would depend on atmosphere<BR>
anyway), but is probably a valid first approximation.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Round	Weight	Cost	KE Multiplier	Pen<BR>
Solid	586	4687.5	48.5<BR>
APSFDS	390.625	37500	97	(2)<BR>
APSFDSDU	390.625	56250	97	(3)<BR>
Superwire	390.625	468750	12.125	(10)<BR>
APSFDSHD	390.625	140625	97	(5)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Design details:<BR>
<BR>
General<BR>
WPS	585.9375<BR>
RoF	0.16		Hourly RoF	576<BR>
Power	468750 kW<BR>
<BR>
GTL9	EMass	LMass	Volume	Cost<BR>
1 gun	9375	0	187.5	957500<BR>
Fusion slice	468750	0	9375	93750000<BR>
Access space	0	0	18750	0<BR>
Operator stations	80	0	80	200<BR>
5531 rounds	0	3240820.31	21605.4688	0<BR>
Total	478205	3240820.31	49997.9688	94707700<BR>
<BR>
GTL10	EMass	LMass	Volume	Cost<BR>
4 gun	25000	0	500	2580000<BR>
Fusion slice	375000	0	7500	18750000<BR>
Access space	0	0	15000	0<BR>
Operator stations	80	0	80	200<BR>
6891 rounds	0	4037695.31	26917.9688	0<BR>
Total	400080	4037695.31	49997.9688	21330200<BR>
<BR>
GTL11	EMass	LMass	Volume	Cost<BR>
4 gun	25000	0	500	2580000<BR>
Fusion slice	375000	0	7500	9375000<BR>
Access space	0	0	15000	0<BR>
Operator stations	80	0	80	200<BR>
6891 rounds	0	4037695.31	26917.9688	0<BR>
Total	400080	4037695.31	49997.9688	11955200<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 15:39:09<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: the stresses of being a grunt (was electronic warfare)<BR>
<BR>
At 06:41 PM 12/8/1999 -0800, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>ObTrav: will the soldiers of the future be physical<BR>
>wimps because all their stuff has been miniturised?<BR>
>My personal feeling is that as stuff gets shrunk or<BR>
>disposed of, the Army just finds more crap for you to<BR>
>lug about, amazing the useless bits of kit they foist<BR>
>upon us (mosquito nets while we're on a snowy<BR>
>mountain, sleeping bags in deserts, etc)<BR>
<BR>
The basic load for an Imperial Army infantryman comes in at about 40lbs.<BR>
The basic weapon (4mm Gauss Rifle) has fairly heavy ammo, and they were<BR>
Combat Enviroment Suits.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 15:41:16<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: your mail<BR>
<BR>
At 09:01 AM 12/9/1999 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>(after the rat, of course, but the rats will always win. I'm just happy<BR>
>we don't lay eggs...that's how they got the dinosaurs.)<BR>
<BR>
I thought it was the Y-6500K bug.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:19:52 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Paintball and morality (was Re: OT/Flamebait ...)<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
<BR>
>>Moral Dilemna. ... However, can a case be made that<BR>
a<BR>
>> paintball is so clearly different from a regular <BR>
>>firearm that it doesn't matter if i point it at<BR>
>>somebody and shoot him?  I don't know.  Barring an <BR>
>>answer i won't play again.<BR>
>Question: How do you feel about fencing? As a sport, <BR>
>that is? And how is paintball different in it's moral<BR>
>implications<BR>
<BR>
Or water pistols? snowballs? martial arts? archery?<BR>
playing army? <BR>
<BR>
We practice hunting and warfare since we're children<BR>
and always have.  So far as I know, that's true across<BR>
all cultures.  I don't see the harm.  Not recognizing<BR>
the difference between play/practice and the real<BR>
thing is harmful.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Thousands of Stores.  Millions of Products.  All in one place.<BR>
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:57:52 +0000<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Mass communication, the nobility and epistemology (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
At 1:22 -0500 9/12/99, "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net> wrote:<BR>
> > Still, my acquaintances' point was that CCGs would replace /<BR>
> >displace RPGs entirely, the way RPGs did with tabletop wargames.<BR>
> >(Same person who tried to recruit me into CAR-PGa, thinking that<BR>
> >my library science professional background and my skill with the<BR>
> >written word would be of benefit to her association... she didn't take<BR>
> >it well when I told her what I thought of her group.) I wonder what she<BR>
> >thinks now -- it's been several years since we've had contact. (She<BR>
> >moved to Seattle to take a job with WotC, of all things!)<BR>
><BR>
>Magic is still going strong, so I think her job's safe, at the very least.<BR>
<BR>
Interesting. One of my University acquaintances met a young lady from <BR>
WotC after he was on of the UK finalists for Magic, and now lives in <BR>
Seattle with her.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
                        MiB - Marines in Battledress<BR>
    "Protecting the Imperium from the Scum of the Galaxy"<BR>
Rob Prior's Mac software @ http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:06:26 +0000<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Rise and Supposed Decline of the RPG Empire<BR>
<BR>
At 7:31 -0500 9/12/99, Keith Johnson <keithalanjohnson@home.com> wrote:<BR>
>The few major companies put out tons of material.  They are trying to win<BR>
>back the market by being aggressive.  Supplements =<BR>
>advertising.  Supplements don't sell as well as the core rulebooks, but the<BR>
money you lose on them are made up by sales of the core rulebooks.<BR>
<BR>
This also illustrates a problem with retailers, especially in the UK. <BR>
It is common for them not to have the rule books in stock. This means <BR>
that although potential customers may have a look at the new <BR>
sourcebooks, they may not buy as there is no system to support them. <BR>
To use an analogy, you can't run the software without the OS....<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
                        MiB - Marines in Battledress<BR>
    "Protecting the Imperium from the Scum of the Galaxy"<BR>
Rob Prior's Mac software @ http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:57:19 -0600<BR>
From: Richard Wilson <rtwilson@rollanet.org><BR>
Subject: re:  Well guys, there goes our salvage...<BR>
<BR>
At 02:56 PM 12/8/99 -0800, you wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>An insurance company could be a patron, if it's<BR>
>cheaper to send a few PCs to look for a ship than to<BR>
>pay the claim. <BR>
><BR>
>--Glenn<BR>
<BR>
Hi, my name is Banachek. <BR>
<BR>
Sigh. I loved that show.<BR>
<BR>
Richard Wilson<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:29:19 EST<BR>
From: KenRoney@aol.com<BR>
Subject: OT-Soviet Death Stars(sorta)<BR>
<BR>
 Hi Guys,<BR>
><BR>
> I came across a little interesting trivia while reading the book "Space <BR>
Power<BR>
> Theory" that I downloaded from the US Space Command website.  According <BR>
to it:<BR>
><BR>
> "The Soviets installed a defensive cannon on one of their early space<BR>
> stations, the Salyut-3 military reconnaissance vehicle launched in 1974.<BR>
> According tho published accounts, reportedly confirmed by spacecraft<BR>
> commander Pavel Popovich, the station carried a modified Soviet jet<BR>
> interceptor cannon.  It was a Nudelman-Rikhter "Vulcan" gun (30 mm) <BR>
similar<BR>
> to models installed on the Mig-19, Mig-21, and Sukhoi-7."<BR>
><BR>
> Just thought that you'd all want to know.<BR>
><BR>
> Ken<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 17:31:38 -0800<BR>
From: "Luther Martin" <tml@ksarul.com><BR>
Subject: Re: OT-Soviet Death Stars(sorta)<BR>
<BR>
Wow. How much does it cost to lift 1 pound to orbit? That's some expensive<BR>
paranoia.<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <KenRoney@aol.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 5:29 PM<BR>
Subject: OT-Soviet Death Stars(sorta)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Hi Guys,<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I came across a little interesting trivia while reading the book "Space<BR>
> Power<BR>
> > Theory" that I downloaded from the US Space Command website.  According<BR>
> to it:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > "The Soviets installed a defensive cannon on one of their early space<BR>
> > stations, the Salyut-3 military reconnaissance vehicle launched in 1974.<BR>
> > According tho published accounts, reportedly confirmed by spacecraft<BR>
> > commander Pavel Popovich, the station carried a modified Soviet jet<BR>
> > interceptor cannon.  It was a Nudelman-Rikhter "Vulcan" gun (30 mm)<BR>
> similar<BR>
> > to models installed on the Mig-19, Mig-21, and Sukhoi-7."<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Just thought that you'd all want to know.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Ken<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:37:42 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: OT/Flamebait: Starship Troopers revisited<BR>
<BR>
From: Eric Henry <ehenry@newberlin.org><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Moral Dilemna.  When i first joined this tangent i said i wondered<BR>
>about a sport ( paintball ) where you have to point a gun at<BR>
>somebody and pull a trigger.  I am not comfortable with that and<BR>
>that's why i haven't played in five years.  However, can a case be<BR>
>made that a paintball is so clearly different from a regular firearm<BR>
>that it doesn't matter if i point it at somebody and shoot him?  I don't<BR>
>know.  Barring an answer i won't play again.<BR>
<BR>
Well, yes, a paintball gun *is* clearly different from a real gun, no two<BR>
ways about it. I've seen some at least one response in this thread, which<BR>
tries to answer your question by posing the same question to fencing.<BR>
<BR>
I'm not going to take that route myself. The "answer", as it were, is very<BR>
simple:<BR>
<BR>
It goes without saying that the end result of being shot with each type of<BR>
gun is quite different. Shooting someone, who is properly attired and<BR>
expecting the possibility that they might be splattered with paint, with a<BR>
paintball pellet poses no *real* moral dilemma. I'm not trying to trivialize<BR>
your concerns, but the two are very different. Shooting somebody with a<BR>
bullet is hazardous to life and limb, while shooting somebody with a<BR>
paintball pellet is not really all that dangerous.<BR>
<BR>
> Now that i've left the ranks of the lurkers i hope this answers some<BR>
> questions.<BR>
<BR>
Welcome to the land of the speaking! ;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:42:15 +1000<BR>
From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au<BR>
Subject: [none]<BR>
<BR>
Dear Folks -<BR>
<BR>
Back in digest 1440, Antony pointed out how the Australian Tax Commisioner is<BR>
able to ignore reality. I thought this was just a joke, so I looked up the<BR>
legislation (actually only a Bill, as it hasn't yet been passed).<BR>
<BR>
The wording is verbatim, but the *context* was missing. Here it is:<BR>
==================<BR>
165-1 What this Division is about<BR>
<BR>
This Division is to deter schemes to give entities benefits by reducing GST,<BR>
increasing refunds or altering the timing of payment of GST or refunds.<BR>
<BR>
If the dominant purpose or a principal effect of a scheme is to give an entity<BR>
such a benefit, the Commissioner may negate the benefit an entity gets from the<BR>
scheme by declaring how much GST or refund would have been payable, and when it<BR>
would have been payable, apart from the scheme.<BR>
<BR>
[snip]<BR>
<BR>
165-55 Commissioner may disregard scheme in making declarations<BR>
<BR>
For the purposes of making a declaration under this Subdivision, the<BR>
Commissioner may:<BR>
<BR>
(a) treat a particular event that actually happened as not having happened;<BR>
and...<BR>
==================<BR>
etc etc [ie. declare the nature of the universe to be altered]<BR>
<BR>
So he *can* change the gravitational constant of the universe, but only in<BR>
certain specific cases...  ;-)<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson        Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)<BR>
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw                       davidjw@pcug.org.au<BR>
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
REQ'D DISCLAIMER - material & opinions contained within are solely those<BR>
of the author and do not necessarily represent, in whole or in part, the<BR>
position of Centrelink or any other Commonwealth Government agency.<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:43:38 +1000<BR>
From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au<BR>
Subject: Re: Australia reclassified to type 3 Government<BR>
<BR>
Dear Folks -<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, that last msg should have been sent under the above Subject...<BR>
<BR>
- - Hyphen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:06:42 +1000<BR>
From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au<BR>
Subject: Re: Kenji's inventions<BR>
<BR>
Dear Folks -<BR>
<BR>
Kenji said:<BR>
>I don't have the designs any more, actually.  But never fear!  Some<BR>
>clueless soul, obviously no reader of the TML, has sold me a copy of Fire,<BR>
>Fusion, and Steel II!  Now I'm redesigning all those favorites of<BR>
>yesteryear -- the PMPP, the RoboReindeer, the TL-C Bong, the Foucault<BR>
>Class Discursive Cruisers, the Lav Ship...<BR>
[snip]<BR>
>See you soon, hee hee, very soon, very, hee hee --<BR>
<BR>
"K-9?"<BR>
<BR>
Yes, Master?"<BR>
<BR>
Fire your laser pistol at that intruder, would you?"<BR>
<BR>
"Yes, Master!"<BR>
<BR>
<<ZAP>><BR>
<BR>
"All right, now we just need to send in the cleaner."<BR>
<BR>
[cut to view of heavy chest (with lots of little legs) running in past a robot<BR>
dog, scooping up a body with its "tongue', slamming the lid, then running out<BR>
again]<BR>
<BR>
"Perfect! [aside] It's amazing what you can pack into these things, these days."<BR>
<BR>
(For those who don't know, K-9 and The Luggage live on the Tavonni web site. See<BR>
Tavonni Specialities ==> trendi ==> Robots. They are my only claim to weirdness,<BR>
I'm afraid - oh, apart from E.R.I.C. - *sigh*, I almost wish _I_ had invented<BR>
the orbital Pogo Stick... ;-)<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson        Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)<BR>
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw                       davidjw@pcug.org.au<BR>
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
REQ'D DISCLAIMER - material & opinions contained within are solely those<BR>
of the author and do not necessarily represent, in whole or in part, the<BR>
position of Centrelink or any other Commonwealth Government agency.<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1471<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (rly-yh01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.33]) by air-yh02.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:09:30 -0500<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (v66.4) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:09:09 -0500<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id VAA30078;<BR>
	Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:08:05 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:07:49 -0500<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id VAA30027<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:07:49 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 21:07:49 -0500 (EST)<BR>
Message-Id: <199912100207.VAA30027@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #1471<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
