<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #1536</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	12/20/99 12:04:09 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     Monday, December 20 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1536<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: Ethnicity<BR>
Re: Marooned (MegaT)<BR>
Re: War of 1812<BR>
Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
Re: Ethnic confusion<BR>
Re: OTP: December 22's lunar eclipse<BR>
Re: Question on BITS giveaway<BR>
Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
Re: Mars exploration<BR>
RE: OT US Gun Control C**P on TML<BR>
Travshorts IV<BR>
Looking for Far Trader Deckplans<BR>
Re: Marooned (MegaT)<BR>
Re: the north american union<BR>
Re: the north american union<BR>
Re: United States<BR>
Re: back on topic?  <BR>
Re: SF Traveller<BR>
Re: Looking for Far Trader Deckplans<BR>
Re: Mars Exploration<BR>
Re: San Francisco Trav game<BR>
RE:  UNITED STATES<BR>
Calling all Portland TML'ers<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:36:08 -0500<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ethnicity<BR>
<BR>
Rupert Boleyn writes:<BR>
>On 19 Dec 99, at 12:44, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>You aren't thinking on the right timescale. Recessive *do* get lost<BR>
>>from populations, unless they provide an advantage of some sort. But<BR>
>>it's a *slow* process.<BR>
>On that sort of timescale non-advantageous dominants would go, too. In <BR>
>fact they should go faster, because they don't "hide" from the <BR>
>selection process.<BR>
<BR>
	Unless selection is acting on the gene, recessives are no more<BR>
	likely to be lost than dominants.  Either sort of gene might<BR>
	be lost by "genetic drift," but as Leonard pointed out it is<BR>
	a slow process.  It is also possible for a gene to "drift" to<BR>
	"fixation," that is, to become more and more common until it<BR>
	has completely taken over the population.  As Rupert mentioned,<BR>
	once selection enters the picture, recessive genes tend to<BR>
	respond more slowly, taking more time to either disappear or<BR>
	take over (depending on which way selection is acting).<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:39:11 -7<BR>
From: "Stuart L. Dollar" <stoo.dollar@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Marooned (MegaT)<BR>
<BR>
On 18 Dec 99, at 17:06, Jim & Peta Lawrie wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>     I have always loved the scenario "Marooned (Alone)", it was travelling<BR>
> at its best. Stuck on a planet with a nebulous time limit (and an S-series)<BR>
> hanging over your head. I was looking at it again last night and I noticed<BR>
> the survival weapon, eg Rifle -2.<BR>
<BR>
This scenario brings back memories.<BR>
<BR>
One of the scenarios we designed and ran during T4's day for <BR>
GenCon '97 was an updated version of Marooned.  I came up with a <BR>
bit of a new spin on the scenario that made it a lot more fun.  <BR>
<BR>
During the opening minutes of the scenario, after the ship has been <BR>
fatally damaged, but before the characters make good their <BR>
escape, we had several random rolls on a set of "Scrounged <BR>
Equipment Tables".  These would be things that maybe people <BR>
hurriedly grabbed out of their cabins, looted from other cabins or <BR>
elsewhere on the ship, etc.  As a natural extension of this, we put <BR>
a whole lot less survival gear on the lifeboat itself...<BR>
<BR>
Because of the random nature of this, players would often wind up <BR>
with unusual equipment (a shotgun, but no ammo...lots of water, <BR>
no food, etc.).  Incidentally, we recorded the roll results secretly <BR>
with the individual players, so none of the PCs knew what the <BR>
others had...and since this was a convention setting, not too many <BR>
of the players knew each other either...it was a great way to break <BR>
the ice as the PCs spent the first few minutes trying to figure out <BR>
what they had as a group...<BR>
<BR>
Stu<BR>
Stuart L. Dollar    stoo.dollar@worldnet.att.net<BR>
Frustrated Novelist, Published Game Designer<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------<BR>
"Now everybody line up alphabetically, according to your<BR>
height." -Casey Stengel<BR>
Visit Stoo's Wee Spot of a Web Page:<BR>
http://home.att.net/~stoo.dollar/index.html<BR>
or Down Prometheus Spaceport<BR>
http://home.att.net/~stoo.dollar/trav/trav.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:58:42 -0800<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
>Lack of political will had nothing to do with it, nor was it an american<BR>
>chance to grab british territory.  The brits started with the invasion and<BR>
>then realized that Napoleon was going to be a tougher enemy than anticipated.<BR>
> They could not fight two major wars and so they chose to take on the closer<BR>
>enemy.  The yanks saw the brit drawel and said fine, we'll follow up to<BR>
>prevent future invasions.<BR>
<BR>
Are you implying Britain invaded the US first during the war of 1812?<BR>
Do they even *teach* Americans history these days?<BR>
<BR>
A quick outline would be<BR>
(0) Britain is conscripting british (and occasional American) soliders out<BR>
of British ships. America doesn't like this. Also, Britain is blocking<BR>
American trade with France (more legitimately). And there are all these<BR>
nice Canadian colonies sitting there apparently undefended...<BR>
Negotiations on the shipping stuff actual reached a compromise, but<BR>
too late, so<BR>
(1) Therefore, the US starts the war, invading Canada, expecting an<BR>
easy victory<BR>
(2) To the US' surprise, they get their tails kicked<BR>
(3) The US wins some surpring victories in one-on-one engagements<BR>
at sea, although<BR>
(4) Britain decisively blockades US ports<BR>
(5) Once the penninsular war is over, Britain takes a bunch of veteran<BR>
troops and invades and burns Washington, but doesn't attempt to hold<BR>
it (which they probably couldn't have done)<BR>
(6) Instead, Britain invades in the south, heading for New Orleans<BR>
(7) Peace is negotiated<BR>
(8) Since the commanders haven't heard about the peace, British and<BR>
US soliders fight at New Orleans; the US wins the battle.<BR>
<BR>
"Draw" is a good description. America got its maratime rights respected<BR>
and a lot of prestige from some otherwise-unimportant naval actions;<BR>
Britain got to burn washington and didn't lose Canada, but did lose the last<BR>
major land battle of the war.<BR>
<BR>
It is actually somewhat Traveller relevant in that it was a war dominated by<BR>
communication delays - if news of negotiations had reached Washington<BR>
in time war might not have been declared, and of course the last<BR>
battle was fought after the war was technically over.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:43:05 -0500 (EST)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
<<If that were true, then we here in the US would be part of Canada now. <BR>
This is one of real life's examples of how real war is not like "Axis &<BR>
Allies".  Sacking the capitol does not mean you won the war.  Both sides>><BR>
<BR>
Well, I suppose it gets down to what you consider "victory".  Germany<BR>
didn't become part of any other nation after WW2.  You could define<BR>
victory as who caused the most damage to the enemy, in which case Canada<BR>
comes out on top in this one. If you define it as "who took over who",<BR>
then it's a draw. <BR>
<BR>
<<were not disinterested as you suggest, it was more like both were<BR>
unprepared.  America was a fledgling nation, not ready physically or<BR>
financially to fight another war and it had incompetant people sprinkled<BR>
through the government.  The british wanted a real war but had over strung<BR>
themselves. >><BR>
<BR>
Well, different accounts are bound to have different biases, but in the<BR>
ones that I've seen the US side asked for and was refused additional<BR>
troops.  This may have been for financial reasons as you suggest, but<BR>
financial considerations are always balanced with political ones. If a<BR>
take-over of Canada had been sufficiently "popular" or politically<BR>
advantageous, more resources would have been put into the effort.  <BR>
<BR>
<<This is off topic so I'll have to add, the brits used Vargr units during<BR>
their sacking of Washington.  The yanks responded by forming a treaty with<BR>
the Yrggyyyagsytelo Aslan clan.  ;-)>><BR>
<BR>
Hmm, sounds like the Aslan have been teaming up with some Great Old Ones<BR>
or something ... :-)  Whoa...now _there's_ a campaign idea!  *WEG*<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:51:57 -0600<BR>
From: ehenry@newberlin.org (Eric Henry)<BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
Victory is determined by the objectives of the combatants.  As Bruce has<BR>
already pointed out, America resolved resolved its issues to its<BR>
satisfaction and won the largest land battle.<BR>
<BR>
Britain succeeded in demonstrating its global reach, if not its staying<BR>
power, and in not losing Canada.  Instead of calling it a draw one might<BR>
accurately state that both sides were victorious in that they got what they<BR>
wanted.<BR>
<BR>
Back to Traveller, one should remember that not all scenarios have mutually<BR>
exclusive winners and losers.<BR>
Perhaps better stated as not all scenarios are zero sum.<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Date: Monday, December 20, 1999 11:57 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><<If that were true, then we here in the US would be part of Canada now.<BR>
>This is one of real life's examples of how real war is not like "Axis &<BR>
>Allies".  Sacking the capitol does not mean you won the war.  Both sides>><BR>
><BR>
>Well, I suppose it gets down to what you consider "victory".  Germany<BR>
>didn't become part of any other nation after WW2.  You could define<BR>
>victory as who caused the most damage to the enemy, in which case Canada<BR>
>comes out on top in this one. If you define it as "who took over who",<BR>
>then it's a draw.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:04:53 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ethnic confusion<BR>
<BR>
Apropos this discussion, SciAm this month (I think it's the 1/00 issue)<BR>
has an interesting article on hominid evolution...<BR>
<BR>
They also have an article on Wormholes and negative energy, including<BR>
one illo showing a spaceship surrounded by a 'bubble' of negative energy<BR>
holding back the sides of the wormhole...<BR>
<BR>
They didn't state that going through such a wormhole would take a week,<BR>
but... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:16:33 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: OTP: December 22's lunar eclipse<BR>
<BR>
James W. Lindsay wrote:<BR>
> In layman's terms, it will be a super bright full moon, much more than<BR>
> the usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years. If the weather<BR>
> is clear and there isn't a snow cover where you live, it is believed<BR>
> that even car headlights will be superfluous.<BR>
<BR>
well, to put a _bit_ of a damper on it...while the moon _will_ be<BR>
brighter (approx 25%), it would have to practically double in brightness<BR>
ot be really noticeable to most people (especially in bright urban<BR>
environments), and the astronomer who wrote the article in the paper<BR>
today was really asking pretty please not to believe that bit about<BR>
driving without headlights..<BR>
<BR>
(OTOH, in the boonies, with cool dry air, even a normal full moon is<BR>
enough to drive on, particularly if you let your eyes adapt for a<BR>
while.)<BR>
<BR>
(Don't try this at home, kids!!!)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:17:41 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Question on BITS giveaway<BR>
<BR>
Jens Rydholm wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> I will probably run it during the holidays. It certainly seems funny<BR>
> enough to provide a change of pace from just about anything else (except<BR>
> perhaps Toon and Paranoia).<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Well, considering it really reminds me of a Trav/Toon/Paranoia mutant<BR>
mind sucker of a scenario, I think you just about nailed it ;-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:13:40 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
From: Eric Henry <ehenry@newberlin.org><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>As Bruce has already pointed out, America resolved resolved its <BR>
>issues to its satisfaction and won the largest land battle.<BR>
<BR>
Don't forget that Yul Brenner played a large part in that victory.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:30:18 -0600<BR>
From: ehenry@newberlin.org (Eric Henry)<BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
I thought he lost when he received that jar of acid to his face.  Or maybe<BR>
it was when he had a fight with Rex Harrison over who made the better king.<BR>
I vote Yul as he was in color.<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Chris Seamans <semo@pil.net><BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Date: Monday, December 20, 1999 12:35 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: [OT] War of 1812<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>From: Eric Henry <ehenry@newberlin.org><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>>As Bruce has already pointed out, America resolved resolved its<BR>
>>issues to its satisfaction and won the largest land battle.<BR>
><BR>
>Don't forget that Yul Brenner played a large part in that victory.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:39:14 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Mars exploration<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Jason T. Barnabas" <cybernaut@netzero.net><BR>
<BR>
>Is there anything about asteroid mining in<BR>
>Traveller?  I seem to remember a flow-chart kind of <BR>
>thing in one of the TAS issues.  <BR>
<BR>
There is a boxed game called Beltstrike! which details<BR>
mining the Bowman Belt.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<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: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 18:48:29 -0000<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: OT US Gun Control C**P on TML<BR>
<BR>
SD Mooney wrote:<BR>
> PLEASE TAKE THIS IRRELEVANT CYCLIC ARGUMENT OFF THE TML!<BR>
<BR>
Oh, you're no fun!  Besides when was  there  a  TML  thread  that<BR>
wasn't an ICA?  :-^<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:07:50 -0000<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Travshorts IV<BR>
<BR>
Anyone interested in submitting a 3-7000 word tale to the anthology; the<BR>
door is still open.<BR>
<BR>
Those who expressed an interest who haven't submitted a draft yet... any<BR>
time you like, folks, but SOON please!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Also; everyone who got a copy of FTGG for review purposes; after monumental<BR>
hiccups, it's due for release April. Anything you may like to say on the<BR>
subject... please do.<BR>
<BR>
MJD<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:13:46 -0500 (EST)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Looking for Far Trader Deckplans<BR>
<BR>
Hi all.  Does anybody have deckplans for a Far Trader (ie. Jump-2+) on the<BR>
web that I could grab for an upcoming game?  Or does anybody have them in<BR>
an electronic format that they'd be willing to email me?  I'm not looking<BR>
for the old traditional far trader necessarily, just anything with decent<BR>
cargo space and jump-2 or 3.  Please reply asap, as the game's happening<BR>
soon. <BR>
<BR>
Many thanks,<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
PS. Consider this my answer to the survey question about running/playing<BR>
ongoing campaigns:  Long-term stuff is hard for me to run these days, and<BR>
I'm my group's SFRPG GM. But I do manage to sneak in occasional games<BR>
about every couple of months.  That's in addition to our ongoing<BR>
Talislanta campaign (great fantasy game, BTW) which is being run by our<BR>
FRPG GM, who has more time these days. <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:30:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Marooned (MegaT)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> But seriously, we are talking survival. IMHO if you crash land in a<BR>
> polar region , I would rather expect that cold would the the most<BR>
> pressing of your worries with shelter a close second.<BR>
<BR>
Shelter is generally easy. At least for a temporary shelter that'll cut<BR>
the wind and help you retain a lot of body heat. Build a snow cave.<BR>
Later, work on an igloo if you've got the right sort of snow handy.<BR>
<BR>
What would be *really* bad is landing in one of Antarctica's "dry<BR>
valleys". There's nothing but bare ground. And fairly hard packed since<BR>
over the centuries, wind has blown away anything loose. So it's basicly<BR>
bare rock and hardpan. Building a shelter is going to be tough. So is<BR>
finding water since it hasn't rained or snowed in these areas for<BR>
hundreds or *thousands* of years. Polar desert... *not* a fun terrain<BR>
type. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Carnivorous beasties rank third or fourth with food and water.<BR>
<BR>
Water is fairly simple, again outside of those %%^^$# valleys. You just<BR>
melt snow.But be careful *how* you melt it. <BR>
<BR>
Food is the real problem. There's damn little living up there in the<BR>
winter. And if you aren't near the ocean, make that *nothing*. <BR>
<BR>
> BTW, Polar bears are notorious for hunting anything that moves on the<BR>
> ice, including man, almost always from ambush.<BR>
<BR>
At least they aren't a problem in Antartica. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:45:13 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: the north american union<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Seeing as the US instigated the war, invaded Canada, got thrown out again,<BR>
> and a Brit force then ravaged up and down the east coast unchecked, sacking<BR>
> Washington twice, before finally being stopped at New Orleans after peace<BR>
> had been declared, I'd call it a loss for the US.<BR>
<BR>
I have to disagree that the US *started* the war. I lay the blame for<BR>
*that* squarely at the feet of the Briish Royal Navy and its treatment<BR>
of US vessels. Given the way they were acting, we didn't have a lot of<BR>
choice if we wished to remain independent and be considered anything<BR>
other than an odd sort of British colony.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:48:18 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: the north american union<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> After two wars, the score is tied at:<BR>
> US: 1<BR>
> UK: 1<BR>
<BR>
You forgot the "Pig War" in the San Juan Islands about 30 years later.<BR>
But that one wasn't very big and can be called a draw. <BR>
<BR>
It also has a lesson. When garrisoning a disputed group of islands, the<BR>
disputants should *not* put their garrisons at opposite ends of the<BR>
*same* island!<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:57:50 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: United States<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Does anybody have any idea what form the United States is in 1100<BR>
> imperial. What happened to the states? What would the ethnic population<BR>
> look like. <BR>
<BR>
There may be a region with that name, but it won't be *significant*.<BR>
1100 Imperial is something like AD 4700, right? That's 2700 years in<BR>
the future. For comparison, compare the nations that existed in 700 BC<BR>
with the ones that occupy the same territory now. That's what's going<BR>
to happen. <BR>
<BR>
> I would figure that the individual nations would continue as entities<BR>
> under the Terran Confederation. Much like the states did after 1789<BR>
> under the consitution.<BR>
<BR>
The states *used* to be more important than the federal government.<BR>
Practically nations in their own right (which is why they were called<BR>
"states"). That changed in only 100 years. <BR>
<BR>
After nearly 3000, things are going to be a lot different. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:30:53 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: back on topic?  <BR>
<BR>
>From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au><BR>
>Subject: Re: back on topic?  was: (Way OT and<BR>
>possible Flamebait)<BR>
<BR>
>Oh, a question: In the OTU, who has killed the most <BR>
>sentients:<BR>
>(a) the Ine Givar<BR>
>(b) Sternmetall Horizons<BR>
>(c) Ling Standard Products<BR>
>(d) Tukera Lines<BR>
>A hint:  It's not (a).<BR>
<BR>
***TAS PRESS RELEASE***<BR>
Capital/Core, 15-1113.  Lord Judge A. von Ambulator<BR>
today granted class certification in Roughkrugzhi v.<BR>
Ling Standard Products, allowing the case to move<BR>
forward on behalf of all persons injured by defects in<BR>
the design of the Ling Standard Products LSP-1000z<BR>
air/rafts.  <BR>
<BR>
Roughkrugzhi v. Ling Standard Products is an<BR>
Imperium-wide class action brought in the Imperial<BR>
Judicial Court at Capital.  Plaintiffs allege that<BR>
defects in the design on the LSP-1000z, the civilian<BR>
version of the military gravsled manufactured by Ling,<BR>
are unreasonably dangerous and have caused "an<BR>
uncounted number of deaths, dismemberments, and<BR>
disfigurements."  Plaintiffs seek an unspecified<BR>
amount of damages, recall of all LSP-1000z air/rafts<BR>
for repair, an injunction against further sale of the<BR>
LSP-1000z until the alleged defects are, and an award<BR>
of attorneys' fees.<BR>
<BR>
The alleged defects include a grav governor that can<BR>
easily be overriden by acceleration such that the<BR>
vehicle can go into a dive beyond the ability of the<BR>
gravitics to recover, which has led to a number of<BR>
crashes.  In addition, the open-topped air/raft<BR>
allegedly tends to roll over easily at high speeds,<BR>
which has caused many passengers to fall out.  <BR>
<BR>
The plaintiff, Pragra Roughkrugzhi, a vargr from<BR>
Jesedipere/Spinward Marches, is not related to Col. Ve<BR>
Roughkrugzhi, the celebrated former Kforuzeng corsair<BR>
who joined Imperial forces during the Fifth Frontier<BR>
War and used her personal knowledge of Kforuzeng<BR>
defenses to lead a series of daring commando raids on<BR>
vargr bases in advance of Admiral Elphinstone's<BR>
counterattack late in the war.  <BR>
<BR>
(Col. Roughkrugzhi was officially reported killed in<BR>
the crash of an LSP-1000z air/raft in 1112 while on<BR>
leave on Regina/Regina, but her body was not been<BR>
recovered.)<BR>
<BR>
************<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: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:32:12 -0800<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: SF Traveller<BR>
<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >> 2. Who's looking for a game?<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> Me...<BR>
<BR>
Well that make three of us...  I can probably add one or two more<BR>
<BR>
> but I need to play someplace that is public transport accessible, as I<BR>
> do not drive or even have a license.<BR>
<BR>
That we can work around.<BR>
A place to play is my hard point. Here I have a very active 4 year old son<BR>
that would let us think much less play.<BR>
<BR>
> >> 3. Availability<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Pretty good once the holidays are done.<BR>
> ><BR>
> Same here.<BR>
<BR>
 Ok the Holidays are right out....   I'm generally free fridays and saterdays,<BR>
evenings<BR>
are definatly better. But a saterday afternoon game could be a posiblity.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Evyn.<BR>
The theme of the whole thing is clear. We have to be careful with wisdom. We<BR>
have to make certain we're ready for it when it comes knocking on our door.<BR>
Knowledge isn't always a blessing;<BR>
    sometimes, it's damnation.<BR>
Play Dirty: Let's All Go to the Movies!, by John Wick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:35:35 GMT<BR>
From: "i Steve" <isteve1967@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Looking for Far Trader Deckplans<BR>
<BR>
>Hi all.  Does anybody have deckplans for a Far Trader (ie. Jump-2+) >on the <BR>
>web that I could grab for an upcoming game?  Or does anybody >have them in <BR>
>an electronic format that they'd be willing to email me?<BR>
Would a scan of the deckplans in Snapshot be any good?<BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
<BR>
iSteve<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:48:48 -0800 (PST)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Mars Exploration<BR>
<BR>
Thad Coons writes:<BR>
>     The first step is to convince enough people that it's stupid<BR>
> to throw away millions of dollars worth of hardware every time<BR>
> you want to put someone or something into orbit.<BR>
<BR>
The first step to humanity being permanently in space is convincing enough people that its worth spending the money to be permanently in space.  There's no shortage of people who think a fully-reusable lifter wouldn't be very useful, the problem is that the number of working prototypes is currently zero, and based on the history of the industry, the odds of any one of various reusable booster schemes currently being proposed actually working as advertised is quite low.  Spending several years and hundreds of millions of dollars on something which has maybe a 20% chance of working is not the sort of thing that excites corporate sponsors....<BR>
<BR>
>     Nobody except comsat companies can make a profit because<BR>
> existing expendable launch vehicles are too expensive. The<BR>
> companies that build the expendables are large, slow-moving,<BR>
> conservative corporate giants that depend on the military and<BR>
> government space agencies for roughly half their business.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, expendables are cheaper than existing reusables.<BR>
> Nobody will invest in the dozen or so small companies that are<BR>
> developing reusable launch vehicles because the companies can't<BR>
> guarantee a profit by next quarter.<BR>
Actually, the problem is that they can't guarantee a profit _ever_, and certainly aren't going to generate a profit in the next five years.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:47:48 -0800<BR>
From: Keith Johnson <keithalanjohnson@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: San Francisco Trav game<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 23:28:04 -0800<BR>
>From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
><BR>
>Ok then a quick nose count then...<BR>
><BR>
>1. How many of us are there now in the Bay Area?<BR>
<BR>
I'm one of them.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>2. Who's looking for a game?<BR>
<BR>
Funny you should mention this... Ross and I are going to an Irish pub in <BR>
San Francisco (Pat O'Sheas on the corner of Geary and 3rd Avenue) to talk <BR>
about this very thing tonight.  If anyone swings by between 8 and 10pm, <BR>
I'll drink some Guinness with you.  I'll be wearing my GURPS Traveller shirt.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>3. Availability<BR>
<BR>
At most, one session a month.  It also really depends on where in the Bay <BR>
Area the game is happening.  I live near San Rafael.<BR>
<BR>
_________________________________________________________<BR>
Rev. Keith Johnson      /\     keith@sjgames.com<BR>
Assistant Webmaster    /()\    keithalanjohnson@home.com<BR>
Steve Jackson Games   /____\   reverendkeith@hotmail.com<BR>
  IMTU tm+ t4+@ tg++$ ru- ge-@ st+ pi+ he+ dr+ hi-@ zh+<BR>
_________________________________________________________ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:57:05 GMT<BR>
From: "Boris Cibic" <kafka47@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: RE:  UNITED STATES<BR>
<BR>
Sorry guys according to cannon, the United States became non-existant after <BR>
the the 3rd or so interstellar war.  As the UN gained in importance, the US <BR>
couldn't hold it's weight against the onslaught of the Vilani.<BR>
   Alien Module Solomani, does provide for "Provinces" which they mean <BR>
former nation-states.  But, DGP TD13 clearly states the US no longer exists. <BR>
  I always assumed that Canada absorbed it into a larger North American <BR>
Union akin the European Union.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:51:04 -0800<BR>
From: Keith Johnson <keithalanjohnson@home.com><BR>
Subject: Calling all Portland TML'ers<BR>
<BR>
At 05:44 PM 12/19/99 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
>From: Sethkimmel@aol.com<BR>
>Subject: Re: SF Trav game<BR>
><BR>
>Better question: How many of you want to vacation in Vegas and play<BR>
>Traveller?....-)<BR>
<BR>
Actually, I'm vacationing in Portland/Beaverton this week.  Any TMLer's <BR>
want to get together?<BR>
_____________________________________________________________<BR>
Rev. Keith Johnson      /\     keith@sjgames.com<BR>
Assistant Webmaster    /()\    keithalanjohnson@home.com<BR>
Steve Jackson Games   /____\   reverendkeith@hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
        Everything you do is Zen  -- Bodhidharma<BR>
_____________________________________________________________ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1536<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-yd05.mx.aol.com (rly-yd05.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.5]) by air-yd01.mail.aol.com (v67.6) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:04:09 -0500<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (v67.6) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:03:50 -0500<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id PAA68693;<BR>
	Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:02:35 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:59:50 -0500<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id OAA68596<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:59:50 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:59:50 -0500 (EST)<BR>
Message-Id: <199912201959.OAA68596@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 #1536<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
