Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #75764 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-10-07 16:07 +0300 |
| Last post | 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 378 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2025-10-07 16:07 +0300
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-07 14:39 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-07 22:52 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-08 01:35 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-08 10:53 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-08 21:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:25 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:45 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 21:41 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-10 09:21 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 13:21 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-10 21:15 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 21:53 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 02:46 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 02:38 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 02:09 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-09 18:52 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 21:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-11 15:10 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-11 17:48 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-11 19:01 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:08 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:32 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 22:29 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-12 11:07 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 09:06 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-18 16:24 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-18 21:02 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-19 01:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-19 13:39 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-20 02:10 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-20 05:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-20 02:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-20 02:31 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-20 19:21 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-19 12:17 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-19 02:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 04:28 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-19 11:19 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 09:20 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-25 12:49 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-25 16:45 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-25 22:16 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 01:51 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 08:42 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 09:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 10:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:25 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 19:48 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 21:29 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-27 00:44 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 00:57 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 07:14 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 11:05 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 02:00 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 11:02 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-25 22:03 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-25 21:19 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 01:50 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 14:52 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 20:29 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 21:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 22:17 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-27 10:09 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-27 21:23 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 00:47 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-28 00:27 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-28 07:45 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-28 23:05 +0000
Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 13:46 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-28 18:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-28 20:21 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 23:46 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-29 01:41 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-29 11:07 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-29 18:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-29 22:15 +0000
Re: Accents. Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> - 2025-10-30 17:29 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-30 17:31 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:14 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:11 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:10 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 21:35 +0100
Re: Accents. candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-30 21:40 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 15:18 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:17 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 21:46 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:25 +0000
LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:38 +0100
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-01 20:50 -0400
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:14 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:41 +0100
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:57 +0000
Re: LED lights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-03 00:12 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 02:38 +0100
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 00:19 -0500
Re: LED lights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-03 07:03 +0000
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 14:20 -0500
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 20:02 +0000
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 04:42 +0000
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:31 -0500
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:16 +0000
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 01:51 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:48 +0100
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:42 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:33 +0100
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:21 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 04:59 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-31 14:41 +0100
Re: Accents. John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 08:56 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:53 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-31 19:02 -0700
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 02:52 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:32 +0000
Re: Accents. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-19 19:19 +0000
TV tropes (was: Re: Accents.) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-20 11:01 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 13:10 +0100
Re: TV tropes Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-20 17:57 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 21:28 +0100
Re: TV tropes Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 02:10 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:14 +0100
Re: TV tropes Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 02:09 +0000
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-21 07:41 +0000
Re: TV tropes Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-11-21 09:00 +0000
Re: TV tropes The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 09:13 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:17 +0100
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-21 19:28 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 20:43 +0100
Re: TV tropes The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 23:00 +0000
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-22 04:06 +0000
Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:24 +0100
Re: Not Blade Runner Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 19:57 +0000
Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:22 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 01:22 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:50 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:20 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:34 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 02:47 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 13:05 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Blade runner c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 15:40 -0500
Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 22:30 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 17:48 -0500
Re: Flashlights Ian <gay@sfuu.ca> - 2025-11-03 20:26 -0800
Re: Flashlights Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-11-04 04:55 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:35 -0500
Re: Flashlights Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-11-05 03:44 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 01:05 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 13:20 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:08 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 16:33 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 20:37 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:26 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 11:56 +0100
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 18:42 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:30 -0500
Re: Flashlights candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-11-07 16:20 +0000
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-07 18:11 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-07 18:50 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-07 22:42 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-07 21:08 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-08 13:31 +0100
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-08 16:05 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-08 20:06 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-09 00:04 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-09 20:08 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-10 00:41 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-10 12:07 +0000
Re: Flashlights John-Paul Stewart <jpstewart@personalprojects.net> - 2025-11-09 19:05 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-10 00:58 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:12 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 05:09 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 01:31 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 18:39 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 07:51 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:19 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 09:55 +0000
Re: Flashlights Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 18:16 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 20:39 +0100
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 22:54 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-21 23:52 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-21 23:32 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 06:49 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-22 03:14 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 11:32 +0000
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-22 22:00 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 02:35 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-23 09:40 +0000
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-23 20:15 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 22:10 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 01:42 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-23 22:09 +0100
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-24 02:17 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 22:19 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-23 21:58 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-24 20:28 +0100
Re: Flashlights Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-24 15:04 -0800
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-24 22:48 -0500
Chemical photography "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-25 07:59 +0100
Re: Chemical photography c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-25 03:43 -0500
Re: Chemical photography "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-25 09:59 +0100
Re: Chemical photography Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-25 10:14 -0800
Re: Chemical photography "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-25 19:38 +0100
Re: Chemical photography Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-25 10:54 -0800
Re: Chemical photography rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-25 18:58 +0000
Re: Chemical photography Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-25 19:12 +0000
Re: Chemical photography "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-25 20:32 +0100
Re: Chemical photography The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-26 13:39 +0000
Re: Chemical photography rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-25 22:26 +0000
Re: Chemical photography "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-26 07:34 +0100
Re: Chemical photography c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-26 02:40 -0500
City fauna "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-26 11:18 +0100
Re: City fauna rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-26 20:40 +0000
Re: Chemical photography rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-26 20:15 +0000
Re: Chemical photography c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-26 22:39 -0500
Re: Chemical photography "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-25 20:31 +0100
Re: Chemical photography c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-25 22:00 -0500
Re: Chemical photography rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-26 05:08 +0000
Re: Chemical photography The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-26 13:40 +0000
Re: Chemical photography The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-26 13:37 +0000
Re: Chemical photography rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-26 21:02 +0000
Re: Chemical photography Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-26 13:29 -0800
Re: Chemical photography rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-27 01:57 +0000
Re: Chemical photography c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-26 22:40 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:28 +0100
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:15 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 13:27 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 19:37 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 21:12 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 13:22 -0500
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 20:52 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 21:23 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 13:23 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:10 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 12:05 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:21 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 07:21 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 03:54 -0500
Re: Flashlights Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 18:20 +0000
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 09:52 +0000
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 07:21 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 03:17 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-05 11:54 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 16:41 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:16 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 22:22 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:41 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 12:10 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:24 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-07 02:44 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 21:53 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:12 +0100
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 23:14 +0100
Re: Accents. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-19 19:01 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:19 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:33 +0000
Blade runner. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:29 +0100
Re: Blade runner. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 19:56 +0000
Re: Blade runner. c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-01 21:38 -0400
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:31 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:48 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:22 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 21:33 +0100
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:20 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 23:36 +0100
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 04:51 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-31 14:48 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 15:03 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 20:15 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:39 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:26 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:44 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:05 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:54 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:02 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:10 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:49 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:13 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 18:48 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:12 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 04:28 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 13:11 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 12:26 +0000
Re: Accents. John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 09:17 -0800
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:42 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 20:01 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:33 +0000
Re: Accents. Don_from_AZ <djatechNOSPAM@comcast.net.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:43 -0700
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-02 19:30 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 02:21 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-10-30 22:48 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:58 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:25 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:09 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:29 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 21:50 -0700
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:28 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:29 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:27 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:41 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:36 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:11 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-28 18:54 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-28 09:34 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-26 13:53 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-10-26 15:40 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-11-02 14:03 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 22:20 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-27 08:29 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-11-02 14:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 02:37 +0100
OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-02 18:49 -0800
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 06:54 +0000
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-03 08:19 -0800
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:18 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-27 09:34 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-27 21:26 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 03:36 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:31 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 01:33 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-11 22:52 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 22:48 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-12 02:43 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:12 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 22:02 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 06:39 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-12 02:59 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 19:20 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-13 16:50 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-13 18:38 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:38 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:45 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:17 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-13 03:28 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-13 03:41 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-13 10:20 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-13 11:55 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-13 21:56 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-14 00:35 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:21 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-14 06:56 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-14 17:20 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 20:01 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-15 05:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 21:18 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 02:24 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 06:31 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 09:00 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 21:24 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 15:11 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 02:27 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-16 07:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-17 22:24 -0400
Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-18 20:08 +0200
Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 04:15 -0400
Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-19 13:46 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-16 04:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 10:29 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 01:49 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 15:43 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-14 21:30 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-14 22:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100
Page 7 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 19 Next page →
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-20 13:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <52d3vlxj1k.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77752 |
On 2025-11-20 12:01, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2025-11-19, Rich wrote: >> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 02:52:00 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 19:02:36 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: ... >> This is usually the fault of the "executives" rather than the >> showrunner. The cliffhanger was written with the expectation there >> would be a "season X+1" and the cliff was meant to draw you back to the >> next season when it airs in the fall (or next year or whenever). >> >> But after season X has aired, and before production of season X+1 is to >> begin the "executives" start looking at the neilson ratings, and decide >> the show is not "profitable" to the level they expect, and they cancel >> "season X+1" without regards to the fact that season X ended on a cliff >> that now remains forever unresolved. > > Even if you have a next season lined up, I'd say that's no excuse to > give the cliffhanger treatment to your audience in a season finale. > > Although I guess some cliffhangers might feel much more adequate than > others in that spot. > > (Now if you have some other reason, like a cast member being in doubt > for the next season, well, it might not be adequate but still be better > than they disappearing all of a sudden in the next episode with no prior > explanation.) > I hate cliffhangers. I remember watching Star Trek NG in 1992 in Ottawa. It finished the season with a cliffhanger, not knowing if Data would be still alive. I think it involved a time travel to Earth past. I remember seen his separated head in the dust. I returned to Spain, and it was 5 years or more till I could see the next episode. I had to install a pay satellite dish and subscribe. ChatGpt says it was season 5 finale, titled “Time’s Arrow, Part I.” -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-20 17:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <fEITQ.71608$fIia.39665@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #77755 |
On 2025-11-20, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> I hate cliffhangers.
>
> I remember watching Star Trek NG in 1992 in Ottawa. It finished the
> season with a cliffhanger, not knowing if Data would be still alive. I
> think it involved a time travel to Earth past. I remember seen his
> separated head in the dust. I returned to Spain, and it was 5 years or
> more till I could see the next episode. I had to install a pay satellite
> dish and subscribe.
So they got money out of you. The trick worked. To a marketroid,
cliffhangers are Good.
> ChatGpt says it was season 5 finale, titled “Time’s Arrow, Part I.”
Don't forget what was IMHO an even bigger cliffhanger, the Borg's
assimilation of Picard in the season 3 finale, "The Best of Both Worlds".
I am Pentium of Borg.
Division is futile.
You will be approximated.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-20 21:28 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <c8a4vlx6ih.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77756 |
On 2025-11-20 18:57, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-11-20, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > >> I hate cliffhangers. >> >> I remember watching Star Trek NG in 1992 in Ottawa. It finished the >> season with a cliffhanger, not knowing if Data would be still alive. I >> think it involved a time travel to Earth past. I remember seen his >> separated head in the dust. I returned to Spain, and it was 5 years or >> more till I could see the next episode. I had to install a pay satellite >> dish and subscribe. > > So they got money out of you. The trick worked. To a marketroid, > cliffhangers are Good. > >> ChatGpt says it was season 5 finale, titled “Time’s Arrow, Part I.” > > Don't forget what was IMHO an even bigger cliffhanger, the Borg's > assimilation of Picard in the season 3 finale, "The Best of Both Worlds". For me, the impact was smaller, compared with waiting 5 years! I was in Ottawa on time to watch seasons 4 and 5; I don't remember if they also replayed other seasons at the time. So when I watched the season 3 I didn't have to wait long to watch season 4 on the satellite channel, I think an ancestor of SciFi channel. > > I am Pentium of Borg. > Division is futile. > You will be approximated. :-D -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 02:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <10fohnd$3cdeb$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77756 |
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > On 2025-11-20, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > >> I hate cliffhangers. >> >> I remember watching Star Trek NG in 1992 in Ottawa. It finished the >> season with a cliffhanger, not knowing if Data would be still alive. I >> think it involved a time travel to Earth past. I remember seen his >> separated head in the dust. I returned to Spain, and it was 5 years or >> more till I could see the next episode. I had to install a pay satellite >> dish and subscribe. > > So they got money out of you. The trick worked. To a marketroid, > cliffhangers are Good. Which means they will now "do it again" because it resulted in "money".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 13:14 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <8l16vlxe5n.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77768 |
On 2025-11-21 03:10, Rich wrote: > Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >> On 2025-11-20, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >> >>> I hate cliffhangers. >>> >>> I remember watching Star Trek NG in 1992 in Ottawa. It finished the >>> season with a cliffhanger, not knowing if Data would be still alive. I >>> think it involved a time travel to Earth past. I remember seen his >>> separated head in the dust. I returned to Spain, and it was 5 years or >>> more till I could see the next episode. I had to install a pay satellite >>> dish and subscribe. >> >> So they got money out of you. The trick worked. To a marketroid, >> cliffhangers are Good. > > Which means they will now "do it again" because it resulted in "money". Debatable. People subscribed to the satellite dish, or cable, which meant have a bunch of channels available. No matter really how they handled serials. In fact, sci fi at least was handled badly. StarTrek was aired at impossible hours, so I had the video recorded programmed to record the channel automatically at a certain hour. One week they suddenly changed the schedule and I did not know. Another week they stopped the serial in mid season and restarted. And another, they changed to another channel, then removed the previous channel. Eventually I got mad and started to download them instead via some mule thing. So they lost money. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 02:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <10fohk6$3cdeb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77752 |
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 2025-11-19, Rich wrote: > >> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 02:52:00 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 19:02:36 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: >>>> >>>>> The real cops would be looking for fingerprints and not touch light >>>>> switches in case there are some on the switch plate. Also for the sake >>>>> of drama they may worry about some booby trap wired to the lights. >>>> >>>> The thing with fiction is, only put in enough detail as you need for the >>>> plot, and avoid superfluous stuff that detracts from that. >>>> >>>> E.g. Chekhov’s gun: if it’s mentioned, then it’s going to be used later, >>>> otherwise why bring it up? >>>> <https://web.archive.org/web/20251011120122/https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/ >>> pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovsGun> >>> >>> Sometimes. I'm having a senior moment for the title but it was a cop show. >>> The season 1 finale was a cliffhanger where the bad guy tells the female >>> detective to run, as he sights in on her back and gets ready to pull the >>> trigger. He may or may not have shot his wife's dog the same way in an >>> earlier episode. >>> >>> Canceled. Either the showrunner didn't see it coming or he decided fuck >>> them and not do a graceful ending. >> >> This is usually the fault of the "executives" rather than the >> showrunner. The cliffhanger was written with the expectation there >> would be a "season X+1" and the cliff was meant to draw you back to the >> next season when it airs in the fall (or next year or whenever). >> >> But after season X has aired, and before production of season X+1 is to >> begin the "executives" start looking at the neilson ratings, and decide >> the show is not "profitable" to the level they expect, and they cancel >> "season X+1" without regards to the fact that season X ended on a cliff >> that now remains forever unresolved. > > Even if you have a next season lined up, I'd say that's no excuse to > give the cliffhanger treatment to your audience in a season finale. > > Although I guess some cliffhangers might feel much more adequate than > others in that spot. > > (Now if you have some other reason, like a cast member being in doubt > for the next season, well, it might not be adequate but still be better > than they disappearing all of a sudden in the next episode with no prior > explanation.) Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it again. And, the trope works to some extent, which is why nearly all shows pull it at the end of each season now.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 07:41 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <moajd8F8umcU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #77767 |
On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: > Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to > operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" > just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget > about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it > again. For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped it up awkwardly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 09:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <10fp9nh$3hn4u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77771 |
On 11/21/25 07:41, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: > >> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget >> about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it >> again. > > For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the > whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. > 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped it up > awkwardly. I think some writers know how the show is going to end, right from the beginning. They just flesh out the middle. Ronald E Moore seemed to be inventing it as he went a long. So there were inconsistencies, the actual story arc development was poor. The thing that saved it was that his characterisation was good. I used to go out drinking after work with Apollo's brother, but that was before the series. He was a Unix DevOp.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 09:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <10fpag6$3htd8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77771 |
On 21/11/2025 07:41, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: > >> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget >> about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it >> again. > > For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the > whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. > 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped it up > awkwardly. Fuck, you didn't actually WATCH that? -- Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age. Richard Lindzen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 13:17 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <ir16vlxa6n.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77773 |
On 2025-11-21 10:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 21/11/2025 07:41, rbowman wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: >> >>> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >>> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >>> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget >>> about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it >>> again. >> >> For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the >> whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. >> 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped >> it up >> awkwardly. > > Fuck, you didn't actually WATCH that? The re-imagined version, certainly. It was good. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 19:28 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <mobsq4Ffsa0U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #77773 |
On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 09:13:42 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 21/11/2025 07:41, rbowman wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: >> >>> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >>> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >>> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget >>> about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it >>> again. >> >> For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the >> whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. >> 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped it >> up awkwardly. > > Fuck, you didn't actually WATCH that? The 2004 version, not the original.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 20:43 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <lvr6vlxn46.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #77782 |
On 2025-11-21 20:28, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 09:13:42 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> On 21/11/2025 07:41, rbowman wrote: >>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: >>> >>>> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >>>> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >>>> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget >>>> about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it >>>> again. >>> >>> For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the >>> whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. >>> 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped it >>> up awkwardly. >> >> Fuck, you didn't actually WATCH that? > > The 2004 version, not the original. I was in high school during the original. Everybody watched it :-) -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-21 23:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <10fqqv0$21du$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77784 |
On 21/11/2025 19:43, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-21 20:28, rbowman wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 09:13:42 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> On 21/11/2025 07:41, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: >>>> >>>>> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >>>>> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >>>>> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll forget >>>>> about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to watch it >>>>> again. >>>> >>>> For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the >>>> whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. >>>> 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped it >>>> up awkwardly. >>> >>> Fuck, you didn't actually WATCH that? >> >> The 2004 version, not the original. > > I was in high school during the original. Everybody watched it :-) > I saw the original film in 1979 in Leicester Square *With SenSurround*. The massive explosions in the vacuum of space were only exceeded in inanity by the dialogue. Naturally we were well chemically enhanced for the experience and just laughed through it. The TV series didn't even have SenSurround. :=) -- "Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) " Alan Sokal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-22 04:06 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: TV tropes |
| Message-ID | <mocr66Fk654U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #77784 |
On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 20:43:17 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-21 20:28, rbowman wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 09:13:42 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> On 21/11/2025 07:41, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:09:11 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: >>>> >>>>> Cliffhangers are due to the delusion that all of Hollywood seems to >>>>> operate under that unless you are left wondering "what happens next" >>>>> just at the start of the summer break that the result is you'll >>>>> forget about the show when it returns next fall and not 'tune in' to >>>>> watch it again. >>>> >>>> For the shows with a story arc I prefer to wait a few years until the >>>> whole thing is in the box so to speak. That doesn't always work. >>>> 'Battlestar Galactica' seemed like they ran out of ideas and wrapped >>>> it up awkwardly. >>> >>> Fuck, you didn't actually WATCH that? >> >> The 2004 version, not the original. > > I was in high school during the original. Everybody watched it :-) I didn't even have a TV in '78. I did see 'Star Wars' in a theater and now am completely confused by the franchise since as far as I'm concerned that was Star Wars 1. I haven't seen many of the newer ones.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-01 14:24 +0100 |
| Subject | Blade runner |
| Message-ID | <t8ehtlxomn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #76889 |
On 2025-11-01 03:52, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 19:02:36 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > >> The real cops would be looking for fingerprints and not touch light >> switches in case there are some on the switch plate. Also for the >> sake of drama they may worry about some booby trap wired to the >> lights. > > The thing with fiction is, only put in enough detail as you need for > the plot, and avoid superfluous stuff that detracts from that. Not if you are Stanley Kubrick :-) > > E.g. Chekhov’s gun: if it’s mentioned, then it’s going to be used > later, otherwise why bring it up? > <https://web.archive.org/web/20251011120122/https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovsGun> -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-01 19:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Not Blade Runner |
| Message-ID | <10e5onc$1h87f$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #76904 |
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 14:24:13 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-01 03:52, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> >> The thing with fiction is, only put in enough detail as you need for >> the plot, and avoid superfluous stuff that detracts from that. > > Not if you are Stanley Kubrick :-) Everything in his movies was there for a reason. His reputation for attention to detail was legendary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-01 14:22 +0100 |
| Subject | Blade runner |
| Message-ID | <d5ehtlxomn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #76875 |
On 2025-10-31 20:53, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 14:41:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> I know all that, but I do complain. I can accept the city being dark, >> but interiors being dark, no way. Heck, we invented the LED. my >> interiors are brighter than they ever were. > > I wonder about the cop/crime shows where the cops wander around in a dark > apartment using flashlights. Usually there are light switches next to the > door and they lost the element of surprise when the kicked the door down. That may be normal police procedure: do not touch anything, not even the lights. The light switches have to photographed and analyzed for fingerprints or adn. Using something else to wrap your finger and then touch the switch may actually fudge or erase the fingerprint. > > Again I think they have one set and it's easier to recycle it if you don't > get a good look at it. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-02 01:22 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Blade runner |
| Message-ID | <mmnq32Fki7dU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #76905 |
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 14:22:21 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > That may be normal police procedure: do not touch anything, not even the > lights. The light switches have to photographed and analyzed for > fingerprints or adn. Using something else to wrap your finger and then > touch the switch may actually fudge or erase the fingerprint. True, but they're stomping through the place yelling 'Clear!' until they fall over a dead body or a crim tries to make them a dead body. As an aside, the old school police didn't really like the new, small, very bright LED flashlights. Maybe you couldn't see as well but if you slap someone with a 6 D cell Maglite they stay slapped.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-02 15:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Blade runner |
| Message-ID | <tl7ktlxkc3.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #76933 |
On 2025-11-02 02:22, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 14:22:21 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > > >> That may be normal police procedure: do not touch anything, not even the >> lights. The light switches have to photographed and analyzed for >> fingerprints or adn. Using something else to wrap your finger and then >> touch the switch may actually fudge or erase the fingerprint. > > True, but they're stomping through the place yelling 'Clear!' until they > fall over a dead body or a crim tries to make them a dead body. > > As an aside, the old school police didn't really like the new, small, very > bright LED flashlights. Maybe you couldn't see as well but if you slap > someone with a 6 D cell Maglite they stay slapped. True. I have one of those somewhere, strong aluminum. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-02 19:20 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Blade runner |
| Message-ID | <mmpp70FnpU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #76958 |
On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 15:50:05 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-11-02 02:22, rbowman wrote: >> On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 14:22:21 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >> >>> That may be normal police procedure: do not touch anything, not even >>> the lights. The light switches have to photographed and analyzed for >>> fingerprints or adn. Using something else to wrap your finger and then >>> touch the switch may actually fudge or erase the fingerprint. >> >> True, but they're stomping through the place yelling 'Clear!' until >> they fall over a dead body or a crim tries to make them a dead body. >> >> As an aside, the old school police didn't really like the new, small, >> very bright LED flashlights. Maybe you couldn't see as well but if you >> slap someone with a 6 D cell Maglite they stay slapped. > > True. I have one of those somewhere, strong aluminum. I put a LED bulb in mine. It's an improvement over the Xenon bulb but not as good as the current cheap LED flashlights. I think it's about 250 lumens. There is a more expensive replacement that costs a lot more than a simple bulb change and a lot more than a $20 1000 lumen flashlight.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web