XPost: uk.media.tv.sf.drwho, rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv
XPost: can.arts.sf

Certainly! Here is a review of all four parts
of "Doctor Who: Warriors of the Deep" based on the transcript
from the website you provided. I'll evaluate each part in terms
of narrative, character development, pacing, and overall impact
to rate them out of 10.

Part One

Summary:

The Doctor, Tegan, and Turlough arrive on Sea Base 4,
an underwater military installation in the year 2084.
Earth is divided between two rival superpowers,
and Sea Base 4 is a critical part of the Western bloc's defenses.
The Doctor quickly realises that the base is under threat
from the Silurians and Sea Devils, ancient reptilian races who once ruled
the Earth. The episode ends with the Silurians beginning their attack
on the base.

Review:

Part One sets up an interesting premise,
revisiting the Silurians and Sea Devils, classic foes from
the Doctor's past. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds
a unique and claustrophobic atmosphere. The political tension
between the superpowers and the internal dynamics of the base's crew
are well-established. The pacing is steady, building up to the Silurians' attack. The cliffhanger is effective, creating anticipation
for the conflict to come.

Rating: 7.5/10

Part Two

Summary:

The Doctor and his companions work to warn the crew of Sea Base 4
about the impending Silurian and Sea Devil attack. However,
their warnings are met with skepticism and mistrust. The base commander, Vorshak, is particularly resistant to the Doctor's advice.
The Silurians and Sea Devils infiltrate the base, taking control
of key areas. The Doctor attempts to mediate, hoping to prevent
a full-scale conflict. The episode ends with the Sea Devils
launching an assault on the command center.

Review:

Part Two intensifies the conflict, showcasing the Doctor's attempts
to broker peace between humans and the Silurians. The mistrust
and political tension within the base add layers to the narrative.
The Silurians' and Sea Devils' infiltration is well-executed,
creating a sense of imminent danger. The pacing is maintained,
with a balance of action and character interactions. The cliffhanger
leaves the audience on edge, eager to see the outcome of the Sea Devils' assault.

Rating: 7/10

Part Three

Summary:

The conflict escalates as the Silurians and Sea Devils gain further control over the base. The Doctor continues to advocate for a peaceful resolution,
but his efforts are hindered by both the base crew's hostility
and the Silurians' aggressive tactics. The base's power systems are compromised, and the situation becomes increasingly dire. The Doctor
discovers that the Silurians plan to use the base's nuclear weapons
to destroy humanity. The episode ends with the Doctor and his companions trapped in a flooding section of the base.

Review:

Part Three ramps up the tension, with the stakes becoming increasingly high.
he Doctor's persistent attempts at diplomacy highlight his character,
though they are met with resistance from all sides. The base's deteriorating conditions and the looming threat of nuclear annihilation create a gripping narrative. The pacing is brisk, and the sense of urgency is palpable.
The cliffhanger with the flooding section adds a dramatic touch,
emphasising the peril faced by the Doctor and his companions.

Rating: 7.5/10

Part Four

Summary:

The Doctor and his companions escape the flooding section
and work to prevent the Silurians from launching the base's nuclear weapons. The Doctor confronts the Silurian leader, Ichtar, in a final attempt
to stop the conflict. Despite the Doctor's efforts, the situation spirals out of control, leading to a tragic and violent conclusion. The base is left
in ruins, and many lives are lost. The Doctor reflects on the senselessness
of the conflict as he and his companions leave.

Review:

Part Four delivers a tense and tragic conclusion to the story. The Doctor's final confrontation with Ichtar underscores the futility of war
and the cost of mistrust. The narrative does not shy away from the darker aspects of the conflict, resulting in a poignant and impactful ending.
The pacing is tight, and the resolution, while grim, is fitting for
the story's themes. The final scenes provide a somber reflection
on the consequences of the conflict.

Rating: 8/10

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits classic foes
and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the cost of conflict.
The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds a unique and atmospheric
backdrop to the narrative. Here are the individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10
Part Two: 7/10
Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

The serial stands out for its tense atmosphere, complex themes,
and the Doctor's persistent efforts to mediate peace. While the story
is darker and more tragic than some other "Doctor Who" episodes,
it effectively conveys the stakes and consequences of the conflict,
making "Warriors of the Deep" a memorable and thought-provoking
entry in the series.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds a
unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative. Here are the
individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10
Part Two: 7/10
Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no normal
person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

The serial stands out for its tense atmosphere, complex
themes, and the Doctor's persistent efforts to mediate peace.
While the story is darker and more tragic than some other
"Doctor Who" episodes, it effectively conveys the stakes and
consequences of the conflict, making "Warriors of the Deep" a
memorable and thought-provoking entry in the series.

It was memorable alright, for all the wrong reasons! The
Silurians and Sea Devils [as realised on screen] were not a
patch on their former selves from the Pertwee era and the Myrka
was the BBC costume department at its worst!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <xn0ooikjy2zwyi9004@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds a
unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative. Here are the
individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10
Part Two: 7/10
Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no normal
person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

The serial stands out for its tense atmosphere, complex
themes, and the Doctor's persistent efforts to mediate peace.
While the story is darker and more tragic than some other
"Doctor Who" episodes, it effectively conveys the stakes and
consequences of the conflict, making "Warriors of the Deep" a
memorable and thought-provoking entry in the series.

It was memorable alright, for all the wrong reasons! The
Silurians and Sea Devils [as realised on screen] were not a
patch on their former selves from the Pertwee era and the Myrka
was the BBC costume department at its worst!

So you did not some error in tis review.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds a
unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative. Here are the
individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10
Part Two: 7/10
Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no normal
person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ... "Certainly'
... implying that there were two identities involved in the production
of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE posting.
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds a
unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative. Here are the
individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10
Part Two: 7/10
Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no normal
person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ... "Certainly'
... implying that there were two identities involved in the production
of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

You would not make a good police officer.

--
Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Doctor wrote:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post
BEFORE posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

If you need evidence go and watch it yourself and stop using
AI to post opinions on episodes of Doctor Who.

You would not make a good police officer.

Dave, "Warriors of the Deep" is SHIT.

It looks shit, it was poorly written and script edited and it
was badly acted in large parts. You can't make a silk purse out
of a sow's ear.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <xn0oojuzr49t63v002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

You 2 are too 2 to read for errors.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <xn0oojuy349qs6z001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

The Doctor wrote:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post
BEFORE posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

If you need evidence go and watch it yourself and stop using
AI to post opinions on episodes of Doctor Who.

You would not make a good police officer.

Dave, "Warriors of the Deep" is S*T.

It looks s*t, it was poorly written and script edited and it
was badly acted in large parts. You can't make a silk purse out
of a sow's ear.

And the original analyis from CHATGPT based on the cscript ...
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 12:45 am:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4 adds a
unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative. Here are the
individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10
Part Two: 7/10
Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no normal
person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ... "Certainly'
... implying that there were two identities involved in the production
of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

BUT YOU, Gobble-de-gook, are NOT producing this garbage, Gobble-de-gook!!

You would not make a good police officer.

Good enough to identify that YOU, Gobble-de-gook, that YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, are a thief for claiming YOU, Gobble-de-gook, produce
this SHIT!!
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 8:35 am:

In article <xn0oojuzr49t63v002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

You 2 are too 2 to read for errors.

"2 too"?? MEANING .... ??
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v7inoh$23pq$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 8:35 am:

In article <xn0oojuzr49t63v002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

You 2 are too 2 to read for errors.

"2 too"?? MEANING .... ??
--
Daniel

You 2 cannot read for errors.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inj2$23pq$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 12:45 am:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4
adds a unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative.
Here are the individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10 Part Two: 7/10 Part Three: 7.5/10 Part
Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no
normal person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

BUT YOU, Gobble-de-gook, are NOT producing this garbage,
Gobble-de-gook!!

You would not make a good police officer.

Good enough to identify that YOU, Gobble-de-gook, that YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, are a thief for claiming YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
produce this S*T!!

And you pull a cut-and-lie Dannyboy!

It's all still "Out There", Gobble-de-gook, if only YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
knew how to do it!!
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inoh$23pq$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 8:35 am:

In article <xn0oojuzr49t63v002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

You 2 are too 2 to read for errors.

"2 too"?? MEANING .... ??

You 2 cannot read for errors.

AH!! So YOU, Gobble-de-gook, cannot READ to IDENTIFY YOUR errors BEFORE
you POST THEM, Gobble-de-gook!!
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v7j4g7$474p$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inj2$23pq$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 12:45 am:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that revisits
classic foes and explores themes of war, mistrust, and the
cost of conflict. The underwater setting of Sea Base 4
adds a unique and atmospheric backdrop to the narrative.
Here are the individual and overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10 Part Two: 7/10 Part Three: 7.5/10 Part
Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no
normal person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

BUT YOU, Gobble-de-gook, are NOT producing this garbage,
Gobble-de-gook!!

You would not make a good police officer.

Good enough to identify that YOU, Gobble-de-gook, that YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, are a thief for claiming YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
produce this S*T!!

And you pull a cut-and-lie Dannyboy!

It's all still "Out There", Gobble-de-gook, if only YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
knew how to do it!!
--
Daniel

But cutting 80% of the context is close to a lie.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v7j4lr$4ad7$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inoh$23pq$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 8:35 am:

In article <xn0oojuzr49t63v002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

You 2 are too 2 to read for errors.

"2 too"?? MEANING .... ??

You 2 cannot read for errors.

AH!! So YOU, Gobble-de-gook, cannot READ to IDENTIFY YOUR errors BEFORE
you POST THEM, Gobble-de-gook!!
--
Daniel

Hence why I say cut and lie.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Doctor wrote on 22/7/24 4:41 am:

In article <v7j4g7$474p$2@dont-email.me>, Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inj2$23pq$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 12:45 am:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that
revisits classic foes and explores themes of war,
mistrust, and the cost of conflict. The underwater
setting of Sea Base 4 adds a unique and atmospheric
backdrop to the narrative. Here are the individual and
overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10 Part Two: 7/10 Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no
normal person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that
highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review'
... "Certainly' ... implying that there were two
identities involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post
BEFORE posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

BUT YOU, Gobble-de-gook, are NOT producing this garbage,
Gobble-de-gook!!

You would not make a good police officer.

Good enough to identify that YOU, Gobble-de-gook, that YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, are a thief for claiming YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
produce this S*T!!

And you pull a cut-and-lie Dannyboy!

It's all still "Out There", Gobble-de-gook, if only YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, knew how to do it!!

But cutting 80% of the context is close to a lie.

That's a *LIE* , Gobble-de-gook, I very much doubt that I have EVER cut anywhere near 80% of the post to which I am responding .... but, then,
many would claim that I don't cut enough cause they believe that if you
aren't responding to some part of a post YOU SHOULD CUT THAT PORTION
OUT. So some might (RIGHTLY) claim that I don't cut enough.

Just because that might make it more difficult for YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
is NOT my FAULT or my PROBLEM, Gobble-de-gook. Perhaps if YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, learned how to set YOUR antiquated News Reader to view
posts in a THREADED manor, perhaps every one here would have a better
time here.

But how many times do those here need to tell YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
that?? .... Do numbers go that high??
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Daniel70 wrote on 22/7/24 12:06 am:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inoh$23pq$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70  <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 8:35 am:

In article <xn0oojuzr49t63v002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Daniel70 wrote:

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review' ...
"Certainly' ... implying that there were two identities
involved in the production of the review ....

1.    Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2.    The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post BEFORE
posting.

You should have put a full stop after the word dumb...

You 2 are too 2 to read for errors.

"2 too"?? MEANING .... ??

You 2 cannot read for errors.

AH!! So YOU, Gobble-de-gook, cannot READ to IDENTIFY YOUR errors BEFORE
you POST THEM, Gobble-de-gook!!

No!! Sorry! I mis-read YOUR reply, Gobble-de-gook, "You 2 cannot read
for errors.".

YOUR reply, Gobble-de-gook, MUST MEAN that YOU, Gobble-de-gook, make
lots of errors so we 'normal people' CANNOT realistically determine what
YOU, Gobble-de-gook, mean!!
--
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <v7l96r$jdgv$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 22/7/24 4:41 am:

In article <v7j4g7$474p$2@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 9:24 pm:

In article <v7inj2$23pq$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 21/7/24 12:45 am:

In article <v7gena$3i933$1@dont-email.me>, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:05 am:

Dave-GPT wrote:

Overall Rating and Final Thoughts

"Warriors of the Deep" is a compelling story that
revisits classic foes and explores themes of war,
mistrust, and the cost of conflict. The underwater
setting of Sea Base 4 adds a unique and atmospheric
backdrop to the narrative. Here are the individual and
overall ratings:

Part One: 7.5/10 Part Two: 7/10 Part Three: 7.5/10
Part Four: 8/10

Overall Rating: 7.5/10

That could only be an AI generated review anyway, as no
normal person would rate "Warriors of the Deep" that
highly!

Correct! The clue was in the first word of the 'review'
... "Certainly' ... implying that there were two
identities involved in the production of the review ....

1. Gobble-de-gook issued some 'instructions, and,

2. The AI entity produced what Gobble-de-gook posted!!

But Gobble-de-gook is too DUMB to even edit "His" post
BEFORE posting.

Why edit when you have to produce the said evidence?

BUT YOU, Gobble-de-gook, are NOT producing this garbage,
Gobble-de-gook!!

You would not make a good police officer.

Good enough to identify that YOU, Gobble-de-gook, that YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, are a thief for claiming YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
produce this S*T!!

And you pull a cut-and-lie Dannyboy!

It's all still "Out There", Gobble-de-gook, if only YOU,
Gobble-de-gook, knew how to do it!!

But cutting 80% of the context is close to a lie.

That's a *LIE* , Gobble-de-gook, I very much doubt that I have EVER cut >anywhere near 80% of the post to which I am responding .... but, then,
many would claim that I don't cut enough cause they believe that if you >aren't responding to some part of a post YOU SHOULD CUT THAT PORTION
OUT. So some might (RIGHTLY) claim that I don't cut enough.

Just because that might make it more difficult for YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
is NOT my FAULT or my PROBLEM, Gobble-de-gook. Perhaps if YOU, >Gobble-de-gook, learned how to set YOUR antiquated News Reader to view
posts in a THREADED manor, perhaps every one here would have a better
time here.

But how many times do those here need to tell YOU, Gobble-de-gook,
that?? .... Do numbers go that high??

No lie there. When was that last time you looked at Warriors of the Deep?

--
Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
United Kingdom save the NAtion on 4 July 2024 vote Liberal Democrat

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)