Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here and
read about the good doctor. not all the constant in bickering
and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
Whether this newsgroup can be salvaged is up to you and no one
else.
On 2025-03-07 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat said:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
ME
First filter the village idiot. Then filter anyone who
continually replies to the village idiot.
Your Name wrote:
On 2025-03-07 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat said:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
ME
First filter the village idiot. Then filter anyone who
continually replies to the village idiot.
You might have to explain to a newcomer exactly who the "village
idiot" is... a RADW newbie might find that description fits
quite a few of us here!!! ;-)
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without >reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's >regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
I could be wrong. Maybe this newsgroup isn't perpetual shit and nothing
but, but you'll never find out till you personally stop complaining
about that no one else has posted anything you care to read and start
posting interesting content yourself.
Newsgroups are ruined, not by trolls, not by off-topic posts, but
because the regulars themselves stop posting interesting discussion that
is on topic.
Whether this newsgroup can be salvaged is up to you and no one else.
On 2025-03-07 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat said:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
First filter the village idiot. Then filter anyone who continually
replies to the village idiot.
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:well then ... it can't , yay
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without
reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's
regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
I could be wrong. Maybe this newsgroup isn't perpetual shit and nothing
but, but you'll never find out till you personally stop complaining
about that no one else has posted anything you care to read and start
posting interesting content yourself.
Newsgroups are ruined, not by trolls, not by off-topic posts, but
because the regulars themselves stop posting interesting discussion that
is on topic.
Whether this newsgroup can be salvaged is up to you and no one else.
james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here and
read about the good doctor. not all the constant in bickering
and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Fair enough.
So let's go;
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just a
specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
If you subscribe, you might as well join the party.
Whether this newsgroup can be salvaged is up to you and no one
else.
RADW is still alive anyway... unlike quite a lot of other
newsgroups that have become wastelands!
On 2025-03-07 21:23:54 +0000, Blueshirt said:
Your Name wrote:
On 2025-03-07 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat said:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
ME
First filter the village idiot. Then filter anyone who
continually replies to the village idiot.
You might have to explain to a newcomer exactly who the "village
idiot" is... a RADW newbie might find that description fits
quite a few of us here!!! ;-)
I think it would become obvious very quickly wh the village idiot is
... although there are definitely other less "prolific" contenders for
the title. :-)
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine s*t.
thankz in advance.
ME
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't
engage with the people who don't. Or start a discussion about
Doctor Who then block anybody who replies with a wacko or off
topic response. usenet is whatever you want it to be.
In article <vqfj32$3mm4s$3@dont-email.me>,
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
[Snip]
Newsgroups are ruined, not by trolls, not by off-topic
posts, but because the regulars themselves stop posting
interesting discussion that is on topic.
Whether this newsgroup can be salvaged is up to you and no
one else.
And every one elese!
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th
Doctor's latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I
(not a NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if
they subscribe to said newsgroup.
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Daniel70 wrote:
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th
Doctor's latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I
(not a NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if
they subscribe to said newsgroup.
I'm pretty sure Dave meant does Adam subscribe to Disney+...
Daniel70 wrote:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't engage with
the people who don't. Or start a discussion about Doctor Who then block >anybody who replies with a wacko or off topic response. usenet is
whatever you want it to be.
--
https://www.theory11.com/
Theory11 wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't
engage with the people who don't. Or start a discussion about
Doctor Who then block anybody who replies with a wacko or off
topic response. usenet is whatever you want it to be.
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for avoiding
the 'noise' here...
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without
reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's
regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage being >cross-posted elsewhere??
Sure, by removing all the cross-posted groups, you can stop your post
and any replies to your post from being cross-posted from here to >kingdom-come.... but that doesn't stop anybody else replying to the same >posts as you but not removing all the cross-posts ... so their post
still gets posted into the other newsgroups.
I would have thought you would have understood that!!
--
Daniel70
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted! >NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if they subscribe
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I (not a
to said newsgroup.
On the other hand, I'm guessing a person can cross-post into any
newsgroup .... as long as they subscribe to at least one of the Newsgroups!!
But I'm no expert!
--
Daniel70
Daniel70 wrote:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
On 8/03/2025 9:50 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:Ah!! Sorry! I guess the ol'ESP is not functioning well. ;-P
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th
Doctor's latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I
(not a NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if
they subscribe to said newsgroup.
I'm pretty sure Dave meant does Adam subscribe to Disney+...
--
Daniel70
The asswipe asked:
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!!
Ever tried to be Tom Baker?
Your idea of rational is very different from mine.
--
solar penguin
In article <vqhe2e$53ia$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!!
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
Ever tried to be Tom Baker?
--
Daniel70
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!!
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious >>>arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without >>reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's >>regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. >>This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts >>from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage being >cross-posted elsewhere??
. . .
Theory11 wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't
engage with the people who don't. Or start a discussion about
Doctor Who then block anybody who replies with a wacko or off
topic response. usenet is whatever you want it to be.
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for avoiding
the 'noise' here...
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I (not a
NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if they subscribe
to said newsgroup.
On the other hand, I'm guessing a person can cross-post into any
newsgroup .... as long as they subscribe to at least one of the
Newsgroups!!
But I'm no expert!
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without
reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's
regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Sure, by removing all the cross-posted groups, you can stop your post
and any replies to your post from being cross-posted from here to kingdom-come.... but that doesn't stop anybody else replying to the
same posts as you but not removing all the cross-posts ... so their
post still gets posted into the other newsgroups.
I would have thought you would have understood that!!
On 3/8/2025 06:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!!
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
I'm doing the best I can! ;)
--
Intelligence is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
--Carl Sagan
On 3/8/2025 07:51, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vqhe2e$53ia$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:Ever tried to be Tom Baker?
Daniel70 wrote:.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!! >>
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all
articles without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet
and because this newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll
feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. This is one of
Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it
yourself and hope on topic threads would result. As you're
unwilling to do that yourself, then you contribute to the
problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars
for the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of
Tim), I will continue to subscribe simply as a method of
cleaning out the unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care
about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
Ever tried to convey a rational thought, or do you just stick to
babbling nonsense?
--
Daniel70
--
Intelligence is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
--Carl Sagan
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious >>>>arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without >>>reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's >>>regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who. >>>This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself >>>would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the >>>nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue >>>to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts >>>from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage being >>cross-posted elsewhere??
It's a magical feature of my newsreader. I enter a newsgroup. I am
presented with an index screen of unread articles. The screen is
presented threaded, and I see authors' names. If theres anything to
read, which is almost never, I read it. Then I execute one of the
commands to junk articles, which also marks the article as read in any >newsgroups it was crossposted into.
I can de-yadify without reading an article, plus I get rid of all the
a* troll feeders who refuse to cut yad's crossposts.
It's faster to mark articles as read that are total off-topic s*t in >newsgroups I don't want to read than in groups that I do want to read.
. . .
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt" <blueshirt@indigo.news>
wrote:
Theory11 wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't
engage with the people who don't. Or start a discussion about
Doctor Who then block anybody who replies with a wacko or off
topic response. usenet is whatever you want it to be.
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for avoiding
the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the krap in
here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
On 2025-03-08 10:43:31 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I (not a
NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if they subscribe
to said newsgroup.
On the other hand, I'm guessing a person can cross-post into any
newsgroup .... as long as they subscribe to at least one of the
Newsgroups!!
But I'm no expert!
Depending on the newsreader app, you can post to any newsgroup your >newsserver has, whether or not you 'subscribe' to it. Just type the >newsgroups' names into the list at the top of the message.
Some newsreader apps may require starting a message in a particular >newsgroup, but you can just delete that from the list at the top before >pressing the send button.
On 2025-03-08 10:36:40 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without
reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's
regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage being
cross-posted elsewhere??
It says "junk all articles without reading".
Depending on the newsreader app and how those posts are being 'junked', >getting rid of them from one newsgroup also gets rid of them from any >cross-posted newsgroup as well.
Similarly, reading a post in one newsgroup will remove it from the
unread lists of other cros-posted newsgroups.
Filters / killfiles will do the same, unless you've set it to be
specific to a particular newsgroup.
Sure, by removing all the cross-posted groups, you can stop your post
and any replies to your post from being cross-posted from here to
kingdom-come.... but that doesn't stop anybody else replying to the
same posts as you but not removing all the cross-posts ... so their
post still gets posted into the other newsgroups.
I would have thought you would have understood that!!
In article <vqh706$3o7t$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted!
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I (not a
NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if they subscribe
to said newsgroup.
On the other hand, I'm guessing a person can cross-post into any
newsgroup .... as long as they subscribe to at least one of the Newsgroups!! >>
But I'm no expert!
Same Adam who got dissed our his anti-cross-cultural exchanges stance.
On 2025-03-08 10:43:31 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I (not a
NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if they subscribe
to said newsgroup.
On the other hand, I'm guessing a person can cross-post into any
newsgroup .... as long as they subscribe to at least one of the
Newsgroups!!
But I'm no expert!
Depending on the newsreader app, you can post to any newsgroup your newsserver has, whether or not you 'subscribe' to it. Just type the newsgroups' names into the list at the top of the message.
Some newsreader apps may require starting a message in a particular newsgroup, but you can just delete that from the list at the top before pressing the send button.
On 3/8/2025 07:51, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vqhe2e$53ia$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70Â <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL postsHow in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
here!!
Ever tried to be Tom Baker?
Ever tried to convey a rational thought, or do you just stick to
babbling nonsense?
In article <vqhe2e$53ia$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!!How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
Ever tried to be Tom Baker?
In article <cf_yP.359213$Kb9a.15603@fx16.ams4>,
Hornplayer9599 <Hornplayer9599@aol.com> wrote:
On 3/8/2025 06:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
I'm doing the best I can! ;).... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL posts here!! >>How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
So do we all.
In article <vqh6jc$3m3e$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage being
cross-posted elsewhere??
Sure, by removing all the cross-posted groups, you can stop your post
and any replies to your post from being cross-posted from here to
kingdom-come.... but that doesn't stop anybody else replying to the same
posts as you but not removing all the cross-posts ... so their post
still gets posted into the other newsgroups.
I would have thought you would have understood that!!
And what is wrong with croos cultural exchanges?
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here and
read about the good doctor. not all the constant in bickering
and asinine shit. thankz in advance. ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles
without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this
newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than
posting on Doctor Who. This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups
for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself
and hope on topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do
that yourself, then you contribute to the problem you've
identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for
the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I
will continue to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the
unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage
being cross-posted elsewhere??
It's a magical feature of my newsreader. I enter a newsgroup. I am
presented with an index screen of unread articles. The screen is
presented threaded, and I see authors' names. If theres anything to
read, which is almost never, I read it.
Then I execute one of the commands to junk articles, which also marks
the article as read
in any newsgroups it was crossposted into.
I can de-yadify without reading an article, plus I get rid of all
the asshole troll feeders who refuse to cut yad's crossposts.
It's faster to mark articles as read that are total off-topic shit
in newsgroups I don't want to read than in groups that I do want to
read.
On 2025-03-08 10:36:40 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles without
reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this newsgroup's
regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than posting on Doctor Who.
This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you yourself
would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself and hope on
topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do that yourself,
then you contribute to the problem you've identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for the
nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I will continue
to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the unwanted crossposts
from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage
being cross-posted elsewhere??
It says "junk all articles without reading".
Depending on the newsreader app and how those posts are being 'junked', getting rid of them from one newsgroup also gets rid of them from any cross-posted newsgroup as well.
Similarly, reading a post in one newsgroup will remove it from the
unread lists of other cros-posted newsgroups.
Filters / killfiles will do the same, unless you've set it to be
specific to a particular newsgroup.
In article <725psj1du1pn0uodhgl3bar9j93s30rr6r@4ax.com>,
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt" <blueshirt@indigo.news>
wrote:
Theory11 wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't
engage with the people who don't. Or start a discussion about
Doctor Who then block anybody who replies with a wacko or off
topic response. usenet is whatever you want it to be.
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for avoiding
the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the krap in
here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Which newsreader are you using?
On 9/03/2025 12:45 am, The Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-PAedophile talker noted
In article <vqh706$3o7t$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 11:44 am, The Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted! >>> NSP) am aware, a person can ONLY post to a newsgroup if they subscribe
In article <xn0p312m5ejwwli003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I subscribe to this newsgroup,
Doctor Who... Season Two... April 12th... Disney+
We look forward to your forthright opinions on the 15th Doctor's
latest adventures.
Does Adam subscribe?
Gee Whiz!! YOU really must be a GREAT NSP, Binky!! As far as I (not a
to said newsgroup.
On the other hand, I'm guessing a person can cross-post into any
newsgroup .... as long as they subscribe to at least one of the Newsgroups!!
But I'm no expert!
Same Adam who got dissed our his anti-cross-cultural exchanges stance.
Say WHAT?? WHAT does that Gobble-de-gook 'statement' mean, Binky??
--
Daniel70
On 9/03/2025 3:30 am, Hornplayer9599 wrote:^^^^^<-PAedophile talker noted
On 3/8/2025 07:51, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vqhe2e$53ia$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70Â <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 9:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
<Snip>
.... as do I .... but I would relish some additional RATIONAL postsHow in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same
garbage being cross-posted elsewhere??
Some people are masochists... reading RADW is a secret part of
their daily ritual. They just don't like to admit they get
pleasure from it!
I'm honest about it... I love RADW! :-)
here!!
Ever tried to be Tom Baker?
Ever tried to convey a rational thought, or do you just stick to
babbling nonsense?
I'm going with Binky selects Option B!!
--
Daniel70
On 9/03/2025 5:05 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 8/03/2025 6:57 am, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here and
read about the good doctor. not all the constant in bickering
and asinine shit. thankz in advance. ME
I subscribe to this newsgroup, then usually junk all articles
without reading, to de-yadify the rest of Usenet and because this
newsgroup's regulars spend more time troll feeding yads than
posting on Doctor Who. This is one of Usenet's worst newsgroups
for off-topic crap.
Of course, if you truly wanted to read on topic content, you
yourself would have to regularly post quite a bit of it yourself
and hope on topic threads would result. As you're unwilling to do
that yourself, then you contribute to the problem you've
identified.
Since I personally despise all of this newsgroup's regulars for
the nonstop troll feeding of yads (and previously, of Tim), I
will continue to subscribe simply as a method of cleaning out the
unwanted crossposts from newsgroups I care about.
How in Hell does your reading garbage HERE stop that same garbage
being cross-posted elsewhere??
It's a magical feature of my newsreader. I enter a newsgroup. I am
presented with an index screen of unread articles. The screen is
presented threaded, and I see authors' names. If theres anything to
read, which is almost never, I read it.
Good.
Then I execute one of the commands to junk articles, which also marks
the article as read
Yeap .... but the impression I got reading your post was that you
thought it was also be "Marked as Read" in EVERYBODY elses Newsreader.
in any newsgroups it was crossposted into.
I would like my SeaMonkey Suite to have this ability. Netscape Suite
and/or Mozilla Suite (on which SeaMonkey Suite is based) used to have
that ability but, for some reason or other, that function was removed in >SeaMonkey Suite.
I can de-yadify without reading an article, plus I get rid of all
the asshole troll feeders who refuse to cut yad's crossposts.
It's faster to mark articles as read that are total off-topic shit
in newsgroups I don't want to read than in groups that I do want to
read.
???
--
Daniel70
On 9/03/2025 10:02 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <725psj1du1pn0uodhgl3bar9j93s30rr6r@4ax.com>,Surely any component NSP would be able to determine what Newsreader
james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt" <blueshirt@indigo.news>
wrote:
Theory11 wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:22:28 +0000, james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Engage with the people that post about Doctor Who - don't
engage with the people who don't. Or start a discussion about
Doctor Who then block anybody who replies with a wacko or off
topic response. usenet is whatever you want it to be.
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for avoiding
the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the krap in
here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Which newsreader are you using?
someone was using!!
--
Daniel70
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
On Sun, 09 Mar 2025 12:59:45 GMT, "Blueshirt" <blueshirt@indigo.news>
wrote:
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
Agent v8. I am familiar with the kill filter process and was just
wondering if anyone had one pre made before I start building one up
that might be too inclusive.
ME
PS:Seems to be daniel70 that is the first to get removed.
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
On Sun, 09 Mar 2025 12:59:45 GMT, "Blueshirt" <blueshirt@indigo.news>
wrote:
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
Agent v8. I am familiar with the kill filter process and was just
wondering if anyone had one pre made before I start building one up
that might be too inclusive.
ME
PS:Seems to be daniel70 that is the first to get removed.
On 09/03/2025 17:52, james moffat wrote:
On Sun, 09 Mar 2025 12:59:45 GMT, "Blueshirt" <blueshirt@indigo.news> >>wrote:
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
ME
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
Agent v8. I am familiar with the kill filter process and was just
wondering if anyone had one pre made before I start building one up
that might be too inclusive.
ME
PS:Seems to be daniel70 that is the first to get removed.
The very inappropriately self-designated "The Doctor" needs to be top of
your list. Then, yes, sadly, Daniel, who can't help responding to him every single time.
That will clear 95% of the noise from this channel.
--
There’s no point in being grown up if you can’t act a little childish
sometimes.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2025 12:59:45 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access
Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
Agent v8. I am familiar with the kill filter process and was
just wondering if anyone had one pre made before I start
building one up that might be too inclusive.
PS:Seems to be daniel70 that is the first to get removed.
james moffat wrote:
On Sun, 09 Mar 2025 12:59:45 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
james moffat wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:22:50 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Killfiles and filters are generally the way to go for
avoiding the 'noise' here...
Yes. That's what I am asking for . A filter to kill all the
krap in here. Does anyone have one or more that works?
Are you using a newsreader or a web interface to access
Usenet?
If a newsreader, most of them have the ability to "killfile"
people or use a filter based on words, subjects or specific
poster(s).
Agent v8. I am familiar with the kill filter process and was
just wondering if anyone had one pre made before I start
building one up that might be too inclusive.
Unfortunately, sometimes that's what you have to do.
PS:Seems to be daniel70 that is the first to get removed.
First? I can see why that would seem to be a good option but
there is another poster here who contributes nothing but noise
95% of the time...
Maybe when the new Doctor Who season begins in April people
might rein in their off-topic excesses? I think that's the
biggest problem here at the moment, we've no new Doctor Who
episodes to talk about.
Incidentally, do you read the Doctor Who novels or follow the
Doctor Who audio adventures produced by Big Finish?
The Doctor wrote:
I hope to engage james moffat and make him feel welcome.
Unless you are discussing "Doctor Who" you are more likely going
to drive him away... so how you choose to behave will tell a lot.
I hope to engage james moffat and make him feel welcome.
In article <xn0p351ib146sy5004@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
I hope to engage james moffat and make him feel welcome.
Unless you are discussing "Doctor Who" you are more likely
going to drive him away... so how you choose to behave will
tell a lot.
Well Dannyboy semms to have annoyed him.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p351ib146sy5004@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
I hope to engage james moffat and make him feel welcome.
Unless you are discussing "Doctor Who" you are more likely
going to drive him away... so how you choose to behave will
tell a lot.
Well Dannyboy semms to have annoyed him.
Roll on April 12th and hopefully we can all get on with talking
about the new season of "Doctor Who".
Think about it... new "Doctor Who" is four weeks away, this
group should be buzzing! When we were posting here during the
wilderness years we'd have wet our pants to have new episodes of
"Doctor Who" to talk about!
james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here and
read about the good doctor. not all the constant in bickering
and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Fair enough.
So let's go;
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just a
specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Incidentally, do you read the Doctor Who novels or follow the
Doctor Who audio adventures produced by Big Finish?
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just
a specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Did I mention I'm terrible with names?)
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who
followed 10. He's awful.
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
On 11.03.25, james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Thumbsup!
Ok, that's wrong speech, let's repeat that in usenet speech:
"AOL!"
Just killfiling the religious nuts doesn't help, because
people who can otherwise say interesting things reply to the
nutty cowdung.
Wonder why though. Feeding the trolls as a hobby, like
feeding pigeons?
In article <xn0p352t915xn2c007@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Roll on April 12th and hopefully we can all get on with
talking about the new season of "Doctor Who".
Think about it... new "Doctor Who" is four weeks away, this
group should be buzzing! When we were posting here during the
wilderness years we'd have wet our pants to have new
episodes of "Doctor Who" to talk about!
A month away!
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:^^^^^^^^<-Who?
james moffat wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here and
read about the good doctor. not all the constant in bickering
and asinine s*t. thankz in advance.
Fair enough.
So let's go;
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just a
specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I forgot his name
too. (I'm happy I could scrape together any name beyond Tennant. Did I >mention I'm terrible with names?)
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who followed 10.
He's awful.
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Blueshirt also wrote in another post in this thread:
Incidentally, do you read the Doctor Who novels or follow the
Doctor Who audio adventures produced by Big Finish?
No, no.
--
Mickmane
On 11.03.25, james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and religious
arguments going on? I just want to come in here and read about the
good doctor. not all the constant in bickering and asinine shit.
thankz in advance.
Thumbsup!
Ok, that's wrong speech, let's repeat that in usenet speech:
"AOL!"
Just killfiling the religious nuts doesn't help, because people who can >otherwise say interesting things reply to the nutty cowdung. (Wonder why >though. Feeding the trolls as a hobby, like feeding pigeons?)
--
Mickmane
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just
a specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a few
Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
[Welcome back btw]
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Did I mention I'm terrible with names?)
I think we remember! ;-)
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who
followed 10. He's awful.
He's very good in "House of the Dragon"!
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p352t915xn2c007@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Roll on April 12th and hopefully we can all get on with
talking about the new season of "Doctor Who".
Think about it... new "Doctor Who" is four weeks away, this
group should be buzzing! When we were posting here during the
wilderness years we'd have wet our pants to have new
episodes of "Doctor Who" to talk about!
A month away!
A month away is better than six years away... we should still be
getting reasonably excited!
The BBC should be dropping more trailers, teases and info
tid-bits in the next few weeks as they ramp-up the PR for the
new season.
In article <xn0p36e252gury5005@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The BBC should be dropping more trailers, teases and info
tid-bits in the next few weeks as they ramp-up the PR for the
new season.
Just keep an eyes. In the meantime Dope Girls is rather
interesting.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p36e252gury5005@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The BBC should be dropping more trailers, teases and info
tid-bits in the next few weeks as they ramp-up the PR for the
new season.
Just keep an eyes. In the meantime Dope Girls is rather
interesting.
Disney+ have an offer on at the moment in Ireland, €1.99 a
month, for four months, so as you can't get much for €1.99 these
days I re-subscribed and I am now enjoying "Daredevil: Born
Again" whilst eagerly awaiting "Andor" season two. (Whilst Mrs
Blueshirt is back in to The Kardashians, series whatever.)
After sitting through two episodes of "Towards Zero" on BBC1 I
can see why the traditional terrestrial TV channels loses out to
the streaming services for decent drama shows these days ...
they're s**t. The BBC deserve to go bankrupt, the days of them
making quality TV seem to be long gone. It's all agenda driven
wokery. Every show now has to have a 'message'.
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Thumbsup!
Ok, that's wrong speech, let's repeat that in usenet speech:
"AOL!"
"Me too" would have done!!! :-)
Just killfiling the religious nuts doesn't help, because
people who can otherwise say interesting things reply to the
nutty cowdung.
"Nutty cowdung" is a new one! Well done... RADW is becoming
original again! ;-)
Wonder why though. Feeding the trolls as a hobby, like
feeding pigeons?
We have all been guilty of that to some extent. I wouldn't think
it's a hobby for anyone though...
Funnily enough, this place has gone very quiet in the last few
days, so that probably means the pigeons are now getting fed...
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just
a specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a few
Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
[Welcome back btw]
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Did I mention I'm terrible with names?)
I think we remember! ;-)
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who
followed 10. He's awful.
He's very good in "House of the Dragon"!
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, james moffat <spam.spam@distributel.net> wrote:
Anybody Got a filter for all this stupid political and
religious arguments going on? I just want to come in here
and read about the good doctor. not all the constant in
bickering and asinine shit. thankz in advance.
Thumbsup!
Ok, that's wrong speech, let's repeat that in usenet speech:
"AOL!"
"Me too" would have done!!! :-)
Not Usenet enough. :P
Just killfiling the religious nuts doesn't help, because
people who can otherwise say interesting things reply to the
nutty cowdung.
"Nutty cowdung" is a new one! Well done... RADW is becoming
original again! ;-)
Hah.
Wonder why though. Feeding the trolls as a hobby, like
feeding pigeons?
We have all been guilty of that to some extent. I wouldn't think
it's a hobby for anyone though...
Why then, though?
Funnily enough, this place has gone very quiet in the last few
days, so that probably means the pigeons are now getting fed...
Does the world need more pigeons to keep the trolls out of here?
Is there a Doctor Who episode prominently featuring pigeons? Did they at >least sit/leave a mess on a Weeping Angel? Do birds count for looking at >them? Do birds get "eaten" by them?
--
Mickmane
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Who is you favourite Doctor and what are your favourite
episodes? Do you like all of "Doctor Who" since 1963 or just
a specific era of the show?
Are you looking forward to the new season coming in April?
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a few
Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
Yes! Him.
[Welcome back btw]
Thanks. I again wasn't gone though, just occasionally forget to check
for new posts, and also when I get some, rarely see any I even want to
look at.
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Yes! Him.
Did I mention I'm terrible with names?)
I think we remember! ;-)
:)
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who
followed 10. He's awful.
He's very good in "House of the Dragon"!
Not watching that. (I guess it's some TV series.)
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
Why not?
--
Mickmane
In article <xn0p36i7i2mffkh000@news.eternal-september.org>,bankrupt,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
After sitting through two episodes of "Towards Zero" on BBC1
I can see why the traditional terrestrial TV channels lose
out to the streaming services for the decent drama shows
these days ... they're shit. The BBC deserve to go
the days of them making quality TV seem to be long gone. It's
all agenda driven wokery. Every show now has to have a
'message'.
Ithough I was reading one AGAmemnon for the moment.
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Wonder why though. Feeding the trolls as a hobby, like
feeding pigeons?
We have all been guilty of that to some extent. I wouldn't
think it's a hobby for anyone though...
Why then, though?
Funnily enough, this place has gone very quiet in the last
few days, so that probably means the pigeons are now getting
fed...
Does the world need more pigeons to keep the trolls out of
here?
Is there a Doctor Who episode prominently featuring pigeons?
Did they at least sit/leave a mess on a Weeping Angel? Do
birds count for looking at them? Do birds get "eaten" by them?
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a
few Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
Yes! Him.
[Welcome back btw]
Thanks. I again wasn't gone though, just occasionally forget
to check for new posts, and also when I get some, rarely see
any I even want to look at.
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Yes! Him.
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who
followed 10. He's awful.
He's very good in "House of the Dragon"!
Not watching that. (I guess it's some TV series.)
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
Why not?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p36i7i2mffkh000@news.eternal-september.org>,bankrupt,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
After sitting through two episodes of "Towards Zero" on BBC1
I can see why the traditional terrestrial TV channels lose
out to the streaming services for the decent drama shows
these days ... they're shit. The BBC deserve to go
the days of them making quality TV seem to be long gone. It's
all agenda driven wokery. Every show now has to have a
'message'.
Ithough I was reading one AGAmemnon for the moment.
I've never said Agamemnon was completely wrong! Anyone with eyes
can see what the BBC are doing to programmes... it's the, Doctor
Who is being made to sexually groom children and RTD/Ncuti Gatwa
are perverts (etc.) sort of thing that lets his opinion down. A
cohesive argument could be made about woke messaging being
inserted in to modern television programmes. AGA just chooses to
go off on a rant instead of putting forward a sensible point of
view on the subject.
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a
few Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
Yes! Him.
Capaldi was okay. His Doctor had some Jon Pertwee vibes going on
so I liked him...I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their lives. So
I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the Doctor.
[Welcome back btw]
Thanks. I again wasn't gone though, just occasionally forget
to check for new posts, and also when I get some, rarely see
any I even want to look at.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in April.
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Yes! Him.
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to one
Doctor!
But I like most of them. Just don't mention the one who
followed 10. He's awful.
He's very good in "House of the Dragon"!
Not watching that. (I guess it's some TV series.)
It's a BIG TV series and quite good, well, in parts... Matt
Smith is one of its stars.
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
Why not?
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a
few Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
Yes! Him.
Capaldi was okay. His Doctor had some Jon Pertwee vibes going on
so I liked him...
I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their lives. So
I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the Doctor.
[Welcome back btw]
Thanks. I again wasn't gone though, just occasionally forget
to check for new posts, and also when I get some, rarely see
any I even want to look at.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in April.
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Yes! Him.
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to one
Doctor!
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
Why not?
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Wonder why though. Feeding the trolls as a hobby, like
feeding pigeons?
We have all been guilty of that to some extent. I wouldn't
think it's a hobby for anyone though...
Why then, though?
Not everyone has pigeons outside to feed... or ducks...
Funnily enough, this place has gone very quiet in the last
few days, so that probably means the pigeons are now getting
fed...
Does the world need more pigeons to keep the trolls out of
here?
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
Just as well we're getting some soon, eh?
Is there a Doctor Who episode prominently featuring pigeons?
Did they at least sit/leave a mess on a Weeping Angel? Do
birds count for looking at them? Do birds get "eaten" by them?
Send an e-mail to RTD... tell him we need a Doctor Who episode
with pigeons... killer pigeons... they'd have to be alien
pigeons from another planet though or children would never go
outside again!
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
Why do you do it?
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
I'm not sure that really changes things.
Just as well we're getting some soon, eh?
Hah.
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Capaldi was okay. His Doctor had some Jon Pertwee vibes
going on so I liked him...
Apart from the awful one, there was no other doctor in the new
series.
I'm excluding the current one now, I don't have him on any
list yet. He needs some actual Doctor scripts, not whatever
they've been doing so far. I want to like him, but they have
yet to give him something brilliant to do, with all the hectic
problem solving while babbling stuff only a Time Lord
understands (possibly).
Yeah, the scripts have generally been a bit of a let-down of
late... when the 15th Doctor got a chance to be THE Doctor, I
thought he showed a lot of promise.
I'm hoping for some more consistency from the scripts in S15/S2.
Did he run from anything yet?
He doesn't do a lot of running... he does seem to cry a fair bit
though.
Oh, and he did some singing once too.
I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their
lives. So I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the
Doctor.
Don't mention Clara. She turned out like the proverbial
visitors and fish.
Well, I wouldn't have said Clara was THAT bad!
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor Who
trope.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to
one Doctor!
I knew you'd recognize him. :) (And that he's your favorite
classic, too.)
My favourite Doctor, full stop. Jon Pertwee was THE Doctor... as
he sang himself in his hit record of the 1970's! :-)
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much
above zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise?
You have to read between the lines! ;-)
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
Why do you do it?
I don't have any pigeons!!! I do have crows around outside
(noisy bastards) but I try not to feed them.
I don't mind the entertainment. I use my filters and Bozo Bin to
block what I don't want to read.
Plus, ironically enough, it's probably King Troll and his
tangents that have kept this place alive through the years
whilst other newsgroups died a death of silence. RADW is
actually quite an active Usenet newsgroup compared to a lot of
others about comparable niche TV shows.
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip those
threads should they choose to do so.
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
I'm not sure that really changes things.
This place is open all hours to discuss Doctor Who... 24/7 365
days a year. If people want to start discussions about the show,
nobody is stopping them. It can't be on one person to start
every conversation. If people want to change things all they
have to do is start talking about Doctor Who... somebody here
will then respond in kind.
Just as well we're getting some soon, eh?
Hah.
Be careful what you wish for though... if Doctor Who takes a
turn for the worse with some poor stories and/or the ratings
tank in S15/S2 you might wish for some noise to deafen the
rabble!
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a
few Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
Yes! Him.
Capaldi was okay. His Doctor had some Jon Pertwee vibes going on
so I liked him...
Apart from the awful one, there was no other doctor in the new series.
I'm excluding the current one now, I don't have him on any list yet. He
needs some actual Doctor scripts, not whatever they've been doing so
far. I want to like him, but they have yet to give him something
brilliant to do, with all the hectic problem solving while babbling
stuff only a Time Lord understands (possibly).
Did he run from anything yet?
I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their lives. So
I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the Doctor.
Don't mention Clara. She turned out like the proverbial visitors and
fish.
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor did they hog the stage so
much.
[Welcome back btw]
Thanks. I again wasn't gone though, just occasionally forget
to check for new posts, and also when I get some, rarely see
any I even want to look at.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone else will at
least stop responding to them?
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Yes! Him.
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to one
Doctor!
I knew you'd recognize him. :) (And that he's your favorite classic,
too.)
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
Why not?
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
In article <xn0p39bsh5hyezx000@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
For those who cannot stand noise.
In article <xn0p39c7a5ijtau001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Be careful what you wish for though... if Doctor Who takes a
turn for the worse with some poor stories and/or the ratings
tank in S15/S2 you might wish for some noise to deafen the
rabble!
No Disney please! No matter what Tennant says on FB!
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the
noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time. I have
only been around since just before xmas yet the people I see
complaining about noise are not what I would call regular
contributors to this group. usenet will never be made just
for you and what you like. usenet is a decentralised open
discussion forum. You can choose to join in on a thread or
ignore it. If you dislike something, try and change from
within rather than just sit and complain. Which means, if you
don't want "noise" talk about dr who then. Drown the so called
noise out. dr who has been around sixty years there must be
plenty to talk about. If you make the discussion about noise
then you are only adding to the noise.
That's my two cents' worth anyhow. Next month there will be
new dr who stories to discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr
who and the right sort of noise to go with it.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 11.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Tennant! Followed by Tennant, and Tennant.
Then Ecclestson and Whitaker.
Then Whatshisname, the old dude.]
Old, really old or very old? The "old dude" could apply to a
few Doctors! If from the new series only, then you mean Peter
Capaldi.
Yes! Him.
Capaldi was okay. His Doctor had some Jon Pertwee vibes going on
so I liked him...
Apart from the awful one, there was no other doctor in the new series.
I'm excluding the current one now, I don't have him on any list yet. He
needs some actual Doctor scripts, not whatever they've been doing so
far. I want to like him, but they have yet to give him something
brilliant to do, with all the hectic problem solving while babbling
stuff only a Time Lord understands (possibly).
Did he run from anything yet?
I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their lives. So
I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the Doctor.
Don't mention Clara. She turned out like the proverbial visitors and
fish.
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new series. There
wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor did they hog the stage so
much.
[Welcome back btw]
Thanks. I again wasn't gone though, just occasionally forget
to check for new posts, and also when I get some, rarely see
any I even want to look at.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone else will at
least stop responding to them?
Oh, and from classic, white haired impressive guy, man I
forgot his name too.
Impressive? That has to be Jon Pertwee!!!
Yes! Him.
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to one
Doctor!
I knew you'd recognize him. :) (And that he's your favorite classic,
too.)
I like it all, except the seasons with the awful one.
Looking forward to the new season!
Most of us are.
You wouldn't think it though would yer?
Why not?
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time. I have only been >around since just before xmas yet the people I see complaining about
noise are not what I would call regular contributors to this group.
usenet will never be made just for you and what you like. usenet is a >decentralised open discussion forum. You can choose to join in on a
thread or ignore it. If you dislike something, try and change from
within rather than just sit and complain. Which means, if you don't want >"noise" talk about dr who then. Drown the so called noise out. dr who
has been around sixty years there must be plenty to talk about. If you
make the discussion about noise then you are only adding to the noise.
That's my two cents' worth anyhow. Next month there will be new dr who >stories to discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr who and the right
sort of noise to go with it.
--
https://www.theory11.com/
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p39c7a5ijtau001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Be careful what you wish for though... if Doctor Who takes a
turn for the worse with some poor stories and/or the ratings
tank in S15/S2 you might wish for some noise to deafen the
rabble!
No Disney please! No matter what Tennant says on FB!
Well I don't know what David Tennant said about Disney on
Facebook, so maybe a quote or a link would help. I am not
psychic... or on Facebook.
But, as I have told you before... if you think Disney are the
main problem with "Doctor Who" in 2025 then you haven't being
paying attention to the show for the last decade!
Disney have invested money in to the show, they are not
responsible for the content of the scripts. If you paid
attention to any interviews that RTD has given in the last few
years you will realise the show he is making is 'his' vision of
"Doctor Who". RTD doesn't hide his opinions and nothing he is
producing should be of any surprise to anybody. (For reference,
"The Writers Tale" book contains a lot of detail on how his
creative juices flowed during his first tenure as Doctor Who
Executive Producer... he is the same man in 2025, just a bit
older!)
Theory11 wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the
noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time. I have
only been around since just before xmas yet the people I see
complaining about noise are not what I would call regular
contributors to this group. usenet will never be made just
for you and what you like. usenet is a decentralised open
discussion forum. You can choose to join in on a thread or
ignore it. If you dislike something, try and change from
within rather than just sit and complain. Which means, if you
don't want "noise" talk about dr who then. Drown the so called
noise out. dr who has been around sixty years there must be
plenty to talk about. If you make the discussion about noise
then you are only adding to the noise.
That's my two cents' worth anyhow. Next month there will be
new dr who stories to discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr
who and the right sort of noise to go with it.
In my experience this place has always been a bit quirky with
many tangents and thread divergences, so we're all pretty much
used to how RADW operates... some of the regulars would be
making use of their filters and killfile on a daily basis
though. Which is why newsreaders have that facility.
There did used to be a lot more on topic discussions here but
there were also many more posters here back in those days too.
The fact we have so little 'new' Doctor Who on the TV to discuss
does play a part I'm sure, but then again there are plenty of
new Star Wars/Star Trek shows being produced for
Disney+/Paramount yet their newsgroups are fairly dead. So
where have all those fans gone?
RADW lives. It's not perfect but what is? But at least there's
no cobwebs or dead space either.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p39bsh5hyezx000@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
For those who cannot stand noise.
Which is irony in itself. As even though you style yourself The
Doctor, are a long-time "Doctor Who" fan, and inhabitant of
this group for over thirty years, it's probably you who are
responsible for starting the threads that others would call
noise.
If you could be 'born again' here as the RADW Elder and limit
your off-topic religious ramblings it would help everyone here,
and maybe even keep the newbies around.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p39bsh5hyezx000@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
For those who cannot stand noise.
Which is irony in itself. As even though you style yourself The
Doctor, are a long-time "Doctor Who" fan, and inhabitant of
this group for over thirty years, it's *probably* you who are
responsible for starting the threads that others would call
noise.
If you could be 'born again' here as the RADW Elder and limit
your off-topic religious ramblings it would help everyone here,
and maybe even keep the newbies around.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
Why do you do it?
I don't have any pigeons!!! I do have crows around outside
(noisy bastards) but I try not to feed them.
I don't mind the entertainment. I use my filters and Bozo Bin to
block what I don't want to read.
Plus, ironically enough, it's probably King Troll and his
tangents that have kept this place alive through the years
whilst other newsgroups died a death of silence. RADW is
actually quite an active Usenet newsgroup compared to a lot of
others about comparable niche TV shows.
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip those
threads should they choose to do so.
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
I'm not sure that really changes things.
This place is open all hours to discuss Doctor Who... 24/7 365
days a year. If people want to start discussions about the show,
nobody is stopping them. It can't be on one person to start
every conversation. If people want to change things all they
have to do is start talking about Doctor Who... somebody here
will then respond in kind.
Just as well we're getting some soon, eh?
Hah.
Be careful what you wish for though... if Doctor Who takes a
turn for the worse with some poor stories and/or the ratings
tank in S15/S2 you might wish for some noise to deafen the
rabble!
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
I'm excluding the current one now, I don't have him on any
list yet. He needs some actual Doctor scripts, not whatever
they've been doing so far. I want to like him, but they have
yet to give him something brilliant to do, with all the hectic
problem solving while babbling stuff only a Time Lord
understands (possibly).
Yeah, the scripts have generally been a bit of a let-down of
late... when the 15th Doctor got a chance to be THE Doctor, I
thought he showed a lot of promise.
I'm hoping for some more consistency from the scripts in S15/S2.
Did he run from anything yet?
He doesn't do a lot of running... he does seem to cry a fair bit
though.
Oh, and he did some singing once too.
I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their
lives. So I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the
Doctor.
Don't mention Clara. She turned out like the proverbial
visitors and fish.
Well, I wouldn't have said Clara was THAT bad!
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor Who
trope.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to
one Doctor!
I knew you'd recognize him. :) (And that he's your favorite
classic, too.)
My favourite Doctor, full stop. Jon Pertwee was THE Doctor... as
he sang himself in his hit record of the 1970's! :-)
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much
above zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise?
You have to read between the lines! ;-)
In article <d7ef31bc5ec55dc6b7a93d70877e9dee@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
Next month there will be new dr who stories to
discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr who and the
right sort of noise to go with it.
How to start a flame war here? Just say the Timeless Child is
part of Doctor Who.
In article <xn0p3acuk6f4w6w001@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
No Disney please! No matter what Tennant says on FB!
Well I don't know what David Tennant said about Disney on
Facebook, so maybe a quote or a link would help. I am not
psychic... or on Facebook.
But, as I have told you before... if you think Disney are the
main problem with "Doctor Who" in 2025 then you haven't being
paying attention to the show for the last decade!
Disney have invested money in to the show, they are not
responsible for the content of the scripts. If you paid
attention to any interviews that RTD has given in the last
few years you will realise the show he is making is 'his'
vision of "Doctor Who". RTD doesn't hide his opinions and
nothing he is producing should be of any surprise to
anybody. (For reference, "The Writers Tale" book contains a
lot of detail on how his creative juices flowed during his
first tenure as Doctor Who Executive Producer... he is the
same man in 2025, just a bit older!)
The Disney investment is what Tennant refers to on FB.
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's
about others' (ever the same) replies to them.
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
You reply to the nutters...
I don't mind the entertainment. I use my filters and Bozo
Bin to block what I don't want to read.
That only works for the nutters, not those replying to them.
Plus, ironically enough, it's probably King Troll and his
tangents that have kept this place alive through the years
whilst other newsgroups died a death of silence. RADW is
actually quite an active Usenet newsgroup compared to a lot
of others about comparable niche TV shows.
Sad, if true.
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip
those threads should they choose to do so.
I don't mind off topic.
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people
to the compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their
kitchen sink, and that other nutter.
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
I'm not sure that really changes things.
This place is open all hours to discuss Doctor Who... 24/7
365 days a year. If people want to start discussions about
the show, nobody is stopping them. It can't be on one person
to start every conversation. If people want to change things
all they have to do is start talking about Doctor Who...
somebody here will then respond in kind.
That's not what I mean. More signal doesn't remove noise,
noise still stays. :P
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
On 14/03/2025 9:34 pm, Blueshirt wrote:^^^^^^^^^^Are you certain?
The Doctor wrote:"probably"?? substitute "Definately"!! .... I mean, now that Tim has left!
In article <xn0p39bsh5hyezx000@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
For those who cannot stand noise.
Which is irony in itself. As even though you style yourself The
Doctor, are a long-time "Doctor Who" fan, and inhabitant of
this group for over thirty years, it's *probably* you who are
responsible for starting the threads that others would call
noise.
If you could be 'born again' here as the RADW Elder and limit
your off-topic religious ramblings it would help everyone here,
and maybe even keep the newbies around.
--
Daniel70
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
You reply to the nutters...
Why do you do it?
I don't have any pigeons!!! I do have crows around outside
(noisy bastards) but I try not to feed them.
I got some crows outside on occasion. I always wonder what I could put
on the balcony to see them do clever tricks.
Got other birds too, they can be a bit vocal. (The crows don't give
whole concerts, just the occasional, even rare, caw.)
I don't mind the entertainment. I use my filters and Bozo Bin to
block what I don't want to read.
That only works for the nutters, not those replying to them.
Plus, ironically enough, it's probably King Troll and his
tangents that have kept this place alive through the years
whilst other newsgroups died a death of silence. RADW is
actually quite an active Usenet newsgroup compared to a lot of
others about comparable niche TV shows.
Sad, if true.
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip those
threads should they choose to do so.
I don't mind off topic.
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people to the >compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their kitchen sink,
and that other nutter.
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
I'm not sure that really changes things.
This place is open all hours to discuss Doctor Who... 24/7 365
days a year. If people want to start discussions about the show,
nobody is stopping them. It can't be on one person to start
every conversation. If people want to change things all they
have to do is start talking about Doctor Who... somebody here
will then respond in kind.
That's not what I mean. More signal doesn't remove noise, noise still
stays. :P
Just as well we're getting some soon, eh?
Hah.
Be careful what you wish for though... if Doctor Who takes a
turn for the worse with some poor stories and/or the ratings
tank in S15/S2 you might wish for some noise to deafen the
rabble!
Hah.
Ok, Doctor Who.
Some cheap stuff channel (free TV, they just show a lot of b-movies in
the evening, and repeat various star trek series and similar stuff in
the afternoon) now has Doctor Who! "New episodes!" they say. They
started with some Tennant episode and continue from there...
I don't object. The more Doctor, the better, especially that one. But,
new this is not. :) (Too bad they're showing them dubbed and no original
on 2nd audio channel. I'd otherwise keep it running in the background.)
--
Mickmane
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
You reply to the nutters...
Why do you do it?
I don't have any pigeons!!! I do have crows around outside
(noisy bastards) but I try not to feed them.
I got some crows outside on occasion. I always wonder what I could put
on the balcony to see them do clever tricks.
Got other birds too, they can be a bit vocal. (The crows don't give
whole concerts, just the occasional, even rare, caw.)
I don't mind the entertainment. I use my filters and Bozo Bin to
block what I don't want to read.
That only works for the nutters, not those replying to them.
Plus, ironically enough, it's probably King Troll and his
tangents that have kept this place alive through the years
whilst other newsgroups died a death of silence. RADW is
actually quite an active Usenet newsgroup compared to a lot of
others about comparable niche TV shows.
Sad, if true.
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip those
threads should they choose to do so.
I don't mind off topic.
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people to the >compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their kitchen sink,
and that other nutter.
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
It needs more new Doctor Who episodes to be talked about!
I'm not sure that really changes things.
This place is open all hours to discuss Doctor Who... 24/7 365
days a year. If people want to start discussions about the show,
nobody is stopping them. It can't be on one person to start
every conversation. If people want to change things all they
have to do is start talking about Doctor Who... somebody here
will then respond in kind.
That's not what I mean. More signal doesn't remove noise, noise still
stays. :P
Just as well we're getting some soon, eh?
Hah.
Be careful what you wish for though... if Doctor Who takes a
turn for the worse with some poor stories and/or the ratings
tank in S15/S2 you might wish for some noise to deafen the
rabble!
Hah.
Ok, Doctor Who.
Some cheap stuff channel (free TV, they just show a lot of b-movies in
the evening, and repeat various star trek series and similar stuff in
the afternoon) now has Doctor Who! "New episodes!" they say. They
started with some Tennant episode and continue from there...
I don't object. The more Doctor, the better, especially that one. But,
new this is not. :) (Too bad they're showing them dubbed and no original
on 2nd audio channel. I'd otherwise keep it running in the background.)
--
Mickmane
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's about
others' (ever the same) replies to them.
And more signal doesn't remove that or any other noise.
--
Mickmane
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
I'm excluding the current one now, I don't have him on any
list yet. He needs some actual Doctor scripts, not whatever
they've been doing so far. I want to like him, but they have
yet to give him something brilliant to do, with all the hectic
problem solving while babbling stuff only a Time Lord
understands (possibly).
Yeah, the scripts have generally been a bit of a let-down of
late... when the 15th Doctor got a chance to be THE Doctor, I
thought he showed a lot of promise.
When did he get that chance?
I'm hoping for some more consistency from the scripts in S15/S2.
I'm just hoping for more actual Doctor. :P
Did he run from anything yet?
He doesn't do a lot of running... he does seem to cry a fair bit
though.
And he's supposed to be the one who's recovered from past traumas. Did
they forget that?
Oh, and he did some singing once too.
Unfortunately.
I wasn't the biggest fan of his main companion
mind you (Clara) but Doctor Who companions in the modern era
tend to be written to make it all about them and their
lives. So I tend to prefer it when the focus is on the
Doctor.
Don't mention Clara. She turned out like the proverbial
visitors and fish.
Well, I wouldn't have said Clara was THAT bad!
She didn't start out bad, but hung around too long.
And almost became some kind of (un-)doctor, can-do-everything-super-
smart. Was she someone's Mary Sue?
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor Who
trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Hopefully that will change when the new season returns in
April.
You think religious nutters will stop posting, or everyone
else will at least stop responding to them?
Well, somebody seems to have quietened them! Either Kermit or
the new fella. This place has been as quiet as a morgue the
last few days. In fact, it's probably the quietest it's ever
been!!!
Kermit? Who's that, and why do you call him that?
New fella? What did he do?
Maybe they have become born again RADW-ers?
Haha.
I never doubted it. The term "impressive" can only apply to
one Doctor!
I knew you'd recognize him. :) (And that he's your favorite
classic, too.)
My favourite Doctor, full stop. Jon Pertwee was THE Doctor... as
he sang himself in his hit record of the 1970's! :-)
Ah yes. :)
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much
above zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise?
You have to read between the lines! ;-)
Where you find next to zero, as you said. :P
a
--
Mickmane
The Doctor wrote:
In article <d7ef31bc5ec55dc6b7a93d70877e9dee@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
Next month there will be new dr who stories to
discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr who and the
right sort of noise to go with it.
How to start a flame war here? Just say the Timeless Child is
part of Doctor Who.
That doesn't start a flame war here, only in your mind... you
think every discussion over one sentence in length is some sort
of war. As you are unable to discuss anything about the
"Timeless Child" or Jodie Whittaker's Doctor bar repeatedly
posting your inane standard one-line response.
If you want to discuss the 13th Doctor's era, feel free... I can
do that. There's no need for any war. So Dave, what didn't you
like about the 13th Doctor's era? Was there anything you did
like about it?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p3acuk6f4w6w001@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
No Disney please! No matter what Tennant says on FB!
Well I don't know what David Tennant said about Disney on
Facebook, so maybe a quote or a link would help. I am not
psychic... or on Facebook.
But, as I have told you before... if you think Disney are the
main problem with "Doctor Who" in 2025 then you haven't being
paying attention to the show for the last decade!
Disney have invested money in to the show, they are not
responsible for the content of the scripts. If you paid
attention to any interviews that RTD has given in the last
few years you will realise the show he is making is 'his'
vision of "Doctor Who". RTD doesn't hide his opinions and
nothing he is producing should be of any surprise to
anybody. (For reference, "The Writers Tale" book contains a
lot of detail on how his creative juices flowed during his
first tenure as Doctor Who Executive Producer... he is the
same man in 2025, just a bit older!)
The Disney investment is what Tennant refers to on FB.
And there was nothing wrong with that investment... for the fans
in the UK that could watch Doctor Who free on BBC1 or the BBC
iPlayer it meant they got to see Doctor Who episodes that could
afford to be made and looked good. Disney's investment wouldn't
have interfered with them one way or the other.
YOU actually watch Doctor Who on BBC1, so why is Disney putting
money into Doctor Who (a show that you claim to be a fan of) for
overseas streaming rights such a big issue for you? It's just
another one of your anti-something bandwagons that you don't
really understand or have a reason to be on as it doesn't affect
you!
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's
about others' (ever the same) replies to them.
But that is every individuals choice... you are free to block
any poster that you feel is not worth reading. Even me! Nobody
can dictate who people reply to or what people post though. That
is the freedom that comes with Usenet. It's an 'open' discussion
forum.
Read your groups, judge who is worth reading and block the rest.
If a thread is diverging too much, use a [subject] filter to
ignore that specific thread.
Your Usenet experience is what YOU make it. But you can't
control everyone else's Usenet experience... well, unless you go
for the moderator job on RADWM and start running that! :-)
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic era
of the show.
The new era of the show even launched with an episode named
after the companion! Jackie and Mickey Smith were all part of
the Rose soap opera style arc, plus we had the Rose-Tenth Doctor
'thing' too. We also had Amy and the Eleventh Doctor (with hubby
Rory), Clara hanging around too long, Donna and the Nobles,
whilst Ruby Sunday also had an episode named after her!
So yeah, most definitely the focus has shifted and the
companions play a much larger part in the series than they ever
did before. Sometimes to the detriment of the actual Doctor.
Which is where I have an issue with it. I want the stories about
the Doctor and whatever alien threat he is dealing with, not the
companion and their back-story or home life.
Blueshirt brought forth:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic era
of the show.
The new era of the show even launched with an episode named
after the companion!
To be fair, the Classic era also launched with an episode named
after a companion. (And the fourth part of that story was named
after another!)
OTOH the Modern era has had episodes named after the Doctor.
Yes, in general there has been a greater focus on companions, but
the episode titles don’t reflect that.
--
solar penguin
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's about
others' (ever the same) replies to them.
And more signal doesn't remove that or any other noise.
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you
don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to
your liking you can go elsewhere.
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's about
others' (ever the same) replies to them.
That's none of your business. You can only control what you yourself
post.
And more signal doesn't remove that or any other noise.
At the moment the only one making any noise here is you.
--
https://www.theory11.com/
Mickmane wrote:
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people
to the compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their
kitchen sink, and that other nutter.
Habit? Entertainment? Boredom?
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <d7ef31bc5ec55dc6b7a93d70877e9dee@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
Next month there will be new dr who stories to
discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr who and the
right sort of noise to go with it.
How to start a flame war here? Just say the Timeless Child is
part of Doctor Who.
That doesn't start a flame war here, only in your mind... you
think every discussion over one sentence in length is some sort
of war. As you are unable to discuss anything about the
"Timeless Child" or Jodie Whittaker's Doctor bar repeatedly
posting your inane standard one-line response.
If you want to discuss the 13th Doctor's era, feel free... I can
do that. There's no need for any war. So Dave, what didn't you
like about the 13th Doctor's era? Was there anything you did
like about it?
On 15/03/2025 8:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <d7ef31bc5ec55dc6b7a93d70877e9dee@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
Next month there will be new dr who stories to
discuss. Here's hoping for some good dr who and the
right sort of noise to go with it.
How to start a flame war here? Just say the Timeless Child is
part of Doctor Who.
That doesn't start a flame war here, only in your mind... you
think every discussion over one sentence in length is some sort
of war. As you are unable to discuss anything about the
"Timeless Child" or Jodie Whittaker's Doctor bar repeatedly
posting your inane standard one-line response.
If you want to discuss the 13th Doctor's era, feel free... I can
do that. There's no need for any war. So Dave, what didn't you
like about the 13th Doctor's era? Was there anything you did
like about it?
^^^^^<-Paedophile talker notedI can't recall .... did Binky provide a review of any of the JodieDoctor
Stories.^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
And I don't mean one of his AI-generated "reviews" (although I think
they came along later), I mean one of his
point-by-point-by-point-by-point reviews.
Or did Binky just bitch about the reviews that Tim wrote??
--
Daniel70
On 15/03/2025 8:51 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people
to the compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their
kitchen sink, and that other nutter.
Habit? Entertainment? Boredom?
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
I don't know about OCD but was it five years or more ago when (Stephen
or Mike) suggested that 'Doctor Who' fans were, most likely, somewhere
on the Autism Spectrum! I'd put my hand up. I reckon I could be ....
maybe .... to a very slight extent, but sure!!
--
Daniel70
On 15/03/2025 8:51 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
I don't know about OCD but was it five years or more ago when
(Stephen or Mike) suggested that 'Doctor Who' fans were, most
likely, somewhere on the Autism Spectrum!
I'd put my hand up. I reckon I could be .... maybe .... to a
very slight extent, but sure!!
In article <vr6dge$1n8gm$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 15/03/2025 8:51 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
I don't know about OCD but was it five years or more ago
when (Stephen or Mike) suggested that 'Doctor Who' fans
were, most likely, somewhere on the Autism Spectrum! I'd put
my hand up. I reckon I could be .... maybe .... to a very
slight extent, but sure!!
I doubt it!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/03/2025 8:51 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
I don't know about OCD but was it five years or more ago when
(Stephen or Mike) suggested that 'Doctor Who' fans were, most
likely, somewhere on the Autism Spectrum!
Doctor Blueshirt agrees with that diagnosis...
The only cure is to stop watching "Doctor Who" altogether. But
that must be harder than giving up the fags... as even the
people who claim to hate "Doctor Who" still feel obligated to
watch it every week! So more than likely death is the only cure.
I'd put my hand up. I reckon I could be .... maybe .... to a
very slight extent, but sure!!
Doctor Blueshirt's prognosis is that it could be a bit more than
"very slight"... but people who have an obsessive interest in a
TV show enough to talk about it (or try to talk about it) in an
online discussion forum are definitely on the spectrum somewhere.
S.I.G.
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about
what you don't want to see and telling people how to post.
Blueshirt brought forth:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic
era of the show.
Yes, in general there has been a greater focus on companions,
but the episode titles don’t reflect that.
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's
about others' (ever the same) replies to them.
But that is every individuals choice... you are free to block
any poster that you feel is not worth reading. Even me! Nobody
can dictate who people reply to or what people post though. That
is the freedom that comes with Usenet. It's an 'open' discussion
forum.
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
You reply to the nutters...
And they reply to me... so they might see that as doing the same
thing!!!
It's my choice though.
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip
those threads should they choose to do so.
I don't mind off topic.
If marked accordingly there's nothing wrong with it. At least
off-topic posts marked OT can be avoided easily.
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people
to the compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their
kitchen sink, and that other nutter.
Habit? Entertainment? Boredom?
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic era
of the show.
So yeah, most definitely the focus has shifted and the
companions play a much larger part in the series than they ever
did before. Sometimes to the detriment of the actual Doctor.
Which is where I have an issue with it. I want the stories about
the Doctor and whatever alien threat he is dealing with, not the
companion and their back-story or home life.
solar penguin wrote:
Blueshirt brought forth:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic
era of the show.
Yes, in general there has been a greater focus on companions,
but the episode titles don’t reflect that.
On the similar theme about Doctor Who companion tropes...
https://screenrant.com/doctor-who-season-15-mystery-girl-belinda-trope-repeat-op-ed/
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I don't feel that way about any other companion of the new
series. There wasn't that much about the others' lives, nor
did they hog the stage so much.
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic era
of the show.
Ok, compared to classic, yes.
I started with the new series, so am used to Rose and Martha level of >companions. They didn't hog the stage, they just had lives. :)
11th doctor, I only watched years later, after the initial few episodes
(up to not finishing the 2-parter(?) weeping angels episodes, I think) >spoiled the whole series, made it unwatcheable. For years, until a
friend said I should check 1 episode of the doctor who follows, which
was ok again, and then I dragged through the 11th doctor episodes up to
that. (Actually, we made a deal, I watch that episode, and she the first
of the new series. I think she still hasn't done that. :P )
Can't we at least replace the figure with, say, Sherlock guy? AI has to
be good for something.
In any case, 11th is not really Doctor Who in my world. :P
So yeah, most definitely the focus has shifted and the
companions play a much larger part in the series than they ever
did before. Sometimes to the detriment of the actual Doctor.
Which is where I have an issue with it. I want the stories about
the Doctor and whatever alien threat he is dealing with, not the
companion and their back-story or home life.
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are about
some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode, and the >absorbalov.
--
Mickmane
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
So, that's why they feed trolls as a hobby?
You'll have to ask them... if they ever turn up again!
You reply to the nutters...
And they reply to me... so they might see that as doing the same
thing!!!
I don't see that. :P
It's my choice though.
Yeah, and I merely asked why. :)
There's no law that says you can't discuss other topics in a
newsgroup either, but convention is those threads should be
marked OT [off-topic] accordingly, so that people can skip
those threads should they choose to do so.
I don't mind off topic.
If marked accordingly there's nothing wrong with it. At least
off-topic posts marked OT can be avoided easily.
They could be interesting.
I don't like ever the same replies from ever the same people
to the compulsory replying of one dude to every post and their
kitchen sink, and that other nutter.
Habit? Entertainment? Boredom?
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
That'd at least explain it. :)
--
Mickmane
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com>
wrote:
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's
about others' (ever the same) replies to them.
But that is every individuals choice... you are free to block
any poster that you feel is not worth reading. Even me!
Nobody can dictate who people reply to or what people post
though. That is the freedom that comes with Usenet. It's an
'open' discussion forum.
I was merely explaining the problem.
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic
era of the show.
Ok, compared to classic, yes.
I started with the new series, so am used to Rose and Martha
level of companions. They didn't hog the stage, they just had
lives. :)
Mickmane wrote:
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com>
wrote:
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's
about others' (ever the same) replies to them.
But that is every individuals choice... you are free to block
any poster that you feel is not worth reading. Even me!
Nobody can dictate who people reply to or what people post
though. That is the freedom that comes with Usenet. It's an
'open' discussion forum.
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you. My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
Behind it all RADW is generally a good place.
Mickmane wrote:
In any case, 11th is not really Doctor Who in my world. :P
Just say;
The 11th Doctor must be retconned. Doctor Who finished in 2010.
We'll all be able to understand what you mean then!
So yeah, most definitely the focus has shifted and the
companions play a much larger part in the series than they
ever did before. Sometimes to the detriment of the actual
Doctor. Which is where I have an issue with it. I want the
stories to be about the Doctor and whatever alien threat he
is dealing with, not the companion and their back-story or
his home life.
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes.
Next season, I think we'll get to see a bit more of Ruby
Sunday's Mum and home-life before she leaves.
But worse are the episodes that have next to no
Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
It's called Doctor Who so yeah, make it all about the Doctor.
Although "Blink" was actually quite a good "Doctor lite" episode.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
I wouldn't put the Weeping Angels in the same sentence as the
Abzorbalov!
Mickmane wrote:
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
That'd at least explain it. :)
I think we've all just become used to one another here... like
one big dysfunctional family.
Welcome!
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
Mickmane wrote:
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Companions hogging the stage is becoming a bit of a Doctor
Who trope.
Nope, don't see it.
Since Doctor Who returned in 2005 the companions and their
lives, and their families at times too, have become more of a
focus than we ever got to see with companions in the classic
era of the show.
Ok, compared to classic, yes.
I started with the new series, so am used to Rose and Martha
level of companions. They didn't hog the stage, they just had
lives. :)
Series One (2005) was all about Rose Tyler. It started off with
the episode "Rose" and finished with a two-parter the first of
which was titled "Bad Wolf"... Rose of course declaring herself
to be the "bad wolf". So Rose more than hogged the stage IMO!
RTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life. Which I
am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern TV shows are
written.
Mickmane wrote:
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
As if the whole group had a collective OCD. :P
Well, that could well be the case! Maybe it's what we've all
picked up from being here too long!
That'd at least explain it. :)
I think we've all just become used to one another here... like
one big dysfunctional family.
Welcome!
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
Mickmane wrote:
In any case, 11th is not really Doctor Who in my world. :P
Just say;
The 11th Doctor must be retconned.
Doctor Who finished in 2010.
We'll all be able to understand what you mean then!
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes.
Next season, I think we'll get to see a bit more of Ruby
Sunday's Mum and home-life before she leaves.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
I wouldn't put the Weeping Angels in the same sentence as the
Abzorbalov!
Mickmane wrote:
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you.
My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
Mickmane wrote:
I started with the new series, so am used to Rose and Martha
level of companions. They didn't hog the stage, they just had
lives. :)
Series One (2005) was all about Rose Tyler. It started off with
the episode "Rose" and finished with a two-parter the first of
which was titled "Bad Wolf"... Rose of course declaring herself
to be the "bad wolf". So Rose more than hogged the stage IMO!
RTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life. Which I
am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern TV shows are
written.
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are about
some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
In any case, 11th is not really Doctor Who in my world. :P
Just say;
The 11th Doctor must be retconned.
Replaced with a different actor and redone.
Doctor Who finished in 2010.
But that's not true.
We'll all be able to understand what you mean then!
Lol.
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes.
Next season, I think we'll get to see a bit more of Ruby
Sunday's Mum and home-life before she leaves.
They're nice though, not irritating or worse.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
I wouldn't put the Weeping Angels in the same sentence as the
Abzorbalov!
I do.
--
Mickmane
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you.
Now you try to redefine the problem. Doesn't work.
My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
That'd take far more time than I'm willing to invest.
I'll stick to looking at subject lines, and any that catch my eye get a
check for whether there's threading. If not, then that's because the
post it's in reply to was caught by killfile.
--
Mickmane
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I started with the new series, so am used to Rose and Martha
level of companions. They didn't hog the stage, they just had
lives. :)
Series One (2005) was all about Rose Tyler. It started off with
the episode "Rose" and finished with a two-parter the first of
which was titled "Bad Wolf"... Rose of course declaring herself
to be the "bad wolf". So Rose more than hogged the stage IMO!
LOL. Didn't feel as bad though.
And I don't think I actually started with the first episode. Took a bit
until I noticed it was on TV here.
RTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life. Which I
am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern TV shows are
written.
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I watch a
crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser brother, or even
know that he has one. I want a crime of the week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an intimate >relationship.
--
Mickmane
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a bad >opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are about
some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode, and the
absorbalov.
--
Daniel70
On 17/03/2025 8:24 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
<Snip>
Good!!I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
--
Daniel70
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
RTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life.
Which I am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern
TV shows are written.
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I
watch a crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser
brother, or even know that he has one. I want a crime of the
week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an
intimate relationship.
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you.
Now you try to redefine the problem. Doesn't work.
My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
That'd take far more time than I'm willing to invest.
I'll stick to looking at subject lines, and any that catch my
eye get a check for whether there's threading. If not, then
that's because the post it's in reply to was caught by
killfile.
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to no
Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies. Like the
first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have
such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT
episode out again!!
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
RTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life.
Which I am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern
TV shows are written.
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I
watch a crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser
brother, or even know that he has one. I want a crime of the
week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an
intimate relationship.
Script writers call it emotional drama... and they think it
should be in absolutely everything.
Doctor Who didn't need in in 1972 or 1982 so I say it doesn't
need it now. People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not
to see the same thing they see in real life or in every soap
opera on the television.
Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you.
Now you try to redefine the problem. Doesn't work.
No, I am saying as far as I am concerned RADW isn't a problem.
You can't tell me something is a problem if I don't agree with
you!
So what you see as the problem here clearly isn't a problem to
me, or some others here. You can't say something is a problem for
everybody else when nobody is backing up your POV here. So your
reality isn't necessarily ours. We might know where you are
coming from, but you are not telling anybody here something they
don't already know!
Constantly posting about what you think is a problem here is
pointless as the only person really engaging with you
is me. So other people clearly have a different opinion... or
maybe their ways of browsing RADW suits them fine and they deal
with anything they see as a problem in their own way and don't
need to be told?
My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
That'd take far more time than I'm willing to invest.
Then the problem is your laziness!
Newsreaders have filters and Bozo Bins for a reason... and the
reason is to deal with the issues that you seem to want solved.
But the cure is already there.
I'll stick to looking at subject lines, and any that catch my
eye get a check for whether there's threading. If not, then
that's because the post it's in reply to was caught by
killfile.
It's your choice how you use Usenet, there is no one size fits
all. Whatever works for you works for you. Most of us don't over
analyse things too much. RADW is what it is. It is only a Usenet
newsgroup at the end of the day, not an academic science project.
We all have our own way of browsing here, your way is as good as
any. If it keeps you happy, all well and good.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to no
Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies. Like the
first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT
episode out again!!
Yes, in "The Lazarus Experiment".
Harold Saxon basically corrupted her mind with lies about the
Doctor.
Mickmane wrote:
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
Well it wasn't actually a bet, but...
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
;-)
Mickmane wrote:
On 16.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com>
wrote:
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's
about others' (ever the same) replies to them.
But that is every individuals choice... you are free to block
any poster that you feel is not worth reading. Even me!
Nobody can dictate who people reply to or what people post
though. That is the freedom that comes with Usenet. It's an
'open' discussion forum.
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you. My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
Behind it all RADW is generally a good place.
In article <3cf105d18ff0b969a98e68089e5979d5@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you >>don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to >>your liking you can go elsewhere.
Hear! Hear!
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's about
others' (ever the same) replies to them.
That's none of your business. You can only control what you yourself
post.
And more signal doesn't remove that or any other noise.
At the moment the only one making any noise here is you.
Spot on!
--
https://www.theory11.com/
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:36:08 +0000, The Doctor wrote:
In article <3cf105d18ff0b969a98e68089e5979d5@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you >>>don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to >>>your liking you can go elsewhere.
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you decide to
contribute to this group. If you leave religion to the places it belongs
in you would be be doing yourself as well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor.
The excitement level here doesn't seem to have gone much above
zero! :-)
How can you get excited, or even find it, among all the noise? :P
It is easy to ignore people here. I do it all the time.
You misunderstand. It's not about ignoring some people, it's about
others' (ever the same) replies to them.
That's none of your business. You can only control what you yourself >>>post.
And more signal doesn't remove that or any other noise.
At the moment the only one making any noise here is you.
Spot on!
Concentrate on your namesake the good doctor. He is back in a few weeks. >Optimism reins.
--
https://www.theory11.com/
--
https://www.theory11.com/
Mickmane wrote:
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
Well it wasn't actually a bet, but...
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
;-)
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are
about some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode,
and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a
bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
Mickmane wrote:
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I
watch a crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser
brother, or even know that he has one. I want a crime of the
week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an
intimate relationship.
Script writers call it emotional drama... and they think it
should be in absolutely everything.
Doctor Who didn't need in in 1972 or 1982 so I say it doesn't
need it now.
People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not to see the same
thing they see in real life or in every soap opera on the television.
Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you.
Now you try to redefine the problem. Doesn't work.
No, I am saying as far as I am concerned RADW isn't a problem.
You can't tell me something is a problem if I don't agree with
you!
In article <vr8s3r$3te66$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a bad
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are about >>> some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode, and the
absorbalov.
opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
The Lazarus Expermient?
The Master poisoned Martha's mum against the Doctor.
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
RTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life. Which I
am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern TV shows are
written.
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I watch a
crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser brother, or even
know that he has one. I want a crime of the week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an intimate relationship.
In article <xn0p3f2y31v1077008@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to no
Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies. Like the
first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT
episode out again!!
Yes, in "The Lazarus Experiment".
Harold Saxon basically corrupted her mind with lies about the
Doctor.
Thank you for the confirmation.
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are
about some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode,
and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a
bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear. She
didn't think to question any of it.
The Doctor was NOT Lazarus, Lazarus was the monster of the week.
In article <57867f462bf56f15ec071a0420e35e49@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you
decide to contribute to this group. If you leave religion to
the places it belongs in you would be be doing yourself as
well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor.
Depends who flaming well starts a wart
and spell favoUr properly.
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and
their quirks
In article <57867f462bf56f15ec071a0420e35e49@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:36:08 +0000, The Doctor wrote:
In article <3cf105d18ff0b969a98e68089e5979d5@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you >>>> don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to >>>> your liking you can go elsewhere.
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you decide to
contribute to this group. If you leave religion to the places it belongs
in you would be be doing yourself as well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor.
Depends who flaming well starts a wart
and spell favoUr properly.
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either.
When I watch a crime show, I don't want to see the
detective's loser brother, or even know that he has one. I
want a crime of the week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an
intimate relationship.
Script writers call it emotional drama... and they think it
should be in absolutely everything.
They're wrong.
People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not to see
the same thing they see in real life or in every soap opera
on the television.
So true!
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Now you try to redefine the problem. Doesn't work.
No, I am saying as far as I am concerned RADW isn't a
problem. You can't tell me something is a problem if I
don't agree with you!
Now you talk about you, that's fine.
Btw, I didn't start this thread, so don't act as if it's my
topic.
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 19:17:10 +0000, Blueshirt wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I was merely explaining the problem.
It's only really a problem if you let it become a problem to
you. My advice is to use your newsreader's filters and block
threads when/if the discussion starts heading in to nutter
territory...
It is not a problem. An online space where people can talk
freely will always be open to trolling. With the small amount
of people here it is containable.
Behind it all RADW is generally a good place.
A bit zany at times - not as zany as Reddit tho.
On 18/03/2025 2:24 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr8s3r$3te66$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
The Lazarus Expermient?
The Master poisoned Martha's mum against the Doctor.
Having re-watched it this afternoon,
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her
ear. She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
Daniel70 wrote:
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
The Devil!
Allegedly.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/03/2025 2:24 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr8s3r$3te66$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
The Lazarus Expermient?
The Master poisoned Martha's mum against the Doctor.
Having re-watched it this afternoon,
You got through those 51 "Stargate SG-1" DVD's fairly quickly!
:-)
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her
ear. She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
Maybe Mrs Jones thought the Doctor was banging her daughter?!
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
Well it wasn't actually a bet, but...
Thus the "'d" "would", if it were a bet. :)
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and their quirks >(never mind the other l-word, which has no meaning anyway, but that's
off topic :P ).
;-)
Hah. :P
--
Mickmane
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are
about some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode,
and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a
bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear. She
didn't think to question any of it.
The Doctor was NOT Lazarus, Lazarus was the monster of the week.
--
Mickmane
On 17/03/2025 8:20 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
<Snip>
One of the ('Ancient') T.V. series that is being repeated here inRTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life. Which I
am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern TV shows are
written.
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I watch a
crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser brother, or even
know that he has one. I want a crime of the week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an intimate
relationship.
Australia ATM is "Homicide:Life on the Street" ....
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106028/?ref_=fn_all_ttl_1
It features a lot of this inter-personal 'intimate relationship' type >interaction .... which, to me at least, makes it a much more enjoyable >programme to watch.
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
--
Daniel70
On 18/03/2025 2:24 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr8s3r$3te66$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a bad
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are about >>>> some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode, and the
absorbalov.
opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
The Lazarus Expermient?
The Master poisoned Martha's mum against the Doctor.
Having re-watched it this afternoon, no, that was mid-episode when one
of The Master's (a.k.a. Mr PM) aides had a word in Mum's Ear .... but
she was set against The Doctor from the start .... perhaps because
Martha and The Doctor had left a 'Family' party together the night
before (in Earth Timespan!).
--
Daniel70
The Doctor wrote:
In article <57867f462bf56f15ec071a0420e35e49@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you
decide to contribute to this group. If you leave religion to
the places it belongs in you would be be doing yourself as
well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor.
Depends who flaming well starts a wart
and spell favoUr properly.
Oh, the irony!
Dave correcting somebody's spelling and then spelling something
wrong himself... you just couldn't make it up.
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the episodes. But
worse are the episodes that have next to no Doctor in them and are
about some random nobodies. Like the first weeping angel episode,
and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a
bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear. She
didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
The Doctor was NOT Lazarus, Lazarus was the monster of the week.Yeap.
--
Daniel70
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and
their quirks
I hope you do stick around. You have already created more
meaningful discussions here in the last month than the
top-poster and longest inhabitant of this group has done in
thirty years!
You're right though, people have quirks, and you don't have to
like anyone or their quirky ways. RADW is basically random
internet dudes, but we are a community and you will get immune
to us and our ways the more you stick around.
Just imagine... it could be you in thirty years time keeping the
RADW show on the road!!!
On 18/03/2025 3:34 pm, The Doctor wrote:
In article <57867f462bf56f15ec071a0420e35e49@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:36:08 +0000, The Doctor wrote:
In article <3cf105d18ff0b969a98e68089e5979d5@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you >>>>> don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to >>>>> your liking you can go elsewhere.
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you decide to
contribute to this group. If you leave religion to the places it belongs >>> in you would be be doing yourself as well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor.
Depends who flaming well starts a wart
How does one start a Wart on UseNet??
and spell favoUr properly.
Look out, Theory11 .... this is possibly the WORST SPELLER on the
Internet picking you up on your spelling!!
--
Daniel70
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
Now you try to redefine the problem. Doesn't work.
No, I am saying as far as I am concerned RADW isn't a
problem. You can't tell me something is a problem if I
don't agree with you!
Now you talk about you, that's fine.
Btw, I didn't start this thread, so don't act as if it's my
topic.
You didn't actually, but whoever did hasn't contributed much
since their original post. Which is usually the way it goes on
Usenet, people complain about things but then don't do anything
themself to try and change it.
You've stepped up to the plate. So fair play to you. Maybe the
person who started this thread is waiting until S2/S15 starts in
April before getting stuck in?
Or we have already scared them away?! ;-)
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her
ear. She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
Maybe Mrs Jones thought the Doctor was banging her daughter?!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/03/2025 2:24 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr8s3r$3te66$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
The Lazarus Expermient?
The Master poisoned Martha's mum against the Doctor.
Having re-watched it this afternoon,
You got through those 51 "Stargate SG-1" DVD's fairly quickly!
:-)
On 18/03/2025 11:51 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:Owww!! That one came from nowhere!! ;-P
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
The Devil!
Allegedly.
--
Daniel70
On 18/03/2025 11:50 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:Yet to be reviewed.
On 18/03/2025 2:24 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <vr8s3r$3te66$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 17/03/2025 4:51 am, Mickmane wrote:
<Snip>
Yeah, don't really need Rose's or Martha's moms in the"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to
episodes. But worse are the episodes that have next to
no Doctor in them and are about some random nobodies.
Like the first weeping angel episode, and the absorbalov.
have such a bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get
THAT episode out again!!
The Lazarus Expermient?
The Master poisoned Martha's mum against the Doctor.
Having re-watched it this afternoon,
You got through those 51 "Stargate SG-1" DVD's fairly quickly!
:-)
Do you want me to review them here, episode by episode?? ;-P
--
Daniel70
Depends who flaming well starts a wart
How does one start a Wart on UseNet??
In article <xn0p3g41282qm5i001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not to see
the same thing they see in real life or in every soap
opera on the television.
So true!
I was staying with my Nan in Belfast in 1972 when I first saw
Doctor Who on the TV... and trust me, you needed some sort of
escapism from the real world in Belfast circa 1972.
Your nan come from the North?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p3g41282qm5i001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not to see
the same thing they see in real life or in every soap
opera on the television.
So true!
I was staying with my Nan in Belfast in 1972 when I first saw
Doctor Who on the TV... and trust me, you needed some sort of
escapism from the real world in Belfast circa 1972.
Your nan come from the North?
My Nan comes from Ireland. Every country has a north!
Just as well she did live there though... imagine if I had never
been exposed to "Doctor Who" on BBC1 one cold dark Saturday
evening whilst I was up there? I wouldn't have needed escapism
from the real world and maybe in turn I would never have become
a Doctor Who fan... and maybe I wouldn't be here now!!!
Scary thought eh?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vrbsnq$2jcu6$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 11:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:What otehr daughter.
Maybe Mrs Jones thought the Doctor was banging her
daughter?!
.... but she didn't seem to mind the other Daughter
potentially banging the Lazarus guy!! ;-P
Martha Jones had a sister. She worked for Professor Lazarus in
"The Lazarus Experiment" and then in a later episode worked for
PM Harold Saxon.
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
Well it wasn't actually a bet, but...
Thus the "'d" "would", if it were a bet. :)
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and their quirks (never mind the other l-word, which has no meaning anyway, but that's
off topic :P ).
On 17/03/2025 8:20 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
<Snip>
One of the ('Ancient') T.V. series that is being repeated here inRTD gave us a Doctor Who soap opera twenty years ago and the
show has continued pretty much in the same vein since then...
with regular emotional attachments between the companions and
the Doctor and exploration of the companion's home life. Which I
am not a big fan of but I accept that's how modern TV shows are
written.
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I watch a
crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser brother, or even
know that he has one. I want a crime of the week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an intimate
relationship.
Australia ATM is "Homicide:Life on the Street" ....
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106028/?ref_=fn_all_ttl_1
It features a lot of this inter-personal 'intimate relationship' type interaction .... which, to me at least, makes it a much more enjoyable programme to watch.
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
Daniel70 wrote:
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
The Devil!
Allegedly.
On 17/03/2025 8:20 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 17.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
<Snip>
That's something I don't like in other TV shows either. When I watch
a crime show, I don't want to see the detective's loser brother, or
even know that he has one. I want a crime of the week.
I also don't want detective and whatever partner to start an
intimate relationship.
One of the ('Ancient') T.V. series that is being repeated here in
Australia ATM is "Homicide:Life on the Street" ....
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106028/?ref_=fn_all_ttl_1
It features a lot of this inter-personal 'intimate relationship' type interaction .... which, to me at least, makes it a much more
enjoyable programme to watch.
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not to see
the same thing they see in real life or in every soap opera
on the television.
So true!
I was staying with my Nan in Belfast in 1972 when I first saw
Doctor Who on the TV... and trust me, you needed some sort of
escapism from the real world in Belfast circa 1972.
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a
bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out
again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear.
She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and
their quirks
I hope you do stick around. You have already created more
meaningful discussions here in the last month than the
top-poster and longest inhabitant of this group has done in
thirty years!
You're right though, people have quirks, and you don't have to
like anyone or their quirky ways. RADW is basically random
internet dudes, but we are a community and you will get immune
to us and our ways the more you stick around.
Just imagine... it could be you in thirty years time keeping the
RADW show on the road!!!
On 19.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
"Martha's mom"?? Did we ever find out why she seemed to have such a
bad opinion of The Doctor/Lazarus?? Must get THAT episode out
again!!
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear.
She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
She had stuff told to her before she met the Doctor.
In article <xn0p3gh4g2lswk003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vrbsnq$2jcu6$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 11:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:What otehr daughter.
Maybe Mrs Jones thought the Doctor was banging her
daughter?!
.... but she didn't seem to mind the other Daughter
potentially banging the Lazarus guy!! ;-P
Martha Jones had a sister. She worked for Professor Lazarus in
"The Lazarus Experiment" and then in a later episode worked for
PM Harold Saxon.
Got you. I recall the wit bother from TOTP.
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 8:54:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
I'm sure the day will come when you love us all... and our
little foibles. ;-)
You'd lose that bet. :P
Well it wasn't actually a bet, but...
Thus the "'d" "would", if it were a bet. :)
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and their quirks
(never mind the other l-word, which has no meaning anyway, but that's
off topic :P ).
Season two is just around the corner. Stick around, change from within.
Better to be inside the tent pissing out than outside pissing in.
--
https://www.theory11.com/
On 19.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
People watch sci-fi type shows for escapism... not to see
the same thing they see in real life or in every soap opera
on the television.
So true!
I was staying with my Nan in Belfast in 1972 when I first saw
Doctor Who on the TV... and trust me, you needed some sort of
escapism from the real world in Belfast circa 1972.
I believe you!
Mind, I had my first birthday (not day of birth) very late in 1972, so I >didn't really know what was going on. Just heard stuff over the years in >between...
--
Mickmane
On 19.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
Who needs nothing but death and mayham??
The Devil!
Allegedly.
Not the one in the TV series Lucifer. He actually didn't really like
that at all.
--
Mickmane
On 19.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Mickmane wrote:
On 18.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
If you're still here this time next year, I win!
Nope, that I stick around doesn't mean I like everyone and
their quirks
I hope you do stick around. You have already created more
meaningful discussions here in the last month than the
top-poster and longest inhabitant of this group has done in
thirty years!
Lol.
I've been here since before the 3 new Tennant episodes, I won't run off
that fast.
You're right though, people have quirks, and you don't have to
like anyone or their quirky ways. RADW is basically random
internet dudes, but we are a community and you will get immune
to us and our ways the more you stick around.
From experience, I'll get allergic, not immune. And impatient, so
annoying people quickly end up in the killfile.
Just imagine... it could be you in thirty years time keeping the
RADW show on the road!!!
Doesn't sound like me. :P
--
Mickmane
On 19/03/2025 8:45 am, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p3gh4g2lswk003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <vrbsnq$2jcu6$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 11:47 pm, Blueshirt wrote:What otehr daughter.
Maybe Mrs Jones thought the Doctor was banging her
daughter?!
.... but she didn't seem to mind the other Daughter
potentially banging the Lazarus guy!! ;-P
"otehr"??
"wit""Martha Jones had a sister. She worked for Professor Lazarus in
"The Lazarus Experiment" and then in a later episode worked for
PM Harold Saxon.
Got you. I recall the wit bother from TOTP.
"TOTP"?? Maybe that second one is "Top Of The Pops" ..... which is over
there .........>
--
Daniel70
In article <vrbnft$2f3fi$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 3:34 pm, The Doctor wrote:
In article <57867f462bf56f15ec071a0420e35e49@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:36:08 +0000, The Doctor wrote:Depends who flaming well starts a wart
In article <3cf105d18ff0b969a98e68089e5979d5@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you >>>>>> don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to >>>>>> your liking you can go elsewhere.
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you decide to
contribute to this group. If you leave religion to the places it belongs >>>> in you would be be doing yourself as well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor. >>>
How does one start a Wart on UseNet??
and spell favoUr properly.
Look out, Theory11 .... this is possibly the WORST SPELLER on the
Internet picking you up on your spelling!!
You cannot spell LaboUr properly Dannyboy!
On 19/03/2025 1:39 am, The Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-Peadophile talker noted! ^^^^<-Peadophile talker noted!
In article <vrbnft$2f3fi$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 3:34 pm, The Doctor wrote:
In article <57867f462bf56f15ec071a0420e35e49@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:36:08 +0000, The Doctor wrote:Depends who flaming well starts a wart
In article <3cf105d18ff0b969a98e68089e5979d5@www.novabbs.com>,
Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 8:34:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 15.03.25, Theory11 <card.master@bee92.invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0000, Mickmane wrote:
On 13.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Ever heard of snipping?
Ever heard of not being rude? You come in here and go on about what you >>>>>>> don't want to see and telling people how to post. If this group isn't to
your liking you can go elsewhere.
Hear! Hear!
The main problem here usually revolves around what you decide to
contribute to this group. If you leave religion to the places it belongs >>>>> in you would be be doing yourself as well as rec.arts.drwho a big favor. >>>>
How does one start a Wart on UseNet??
and spell favoUr properly.
Look out, Theory11 .... this is possibly the WORST SPELLER on the
Internet picking you up on your spelling!!
You cannot spell LaboUr properly Dannyboy!
YOU, Binky can spell 'Labor' however YOU want, Binky!
The Australian Labor Party spells 'Labor' 'Labor'!!^^^^<-Peadophile talker noted!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Labor_Party
So they are, apparently, of the opinion that YOUR opinion, Binky, counts
for ZERO!!
--
Daniel70
On 19.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Just imagine... it could be you in thirty years time keeping
the RADW show on the road!!!
Doesn't sound like me. :P
In article <xn0p3gguv27znj002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
My Nan comes from Ireland. Every country has a north!
Just as well she did live there though... imagine if I had
never been exposed to "Doctor Who" on BBC1 one cold dark
Saturday evening whilst I was up there? I wouldn't have
needed escapism from the real world and maybe in turn I
would never have become a Doctor Who fan... and maybe I
wouldn't be here now!!!
Scary thought eh?
You missed Inferno.
On 19/03/2025 5:38 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 19.03.25, Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in
her ear. She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
She had stuff told to her before she met the Doctor.
Was that BEFORE Martha became the Companion?? Because, in this
episode, they had just returned to Earth after several
'Adventures' .... and who had told her about ....
Oh!! Hang On!! Are you suggesting Martha's MOTHER had been
told stuff about The Doctor before Martha took off with The
Doctor??
Daniel declared:
On 19/03/2025 8:45 am, The Doctor wrote:
"wit""
Got you. I recall the wit bother from TOTP.
"TOTP"?? Maybe that second one is "Top Of The Pops" ..... which is over
there .........>
The Order of The Phoenix?
--
solar penguin
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0p3gguv27znj002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
My Nan comes from Ireland. Every country has a north!
Just as well she did live there though... imagine if I had
never been exposed to "Doctor Who" on BBC1 one cold dark
Saturday evening whilst I was up there? I wouldn't have
needed escapism from the real world and maybe in turn I
would never have become a Doctor Who fan... and maybe I
wouldn't be here now!!!
Scary thought eh?
You missed Inferno.
I missed quite a lot of Doctor Who episodes live pre-1972,
especially those from before I was born! Fortunately for all us
younger fans there was the Target novels, then came the VHS
tapes and then DVD's ... (etc.)
Mickmane wrote:
On 19.03.25, Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Just imagine... it could be you in thirty years time keeping
the RADW show on the road!!!
Doesn't sound like me. :P
Most of us won't be around to know, but do your best!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/03/2025 5:38 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 19.03.25, Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
Master's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in
her ear. She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
She had stuff told to her before she met the Doctor.
Was that BEFORE Martha became the Companion?? Because, in this
episode, they had just returned to Earth after several
'Adventures' .... and who had told her about ....
Oh!! Hang On!! Are you suggesting Martha's MOTHER had been
told stuff about The Doctor before Martha took off with The
Doctor??
Maybe Mrs Jones just didn't like the idea of her daughter going
off on <cough> adventures with an older man... I mean, the
Doctor is over a 1,000 years old, and Martha was around 30, so
it is kind of disgusting when you think about it. (Hmmm... maybe
Agamemnon has been right all along?!)
Maybe that's also why Barry Letts never brought any of that
romance stuff in with the Third Doctor and his much younger
female companions?
On 19/03/2025 5:38 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 19.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
Was that BEFORE Martha became the Companion?? Because, in thisMaster's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear.
She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
She had stuff told to her before she met the Doctor.
episode, they had just returned to Earth after several 'Adventures'
.... and who had told her about ....
Oh!! Hang On!! Are you suggesting Martha's MOTHER had been told stuff
about The Doctor before Martha took off with The Doctor??
On 20.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 19/03/2025 5:38 pm, Mickmane wrote:
On 19.03.25, Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 18/03/2025 7:49 pm, Mickmane wrote:
Was that BEFORE Martha became the Companion?? Because, in thisMaster's agents whispered bad things about the Doctor in her ear.
She didn't think to question any of it.
Correct .... but the dislike was from the start!!
She had stuff told to her before she met the Doctor.
episode, they had just returned to Earth after several 'Adventures'
.... and who had told her about ....
Oh!! Hang On!! Are you suggesting Martha's MOTHER had been told stuff
about The Doctor before Martha took off with The Doctor??
No, I'm pretty sure it was in an episode before Lazarus. Like the living
sun thingy one? Where she calls her mother, and we see agents in the >background.
Or maybe I'm confusing things, but I'm pretty sure the first time she
sees the doctor she already has been told stuff by the Master.
--
Mickmane
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 35:49:47 |
| Calls: | 10,392 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 14,064 |
| Messages: | 6,417,151 |