The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:

>> 2000s?
>
> A fine comeback and the best decade - so far - of the revived series. On
> balance, probably second only to the 1980s.

Oh dear. 1970s.

Summary. For me:

1st 1970s.
2nd 2000s.
3rd 2010s.
4th 1960s.
5th 2020s to date - subject to change.
6th 1980-1984.
(Special mention: 1995 TV Movie).
(Special mention: Remembrance of the Daleks).
7th 1985-1986.
19th 1989.

75th 1987-1988 excluding Remembrance.

--
“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor

In article <uv12rf$3j36c$1@dont-email.me>,
The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:
>The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> 1960s?
>
>Seminal. The second best era of classic who. But in some ways it hasn’t
>aged well, and a fair bit of it is still not reanimated.
>

Welll it was a stater!

>> 1970s?
>
>The entirety of the Third Doctor and all but the rather poorer tail end of
>the Fourth? The pinnacle of classic Who and the best era so far of the
>whole show.
>

For the most part that is what I see from many a fan of the early era!

>> 1980s?
>
>A distant third, the show was in continuous decline between 1980 and 1988
>and the smallest of upticks in 1989 means that this is definitely the
>weakest era of classic Who.
>

Thanks to management versus production.

>> 1990s?
>
>The Wilderness Years. Dimensions in Time was the depths of cynical
>exploitation of the franchise. The TV movie was - seriously flawed. The
>Curse of Fatal Death was tremendous fun, but if any televised Who is
>definitely non-canon, that is it. 1990s don’t even count as a decade for
>the show.

Flawed to the point where Fox declared no hope?

>
>> 2000s?
>
>A fine comeback and the best decade - so far - of the revived series. On
>balance, probably second only to the 1980s.
>

WEll Tennant was a big factor.

>> 2010s?
>
>A game of three parts. Each Doctor’s era was weaker than the one before -
>but still, probably the third best decade overall, edging out the 1960s
>only because it is so much more watchable now than the show from those
>times, with the odd exception.
>
>> 2020s?
>
>Too soon to judge. Series 12 was mostly good. Series 13 was a hot mess. The
>specials have been mostly good. Time will tell.
>

The whole Timeless Child nearly sent the series into disrepute.

>--
>“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <uv139u$3j79o$1@dont-email.me>,
The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:
>The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:
>
>>> 2000s?
>>
>> A fine comeback and the best decade - so far - of the revived series. On
>> balance, probably second only to the 1980s.
>
>Oh dear. 1970s.
>

It helps to look back.

>Summary. For me:
>
>1st 1970s.
>2nd 2000s.
>3rd 2010s.
>4th 1960s.
>5th 2020s to date - subject to change.
>6th 1980-1984.
>(Special mention: 1995 TV Movie).
>(Special mention: Remembrance of the Daleks).
>7th 1985-1986.
>19th 1989.
>
>

19th?

>
>75th 1987-1988 excluding Remembrance.
>

So far down the rung?

>--
>“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On 2024-04-08 14:32:57 +0000, Blueshirt said:
> The True Doctor wrote:
>> On 07/04/2024 23:25, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>
>>> That doesn't mean that some of those 1970's Doctor Who
>>> stories didn't deal with the political issues of the day...
>>> we were children back then so we just enjoyed Doctor Who for
>>> what it was.
>>
>> Back then the story always came first not a pile of
>> hypocritical degenerate woke virtue signalling to cover up the
>> sexual grooming of children by a bunch of far left perverts
>> and bigots.
>>
>> Doctor who was always about opposing and toppling tyranny and
>> the oppression of free thought, speech, and expression. Now
>> Doctor Whoke is exactly the opposite of everything it once
>> stood for. The monsters represented those that wanted to hurt
>> and do harm to us and out families and children. Now we must
>> embrace the same hideous monsters and ones even more sickening
>> because they are simply misunderstood. That's woke degeneracy
>> for you because woke ideology is all about accepting
>> tyrannical oppression and thought control, not fighting it to
>> regain your freedom, and not challenging what is wrong and
>> evil using logical and rational arguments to discredit it, but
>> to accept it without questioning it with any kind of rigorous
>> debate, or face cancellation for blasphemy against its
>> Marxist-Fascist principles which are based on lies, false
>> narratives, and misinformation.
>
> You definitely shouldn't be watching S1/S14 next month. After
> all, we wouldn't want you exposed to 'that sort of thing'. Maybe
> you should join a library and take out a few books to pass the
> time instead?

It's not even possible to do that with the "Politically Correct" morons
going around banning and altering old books. :-\

In article <uv1skn$3pacj$1@dont-email.me>,
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>On 2024-04-08 14:32:57 +0000, Blueshirt said:
>> The True Doctor wrote:
>>> On 07/04/2024 23:25, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't mean that some of those 1970's Doctor Who
>>>> stories didn't deal with the political issues of the day...
>>>> we were children back then so we just enjoyed Doctor Who for
>>>> what it was.
>>>
>>> Back then the story always came first not a pile of
>>> hypocritical degenerate woke virtue signalling to cover up the
>>> sexual grooming of children by a bunch of far left perverts
>>> and bigots.
>>>
>>> Doctor who was always about opposing and toppling tyranny and
>>> the oppression of free thought, speech, and expression. Now
>>> Doctor Whoke is exactly the opposite of everything it once
>>> stood for. The monsters represented those that wanted to hurt
>>> and do harm to us and out families and children. Now we must
>>> embrace the same hideous monsters and ones even more sickening
>>> because they are simply misunderstood. That's woke degeneracy
>>> for you because woke ideology is all about accepting
>>> tyrannical oppression and thought control, not fighting it to
>>> regain your freedom, and not challenging what is wrong and
>>> evil using logical and rational arguments to discredit it, but
>>> to accept it without questioning it with any kind of rigorous
>>> debate, or face cancellation for blasphemy against its
>>> Marxist-Fascist principles which are based on lies, false
>>> narratives, and misinformation.
>>
>> You definitely shouldn't be watching S1/S14 next month. After
>> all, we wouldn't want you exposed to 'that sort of thing'. Maybe
>> you should join a library and take out a few books to pass the
>> time instead?
>
>It's not even possible to do that with the "Politically Correct" morons
>going around banning and altering old books. :-\
>
>

Boo on that!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>,
> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>> 1960s?
>>> 1970s?
>>> 1980s?
>>> 1990s?
>>> 2000s?
>>> 2010s?
>>> 2020s?
>>
>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised movie with
>> Paul McGann in 1996.
>>
>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show started in 2005.
>>
>
> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.

+1

On 2024-04-08 8:07 a.m., Blueshirt wrote:
> % wrote:
>
>> Idlehands wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-07 4:15 p.m., Blueshirt wrote:
>>>> Hornplayer9599 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Speaking of cross-posting, as I write this I only see
>>>>> one post that cross-posted a reply.  All the other posts
>>>>> I see didn't cross-post.
>>>>
>>>> I did trim Dave's excessive cross-posting, but as he runs
>>>> his own nntp server I'm sure he'd say cross-posting to six
>>>> newsgroups is allowed in his TOS! :-)
>>>
>>> Binky's TOS have been reduced to a wishy washy sort of whiny
>>> statement which really means very litte.
>>>
>>> I love his spam policy:
>>>
>>> "Email / Usenet (news) spam (unsolicited commercial email /
>>> usenet posting OR Bulk mailing through our server ) will
>>> not be tolerated, NO EXCEPTIONS! Users found to be spamming
>>> will have their account terminated without warning, and
>>> without refund. "
>>>
>>> He then drones on about how bad spam is and how much work it
>>> generates for his "staff".
>>>
>>> Nothing about cross-posting, big surprise there.
>>>
>>>
>> i remember when you all said he didn't have a server ,
>> and here you're saying he doesn't use it right ,
>> what oil heads
>
> We've always known Dave runs his own nntp server, if he didn't
> someone would have sent off an abuse complaint to NotKnow Inc.
> many years ago!
>
> But as that e-mail would arrive at the inbox of the NotKnow news
> admin, a Mr D.S Yadallee, and the object of the complaint would
> be the abuse of Usenet by a Mr D.S Yadallee, there wouldn't be
> much point in typing an e-mail of complaint out... so nobody has
> bothered.

The assworm likes to make shit up, he tends to run away when pressed for
proof of there I said he didn't have a server.

But binky loves to kiss his ass so I guess that's what matters.

--
Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.

George Bernard Shaw

In article <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>,
Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>> 1960s?
>>>> 1970s?
>>>> 1980s?
>>>> 1990s?
>>>> 2000s?
>>>> 2010s?
>>>> 2020s?
>>>
>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised movie with
>>> Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>
>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show started in 2005.
>>>
>>
>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>
>+1

+2
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote on 9/4/24 3:33 pm:
> In article <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>, Your Name
>>> <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>> 1960s? 1970s? 1980s? 1990s? 2000s? 2010s? 2020s?
>>>>
>>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised
>>>> movie with Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>>
>>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show
>>>> started in 2005.
>>>
>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>
>> +1
>
> +2
>
WHAT??? YOU, asswipe, think you are sooooo important that YOU, asswipe,
should get TWO votes!! REALLY??
--
Daniel

Arthur Lipscomb wrote:

> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
> >Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
> > > > 1960s?
> > > > 1970s?
> > > > 1980s?
> > > > 1990s?
> > > > 2000s?
> > > > 2010s?
> > > > 2020s?
> > >
> > > The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful
> > > Americanised movie with Paul McGann in 1996.
> > >
> > > The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show
> > > started in 2005.
> >
> > I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>
> +1

The TVM had its moments... you know who getting shot and dying
being one of them! But the only Doctor Who that really mattered
in the 1990's were the Virgin NA's.

In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
<arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>> 1960s?
>>>> 1970s?
>>>> 1980s?
>>>> 1990s?
>>>> 2000s?
>>>> 2010s?
>>>> 2020s?
>>>
>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised movie with
>>> Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>
>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show started in 2005.
>>>
>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>
>+1

I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take on the
Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly charming rather than
hideous.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

John Hall wrote:

> In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
> > On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
> >>
> >> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
> >
> > +1
>
> I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take
> on the Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly
> charming rather than hideous.

It looked like the writer/producer of the TVM hadn't researched
the subtleties of the character and just knew 'The Master' was
"the bad guy"... so we just got the stereotypical US TV show bad
guy... which was a million miles away from Roger Delgado's
original version of that character.

I have yet to hear any of the Eric Roberts 'Master' Big Finish
audios to see if better scripts have improved his take on the
character. Not that they could be any worse than his performance
in the TVM!

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> John Hall wrote:
>
>> In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
>> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>> I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take
>> on the Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly
>> charming rather than hideous.
>
> It looked like the writer/producer of the TVM hadn't researched
> the subtleties of the character and just knew 'The Master' was
> "the bad guy"... so we just got the stereotypical US TV show bad
> guy... which was a million miles away from Roger Delgado's
> original version of that character.
>
> I have yet to hear any of the Eric Roberts 'Master' Big Finish
> audios to see if better scripts have improved his take on the
> character. Not that they could be any worse than his performance
> in the TVM!
>

Yes. He oozes a sleazy menace that gives his Master a very distinct tone
and redeems him a lot. However the constraint that this incarnation can
exist only as a lost soul in the Vortex, due to his TVM arc, limits the
stories somewhat. The War Master was a full reboot of the individual in
canon so the Roberts Master ultimately cannot survive.

--
“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor

In article <uv31lq$4shr$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote on 9/4/24 3:33 pm:
>> In article <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
>> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>, Your Name
>>>> <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>> 1960s? 1970s? 1980s? 1990s? 2000s? 2010s? 2020s?
>>>>>
>>>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised
>>>>> movie with Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>>>
>>>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show
>>>>> started in 2005.
>>>>
>>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>> +2
>>
>WHAT??? YOU, a%e, think you are sooooo important that YOU, a%e,
>should get TWO votes!! REALLY??

How dense are you red-beard?

>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <R4B$5nDNzQFmFwrQ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
><arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>>On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>> 1960s?
>>>>> 1970s?
>>>>> 1980s?
>>>>> 1990s?
>>>>> 2000s?
>>>>> 2010s?
>>>>> 2020s?
>>>>
>>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised movie with
>>>> Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>>
>>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show started in 2005.
>>>>
>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>
>>+1
>
>I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take on the
>Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly charming rather than
>hideous.

What about the Daleks exterminating the MAster?

>--
>John Hall
> "Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
> from coughing."
> Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <xn0okd6n4ixn0ii002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>John Hall wrote:
>
>> In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
>> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>> > On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>> >
>> > +1
>>
>> I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take
>> on the Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly
>> charming rather than hideous.
>
>It looked like the writer/producer of the TVM hadn't researched
>the subtleties of the character and just knew 'The Master' was
>"the bad guy"... so we just got the stereotypical US TV show bad
>guy... which was a million miles away from Roger Delgado's
>original version of that character.
>
>I have yet to hear any of the Eric Roberts 'Master' Big Finish
>audios to see if better scripts have improved his take on the
>character. Not that they could be any worse than his performance
>in the TVM!

BF does rock.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <uv361d$5tri$1@dont-email.me>,
The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:
>Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> John Hall wrote:
>>
>>> In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
>>> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>>>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>
>>> I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take
>>> on the Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly
>>> charming rather than hideous.
>>
>> It looked like the writer/producer of the TVM hadn't researched
>> the subtleties of the character and just knew 'The Master' was
>> "the bad guy"... so we just got the stereotypical US TV show bad
>> guy... which was a million miles away from Roger Delgado's
>> original version of that character.
>>
>> I have yet to hear any of the Eric Roberts 'Master' Big Finish
>> audios to see if better scripts have improved his take on the
>> character. Not that they could be any worse than his performance
>> in the TVM!
>>
>
>Yes. He oozes a sleazy menace that gives his Master a very distinct tone
>and redeems him a lot. However the constraint that this incarnation can
>exist only as a lost soul in the Vortex, due to his TVM arc, limits the
>stories somewhat. The War Master was a full reboot of the individual in
>canon so the Roberts Master ultimately cannot survive.
>

War MAster? Hmm ...

>--
>“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <xn0okd63ciwuhdx001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>Arthur Lipscomb wrote:
>
>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>> >Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>> > > On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>> > > > 1960s?
>> > > > 1970s?
>> > > > 1980s?
>> > > > 1990s?
>> > > > 2000s?
>> > > > 2010s?
>> > > > 2020s?
>> > >
>> > > The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful
>> > > Americanised movie with Paul McGann in 1996.
>> > >
>> > > The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show
>> > > started in 2005.
>> >
>> > I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>
>> +1
>
>The TVM had its moments... you know who getting shot and dying
>being one of them! But the only Doctor Who that really mattered
>in the 1990's were the Virgin NA's.

IYIO. Never liked the NAs.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On 4/9/2024 7:28 AM, The Doctor wrote:
> In article <R4B$5nDNzQFmFwrQ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
> John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
>> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>> 1960s?
>>>>>> 1970s?
>>>>>> 1980s?
>>>>>> 1990s?
>>>>>> 2000s?
>>>>>> 2010s?
>>>>>> 2020s?
>>>>>
>>>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised movie with
>>>>> Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>>>
>>>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show started in 2005.
>>>>>
>>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>> I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take on the
>> Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly charming rather than
>> hideous.
>
> What about the Daleks exterminating the MAster?
>
>> --
>

I have to admit, the Daleks would never put someone on trial. They
exterminate first and ask questions later! But it would have been a
*little* more believable if the Master convinced the Daleks to let him
git rid of the Doctor for them and it was all part of a joint plan. A
throw away line could have fixed that plot hole. Perhaps that was the
plan all along but the scene was cut for time.

In article <uv58i7$p3a5$3@dont-email.me>,
Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>On 4/9/2024 7:28 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <R4B$5nDNzQFmFwrQ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
>> John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <uv2742$3rf1o$1@dont-email.me>, Arthur Lipscomb
>>> <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> writes
>>>> On 4/7/2024 8:56 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>> In article <uuv74g$31q8c$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/7/2024 5:08 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>> 1960s?
>>>>>>> 1970s?
>>>>>>> 1980s?
>>>>>>> 1990s?
>>>>>>> 2000s?
>>>>>>> 2010s?
>>>>>>> 2020s?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only Doctor Who in the 1990s was the awful Americanised movie with
>>>>>> Paul McGann in 1996.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The original show ended in 1989 and the resurrected show started in 2005.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I did like the McCoy/McGann movie myself.
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>
>>> I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its take on the
>>> Master, who I have always felt should be outwardly charming rather than
>>> hideous.
>>
>> What about the Daleks exterminating the MAster?
>>
>>> --
>>
>
>I have to admit, the Daleks would never put someone on trial. They
>exterminate first and ask questions later! But it would have been a
>*little* more believable if the Master convinced the Daleks to let him
>git rid of the Doctor for them and it was all part of a joint plan. A
>throw away line could have fixed that plot hole. Perhaps that was the
>plan all along but the scene was cut for time.

Exactly! A trial for the Master by the Daleks?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <uuvpup$lgg$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>> doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:

>>>1970s?
>>>1980s?
>>
>>I'm not sure which one, but leaning towards the 1980's.
>
>The JN-T years.

I had Tom Baker and Peter Davidson in mind when I chose.

--
Let's go Brandon!

In article <uv67tu$10nsn$1@dont-email.me>,
Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>In article <uuvpup$lgg$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>> doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>
>>>>1970s?
>>>>1980s?
>>>
>>>I'm not sure which one, but leaning towards the 1980's.
>>
>>The JN-T years.
>
>I had Tom Baker and Peter Davidson in mind when I chose.
>

Early 1980s then.

>--
>Let's go Brandon!
>
>

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In message <uv67tu$10nsn$1@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
<weberm@polaris.net> writes
>In article <uuvpup$lgg$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>> doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>
>>>>1970s?
>>>>1980s?
>>>
>>>I'm not sure which one, but leaning towards the 1980's.
>>
>>The JN-T years.
>
>I had Tom Baker and Peter Davidson in mind when I chose.
>

Wasn't Tom Baker the 1970s?
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <uv67tu$10nsn$1@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
> <weberm@polaris.net> writes
>> In article <uuvpup$lgg$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>>> Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>>>> doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
>>
>>>>> 1970s?
>>>>> 1980s?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure which one, but leaning towards the 1980's.
>>>
>>> The JN-T years.
>>
>> I had Tom Baker and Peter Davidson in mind when I chose.
>>
>
> Wasn't Tom Baker the 1970s?

1974-1981

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Arthur Lipscomb wrote:

> On 4/9/2024 7:28 AM, The Doctor wrote:
> > In article <R4B$5nDNzQFmFwrQ@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
> > John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > I didn't like it myself. The worst thing was possibly its
> > > take on the Master, who I have always felt should be
> > > outwardly charming rather than hideous.
> >
> > What about the Daleks exterminating the MAster?
>
> I have to admit, the Daleks would never put someone on trial.
> They exterminate first and ask questions later! But it would
> have been a little more believable if the Master convinced the
> Daleks to let him git rid of the Doctor for them and it was
> all part of a joint plan. A throw away line could have fixed
> that plot hole. Perhaps that was the plan all along but the
> scene was cut for time.

And they wasn't even Daleks... they were "Cadbury's Smash"
aliens imitating Daleks!

But no, Daleks wouldn't have put the Master on trial or ask the
Doctor to collect his remains from Skaro and transport them to
Gallifrey.