ATTN JMS: Why no techno-babble?

[B5JMS Poster]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "Thomas Lawson" <Kurmark at ix.netcom.com>
Date: 7 Apr 1998 22:32:23 -0600
Lines: 18

    One thing I have come to expect from, 'the other show,' is a profuse
usage of techno-babble. Although it has gotten so overused it has become
almost inane, I must say that at sometimes I really enjoy it. I guess
sometimes the engineer in me wants to know how something supposedly works.
I was just wondering why you left techno-babble out of Babylon 5: a) Does
it detract from the point of the story? b) Do you not feel qualified to
write about technology of the future? c) Are you afraid of it making
Babylon 5 seem campy like 'the other show' ? d) Are you really even
interested in technology of the future? e) Was there a fear of someone
saying in 15 years, "JMS wrote that Shadow ships use anti-proton beams as
the ship's weapon and we all know NOW that that is stupid...."?

   Just curious. Thanks for an incredible story that I hope to watch with
my children 30 years from now when it is in reruns. Hey, they called
Roddenberry the Great Bird wasn't it? What should we give you as a
nickname?
-- 
"We are everything that we have ever done. So what does that make you?"

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 8 Apr 1998 20:35:33 -0600
Lines: 8

Because this show ain't that show, and I personally find it dull and
impenetrable.

 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
-***
-*** B5JMS SUBSCRIBERS: Replies to messages go to the list maintainer,
-*** <b5jms-owner at cs.columbia.edu>.  If you want to reply elsewhere, adjust
-*** the "To" field.  See http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/b5jms/ for all
-*** other information about this list.