Amentep

I imagine it was worse for syndicated programs at the time since they might be pre-empted by other local station programming. It still could have made a light arc, without heavy episode-to-episode continuity. Comics at the time did that.

TNG "Lessons" Pretentious title much? Picard finds love then must send them on a dangerous mission where his ability to be impartial breaks. The episode works primarily because of the actors, and ends up being a decent dramatic episode for the most part. That said, it seems weird how in the episode where Picard finds romance with Lt Daren, her area of responsibility also ends up crucial to the story - including a spot for Daren at the big meeting table when Stellar Cartography had never been there before. It points to one of the primarily structural weaknesses of the episode, namely that it should have had more episodes to develop the Daren and her department in a natural way so that the final conflict with the solar wind (or whatever) felt natural. While yes, most episodes were done-in-ones in the era, this type story I think would be better percolating for a bit; Lt. Daren and Stellar Cartography should have had multiple appearances leading to this culmination of the arc for her character and relationship with Picard. Also, Troi was in her uniform in this episode for those counting at home.

My grandfather used to fill up at Col. Sanders' gas station in Corbin, but according to my dad they never ended up eating in the restaurant when they were traveling through that area. My dad was only a few months old when fire destroyed the original place, so he only ever really saw the rebuilt one.

Rediscovered archival photos capture Amelia Earhart visit to Atlanta in 1934 (ajc.com)

The government does not require you to buy your groceries at Stokrotka does it? My point is that even if stores want your vaccination information and you do not want to voluntarily surrender it, there is no government requirement making you shop at that store that requires you to give up your vaccine information. If left to their own devices, owners would choose what would be best for them and their clientele and customers would choose where to take their business. If one place requires vaccines, then odds are another will not. Or vice-versa, and if one didn't exist then there would be incentive to create it to cater to the customers who'd use it if a sustainable customer base existed. Further, it is completely legal to deny services to customers. No shirt no shoes no service exists because of public safety concerns with germs, if I recall correctly, which is why it is usually a requirement for restaurants. Having to pay to be a member of a store like Sam's Club means stores are only open to members, not just anyone. Most standardized testing companies will deny service if you can't show proof of identity with a non-expired government issued ID with photo and signature. There there are things like requiring a suit jacket and tie for male patrons of an upscale restaurant which might no tbe seen as reasonable in this day of business casual, but also is not illegal. And then you have even more arbitrary situations like Ali “Al” Yeganeh refusing service to anyone who takes too long to order which, again, is not illegal. What is illegal, here at least, is for businesses open to the public to refuse service for certain types of immutable demographic characteristics. Immunization status would not be one of those. Also, there is the issue that public health emergencies are a different thing entirely, anyhow. As has been pointed out in these threads before, we already require proof of vaccinations here in the US for other public health issues (like immunizations for enrollment in public school) which isn't a violation of privacy. You don't have to buy sneakers or headphones to live; you can probably buy them from a number of places that would deliver them to your home without you needing to disclose your medical information, nor are you required, by the government, to shop at a particular store under penalty of legal action for sneakers and headphones. That would make it a voluntary disclosure on your part and not illegal. You can choose not to patronize any store that requires of you something you do not want to give, whether its putting on shoes, a tie or showing your vaccination status.

You have no legal compulsion to shop at a particular store, therefore you are not being legally required to give up your right to medical privacy, as your choice to shop at the store is dependent on you volunteering to choose to disclose your medical information to retain the privilege of shopping at that private institution or not. Not unlike you choosing to abide by no shirt/no shoes, buy into a shoppers club or any other reasonable measures business owners may institute that would be voluntarily accepted by its clientele. I see this as being fairly reasonable unless there were situations where necessities (primarily food and water) have no alternatives ways of purchase for patrons (ie stores that could opt out if that's an option within laws and mandates or by paying for delivery to your home, for example), in which case local mandates covering only stores providing necessities rather than state mandates (or even finding ways to make alternative arrangements on behalf of the citizens by the government to meet those necessities) might be better choices, in my opinion, and obviously dependent on the situations involved. This does not appear to be the case in the blanket Florida order, however. I'm more understanding of limiting governmental offices and operations from requesting medical information since there is often no other option in governmental dealings that hold legal requirements to attend outside of a face-to-face meetings/appointment and in those cases the surrendering of medical information would be more compulsory due to the legal requirements of the business being conducted with the municipality. But I'd consider it reasonable for states/local governments to look at them there if there were options available that would allow citizens to finalize their legal business with the government without disclosures, but only for those services that had those alternatives.

Its not even a consistent law, unless they also start fining businesses for requiring shirts and shoes for services and fining the store if they refuse service to disruptive patrons and fine them if they do not accept whatever form of payment the customer brings and fine them for any of the millions of other limitations to service business make everyday under the guise of protecting the customer's 'rights'. Otherwise its just an arbitrary limitation to the business owner's right to determine how best to run their company made to win political points without a real rational basis for being done.

Clearly the losers had to do chores. Mom and Sally had obviously lost previous rounds of the game, so had to wash dishes. Now would it be Dad or Timmy who mowed the lawn? Also Sally threw her game, because she felt she was too small to mow the lawn and wasn't confident she could beat Timmy, who cheats when they play against one another.

It wasn't me... IT WAS DIO!

Old thread: Last few posts:

New thread:

I was just under my dad's height and then suddenly I was the exact height as my dad. I had two aunts under 5 feet tall, one on each side of the family (and in a total coincidence, they had the same first name).

I have a 32 year old suit I bought, but even if I lost the weight to fit into it from the waistline size, it still wouldn't fit, thanks to a last minute growth spurt in my 20s changing my proportions (pants leg too high, sleeve too high and shoulders slightly larger the suit jacket). I'm not actually sure why I still keep it. Also, I need to get me a new suit jacket...

Pretty much every story that it might be useful to have an empath (and where I guess they don't need Troi to be traumatized somehow) sidelines her. Even a story like "Disaster" that should have given her a chance to shine makes her look bad.

I keep saying someday I'll watch it - just haven't gotten around to it yet. That said, since I was only a casual viewer of Transformers, I doubt it'll retroactively scar my childhood!

The internet tells me the episode you refer to is from season 7 (episode 16 - "Thine Own Self"), so I'm a season away (as an aside, she wears the original outfit in Starship Mine, not the uniform).

I never saw Transformer's the Movie in the theaters*, but another film that turned 35 years old this year (in July though...not in August), well that I DID see in theaters. And that I rewatched in honor of that milestone... *actually I've never seen Transformers: The Movie anywhere...

Eh, I'm not sure having Captain Jellico in "Chain of Command Pt. 1" (S.6 Ep. 10) tell her to put on a uniform actually made her qualified to be a bridge officer. According to "Disaster" (S.5 Ep.5) she was already a Lt. Commander (or equivalent; I can only assume that counseling was considered a separate structure (not dissimilar to the Diplomatic corps) at the start of TNG (whereas it had previously been that counseling was in Life Sciences in TOS, albeit with unclear ranking) and this continued through "Disaster". However, by the time Jellico took over for "Chain of Command", counseling had been folded back into the regular ship command structure, with Picard not stressing on the formality of having Troi put on a uniform, but Jellico did. But really Troi should have always been in a uniform, IMO, it never made sense that she wasn't in uniform at least when on the bridge.)

That seems to happen a LOT in TNG. Worf in particular, when he isn't being one-hit knocked out by a menace, seems to get sidelined a lot in stories that could use his experience and expertise later on, as if the writers didn't want to deal with it. Actually thinking about it, Troi gets sidelined a lot as well in situations where a counselor might be useful.

TNG: Die Hard on a Starship Starship Mine Ugh. Okay so the Enterprise has to go into drydock to perform a baryon sweep that needs to have everyone out of the ship (presumably so the plot can happen). A group of mercenaries sneak about the ship to steal deadly toxic waste from the engines which can be used as a weapon (which is the first time I recall them mentioning a waste by-product on the Engines at all; you'd think as many times as they've had trouble in Engineering you'd hear someone shout "Be careful of the Trilithium Resin!", but noooooo...) Picard is aboard (because he wanted his horse saddle) and fights the mercenaries. Meanwhile the rest of the command staff (minus Worf because it makes sense to sideline the security operative during a situation that might actually use one) get taken captive and act like jerks to Commander Hutchinson - so much so none of them actually mention him after he got shot and killed (at least they covered him up - presumably after kicking his corpse a few times). Somehow Geordi's visor can regulate pain to his brain and create an ultrasonic sound that can paralyze everyone but Data. Picard kills all the mercenaries (except the dude the mercenaries, inexplicably, killed themselves for no apparent reason), the captives free themselves, and pretty much the motivation of the Arkarians is left unexplained (why were they working with the mercenaries? Why didn't they seem to have a plan to leave with the mercenaries if that was true? If they weren't supposed to leave with the mercenaries, what was their endgame with the hostages?).