I don't know if I'm just repeating dusty facts, but a part of Uncle
Scrooge ten-pager "D/D 2001-021" by Daan Jippes(?) must be inspired by
a Barks plot synopsis for a never-produced 1950s Scrooge cartoon.
This plot synopsis has been published in Carl Barks Library set 4,
page 460. And also in a Carl Barks Library in Color album.
The last three or four pages of the Scrooge-story follow a part of
Barks' synopsis. This part tells about the 10.000 dollar bill and the
most expensive cheese in the world, Odora De Pungento, which is brought
from its mountain cave in an armored car, and served to the rat on a
velvet cushion accompanied by a flourish for trumpets. This costs
Scrooge 10.000 dollar and ONE CENT, more than destroying a 10.000
dollar bill, so Scrooge gets berserk at the rat.
This is too similar to be a coincidende. But maybe I'm telling
something that's already mentioned in the story's credits?
--- Dani?l
"Well, back into the barrel with the FLEAS!"
(Which Barks story?)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Author
Topic: 200305
(658 messages)
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Story "D/D2001-021" based on never-produced Barks-cartoon?
Message 511 -
2003-05-25 at 17:23:14
Daniel Van Eijmeren
New DCML
Message 512 -
2003-05-25 at 17:55:04
OLIVER to ROB KLEIN, 25-05-2003:
>>I wonder if we shouldn't try to make a SECOND DCML
>> forum for NON Disney Comics Topics, or "Tangential Topics".
> Great idea!
> How about making it a discussion board rather than a mailing-list?
I don't like the idea of a second DCML, and even less the idea of a
discussion board.
What I like about mailing lists, is that you only need to check for
email to get them. After that, you can even disconnect internet and
easily copy the email(s) to another medium, before you read them.
With a discussion board, this isn't possible. And it even may mean
a lot of clicking on links, instead of just scrolling.
The reason why I don't like a second DCML, is that the chaos may even
get bigger. On DCML we may get emails that turn off-topic, *before*
they go to the second list. (This will result in off-topic emails that
warn other off-topic contributors for being on the on-topic list
instead of the off-topic list.)
On the "SECOND DCML" we may get emails that turn ON-topic, *before*
they go the real DCML. (This will result in off-topic emails that warn
other on-topic contributors for being on the off-topic list instead of
the on-topic list.)
The DCML is a mailing list about Disney comics. If people think that
the tolerance of off-topic emails isn't enough, they can raise their
own clubs elsewhere.
Otherwise raising a mailing list would mean that you have to take care
for emails that share your interest *and* for emails that *don't* share
your interest. In other words: just about every email that gets in your
direction.
--- Dani?l, realising that he has just contributed yet-another
off-topic email :-)
>>I wonder if we shouldn't try to make a SECOND DCML
>> forum for NON Disney Comics Topics, or "Tangential Topics".
> Great idea!
> How about making it a discussion board rather than a mailing-list?
I don't like the idea of a second DCML, and even less the idea of a
discussion board.
What I like about mailing lists, is that you only need to check for
email to get them. After that, you can even disconnect internet and
easily copy the email(s) to another medium, before you read them.
With a discussion board, this isn't possible. And it even may mean
a lot of clicking on links, instead of just scrolling.
The reason why I don't like a second DCML, is that the chaos may even
get bigger. On DCML we may get emails that turn off-topic, *before*
they go to the second list. (This will result in off-topic emails that
warn other off-topic contributors for being on the on-topic list
instead of the off-topic list.)
On the "SECOND DCML" we may get emails that turn ON-topic, *before*
they go the real DCML. (This will result in off-topic emails that warn
other on-topic contributors for being on the off-topic list instead of
the on-topic list.)
The DCML is a mailing list about Disney comics. If people think that
the tolerance of off-topic emails isn't enough, they can raise their
own clubs elsewhere.
Otherwise raising a mailing list would mean that you have to take care
for emails that share your interest *and* for emails that *don't* share
your interest. In other words: just about every email that gets in your
direction.
--- Dani?l, realising that he has just contributed yet-another
off-topic email :-)
Timo Ronkainen
Story "D/D2001-021" based on never-produced Barks-cartoon?
Message 513 -
2003-05-25 at 20:01:36
>Scrooge ten-pager "D/D 2001-021" by Daan Jippes(?) must be inspired by
>a Barks plot synopsis for a never-produced 1950s Scrooge cartoon.
>This is too similar to be a coincidende. But maybe I'm telling
>something that's already mentioned in the story's credits?
That's exactly the case, although I don't know if Barks is credited in every
reprint of the story. Jippes took only those parts from the synopsis he
liked the best.
Timo
^^''*''^^
Cartoonist - writer - donaldist -
Timo Ronkainen ---------------- -
YO-kylä 52 A 26 --------------- -
20540 Turku ------------------- -
Finland ----------------------- -
timoro at hotmail.com
timoro at sunpoint.net
¨¨ Personal:
http://www.geocities.com/timoro2/
¨¨ Ankkalinnan Pamaus:
http://www.perunamaa.net/ankistit/
.................................
"Rumble on, buxom bumble bee!
Go sit on cowslip - far from me!"
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>a Barks plot synopsis for a never-produced 1950s Scrooge cartoon.
>This is too similar to be a coincidende. But maybe I'm telling
>something that's already mentioned in the story's credits?
That's exactly the case, although I don't know if Barks is credited in every
reprint of the story. Jippes took only those parts from the synopsis he
liked the best.
Timo
^^''*''^^
Cartoonist - writer - donaldist -
Timo Ronkainen ---------------- -
YO-kylä 52 A 26 --------------- -
20540 Turku ------------------- -
Finland ----------------------- -
timoro at hotmail.com
timoro at sunpoint.net
¨¨ Personal:
http://www.geocities.com/timoro2/
¨¨ Ankkalinnan Pamaus:
http://www.perunamaa.net/ankistit/
.................................
"Rumble on, buxom bumble bee!
Go sit on cowslip - far from me!"
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Rob Klein
Off-Topic Forum
Message 514 -
2003-05-25 at 20:22:43
Hi everyone. I got several positive responses to the idea of an adjunct "OFF-
TOPIC FORUM". They all feel it should be a Discussion Board, rather than an e-
mailed message list of subscribers. For Daniel: I have a suggestion that might
alleviate your fears of missing out on some Disney discussion. We could have a
RULE that when the topics move back into Disney Comics, the author MUST move
the thread BACK TO DCML, by initiating a new posting. Unfortunately, I think
whoever is the Discussion Board's moderator, will likely not have enough time
to "monitor" the postings everyday to "enforce" that rule. On many boards,
rulebreakers are "banned" from the board, and their names under their original
registration are blocked from making posts. WE wouldn't need that. Any of OUR
members could be expected on the HONOUR SYSTEM to simply make a new post on
DCML to cover the new ON-Topic thread started on the OFF-Topic forum.
The reason why I WOULD NOT want to make the new discussion board totally
independent of DCML is that I and several other DCML members would NOT go over
to a new discussion board every day just TO SEE IF A FELLOW DCML MEMBER POSTED
AN OFF-TOPIC THREAD THAT WE MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN. The topics come out of
Disney Comics discussions. In addition, having the related "forum" be another
mailing list would not be good, as most of us are already very busy, and
probably wouldn't want ANOTHER bunch of mails coming every day. The reason why
this wouldn't work is that we are ALL interested in Disney Comics, but we are
not likely to be interested in all or even most of the "OFF-Topic topics". Most
of us will probably be interested in only a selected few of them.
Those are the reasons why I HOPE that we can make a low maintenance,
adjunct "Discussion Board" where topics that will be only of interest to a few
members can be discussed, freeing the real DCML from being polluted by so much
off-topic content. But yet this system would allow some members to pursue
these topics, directly, from their inspired inception, in an open discussion,
instead of limiting it to two people in a private e-mail. Such ideas would NOT
be generated WITHOUT a DCML topic already started. THAT is why I wouldn't want
us (Off-Topic fans) to move to a completely independent location.
I have also sent this to Per. I understand that if such a set-up would be a lot
of extra work for him, that we probably shouldn't have it connected to DCML.
But, I am hopeful. What do you all think?
Rob
Klein
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using the LA Free-Net - LA's best kept secret.
http://www.lafn.org/
TOPIC FORUM". They all feel it should be a Discussion Board, rather than an e-
mailed message list of subscribers. For Daniel: I have a suggestion that might
alleviate your fears of missing out on some Disney discussion. We could have a
RULE that when the topics move back into Disney Comics, the author MUST move
the thread BACK TO DCML, by initiating a new posting. Unfortunately, I think
whoever is the Discussion Board's moderator, will likely not have enough time
to "monitor" the postings everyday to "enforce" that rule. On many boards,
rulebreakers are "banned" from the board, and their names under their original
registration are blocked from making posts. WE wouldn't need that. Any of OUR
members could be expected on the HONOUR SYSTEM to simply make a new post on
DCML to cover the new ON-Topic thread started on the OFF-Topic forum.
The reason why I WOULD NOT want to make the new discussion board totally
independent of DCML is that I and several other DCML members would NOT go over
to a new discussion board every day just TO SEE IF A FELLOW DCML MEMBER POSTED
AN OFF-TOPIC THREAD THAT WE MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN. The topics come out of
Disney Comics discussions. In addition, having the related "forum" be another
mailing list would not be good, as most of us are already very busy, and
probably wouldn't want ANOTHER bunch of mails coming every day. The reason why
this wouldn't work is that we are ALL interested in Disney Comics, but we are
not likely to be interested in all or even most of the "OFF-Topic topics". Most
of us will probably be interested in only a selected few of them.
Those are the reasons why I HOPE that we can make a low maintenance,
adjunct "Discussion Board" where topics that will be only of interest to a few
members can be discussed, freeing the real DCML from being polluted by so much
off-topic content. But yet this system would allow some members to pursue
these topics, directly, from their inspired inception, in an open discussion,
instead of limiting it to two people in a private e-mail. Such ideas would NOT
be generated WITHOUT a DCML topic already started. THAT is why I wouldn't want
us (Off-Topic fans) to move to a completely independent location.
I have also sent this to Per. I understand that if such a set-up would be a lot
of extra work for him, that we probably shouldn't have it connected to DCML.
But, I am hopeful. What do you all think?
Rob
Klein
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using the LA Free-Net - LA's best kept secret.
http://www.lafn.org/
Stefan Persson
Off-Topic Forum
Message 515 -
2003-05-25 at 20:31:53
Rob Klein wrote:
> Hi everyone. I got several positive responses to the idea of an adjunct "OFF-
> TOPIC FORUM". They all feel it should be a Discussion Board, rather than an e-
> mailed message list of subscribers. For Daniel: I have a suggestion that might
> alleviate your fears of missing out on some Disney discussion. We could have a
> RULE that when the topics move back into Disney Comics, the author MUST move
> the thread BACK TO DCML, by initiating a new posting. Unfortunately, I think
> whoever is the Discussion Board's moderator, will likely not have enough time
> to "monitor" the postings everyday to "enforce" that rule. On many boards,
> rulebreakers are "banned" from the board, and their names under their original
> registration are blocked from making posts. WE wouldn't need that. Any of OUR
> members could be expected on the HONOUR SYSTEM to simply make a new post on
> DCML to cover the new ON-Topic thread started on the OFF-Topic forum.
Well, let's say that you are only a member of the ON-topic list. You
are discussing something with another member, and suddenly that
discussion moves to the OFF-topic list and you can't follow the rest of
the discussion. Or let's say that a discussion moves from the OFF-topic
list to the ON-topic list, that could be very confusing if you suddenly
see a part of a discussion without having had a chance to follow
previous parts of it. In order to avoid such confusion, you would have
to be a member of both lists, but then I don't see any meaning in having
two lists as everyone will get all messages in any case.
Stefan
> Hi everyone. I got several positive responses to the idea of an adjunct "OFF-
> TOPIC FORUM". They all feel it should be a Discussion Board, rather than an e-
> mailed message list of subscribers. For Daniel: I have a suggestion that might
> alleviate your fears of missing out on some Disney discussion. We could have a
> RULE that when the topics move back into Disney Comics, the author MUST move
> the thread BACK TO DCML, by initiating a new posting. Unfortunately, I think
> whoever is the Discussion Board's moderator, will likely not have enough time
> to "monitor" the postings everyday to "enforce" that rule. On many boards,
> rulebreakers are "banned" from the board, and their names under their original
> registration are blocked from making posts. WE wouldn't need that. Any of OUR
> members could be expected on the HONOUR SYSTEM to simply make a new post on
> DCML to cover the new ON-Topic thread started on the OFF-Topic forum.
Well, let's say that you are only a member of the ON-topic list. You
are discussing something with another member, and suddenly that
discussion moves to the OFF-topic list and you can't follow the rest of
the discussion. Or let's say that a discussion moves from the OFF-topic
list to the ON-topic list, that could be very confusing if you suddenly
see a part of a discussion without having had a chance to follow
previous parts of it. In order to avoid such confusion, you would have
to be a member of both lists, but then I don't see any meaning in having
two lists as everyone will get all messages in any case.
Stefan
Mateusz Lis
Time machine
Message 516 -
2003-05-25 at 21:36:12
Hi all,
In D 96116 (art by Marco Rota) in 6 panel, in Gyro's workshop, there is a
small machine, which seems to be the one from DD Time Travel series. My
question is: was this vehicle shrunk in any episode of this series? Or maybe
it is a project?
This story was published as a 3D comic in Poland and probably also in other
countries.
Best wishes,
mateusz lis
In D 96116 (art by Marco Rota) in 6 panel, in Gyro's workshop, there is a
small machine, which seems to be the one from DD Time Travel series. My
question is: was this vehicle shrunk in any episode of this series? Or maybe
it is a project?
This story was published as a 3D comic in Poland and probably also in other
countries.
Best wishes,
mateusz lis
The Fenske's
Off-Topic Forum
Message 517 -
2003-05-25 at 21:42:40
Could I add a few words regarding a very similar situation in another
mailing list I
belong to? The long and the short of it was that we created an off-topic email
list, and it was a smashing success for those who enjoy such discussions.
Now the details: The primary list was made up of fans of an American
alternative
pop-rock band named Daniel Amos, and centered on discussions on their
recordings,
the musicians, and information on tours, hard-to-find memorabilia,
etc. But quite often,
a maelstorm of off-topic fury would erupt, with OT-topics dominating the
list, resulting
in hundreds of messages a day. Often this would go on for several days, if
not a week
or more. Finally, the decision was made to start a new list, which people
would join
only if they were interested. The results?
1) Both lists have been going strong for several years now, and for the
most part the
On-topic and Off-topic distinction has been preserved. When a member or
two slips up,
discussions usually get moved after a few messages over to the appropriate
list. But
the two lists keep fairly separate. There isn't a lot of confusing
back-and-forth between
them. But be careful: the off-topic list might get more fun than the
primary one!
2) The off-topic list generates, on average, 2-3 times the mail load of the
on-topic list.
The people who love to chat about politics, religion, war, movies, or
you-name-it are
very prolific. They all love the secondary list, but still contribute
strongly to both.
3) You can filter both lists to different mailboxes, and only read the few
messages you
want from either. I subscribe to both, but only skim the contents, and
only read a few
of either when I have the time. Sort of like I do with this list, which,
by and large, I find
not terribly interesting (sorry!). I'm interested in the coming Gemstone
issues, in Rosa
stories, but not in the many details of Disney comics that many of you find
so interesting.
But that's OK. This list provides details I couldn't find elsewhere, and I
can ignore the
stuff I don't like. The same works with an Off-topic list. You can mass
delete the messages
each day if they don't appeal to you. For that reason, I think another
email list is
*vastly* preferable to message boards, where you have to be on-line, and
wait for things
to load, etc.
Conclusion: Go for it. If you don't like the second list, you won't be
missing anything.
And the Disney-only subscribers won't feel frustrated at the OT chaffe that
pollutes the
primary list.
Off course, the Off-topic police who inhabit the primary list become
On-topic police on
the secondary list...ie, if someone on the Off-topic list brings up Disney,
that would
be denounced as being on-topic and send off to the DCML.... so you see, it
*can* be
confusing... :-)
Hope this helps!
Dave Fenske
... long time lurker...
At 05:22 PM 5/25/03 +0000, Rob Klein wrote:
>Hi everyone. I got several positive responses to the idea of an adjunct "OFF-
>TOPIC FORUM". They all feel it should be a Discussion Board, rather than an e-
>mailed message list of subscribers. For Daniel: I have a suggestion that
>might
>alleviate your fears of missing out on some Disney discussion. We could
>have a
>RULE that when the topics move back into Disney Comics, the author MUST move
>the thread BACK TO DCML, by initiating a new posting. Unfortunately, I think
>whoever is the Discussion Board's moderator, will likely not have enough time
>to "monitor" the postings everyday to "enforce" that rule. On many boards,
>rulebreakers are "banned" from the board, and their names under their
>original
>registration are blocked from making posts. WE wouldn't need that. Any of OUR
>members could be expected on the HONOUR SYSTEM to simply make a new post on
>DCML to cover the new ON-Topic thread started on the OFF-Topic forum.
>
>The reason why I WOULD NOT want to make the new discussion board totally
>independent of DCML is that I and several other DCML members would NOT go
>over
>to a new discussion board every day just TO SEE IF A FELLOW DCML MEMBER
>POSTED
>AN OFF-TOPIC THREAD THAT WE MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN. The topics come out of
>Disney Comics discussions. In addition, having the related "forum" be another
>mailing list would not be good, as most of us are already very busy, and
>probably wouldn't want ANOTHER bunch of mails coming every day. The
>reason why
>this wouldn't work is that we are ALL interested in Disney Comics, but we are
>not likely to be interested in all or even most of the "OFF-Topic topics".
>Most
>of us will probably be interested in only a selected few of them.
>
>Those are the reasons why I HOPE that we can make a low maintenance,
>adjunct "Discussion Board" where topics that will be only of interest to a
>few
>members can be discussed, freeing the real DCML from being polluted by so
>much
>off-topic content. But yet this system would allow some members to pursue
>these topics, directly, from their inspired inception, in an open discussion,
>instead of limiting it to two people in a private e-mail. Such ideas would
>NOT
>be generated WITHOUT a DCML topic already started. THAT is why I wouldn't
>want
>us (Off-Topic fans) to move to a completely independent location.
>
>I have also sent this to Per. I understand that if such a set-up would be
>a lot
>of extra work for him, that we probably shouldn't have it connected to DCML.
>But, I am hopeful. What do you all think?
>
>Rob
>Klein
>
>---------------------------------------------
>This message was sent using the LA Free-Net - LA's best kept secret.
>http://www.lafn.org/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>http://stp.ling.uu.se/mailman/listinfo/dcml
mailing list I
belong to? The long and the short of it was that we created an off-topic email
list, and it was a smashing success for those who enjoy such discussions.
Now the details: The primary list was made up of fans of an American
alternative
pop-rock band named Daniel Amos, and centered on discussions on their
recordings,
the musicians, and information on tours, hard-to-find memorabilia,
etc. But quite often,
a maelstorm of off-topic fury would erupt, with OT-topics dominating the
list, resulting
in hundreds of messages a day. Often this would go on for several days, if
not a week
or more. Finally, the decision was made to start a new list, which people
would join
only if they were interested. The results?
1) Both lists have been going strong for several years now, and for the
most part the
On-topic and Off-topic distinction has been preserved. When a member or
two slips up,
discussions usually get moved after a few messages over to the appropriate
list. But
the two lists keep fairly separate. There isn't a lot of confusing
back-and-forth between
them. But be careful: the off-topic list might get more fun than the
primary one!
2) The off-topic list generates, on average, 2-3 times the mail load of the
on-topic list.
The people who love to chat about politics, religion, war, movies, or
you-name-it are
very prolific. They all love the secondary list, but still contribute
strongly to both.
3) You can filter both lists to different mailboxes, and only read the few
messages you
want from either. I subscribe to both, but only skim the contents, and
only read a few
of either when I have the time. Sort of like I do with this list, which,
by and large, I find
not terribly interesting (sorry!). I'm interested in the coming Gemstone
issues, in Rosa
stories, but not in the many details of Disney comics that many of you find
so interesting.
But that's OK. This list provides details I couldn't find elsewhere, and I
can ignore the
stuff I don't like. The same works with an Off-topic list. You can mass
delete the messages
each day if they don't appeal to you. For that reason, I think another
email list is
*vastly* preferable to message boards, where you have to be on-line, and
wait for things
to load, etc.
Conclusion: Go for it. If you don't like the second list, you won't be
missing anything.
And the Disney-only subscribers won't feel frustrated at the OT chaffe that
pollutes the
primary list.
Off course, the Off-topic police who inhabit the primary list become
On-topic police on
the secondary list...ie, if someone on the Off-topic list brings up Disney,
that would
be denounced as being on-topic and send off to the DCML.... so you see, it
*can* be
confusing... :-)
Hope this helps!
Dave Fenske
... long time lurker...
At 05:22 PM 5/25/03 +0000, Rob Klein wrote:
>Hi everyone. I got several positive responses to the idea of an adjunct "OFF-
>TOPIC FORUM". They all feel it should be a Discussion Board, rather than an e-
>mailed message list of subscribers. For Daniel: I have a suggestion that
>might
>alleviate your fears of missing out on some Disney discussion. We could
>have a
>RULE that when the topics move back into Disney Comics, the author MUST move
>the thread BACK TO DCML, by initiating a new posting. Unfortunately, I think
>whoever is the Discussion Board's moderator, will likely not have enough time
>to "monitor" the postings everyday to "enforce" that rule. On many boards,
>rulebreakers are "banned" from the board, and their names under their
>original
>registration are blocked from making posts. WE wouldn't need that. Any of OUR
>members could be expected on the HONOUR SYSTEM to simply make a new post on
>DCML to cover the new ON-Topic thread started on the OFF-Topic forum.
>
>The reason why I WOULD NOT want to make the new discussion board totally
>independent of DCML is that I and several other DCML members would NOT go
>over
>to a new discussion board every day just TO SEE IF A FELLOW DCML MEMBER
>POSTED
>AN OFF-TOPIC THREAD THAT WE MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN. The topics come out of
>Disney Comics discussions. In addition, having the related "forum" be another
>mailing list would not be good, as most of us are already very busy, and
>probably wouldn't want ANOTHER bunch of mails coming every day. The
>reason why
>this wouldn't work is that we are ALL interested in Disney Comics, but we are
>not likely to be interested in all or even most of the "OFF-Topic topics".
>Most
>of us will probably be interested in only a selected few of them.
>
>Those are the reasons why I HOPE that we can make a low maintenance,
>adjunct "Discussion Board" where topics that will be only of interest to a
>few
>members can be discussed, freeing the real DCML from being polluted by so
>much
>off-topic content. But yet this system would allow some members to pursue
>these topics, directly, from their inspired inception, in an open discussion,
>instead of limiting it to two people in a private e-mail. Such ideas would
>NOT
>be generated WITHOUT a DCML topic already started. THAT is why I wouldn't
>want
>us (Off-Topic fans) to move to a completely independent location.
>
>I have also sent this to Per. I understand that if such a set-up would be
>a lot
>of extra work for him, that we probably shouldn't have it connected to DCML.
>But, I am hopeful. What do you all think?
>
>Rob
>Klein
>
>---------------------------------------------
>This message was sent using the LA Free-Net - LA's best kept secret.
>http://www.lafn.org/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>http://stp.ling.uu.se/mailman/listinfo/dcml
Olivier
What IF
Message 518 -
2003-05-25 at 21:46:16
Hello!
Someone U Know (I wonder who):
>>> What if Don Rosa The duck Master wasn't An Engineer
>>> How his engineering Sense affected his Stories and His Art
Then he probably wouldn't write such stories as "A Matter of Gravity" and "On Stolen Time".
A writer without a scientific background surely can come up with such ideas ("The Universal
Solvent", for instance), then do some research; yet when you are already well-versed in the subject,
the thinking and writing (certainly?) is easier.
First, the difference must be most apparent in the details (the depressurization consequent ot the
Solvent boring through the Earth).
Then, possibly in the way the story is written-- I'd need to read them again to discuss this
particular point.
Story-wise, and more generally (ie, besides SF), I believe the rigorous logic in all the stories is
one of the resulting characteristics; surely, any good writer will display such logic, and all
scientists may not be that rigorous.
I believe that the scientific background actually is more a "symptom" than a "cause"; ie, Don Rosa's
stories are so rigorous and logical and detailed because that's how Keno Don Rosa's mind works
naturally; his becoming an engineer in a sense is incidental, a consequence of such traits, not the
reason. Had he studied economics or something else, he would still have been capable of writing
such stories as L&T-- but he might not have been interested in writing SF.
I'm not sure I was clear. What I mean is that rigor / logic / attention to detail are not the
result of scientific training: they precede it.
Therefore, Don Rosa's stories are not writen that way because he is an engineer but because he
naturally has such a frame of mind; I think the only effect of his scientific background on his
writing is that it inspires him science fiction stories (ie, more easily than a non-scientist
writer).
Now, what if:
a/ a medical doctor wrote duck stories? Would the ducks be sick all the time or look for long-lost
medicines?
b/ a financier wrote duck stories? Would he focus on Scrooge? On the origins of his fortune and the
way he manages his money? More treasures to seek?
c/ an ornithologist (Theresa? ;) ) wrote duck stories? Would the stories be more concerned with
nature? Truer-to-facts? Maybe ducks & ganders really don't like each other.
d/ Stan Lee wrote duck stories? Would they turn out to be human mutants (D-Men?)?
c/ Shakespeare was actually thinking of ducks, geese, dogs and ganders when he wrote his plays?
Olivier
Someone U Know (I wonder who):
>>> What if Don Rosa The duck Master wasn't An Engineer
>>> How his engineering Sense affected his Stories and His Art
Then he probably wouldn't write such stories as "A Matter of Gravity" and "On Stolen Time".
A writer without a scientific background surely can come up with such ideas ("The Universal
Solvent", for instance), then do some research; yet when you are already well-versed in the subject,
the thinking and writing (certainly?) is easier.
First, the difference must be most apparent in the details (the depressurization consequent ot the
Solvent boring through the Earth).
Then, possibly in the way the story is written-- I'd need to read them again to discuss this
particular point.
Story-wise, and more generally (ie, besides SF), I believe the rigorous logic in all the stories is
one of the resulting characteristics; surely, any good writer will display such logic, and all
scientists may not be that rigorous.
I believe that the scientific background actually is more a "symptom" than a "cause"; ie, Don Rosa's
stories are so rigorous and logical and detailed because that's how Keno Don Rosa's mind works
naturally; his becoming an engineer in a sense is incidental, a consequence of such traits, not the
reason. Had he studied economics or something else, he would still have been capable of writing
such stories as L&T-- but he might not have been interested in writing SF.
I'm not sure I was clear. What I mean is that rigor / logic / attention to detail are not the
result of scientific training: they precede it.
Therefore, Don Rosa's stories are not writen that way because he is an engineer but because he
naturally has such a frame of mind; I think the only effect of his scientific background on his
writing is that it inspires him science fiction stories (ie, more easily than a non-scientist
writer).
Now, what if:
a/ a medical doctor wrote duck stories? Would the ducks be sick all the time or look for long-lost
medicines?
b/ a financier wrote duck stories? Would he focus on Scrooge? On the origins of his fortune and the
way he manages his money? More treasures to seek?
c/ an ornithologist (Theresa? ;) ) wrote duck stories? Would the stories be more concerned with
nature? Truer-to-facts? Maybe ducks & ganders really don't like each other.
d/ Stan Lee wrote duck stories? Would they turn out to be human mutants (D-Men?)?
c/ Shakespeare was actually thinking of ducks, geese, dogs and ganders when he wrote his plays?
Olivier
Søren Krarup Olesen
Off-Topic Forum
Message 519 -
2003-05-25 at 21:47:30
STEFAN + ROB + more:
> [...] In order to avoid such confusion,
> you would have to be a member of both lists, but then I don't see any
> meaning in having two lists as everyone will get all messages in any
> case.
I fully agree with you on this, Stefan. More mailing lists or news
groups are not what we need.
In case you wish to speak about (partly) off-topic topics, I recommend
to join the IRC chat server:
Server: irc.inducks.org
Port: 6667
Channel: #dcml
In order to join the channel (the "chat room"), simply type:
/join #dcml
See also:
http://irc.inducks.org
on how to getting started.
In this forum we mainly discuss Disney comics, but sometimes also more
personal matters. Anyone can join, no password or such required. And,
perhaps even more significant; no opinions are rejected as beeing "Not
true!" etc.
The server has been running for almost two years now, and the atmosphere
has always been *very* polite but also very free..."hyggelig" as we say
in Danish (="cosy" in lack of better words).
If you have a fixed Internet connection like ADSL, this is the perfect
place to "hang out".
S?ren
> [...] In order to avoid such confusion,
> you would have to be a member of both lists, but then I don't see any
> meaning in having two lists as everyone will get all messages in any
> case.
I fully agree with you on this, Stefan. More mailing lists or news
groups are not what we need.
In case you wish to speak about (partly) off-topic topics, I recommend
to join the IRC chat server:
Server: irc.inducks.org
Port: 6667
Channel: #dcml
In order to join the channel (the "chat room"), simply type:
/join #dcml
See also:
http://irc.inducks.org
on how to getting started.
In this forum we mainly discuss Disney comics, but sometimes also more
personal matters. Anyone can join, no password or such required. And,
perhaps even more significant; no opinions are rejected as beeing "Not
true!" etc.
The server has been running for almost two years now, and the atmosphere
has always been *very* polite but also very free..."hyggelig" as we say
in Danish (="cosy" in lack of better words).
If you have a fixed Internet connection like ADSL, this is the perfect
place to "hang out".
S?ren
Dan Rosenberg
Swedes in Finland
Message 520 -
2003-05-25 at 22:02:19
Michael wrote:
> They are not Swedes in Finland, but finns with swedish as their mother tongue. One part of Finland, the island Aaland (Ahvenanmaa), only have Swedish as official language. They wanted to belong to Sweden but the UN desided 1921 that the island should be an autonomy part of Finland.
>
> /Michael
I see. But perhaps you meant the League of Nations? The UN didn't exist in 1921.-Dan
--
__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> They are not Swedes in Finland, but finns with swedish as their mother tongue. One part of Finland, the island Aaland (Ahvenanmaa), only have Swedish as official language. They wanted to belong to Sweden but the UN desided 1921 that the island should be an autonomy part of Finland.
>
> /Michael
I see. But perhaps you meant the League of Nations? The UN didn't exist in 1921.-Dan
--
__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
Daniel Van Eijmeren
New DCML
Message 521 -
2003-05-25 at 22:06:28
In addition to my previous email about an on-topic mailing-list
and an off-topic mailing-list, I would like to make a difference
between interesting off-topic emails and annoying off-topic emails.
1. I like off-topic emails that tell me more information about a
subject that initially was a Disney comics subject.
2. I don't like off-topic emails that go on and on with discussing
discussions that initially were Disney comics discussions. ("You
wrote that I wrote that you wrote that I wrote that you wrote it.
I didn't. In fact, I wrote that you wrote that I wrote... etc.)
I think that if the off-topic discussion is an attempt to get rid
of the second category, then there should be other possibilities
than raising a second mailing list. (There are rules for this list,
for example. So, people who don't follow the rules can be reminded
of them.)
I feel that a lot of people are annoyed by the discussions-about-
discussions emails, and that the more interesting off-topic emails
(the first category) are not really much of a concern.
Of course, I might be wrong. I'm very much behind with reading my
email, so my peeking into recent digests may not have given me a
representative view on the matter.
--- Dani?l
and an off-topic mailing-list, I would like to make a difference
between interesting off-topic emails and annoying off-topic emails.
1. I like off-topic emails that tell me more information about a
subject that initially was a Disney comics subject.
2. I don't like off-topic emails that go on and on with discussing
discussions that initially were Disney comics discussions. ("You
wrote that I wrote that you wrote that I wrote that you wrote it.
I didn't. In fact, I wrote that you wrote that I wrote... etc.)
I think that if the off-topic discussion is an attempt to get rid
of the second category, then there should be other possibilities
than raising a second mailing list. (There are rules for this list,
for example. So, people who don't follow the rules can be reminded
of them.)
I feel that a lot of people are annoyed by the discussions-about-
discussions emails, and that the more interesting off-topic emails
(the first category) are not really much of a concern.
Of course, I might be wrong. I'm very much behind with reading my
email, so my peeking into recent digests may not have given me a
representative view on the matter.
--- Dani?l
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Off-Topic Forum
Message 522 -
2003-05-25 at 22:22:19
SOREN to STEFAN + ROB + MORE, 25-05-2003:
> In case you wish to speak about (partly) off-topic topics,
> I recommend to join the IRC chat server: [...]
> If you have a fixed Internet connection like ADSL, this is
> the perfect place to "hang out".
Wak! Now the off-topic discussion is followed by SPAM! :-)
Or maybe it isn't spam. What do you all think? Let's discuss it! :-)
--- Dani?l
"Ouch! More automation!"
(Which Barks story? This is quote-reprint from november 2002.
I believe no one has given the right answer yet.)
> In case you wish to speak about (partly) off-topic topics,
> I recommend to join the IRC chat server: [...]
> If you have a fixed Internet connection like ADSL, this is
> the perfect place to "hang out".
Wak! Now the off-topic discussion is followed by SPAM! :-)
Or maybe it isn't spam. What do you all think? Let's discuss it! :-)
--- Dani?l
"Ouch! More automation!"
(Which Barks story? This is quote-reprint from november 2002.
I believe no one has given the right answer yet.)
Sigvald Grøsfjeld Jr.
Swedes in Finland
Message 523 -
2003-05-25 at 23:26:23
Dan Rosenberg wrote:
> I'm confused. Why would Swedes in Finland want
> to form their own state when Sweden is right
> next door? All they'd have to do is get on a
> train and actually go there?
Why did the Turks form their own state in Cyprus when Turkey is close by?
All they'd had to do was getting on a boat and actually go there?
Sigvald
> I'm confused. Why would Swedes in Finland want
> to form their own state when Sweden is right
> next door? All they'd have to do is get on a
> train and actually go there?
Why did the Turks form their own state in Cyprus when Turkey is close by?
All they'd had to do was getting on a boat and actually go there?
Sigvald
Carey Furlong
Jaybird cannon in "The Doom Diamond" (US 70)
Message 524 -
2003-05-26 at 01:04:17
> From: "Daniel van Eijmeren" <dve at kabelfoon.nl>
> Subject: Jaybird cannon in "The Doom Diamond" (US 70)
>
> Page 12 of Barks' story "The Doom Diamond" (US 70) seems to suggest
> that the jaybird cannon in Scrooge's submarine is attached *upside
> down*. When Scrooge shows the cannon to Donald (panel 12.4), they're
> standing on the submarine's ceiling.
>
> This is not an error. I just found it funny to notice.
>
> (An explanation could be that Scrooge foresaw the possibility of being
> put upside down, so he made two jaybird cannons. One on the floor. And
> one upside down on the ceiling, meant as an alternate floor.)
This was an interesting scene. I agree that Scrooge foresaw the possibility
of being capsized during battle and had the jaybird cannon installed, ready
to be deployed through a special hatch in the bottom of the hull (it worked,
too!). However, I don't think he had another jaybird cannon installed on
the floor for upright battle. I see no evidence of a second jaybird cannon
in the story.
The idea of a cannon that fires metal jaybirds instead of normal ordinance
is a nifty little Barks pun that compares the Beagle Boys to "jailbirds."
This gag also hearkens back to some of the shot we saw exchanged between
Scrooge and the Beagles in The Paul Bunyan Machine (US 28).
> "I'm putting my heart back into my chest -
> all fractured and tattered - in need of a rest!"
"The Queen of the Wild Dog Pack," Uncle Scrooge 62
Carey Furlong
> Subject: Jaybird cannon in "The Doom Diamond" (US 70)
>
> Page 12 of Barks' story "The Doom Diamond" (US 70) seems to suggest
> that the jaybird cannon in Scrooge's submarine is attached *upside
> down*. When Scrooge shows the cannon to Donald (panel 12.4), they're
> standing on the submarine's ceiling.
>
> This is not an error. I just found it funny to notice.
>
> (An explanation could be that Scrooge foresaw the possibility of being
> put upside down, so he made two jaybird cannons. One on the floor. And
> one upside down on the ceiling, meant as an alternate floor.)
This was an interesting scene. I agree that Scrooge foresaw the possibility
of being capsized during battle and had the jaybird cannon installed, ready
to be deployed through a special hatch in the bottom of the hull (it worked,
too!). However, I don't think he had another jaybird cannon installed on
the floor for upright battle. I see no evidence of a second jaybird cannon
in the story.
The idea of a cannon that fires metal jaybirds instead of normal ordinance
is a nifty little Barks pun that compares the Beagle Boys to "jailbirds."
This gag also hearkens back to some of the shot we saw exchanged between
Scrooge and the Beagles in The Paul Bunyan Machine (US 28).
> "I'm putting my heart back into my chest -
> all fractured and tattered - in need of a rest!"
"The Queen of the Wild Dog Pack," Uncle Scrooge 62
Carey Furlong
Anthvvuono
Gemstone subsciptions
Message 525 -
2003-05-26 at 05:31:32
To Gemstone representative:
I was wondering about subscription information for Uncle Scrooge and
Walt Disney's Comics and Stories. I would like to order my copies soon so I can
receive the first issues and not miss out on them. I hope I can place my
order eventually considering it's near the end of May and the first issues of both
titles appear in a couple of weeks. Please let me know what to do and how.
Thanks.
Anthony
I was wondering about subscription information for Uncle Scrooge and
Walt Disney's Comics and Stories. I would like to order my copies soon so I can
receive the first issues and not miss out on them. I hope I can place my
order eventually considering it's near the end of May and the first issues of both
titles appear in a couple of weeks. Please let me know what to do and how.
Thanks.
Anthony