Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1exp 11/4/83; site ihlts.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!houxm!ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe
From: rjnoe@ihlts.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: Star Trek III
Message-ID: <263@ihlts.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 8-Nov-83 11:55:24 EST
Article-I.D.: ihlts.263
Posted: Tue Nov  8 11:55:24 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 9-Nov-83 21:20:58 EST
References: <472@hpda.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, Il
Lines: 23

I feel compelled to caution readers of Starlog (and this newsgroup) not
to readily believe every little detail about ST3 they read or hear.  You
can be pretty sure about the cast announcements and the release date (at
least as much as they can control it), but certain other details are very
probably red herrings.  They've been "leaking" tiny details here and there
about Spock's parents, the pivotal roles of Saavik and McCoy (and of course,
Kirk), and endings for several weeks now.  Starlog is generally a very
reputable publication but they also would like to scoop everyone else.
Paramount's PR task force is quite adept at making their false hints appear
genuine.  How do I know all this?  I got burned before Star Trek-The Motion
Picture and (to a much lesser extent) Star Trek-The Wrath of Khan when I
succumbed to the temptation of divulging all the tidbits thrown my way.
I dug really hard for some of them and was convinced of the authenticity of
the information, but turned out to be dead wrong.  Now that I've been on
Usenet since just after the release of ST2 I realize the damage I could do
here is much greater than what happened with newsletters mailed out to the
midwestern theater of Starfleet.  Be careful about what you believe and
if you can help it be careful about what you say or write.  I'd like to
keep others from making the same mistakes I did out of naivete and
excessive fanaticism.

-- 
		Roger Noe		...ihnp4!ihlts!rjnoe