Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
Sci-Fi

Enterprise Fans Buy Full-Page Ad In LA Times 440

Posted by Zonk
from the more-pink-skins dept.
jangobongo writes "SciFiWire.com reports that fans of Star Trek Enterprise have succeeded in placing a full-page ad in the LA Times. The ad will urge someone to pick up the show for a fifth season. According to the official fan site, a Star Trek Enterprise fan working for the LA Times has arranged a special deal for a discounted ad. Donations collected to date have covered the cost of the ad which will be located in the "A" section of the paper on Feb. 21."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Enterprise Fans Buy Full-Page Ad In LA Times

Comments Filter:
  • Come on (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mr_null (16516)
    Let it die already!
    • Let it die already!

      Seriously!
    • Re:Come on (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nuclear305 (674185) * on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:43PM (#11655435)
      "Let it die already!"

      I wouldn't consider myself a fan at the level of doing anything to save the series, but ...really; I'm sick of seeing all the "Let it die!" comments. On the other hand I'm sure all those who dislike Enterprise are tired of the "Save Enterprise!" campaigns--in which case I wish they'd just ignore them rather than complain about them.

      Anyway, to the point...is it worth saving? Yes, I think so. I think I can safely say without a doubt that Season 4 gets better as each episode passes (Minus the time-traveling space nazi aliens)

      From the preview of upcoming episodes it seems they're finally going to mix things up and add some actual drama to the show rather than psuedo-drama that seems almost forced from Bakula.
      • This season has been good in comparison to the previous ones agreed, but Enterprise suffers from annoying character syndrome: tucker, t'pals hair, hoshi, travis, daniels, the theme song ... also have you noticed the special effects have taken a turn for the worse this season?
    • Re:Come on (Score:2, Interesting)

      by redcone (838393)
      I agree. Let it die. I was a Star Trek fan for many years, but Voyager, DS9, and now Enterprise conspired to suck the life out of a great idea. Enterprise could have been a great series had they just went with the idea of chronicling the early days of space exploration and forgot all the time travellers from the future trying to destroy the federation before it even began.
    • Re:Come on (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:45PM (#11655452)
      I know it's common on Slashdot to think Star Trek should die. Let me tell let you in on a little secret: You don't have to watch it. Seriously. I like it, I want to watch it. How does it harm you if it's on?

      For example, I don't care that Stargate plays. Personally, I think I could create a better show based off of the contents of my toilet. Do I constantly complain about it and say that Stargate should die? No. Live and let live.
      • Re:Come on (Score:4, Insightful)

        by toddestan (632714) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @02:20AM (#11657320)
        Enterprise gets some of the hardcore trekkies into a dilemma - they eat and breathe Star Trek, so naturally they must watch everything Trek. They've seen every movie, every TOS episode, every TNG episode, DS9, Voyager - certainly more than once. But they also find Enterprise painful. So do they:

        1. Endure watching Enterprise for sake of completeness?
        -or-
        2. Don't watch Enterprise cause it stinks, but miss out on this corner of the Star Trek universe?

        The easiest way to get around this delimma is to have Enterprise canceled. That way they won't have to endure any more episodes if they chose option 1, or if they chose option 2 - they can stop worrying about what they might of missed.

        I also must note that a simular problem exists for Star Wars fans, and the upcoming Episode III.
    • Re:Come on (Score:2, Interesting)

      by The Bubble (827153)

      I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I'd hate to see a Star Trek series die like this, especially when there is no alternative (in the Star Trek universe) to take its place. I am one of the few who enjoy Enterprise; it has something that most of the others have lost out on: contiguous storylines. The 'Brady Bunch' syndrome of Voyager really got annoying.

      Still, I'm afraid of what would happen if someone takes pity on the series. I am reminded of Stargate SG-1, the MGM masterpiece that turned quick-and-dirty

  • by gid13 (620803) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:37PM (#11655399)
    I wonder when the demand for some shows will become great enough that fans will be able to finance entire shows DIRECTLY. Could probably save a pretty penny by not having to pay so many executives too.
    • by Dachannien (617929) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:39PM (#11655412)
      What, are you some sort of Slashdot editor or something? [slashdot.org]

    • Fan made episodes (Score:4, Informative)

      by cbr2702 (750255) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @11:52PM (#11656614) Homepage
      Have you seen this? [newvoyages.com] Two new episodes of TOS, with more on the way.
  • Huh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Black Parrot (19622) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:39PM (#11655410)


    Is this story an ad for an ad?

  • Add (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:40PM (#11655415)
    The entire open source community could hardly gather money for the Firefox add in 3(?) months, but a few Star Trek fans gather for an LA Times add in 2(?) weeks?

    omfg.
    • Actually, the money for the FF NYT ad (not "add") came together pretty easily as I recall.
    • Evidently the two actual fans managed to find a third person to help sponsor the effort.
    • by Jeff DeMaagd (2015)
      The Firefox ad was slow in coming. They raised the money very quickly but there was no word on what happened to it for a couple months.
    • Re:Add (Score:3, Informative)

      by MrNonchalant (767683)
      Uh. No. Firefox took 1 week to get the money and got way more money than they needed. Plus they were paying normal rates. It did, however, take 3 months for the ad to run. This angered many. Get your facts straight.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:41PM (#11655418)
    They should have taken out an ad instead calling for the involuntary euthanasia of Rick Berman. I'd eat Alpo for a month to come up with the money to get behind that.
    • I'd eat Alpo for a month to come up with the money to get behind that.

      Alpo? When did you win the lottery?
    • Re:Paaaa-thetic (Score:4, Insightful)

      by NOLAChief (646613) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @12:01AM (#11656661)
      Not to defend Berman or anything (he is a fuckwit), but I don't think the entire blame can be laid on him. I think the faceless (and brainless) network suits are at least partially to blame.

      Think about it, the three incarnations that have aired as part of a network lineup have either sucked, been cancelled early, or both. The ultimate reason is ratings. Network suits care only about ratings, because they are in a brutal competition to be the first to the bottom of the barrel. The two incarnations that aired in syndication, though, were actually quite good (or at least respectable). Because it's airing as filler for a station (yes it sounds bad, but bear with me) they aren't as worried about ratings, so there's less meddling by suits in order to get a short-term ratings boost.

      To illustrate, TOS was simply killed because it wasn't getting enough ratings. NBC had other stuff to work with, so no stupid stunts (and it was the '60s, we were much closer to the top of the barrel). Voyager wasn't too bad, but it was UPN's only show that was worth anything at the time, so they wanted to boost it's ratings (and cross-promote its other shows) any way they could to make the network look good. Unfortunately that led to the travesty of an episode guest starring the Rock and the "hey, CBS is doing a miniseries about an asteroid hitting earth this week, how quickly can we air an asteroid episode too?" insult that was the episode "Rise". Then, with Enterprise, they continued the ratings boost shenanigans from the beginning, alienating fans and leading to a horrible show. This time, because of the WWE deal, UPN can afford to abandon the ST franchise. Anyone else notice that when they put it in the Friday night deathwatch slot, the show got a far sight better?

  • by Anonymous Coward
    That have had similar campaigns is that the vast majority of the audience believed in the people behind them. Whether it was Angel, or Farscape, or even the original Star Trek, people respected the person(s) in charge of making the show happen, and they were upset with how a studio/channel treated them unfairly.

    This is different, though. No one has been more vocal about the problems with B&B than the fans. Why support them? Why raise money for them to make another season? Let them take the fall on
  • ENOUGH! (Score:2, Interesting)

    This needs to not become a habit. If loads of people get full page adverts in magazines for every little fanbase then it will become meaningless.

    Enterprise has been a rather poor series from the start. It didn't follow the Star Trek theme at all, it didn't feel like Star Trek. It seemed more of a parody which could of been named "Hicks in space".

    I'm not a HUGE Trekkie, but I'll happily watch anything EXCEPT Enterprise. Where as I can't even stand to watch a full episode of the "new" series. I understand f
    • Hell as far as I know they don't even have a Holo-deck, surely that cuts the series length in half without the "OMG SAFEY HAS BEEN REMOVED" episodes.

      They managed to meet an alien race with holodeck technology (damn you Berman), and one of the hicks got pregnant in it.
      Boy was he surprised.

      I'm not a HUGE Trekkie, but I'll happily watch anything EXCEPT Enterprise.

      I don't even consider Enterprise to be Trek.

      As far as I'm concerned, continuity ended in Generations: Picard never made it out of the Nexus a
    • Hicks in space^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HFirefly has already been done.
    • Enterprise has been a rather poor series from the start. It didn't follow the Star Trek theme at all, it didn't feel like Star Trek. It seemed more of a parody which could of been named "Hicks in space".

      You know, when I watched it for the first time and that inappropriately folky Rod Stewart opening music started, I had a premonition that the whole series was going to be bad. I watched the first couple seasons anyway, just in case I was wrong. I wasn't. Somebody tell that shitbag Rick Berman I want those

    • Re:ENOUGH! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Sponge Bath (413667) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @09:51PM (#11655868)
      ...could of been named "Hicks in space"

      Captain: Cletus, engage that warp thangy.
      Cletus: I caint! Thar's possums in the warp drive!

    • Re:ENOUGH! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by kongjie (639414) <kongjie AT mac DOT com> on Saturday February 12, 2005 @10:08PM (#11656003)
      Turn-X Alphonse said:
      It seemed more of a parody which could of been named "Hicks in space".
      Well, before you accuse people of being hicks just because their English sounds different than your English, perhaps you should hit the books. There is no such phrase "could of"; what you mean is "could have," usually contracted as "could've" and thus sounding like "could of."
  • by bigtallmofo (695287) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:42PM (#11655427)
    My campaign to save Webster in the late 80's didn't succeed and I don't see why this campaign will either.

    Emmanuel Lewis, one day, you'll be back if it's the last thing I do.
  • PDF of advert (Score:5, Informative)

    by jong99 (848508) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:44PM (#11655444)
    Actual advert here: http://enterprisefans.com/ad/final.pdf [enterprisefans.com]
  • by blcamp (211756) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:49PM (#11655472) Homepage

    At least save T'Pol.

    There are "logical" reasons for this.

    No, really. Honest...

  • I have been a fan of Star Trek - The Original Series (ST-TOS) and Star Wars (IV, V, & VI) for ages. The main strength of ST-TOS is that it dealt directly with the social issues of the day. Remember that the 1960s were a turbulent time in America.

    I like Star Wars because it has excellent acting and dealt with good versus evil. Star Wars is essentially a medieval tale (of knights and a princess) shrouded in sci-fi props: lasers, spaceships, etc.

    The problem with Enterprise is the bad acting. and bad

    • by Scrameustache (459504) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:52PM (#11655496) Homepage Journal
      The problem with Enterprise is

      The problem with Trek, in two words: Rick Berman.
    • by TheKidWho (705796) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:54PM (#11655503)
      Get off your high horse and start watching the newest season of enterprise. It by far kicks major ass.

      Watch it Pink Skin.
    • Enterprise should take homosexuality or Tibet and frame those issues in a big metaphor and give the punch line at the end.

      I'm not sure that The Tiresome, Preachy Metaphor Show would be any more successful than The Tired Premise Sci-Fi Western Show.

    • Remember the old episode with the 2 aliens, each being half white and half black. At the end of the show, you realize that they hate each other because they are white on different sides. Wow. That was an excellent metaphore for race relations.

      I liked Babylon 5's Purple/Green [midwinter.com] better.

    • I like Star Wars because it has excellent acting and dealt with good versus evil. Star Wars is essentially a medieval tale (of knights and a princess) shrouded in sci-fi props: lasers, spaceships, etc.

      And that is why we have to be really careful about Trek. I do NOT want it to deteriorate into a we-are-good-because-we-are-good story. ST is about people with ideals. SW is more about, well, people.

      In addition to the acting, what I couldn't find in Enterprise were those ideals. Sure, Archer talks about t

    • The main strength of ST-TOS is that it dealt directly with the social issues of the day.

      Are you saying we need a ship cast from Janet Jackson's boob that goes to fight the evil terra on Iraqi Prime?
    • Remember the old episode with the 2 aliens, each being half white and half black. At the end of the show, you realize that they hate each other because they are white on different sides. Wow. That was an excellent metaphore for race relations.

      This is intended to be read as sarcasm, right? I mean... honestly Star Trek was often a good show, but whenever it (or ST:TNG which often did the same thing) went to absurb lengths to create an episode that only served to be a heavy-handed lesson it was rarely good.
  • by saskboy (600063) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:51PM (#11655482) Homepage Journal
    ...have long gone.

    Paramount owns Star Trek, and will not let the show continue on anything but UPN, and they've probably already filled Enterprise's time slot with some crud on Friday nights at UPN.
  • Help save Star Trek.

    New writers needed.
  • by earthforce_1 (454968) <earthforce_1NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Saturday February 12, 2005 @08:59PM (#11655533) Journal
    How about covering the hull of the enterprise in ads like a formula 1 race car?

    Seeing a big Viagra ad splayed across the top of the saucer section would be worth watching the show again...
  • I'm not some tree hugging freak, but I think there are FAR more useful and constructive places the time, money and energy being pissed away on trying to save a mediocre TV series can be spent.

    Face it: it's network television. Its fundamental purpose is to keep your attention between commercials. It wasn't doing a very good job of that, so they canned it. It has nothing to do with art. It has everything to do with commerce.

    If they could show nothing but TV commercials and keep an audience that way, they

  • I was not aware that people truly read Newspapers anymore. The newspapers in my town (Augusta) completely suck and aren't worth the 12$ they're trying to sell it for. My parents stopped buying their paper up in Chicago for the same reason.

    With the Internet becoming a place where news are instant and commentary is a little deeper, why are Newspapers still around? How are they remaining profitable?
    • With the Internet becoming a place where news are instant and commentary is a little deeper, why are Newspapers still around? How are they remaining profitable?

      Newspapers are somewhat cheaper than laptops and usually require no batteries to read. And when you are done they make wonderful packing material, bird cage lining, masking paper, origami, pirate hats, or can be used as a fire starter.

  • If enough sci-fi fans thought it was good enough then it would get ratings.

    An idea to spice up the show would be new uniforms . Have ALL the women including the hot vulcan in tight miniskirts just like in the original series. Remember the Vulcan in the StarTrek movie ? Hell make them even smaller skirts. Why not add some eroticism instead of staying stale and puritan.

    I WOULD DEFINITELY WATCH THEN.
  • Jumping (Score:4, Funny)

    by vistic (556838) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @09:08PM (#11655599)
    Please stop, the shark is tired now.
  • by kuzb (724081) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @09:10PM (#11655604)
    ...Enterprise Fans Waste Money On Full-Page Ad In LA Times

    While I respect the fact that some want it to continue, it's a truly futile effort which is not going to go anywhere. Save your money to pay for the service to watch whatever Star Trek incarnation comes along next.
  • I REALLY hope this canceling doesn't turn into the same story as the original Star trek and Gundam.. That would just be hell.. Could anyone seriously see Enterprise being called "The series which revived Star trek and took it in a new generation" as people would say "Star trek revived Sci Fi and took it in a new bold direction"? I fear for the universe if Enterprise becomes cult..
  • by Squeezer (132342) <awilliam.mdah@state@ms@us> on Saturday February 12, 2005 @09:20PM (#11655680) Homepage
    the problem with enterprise isn't the show, its ha da great 3rd and 4th series that tie the episodes together. (unlike TNG where enterprise just flew around the galaxy doing whatever and none of the episodes tied anything together)

    Anyway, getting back to my point, the problem is that its shown on UPN. who watches UPN? nobody, look at their ratings on every show. If enterprise was on Fox the ratings would be through the roof. Heck where I live, there is no local UPN station (so I can't get with with my satalite subscriber or on a antenna) so I have to download the copy from usenet the morning after the new episode airs.

    but here we do have local fox, abc, cbs, nbc, and wb (bleh) affiliates. for gods sake, show enterprise on anything other then UPN and you'd have great ratings. The problem isn't enterprise, the problem is that nobody watches UPN, no matter what UPN has on tv.
    • (unlike TNG where enterprise just flew around the galaxy doing whatever and none of the episodes tied anything together)

      That's why I actually ended up watching it, though. Sure, you had to figure out who's who and such, but episodes like Thine Own Self, The Inner Light or Emergence didn't require you to know much about Star Trek politics, alliances, factions, wars. They just used the ST universe as a vehicle for a couple quite original stories (by TV standards) that didn't have much of an effect on futur

  • by chrysrobyn (106763) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @09:20PM (#11655682)

    Let's look at this story another way. Enterprise fans (who are among the most rabid bit torrent users, many because of UPN's limited audience) don't believe they're spending enough money on the show through eyeballs (commercials) and uploading. They feel the need to tell the studios that they're willing to pay more, so they took out an ad.

    Do we need more evidence that current copyright law is hindering the progress of science and useful arts?

    Studios, the Internet is there for more than just commercials served as web pages. We're willing to pay for content. We're ready for you. You will lose money if you stand in the way of progress, just like the US Constitution foretold 200 years ago. You can either help with something like iTunes or sue dead grandmothers until teenagers teach their parents how to take care of this themselves.

    We have the technology to allow the market to directly tell you what they want. We want Firefly (just count those DVD sales). We want Family guy. Yet the studios count the millions who watch the Superbowl just for the commercials the same as a rabid fan base who will pay through the nose for a series on commercial free DVD. (Here's a tip, I don't like menus or "special features", I just want to use my DVD player like a CD player hooked up to the TV.)

    [karma whore]Wait, this is Slashdot. Nobody likes Enterprise. How much did both Enterprise fans have to contribute for the full page ad?[/karma whore]

  • Enterprise is one of the only Sci-Fi shows on TV that you don't need cable to watch. That said, I see one major problem with the show (which, by the way, I like quite a bit): UPN

    What is ON UPN? Can you name ANYTHING besides Enterprise? I never watch the channel. It is full of shows no-one has ever heard of. If it wasn't for Enterprise it wouldn't matter to me if the channel disappeared from the face of the Earth. Advertising is only as effective as the people who watch it. You can advertize 24/7, but if yo

  • Alluring Theme Tune (Score:4, Interesting)

    by zootm (850416) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @10:06PM (#11655987)
    Right. Enterprise. I'm sure it's a perfectly good show. Maybe even good. But am I the only one who instinctively turns their TV off before the end of the theme tune?

    It could be the worst theme on television. Ever.
  • by xC0000005 (715810) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @10:15PM (#11656049) Homepage
    (No, not "suck and die") but attract non star trek fans. I know many trek lovers at work. All of them hate Enterprise. Then there's the dedicated non SF crowd, like my wife, who actually likes Enterprise. She likes the characters more. Likes the lower tech "high tech." And she's not alone. The other Enterprise watchers I know didn't really like Trek before Enterprise. Enterprise's downfall? It isn't really working as a gateway drug. I don't know people who have moved off of enterprise onto harder SF. (Unlike firefly, which began soft and smooth, but I know people who live their social lives in the social equivalent of an abandoned building, straining shows like Andromeda through bread to get a SF high). Enterprise hasn't built a following of people who would watch another show from the same series. Contrast TNG, which made so many addicts that they were willing to watch a show about a space station that boldly sat in one place year after year.
  • by Genghis Cohn (781034) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @10:23PM (#11656106)
    I love the articles here, but any time I venture into the comments section, I wind up irritated and depressed at humanity's future prospects.

    Slashdot commentators seem to combine the arrogance and incivility of your average adolescent with the cantankerous anger of a bitter old man. Most of you don't seem to love anything, and if you do stumble across someone expressing appreciation or admiration for anything, you just DUMP ALL OVER IT.

    That's my general statement. Now about this topic in particular:

    I LIKE Enterprise. Yes, it has taken a few years to hit its stride. This seems to be the pattern for these Berman-produced Trek vehicles. They get better as they go along. I thought this one would be particularly challenging for them to pull off, because writing a past history for any established storyline is just hard. You have to work within the strictures of what has already been plotted, not violate any rules already laid down, but still keep things fresh and unpredictable. Furthermore, since they are working in a reality that is lacking quite a few of the standard Star Trek devices (meaning both technology and plot devices), they can't just fall back on old storylines like holodecks (not invented yet), Q continuum (won't meet them for centuries), the Borg (likewise), or even original Trek conventions like the Klingon War or the Romulan Neutral Zone (yet to happen/be established.)

    I wasn't wild about the Temporal Cold War plotlines, but there is an ongoing theme, well established during Voyager, that Temporal violations are possible and certain organizations work hard to prevent that from happening. The TCW plots at least establish some of the "history" (slippery word when you're talking about time travel) that led to that sort of management.

    And this season, I think they are really getting to the meat of the plots, the establishment of much of what we first came to like about Star Trek: The Federation (and Humans central role in bringing it about), the battles with the Romulans that will lead to the Zone, the roots of the Klingon/Terran conflict, the moral dilemmas that necessitate the Prime Directive, reliable Transporter technology, and so on. Between the First Contact movie and Enterprise, the Zefram Cochrane/Warp Drive/Vulcan first contact plot line has really been fleshed out, and now seems like a genuine part of Trek history.

    Those are reasons why I like it. I don't demand that YOU do. But why do so many people around here WANT it to die? This isn't 1975, with just three big TV networks and very limited programming space. It's 2005, there are dozens of networks and hundreds of channels. There's plenty of room for both Trek and Battlestar Galactica, and whatever else. If you don't like Trek, don't watch it. I'll admit that plenty of people have made that choice, and that's why the show is in peril. But ferchrisakes, don't demand that it be taken off just because it doesn't appeal to YOU. And if those of us who do enjoy it make some effort to keep it on, please try not to savage us, or disparage the attempt. I'm much more turned off by apathy than by people earnestly trying to do something, even something a little silly.

    Better to tilt at windmills than to just sit home in your underwear and type snide comments at people you haven't (and probably never will) meet.
    • by hotshot2000 (88939) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @01:00AM (#11656945)
      The problem with your argument is that you assume the presence of Enterprise doesn't affect those who dislike it. That is false.

      1) Aired Trek becomes canon, that is, it becomes part of the mythos that needs to be factored in by, e.g., Trek novels -- those who dislike Enterprise also dislike the fact that future series and books will need to take its presence into account, and spend at least some energy addressing the (in their opinion) contradictions and dubious elements it introduces into the mythos.

      2) The resources being used on Enterprise (squandered, according to those who dislike it) could be put to better use on better Trek if Enterprise was off the air.

      Please realize that at least some of those who advocate the cancellation of Enterprise are not mean-spirited folk who want to take away your enjoyment, but rather equally earnest people trying to ensure the future of Trek they enjoy, in the same way that Enterprise supporters believe themselves to be acting.
  • Good luck (Score:3, Interesting)

    by anethema (99553) on Saturday February 12, 2005 @11:58PM (#11656642) Homepage
    A friend recommended me to watch the pilot of Battlestar Galactica. After seeing that (then of course watching the entire season1), I have this to say to enterprize fans: Good luck.

    This is obviously just my humble personal opinion, but from what ive seen, ST:E has absolutly -nothing- on BSG.
    • Re:Good luck (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MtViewGuy (197597)
      If you've seen my post on this topic, you know that Paramount dearly misses Ronald D. Moore, who was involved in some of the very best episodes of ST:TNG and ST:DS9. If Moore were involved with ST:E I think the series would have far higher ratings.

It's not so hard to lift yourself by your bootstraps once you're off the ground. -- Daniel B. Luten

Working...