I read this lasted abbreviated article by Brad Wright, and I must say that based on the last two seasons’ writing quality, I’d be scrutinizing scripts sent to me, too. I don’t blame Mr. Shanks for being a bit wary.

I’m deeply disappointed and must tell you that I refuse to watch this show without Daniel Jackson.

This is a grievious error in judgement, and I hope that you will reconsider this situation and make every effort to set things right.

Thanks for your time.

Linda
Salem, IL USA - Tuesday, April 30, 2002, 10:15 PM

I just finished watching Menace and I have to say that TPTB and Sci-Fi have made the worst mistake ever in pushing out such a talented actor.

How can they watch this episode and not see what we see and understand that Daniel’s character is very important, his caring and wiliness to understand and go that extra step, he could never be replaced.

I for one will not be watching season 6 or the spin-off and I will only watch the movie (if there is one) if Michael Shanks is in it.

Pam
USA - Friday, April 26, 2002, 11:04 PM

Maya Comer <Work email is private>
Santa Barbara, USA - Monday, April 22, 2002, 12:54 PM

Here is more information on the series of special mysteries to air on PAX. Mr. Shanks stars in the final one shown on the page.

http://www.pax.tv/specials/maryhiggins/default.cfm

This is meant to give you an idea of the kind of show he will be in... and possibly to give the Stargate writers some new ideas to lift -- er, I mean, be inspired by.

Peace!

Heather <heather@lapa.net>
Lafayette, IN, USA - Monday, April 22, 2002, 12:38 PM

Yeah. Must be lots of self-mutilation going on. Or Peter D was speaking for himself. He’s a nice guy and a fan.

Clare without the i
Monday, April 22, 2002, 10:05 AM

I’m looking forward to seeing you in your next project, whatever it is.

P.S. Loved your interview in the April 2002 issue of _SFX_

Mrs. Wainwright
Zurich, Switzerland - Sunday, April 21, 2002, 6:41 PM

(He assured fans that a theatrical SG-1 adventure would remain faithful to the series. "We’d cut into our own flesh [before we’d] anger the fans," DeLuise said. "A Stargate movie will be like the show, only much bigger, more elaborate and faster.")

Humm... We’d cut into our own flesh [before we’d] anger the fans. Yep you don’t want to anger the fans. *grin*

Bugsbear
USA - Sunday, April 21, 2002, 5:59 PM

Lets face it, they know they’ve made a mistake, but they would rather ignore us the fans than admit it, well its going to be there own downfall. I really hope that Season 6 gets such bad ratings (and I believe they will) that there will not be a movie or a spin-off series. The Stargate that we have come to love has been gone for quite awhile now.

Besides I’m not adding the Sci-fi channel to my TV bill just to watch this poor imitation of a show that I really loved. Furthermore, I have plenty of past episodes and stories to watch and read when S6 gets here that I won’t even miss it!!!

P Vandyke <pvandyke3@hotmail.com>
Virginia, USA - Sunday, April 21, 2002, 12:32 PM

"In the first rush of shock and grief after "Meridian" aired, Mr. Mallozzi’s comments likening losing Daniel to losing the little monkey from "Friends" were insulting at best and some posters did take them personally." First of all, I would like to say that I’m deeply insulted by Mr. Mallozzi’s remarks. Daniel Jackson is a hell of a lot more than some stupid monkey. He’s a wonderfully realized character that fans can’t help but like. Daniel is a tribute to the very talented writers who wrote him and Michael Shanks, who brought him to life.

Secondly, Mallozzi, your whole attitude towards this situation disgusts me.

But what I’d like to know is, Mr. Mallozzi, why do you hate Daniel Jackson and his fans SO much?

And what exactly do you mean by "Unfortunately for the real Daniel Jackson fans out there, the individuals involved in the SDJ campaign have done their cause a disservice"? All we’ve done is tell you that we love Daniel, we want him back, and that you people are fucking up what was once the best sci-fi show out there. Truth hurts, doesn’t it. And what the HELL do you mean by ’real Daniel Jackson fan’? Do you consider a ’real Daniel Jackson fan’ to be someone with no spine who isn’t brave enough to tell you that they’re unhappy, someone who will just sit back without a whimper and watch their favorite character be destroyed, someone who’ll just accept the injustice being done Daniel *and* Michael without trying to do *something* to make it stop? That’s not a fan.

You should be ashamed of yourself, Mallozzi, but obviously you have none.

And PTB, I’m *still* waiting on those backbones I mentioned here in February. Though regrettably, I can now see that backbones *evolved* faster than the lot of you will grow them.

Amanda Drake <firedrake@hotmail.com>
WA - Sunday, April 21, 2002, 7:06 AM

Hello Claire

Though we respect your right to free speech and the strength of your impassioned feelings, we regretfully had to remove your post. Naturally in response to Mr. Mallozzi’s unwarranted accusations we took legal advice, which we are following to the letter, hence the amended Guestbook rules (17-Apr-02).

We at SDJ do thank you for your indignation and protectiveness on behalf of our reputation and the SDJ site.

Your views on Mr. Mallozzi’s veracity, personality and motivations were heated.

We hope you still feel comfortable in posting again to the Guestbook and thank you for your recognition that in posting as you did, you were placing the SDJ campaign in a very difficult position, as there are those who loudly persist in holding ’SDJ’ solely responsible for the negative opinions of every individual poster here at the site, though not as yet at the MGM and SciFi bulletin boards. Though we respect the right of others to oppose us, we regret that they are unable or unprepared to accept that it is the actions and decisions of TPTB that are directly responsible for any negativity expressed here or in other forums by individuals written off by TPTB along with Daniel Jackson, the original spirit of the show and our beloved SG-1 team.

ADMIN <savedanieljackson@btopenworld.com>
Sunday, April 21, 2002, 5:27 AM

Xochiquetzl
Etlanna, Jawjah, USA - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 5:02 PM

Now, I stopped watching the show about 18 months ago, half way through what I believe was the fourth season, because I started to dislike the direction the writers were forcing the characters. These strangers on the screen sniping at each other weren’t the four tightly knit team members I’d grown to enjoy watching. So I cancelled Showtime and got on with ... Farscape.

However, Daniel Jackson had been the character I liked the most, the one I identified with, so when my collegues mentioned him, my ears perked up. They were eager to tell me what had happened since the time I stopped watching, and directed me to the Save Daniel Jackson website.

With all due respect, Mr Powers That Be, whomever you may be, I think you’ve just done a very good job of showing to the world what exactly the phrase "shooting yourselves in the foot," really means. "Cutting your nose off to spite your face" comes to mind, also.

I rather wish I’d continued watching the series, if only so I could say I was going to stop.

Paula Stenger <(none)>
Ventura, USA - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 4:54 PM

Daniel was the one character on the show I could identify with, the non-military man who still believed it was possible to solve problems peacibly rather than with force, the way it seems to happen so much in Real Life.

You had such a great team there, too, Jack and Daniel and Sam and Teal’c, all working together to "save the world." From what I understand, you could have kept Michael Shanks from leaving with very little effort on your part. Was it to much for him to ask of you, giving his character things to do that utilized Daniel’s areas of expertise, to give the four team members back the licking they had for each other during the first two years or so? Was that so hard for you to do???

Apparently so. And I’m very sorry for that because you’ve taken away one of the few TV shows I’ve enjoyed in the past few years. I won’t be watching the season coming up on the Sci-Fi Channel, and I most emphatically will NOT watch any spin-off you might try and palm off on your unsuspecting public.

James Danisch <>
Goleta, California - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 4:37 PM

I can not believe that you’ve let Michael Shanks leave the series like this. Daniel Jackson was the best character, the most well-rounded and fleshed-out person on the team, and you let the actor who played him get away. That is so unreal. You had a fantastically marketable commodity and you basically stopped its production. That’s not the way to sell people on a series. It would be like McDonalds getting rid of the Big Macs and trying to sell hamburgers in its place.

The last two years of the show has, with few exceptions, been mediocre, and the only reason I continued watching was in hopes I’d catch a glimpse of the old brilliance, the great rapport between Jack and Daniel, the wonderful support of Sam and Teal’c.

I just can’t believe you’ve done this. It boggles my mind that you’d want to ruin what was such a great team show.

Heather Alexander <>
Santa Barbara, California - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 4:25 PM

I’m disgusted. That’s the best word I can think of for how I felt when I read that.

Maybe Mallozi was trying to be funny.

Does it seem like anyone is laughing?

If that’s the sort of respect Michael Shanks was getting, then when done for leaving! I’m certainly not going to watch anymore.

Clo

Clo
England - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 12:19 PM

I was made aware of this website by The Guardian newspaper and I must express my admiration. The word ’fan’ does foster some unfortunate misconceptions within the general public but if I am being entirely honest with myself, yes I am indeed a ’fan’. I watch regularly and have been known ask family members to record episodes when I have been unable to watch live broadcast with them.

I was under the impression that Daniel Jackson would be returning as a regular in the next series of new episodes, certainly that was the impression given by Sky television in their T.V. guide. However it apppears that this is not the case. I find it impossible to comprehend the reasoning behind the decision to reduce the role of Mr. Shanks. It was something I was aware of as I watched the series and it was a constant annoyance, though I had assumed the situation would resolve itself and attempts would be made to redress the balance. Now I disover how it has been resolved - with the ’death’ of Daniel. It further appears that the singularly charmless character who was prepared to hang Daniel out to dry for a crime committed by his planet’s government is intended as a replacement.

One can only speculate as to the personal hostility or personal agenda(s) behind such a decision. If indeed those in a position to do something about this ridiculous state of affairs are reading comments on this website, then to them I say for the future of this series, please reconsider. I have no interest in a series without Daniel Jackson as part of the team; already there has been a limited exloration of other worlds and mythology and the interest in ancient Egyptian based culture now appears to be nil. I would urge them to once again return to exploration of other worlds and cultures as this was my primary reason for watching in the first place as I do not ordinarily watch science fiction. As the series stands now it appears to be more of a ’poor man’s ’ The X-Files.

From reading the interviews housed here, Mr. Shanks has made it abundantly clear that he is/was prepared to reprise his role. Given that only one episode has been written to include the character, it would appear that Mr. Shanks is not the person placing obstacles in the path of Daniel’s return. If Mr. Shanks is not the problem then those in a position of power are either the problem or should be prepared to ensure that the problem is removed. If personal hostility towards Mr. Shanks is behind this, and from the interviews it would appear Mr. Shanks is a well loved figure within the cast and strikes me as an admirable young man, then I respectfully request that those with a ’problem’ buckle down and start behaving professionally and leave their personal feelings out of this matter.

Sincerely,

K Davenport

K. Davenport <n/a>
St. Albans, UK - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 9:02 AM

TEPY-KA-NIB

Tepy Ka nib
London, England - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 6:57 AM

Dangermouse <colonelk@tiscali.co.uk>
UK - Saturday, April 20, 2002, 6:32 AM

Stargate just hasn’t been the same since the end of season three. My season four and season five tapes just don’t get any play at all. I’m just not sure why TPTB can’t understand why we feel this way - or why they seem to be smearing the SDJ site and campaign. I haven’t seen anything like a death threat here so far.

Tracy LeCates <tracy@pitchforkpress.com>
Rowayton, CT - Friday, April 19, 2002, 8:02 PM

I started watching Stargate SG1 only last July. I don’t know what finally nudged me to give it a serious look, as I’ve seen portions of episodes when visiting my parents, but I did. After rewatching the movie, I, oddly enough, I began with the pilot episode (strange concept, I know.) and was rather impressed with Stargate’s transition to the small screen as well as Micheal Shanks dead-on portrayal of Daniel. I was hooked. I immediately bought the boxed set and was even more impressed and more hooked. Maybe this doesn’t seem so unusual, but you see, I don’t watch tv much anymore. It’s all either crap, doesn’t interest me enough, or... gets cancelled. Well, Stargate managed two impressive feats: it hooked me on a tv show again, and presented a female character I could actually like (although Sam’s first scene almost removed that possibility.)

After the boxed set, I sought out every episode I could get a hold of and watched the rest of the series, in order, (again, strange concept.) and even though not every one was the best or didn’t have equal appeal, I was still completely and totally hooked. Until... I got to season 4. Interesting thing about watching a series from episode 1 through to the most recent, it makes discrepencies all the more glaring. As it does the drop in quality. Not every season 4 and 5 episode is bad, but there are more bad than good than there were in seasons 1-3. But... I still watched, hoping since season 6 and a possible movie was on the horizon, it might get better. It didn’t. So many missed opportunities and just bad plotting/story-telling were becoming the norm, and the themes and character-elements which so impressed me about the show were disappearing. Some of the changes wouldn’t have been so bad if there had just been *some* effort in showing *why* and develop it. Why was Jack always so pissed at Daniel? Why was Sam suddenly so annoyingly perfect, apparently with only having an astrophysics degree, she’s knowledgeable, if not an out-right expert, in every scientific field imaginable? The only thing she *didn’t* seem to know much about was archaeology, anthropology, and linguistics?(Thankfully) Why were Daniel and Teal’c relegated to the background more and more and the seasons progressed, only popping into the picture when there was no avoiding their usefulness to the story, then sent back to the sidelines so Sam could ’save the day’, *AGAIN*? And the whole Sam/Jack thing was absolutely ridiculous. But... I still watched. Yet, I wasn’t enjoying the show as much as before. It was changing and *not* for the better.

Now, I’ve seen Meridian (Ah, the wonders of the internet). And I’ve seen the beginnings of the end. Admittedly, Daniel Jackson was and is my favorite character. He gave heart to a show that could have easily been just another sci-fi series. And he brought elements to the other members of the team which made me fond of them as well. Through Sam’s little-girl wonder and instant sibling-like rapport with Daniel, I could see past the annoying female bravado of her introductory scene to be charmed by her; Teal’c gained added depth through the angst of his guilt over Shar’e; And Jack, his interactions with Daniel showed the softer side of the colonel, and showed a rapport between them the likes I had never seen in a tv show before. Not that Daniel is all important, but he was (should still be) part of the team and the team was family. They all cared about each other ’more than they should’. And it was this element that set Sg1 apart from every other tv show I have ever watched in my 33 years. With Daniel gone, that family is broken. And sorry, but I will never be convinced that Jonas could ever find his own place within it. He shouldn’t need to, because not only is he *not* a single thing Daniel was, in the things that matter, the ’meaning of life stuff’, but he is intended to be brought in for the things he supposedly *does* have in common with Daniel (strange coincidence, that.) WHY... why could there still not have been a place for Daniel??? If the stories are there for Daniel’s skills, why the hell isn’t Daniel the one who gets to use them? True, MS left, but judging by all that’s been said, he only left because Daniel wasn’t ’useful’ anymore.

And if all that isn’t enough, the more vocal of the PTB have made statements over the past several months that I am amazed I have found the calm to not go completely ballistic over. "Handsome Hunk"? "The monkey from ’Friends’"? And then there’s the insults to Daniel/MS fans and those associated with this site, or to those who have the audacity to criticize the ’oh, so wonderful, fresh, new’ direction of the show. Well, sorry, I call it as I see it and so far all I see is more crap in store for Stargate. It’s not just MS leaving and Daniel gone, they’re just the final, fatal symptom in the disease that has been plaquing the show through seasons 4 and 5. It almost seems like those in charge don’t care about the characters or the show, and certainly not the fans. Stargate *was* a show that apparently offered a little bit of everything to all its fans. Once upon a time. Now it only caters to a select few and whatever apparently passes for ’fresh, new’ ’vision’ in the PTB’s minds. Even through it all I was considering still giving the show a chance. I’m too curious by nature. It was probably a ’morbid fascination’ thing.

But after JM’s most recent ’chat’ (interesting that he only goes where he’ll get ’huggles’ and compliments and a heavy round of ass-kissing), I’m absolutely furious, frustrated, and fed-up. Everything that has been wrong with Stargate seems to be the direction the PTB are taking it, and everything that was right *isn’t*. Well, unless I hear news otherwise, that MS and Daniel are back, as part of SG1, the team, the family, I’m gone. I’ll only watch episodes with the team whole, as it should be. I’ll *only* buy seasons 2 and 3’s DVDs. I have no interest in the spin-off, no matter how intriguing it might be. Not only do I have no faith in the PTB to create a quality show any longer, I refuse to waste my time getting hooked on a show only to have it ’improved’ and made ’better’, in other words: ruined.

PTB, you had accomplished an amazing thing: made me care about a tv show again, to take my time out of the things that are important to me by giving me something that entertained and I enjoyed. Then you did another amazing thing and ruined a show that *had* almost everything right. What I find most amazing of all, is that given the level of mediocrity you have allowed the show to sink to, and the level of outrage from fellow fans, you still don’t realize your mistake or just plain don’t care. Going by past interviews and comments I’m guessing you just don’t care. And that I don’t understand. Wouldn’t the seller of a product *want* people to buy it?? Well, I’m not buying this one. Thanks for the enjoyment Stargate SG1 has given me for a too short time. I seriously wish you would let down your pride and realize a mistake has been made. I would also like to thank Michael Shanks for having the integrity to stand up for himself and for a character he obviously cares about. And for 5 seasons of amazing performances as Daniel Jackson, the most inspiring and emotionally, as well as intellectually and morally, moving character I’ve seen in a tv show, maybe period. Thank you. And thanks to RDA, AT, and CJ for sharing their talents and bringing life to the other three pieces of the whole that it SG1. I will miss them.

R.Franke

R. Franke <neemeister@cox.net>
Virgina, USA - Friday, April 19, 2002, 12:33 AM

Dear PTB, Corin Nemec sure is acting cocky for a guy who has generated some negative attention, to put it lightly. Is it possible you aren’t telling him the negative attention he is getting, much like you didn’t tell Michael Shanks about how popular his character was?

The adventures of Super Jonass! http://www.geocities.com/stargatefanner/superjonass.html

Tom Mahoney
Thursday, April 18, 2002, 10:02 PM

++++++++++

Andrew, I think the only person who wants attention is Joseph Mallozzi. That’s why he keeps having chats and saying the sneery pathetic things that he says. Personally I think he’s acting like a troll and everyone should just ignore him.

Caroline Lincoln
GB - Thursday, April 18, 2002, 4:10 PM

I don’t think the people complaining about us wasting our money on this campaign have anything to do with MGM. It seems to be resentful production staff (maybe because, to them, it appears we like Michael Shanks and Daniel Jackson better then we like them…) and other fans of the show that don’t happen to share the opinion of this site.

It is the same group that keeps telling us to "get a life." Of course they didn’t say that when we helped campaign for Season 6. It wasn’t "just a TV show" then. It seems to okay to these people if *they* spend their time writing to this site, or other sites, or to newsgroups, or clubs, mailing lists, and doing chats; it’s okay for them to waste their time on something for "only a TV show" but we can’t (because we are wrong and they are right.)

I’m not even going to mention Mr. Mallozzi’s analogy, others have done this much better than I could. But, just so you don’t confuse Mr. Mallozzi’s threats about not writing scripts that include Daniel Jackson, with the views of the rest of the staff and actors. He is speaking for himself, and it isn’t anything he hasn’t said before, he has said, many times that he wasn’t planning to write anything that included Daniel Jackson. I guess that’s why Brad Wright had to it.

Please don’t fall into the same thinking as this absurd writer, Mr. Mallozzi; he is deliberately trying to separate this campaign, fans of the show and "the real Daniel fans." He wants us working against each other, evidenced by deliberately making inflammatory statements every time he sits down at his keyboard. So, I am asking you all to please don’t let that happen! Don’t let him tell you what to think. I’m so glad that I have met so many like-minded fans of the true team here, you guys are all I have left and I don’t want to lose you!

(BTW, Mr. Mallozzi’s threats to keep Daniel Jackson out of the rest of Season 6 shouldn’t be construed as a death threat against this campaign, or Daniel Jackson fans. Although, he *allegedly* might be making them against the character of Daniel Jackson…?)

Susan
Chicago, Thursday, April 18, 2002, 11:58 AM

I think he’s in why should I care mode. I loved the way Daniel kicked the bucket...*g* but he’s not dead so; the way he ascended. But he will probably only be back for a couple episodes this season if any and then the film which he most likely will be in.

DJ was my favourite character, I only wish they’d figured out a way to ascend him at the end of Stargate instead of the end of just another season. That’s all.

Andrew <add@hawaii.com>
UK - Thursday, April 18, 2002, 7:24 AM

I really dont understand why writers and producers feel the need to constantly mess around with shows that are clearly working the way they are why change things just for the sake of it it never works.Stargate was good when it was about the whole team all FOUR of them it was great when we had lots of Jack and Daniel together those two always seemed to be so in tune with each other they had real chemistry a great partnership.I have really missed that from the last two seasons Sam and Jack together leave me stone cold.

I gave up trying to keep up with the new characters a long time ago the show to me will always be about Jack, Daniel, Sam and Teal’c with a bit of Hammond and Janet thrown in. That’s what drew me to the show in the first place and that’s what has kept me watching the last five years.I have no interest in watching a show without that team in place it’s not that I dont like Jonas although I must admit he hasn’t been written as a very likeable character it’s just that I have no interest in him.I dont care what happens to him where he goes or how excited he gets going there I was interested in Daniel because I have shared the last five years with him. I guess that’s what it all comes down to the last five years all that shared history so much has happened to these four people they have journeyed so far and taken us the viewers with them.These are the people I want to see I have after all invested the last five years in them I dont want to go through all that with a new character especially as this will be Stargate’s last season, it took me most of the first year to "get into" the original team. So I wont be around for season six I am not alone I hope you do get all the new viewers you are expecting but I doubt it. See not a death threat in sight.

zootek <private>
u.k. - Thursday, April 18, 2002, 5:20 AM

I am curious about all the mud-slinging concerning donations for ads re: Michael Shanks and *how* they should have been used.

Forgive me my ignorance: exactly WHERE should we have given our money? To the Salvation Army? To the Red Cross? To anyone who asks? Why is it wrong for people go give their money to a campaign in which they believe?

Forgive my further ignorance when I ask, haven’t we, in fact, over the past five years been giving that "child saving money" -- TO YOU????? if some of us giving money to the Save Daniel Jackson campaign is so rife with heartache for you and your concern for the starving children, why don’t you give some of the profits from the licensed Stargate profits to the starving children?

I’m willing to bet the collective "we" (who have and have not given to SDJ but who support it) have given more to charity in ratio comparison out of our hearts than you ever have.

Oh, but that’s making an assumption. Forgive me for that -- I was assuming you corporate types had a heart.

Do you? Let’s see a big billboard campaign to raise money for the homeless there, or for food shelters, or for neglected, abused women (who probably don’t fit your demographic anyway). Just do the campaign in Vancouver -- *just* in Vancouver (that would be enough for me). All you have to do to prove your sincerity is to give up -- asking for NO tax shelter or receipt for income tax -- 1% of your yearly salaries. I’d want to see proof, of course. And no hiding behind accountants or lawyers backs (who will take more of your money anyway).

Now here’s my sugggestion to whoever is in charge of PR at MGM and Stargate, when you get up in the morning, look yourself in the mirror and repeat to yourself while slapping yourself in the middle of the forehead and say: "I will not open my mouth and say anything about the fans without thinking it through first."

You’ll find your daily drudgery much easier to get through.

Disclaimer: None of the above should be considered a threat, and the word "threat" is used here only for corroborative detail. "Threat" is used as a word in passing, and ONLY as a word, not as a "threat" in the physical or literal sense. It is simply a word. In this case it is *not* connected to the words "death" or anything else remotely negative or life-altering. Therefore, what has been said here should not be considered as a death threat within a threat, or a threat within a death threat. Or a threat within a threat or a death threat within a death threat, or any combination thereof.

Ruth
USA - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 11:13 PM

As for the associates of the distributor, well, forgive me, but that presupposes much and assumes even more. Using your example, if the ’associates’ of say McDonald’s protested a change in the ’special sauce’ on the BigMac, MickieD should get sulky and say the customer is wrong, wrong, wrong and just because they write letters and want the special sauce so much Ronald is going to get mad and eat the recipe so no one can ever have it again. Riiight. That makes perfect business sense.

Get real. Better yet, get a clue. ’Cause what you’re talking just ain’t good business.

Tesh

Teshon
N.O., LA - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 8:43 PM

I don’t want this to be mistaken as an authentic death threat so I won’t list who... I mean what killed it.

MJFoster <mjfoster_53@hotmail.com>
Sturgeon Bay, WI - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 7:24 PM

http://members.aol.com/ashton7/twuwuv.jpg

Thank you very much.

(The above ’thank you’ is not a death threat. Don’t be frightened.)

Leah Rosenthal
Orlando, FL - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 4:37 PM

MICHAEL SHANKS interviewed by Thomasina Gibson for Starlog #024, Mar 2002 Not lost but gone before

Somewhat surprised by the intensity of people’s reactions, Michael Shanks had this to say:

"In terms of the big internet campaign and things like that, I think it is great. That said, it has also been a bit overwhelming. I mean, it’s all supportive and a lot of people I’ve talked with have been very sad about the character’s death, which again is quite an ego boost. But, really, its just great to see that people feel strongly enough to do something about their feelings and I think they’ve gotten enough of both sides of the story - mine and MGM’s - to have enough information to take a perspective on the whole situation".

MICHAEL SHANKS interviewed by Sharon Gosling for Xpose #66, Mar 2002 Daniel in the lion’s den

It’s not a decision that has been accepted easily by his thousands of fans, a fact that evidently bemuses him. While he has taken pains to assure the `Danielites’ that it was, in the end, his decision to make, the dedication of these viewers has taken him by surprise. In an action that is largely unprecedented, one group of fans took out several advertisements in magazines such as the Hollywood Reporter, campaigning for his return. Looking at one such advert he smiles wryly.

"It’s very flattering, is the best way to put it, I guess. It’s very nice to see a group of people go to that amount of effort to bring it into the public eye even more than the show would do itself, in a way…" he continues, indicating the article in question, "…no, I’ve never seen anything like that before and yes, it’s very flattering."

MICHAEL SHANKS interviewed by Jayne Dearsley for SFX #90, April 2002 The gate escape

Those producers did announce that Shanks would return in season six. Is that true? "Privately, they’ve made no such commitment to me. There’s nothing on the slate, as of right now."

Still, he can rely on his fans to fight the good fight on his behalf. Many have reacted badly to the treatment their favourite character has received, swearing that they won’t watch the series any more. Others have formed torch-wielding lynch mobs and yelled from the rooftops that they love Daniel and want him back.

"It’s very flattering," is Shanks’ response. "It’s nice to know that you must be doing something right if you have that kind of debate with the fans going on. If people are expressing themselves then at least you’ve made some impact, for better or for worse! I’ve read one site — some fans have a website called www.savedanieljackson.com — with a whole brochure of information on it. For the most part I agreed with it! I couldn’t really sit there and go, `Well, you shouldn’t really say that...’ I just go, `They’ve got a point!’ I can’t say these things, but these people will."

Doesn’t sound like a man who thinks the fans are overreacting to me. I think Mallozzi is the one doing the misquoting. It couldn’t be because he wants to discredit Michael to his fans, could it? Oh no, surely even he wouldn’t stoop *that* low?

Nell <miniaturesun@hotmail.com>
USA - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 1:39 PM

Q: How was it like when Michael Shanks was on the set for Abyss? A: It was all very polite. In fact, I ran into Michael the weekend before shooting started and he informed me that he had been misquoted in his interviews and that the fans were overreacting.

Anyone?

Heather <heather@lapa.net>
Lafayette, IN, USA - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 12:46 PM

Camilla (voluntarily working single female and glad about it and not longing for babies and twu wuv, puke!) DISCLAIMER: This is not a death threat. This isn’t even related to a death threat by marriage. This is not a death threat disguising itself to make a sneak attack upon unsuspecting wimpy writers.

Camilla
Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 7:08 AM

I just want to say that I am saddened by the departure of Michael Shanks, and by what appears to be a lack of understanding from the people behind the Stargate premise. I loved the movie, followed the series from the first and have enjoyed it all. But, without - I hope - sounding small minded, I will not be bothering to watch the series any more. Yes, Daniel Jackson was a particular favourite of mine, but it’s more than that. I loved the interplay and the dynamics between *all* the characters. Something which has now been lost. I tend to think that all series have a limited lifespan...because after a time they seem to lose their way. This has certainly happened here IMHO. It’s a shame, but change is part of life (as I believe ’someone’ stated recently) so I guess I’ll be changing my interests to something new.

Emma

Emma
England - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 5:49 AM

This is NOT a DEATH THREAT.I repeat NOT a death threat.

So Corin Nemec (Nemic?) Sorry never can remember his name thinks he can fill Daniels boots does he?He thinks we the fans will accept him thinks we will believe he is a great character reads really fast has a good sense of humour brings Jack around in THREE episodes to warming to him.Thinks that we will believe that Sam is the first person to welcome him to S.G.1 thinks that we will all welcome the newness and fresh approach his character will bring to the show does he?How sad.All I can say is dont hold your breath Corin.

To Joe Mallozzi ...Telling lies, being a coward, being disloyal ... sounds kinda familiar doesnt it sounds a bit like a certain new character on the show ...now if you were a thief as well ..day aint over yet is it Joe..Jo..Jonas...

I dont wish you dead just GONE .I didnt find any death threats on this site but then I dont have your secret decoder ring the one you must have got from the last comic your mother bought you.

To T.P.T.B. does this man really represent you and your views? If not say something you might just be able to earn some respect AND keep a few fans... who knows.

JO JO <Private>
u.k - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 6:56 AM

It is unfair and hypocritical for any of you to try to condemn the fans of Michael Shanks or Stargate -- or anyone else for that matter -- for placing ads about something or someone that means something to them.

After all, isn’t that what Variety, Hollywood Reporter, etc., et al., ad infinitum, ad nauseum is about? Don’t the studios pay thousands each year to promote their movies, television shows and stars for Emmy or Oscar nods?

So what’s the difference, can you tell me? Why aren’t YOU out putting some bucks in firemens’ boots to help Jerry’s Kids. Why aren’t YOU supporting the Christian Children’s Fund (or any like it) and why aren’t YOU standing in a soup line doling out spoonsful of nourishment to the poor?

Where are YOUR contributions? Oh sure, you probably make them -- but as a tax break. Those of us who are not in the 7 or 8 figure range can’t make that kind of contribution and do not receive the high-income tax shelters and returns that must, whether in the U.S. or Canada.

PULLLEEEZ ... don’t tell us who we are and what we do and what don’t do correctly. You are the ones on the public eye. You put yourself there by wanting to be there and doing whatever it took for each of you to get there. How you went about it is pointless. The point is -- you’re there now and YOU could make a difference to the starving children. BUT ARE YOU?

Show me some evidence before you condemn me and my ilk to the gutter. I am beyond livid at MGM and TPTB at Stargate SG-1. I will NOT be watching next year. Yep, I said it. Yep, I mean it. Yep, I will follow through with it. I have plenty of DVDs and/or other things to do, people to see, places to go -- and they don’t necessarily mean for a 46 minute stint on a Vancouver soundstage full of Kleig lights and an unhappy cast.

You had it for awhile, and then you ruined it. By the way, you may be interested to know that Daniel Jackson was NOT my favorite character on the show. Really and truly. Believe it or not.

For your dubious information, I am 47 years old, not interested in the 18-25 male demographic’s interests. I am interested in STORY, PLOT and CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT -- very little of which have shown up lately. You developed the character of Daniel Jackson to death.

While it doesn’t make sense, since Stargate SG-1 hasn’t made sense in awhile, I will here quote the late great Douglas Adams: "SO LONG AND THANKS FOR ALL THE FISH."

Laura <>
North Texas - Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 12:27 AM

Dr. Jan
Wednesday, April 17, 2002, 12:20 AM

Ohhh, there’s not a chance in hell. This guy isn’t just a Daniel-cone, he’s PTB clone. Imagine that.

According to him change is a beautiful thing, but this change ain’t happening. Necessary change might be forgiveable, the whole freaking issue here is this change wasn’t necessary. It was contrived and pushed and ill-considered from the word go and no new age BS is going to change the facts.

I really do wish this guy luck, he seems okay, if pretty damn naive. Not his fault he’s the one PTB brought in to dance on Daniel’s grave. Not his fault he’s obviously under the impression he’s got a snowball’s odds of winning over people who understand just what disservice was done to a damn fine actor to get him there. Not his fault he is never going to be a part of SG1 in the eyes of a lot of people. PTB got their wind up dweeb and CN seems perfectly happy to let them wind him up. But I’m not.

Col. Jack

Jack Nathan <dadt>
Albany, NY - Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 10:48 PM

I herd this was a site were chicks post sometime anyone want to go out with a REAL mna call 1-800-get-date I promise Ill take a shower and everything! by the way whos Daniel Jackson my ex girlfrend sasy hes cuter than me!

TROLLMAN <goahead@makemyday.com>
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 6:31 PM

Concerned <runforrestrun@hotmail.com>
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 6:23 PM

Well instead of typing go and get their dinner ready!

NC
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 6:03 PM

I totally understand what you are trying to do to make season six stand out from the rest. With that thought in mind, visit my (not completely finished) but available website. http://www.geocities.com/stargatefanner/superjonass.html

From the creators of Super Jonass
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 9:36 PM

Or is it?

Toia <nunya>
Chi-town, Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 8:41 PM

Don’t think that little grave dance went unnoticed either. You guys are having such a good time without Shanks you have to come onine and tell us, and presumably him, all about it. From the dailies you say? Huh, ever considered going down to the set and seeing just how happy people are with your brown-nosing ex-child star and you? Nah, of course you haven’t.

Once again you took a shot in the dark based on biased information and completely missed the mark. Brad must be so proud.

Oh, and just in case you couldn’t tell the difference, this isn’t a death threat. Hey, maybe everyone should start putting disclaimers on their posts, just so you can tell? Visual aids and all that.

Col. Jack

Jack Nathan <dadt>
Albany, NY - Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 4:50 PM

I for one cant wait for season six to see more of him.Oh and more of super Sam and jackass Jack, stupid alien Teal’c, Judas Quinn ,recycled storylines ,Tangent again ,Watergate again ,X-Files rip off’s again ,oh wait sorry I just found some grass growing that is way more interesting so I think i’ll go watch that instead.

private
Bristol, u.k. - Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 3:05 PM

I’m with Billybob! Why are you wasting time defending your brilliant vision when you should be busy watching episodes of Enterprise so you can rip them off - um, I mean ’adapt’ them for Stargate? You know you’re a genius and the new show is so hot we’ll be screaming with joy once we get a chance to see it. So why do you care what we think or say?

What’s more, if you’re all so darned convinced your ’fresh perspective’ and your ’newerbetterfunnier’ Daniel are the greatest things since tunafish - so convinced you’re prepared to stand by them at the risk of alienating/driving away what could be potentially *millions* of viewers - then why are you being so coy about telling the world and the huge, uniformed masses of unsuspecting Stargate fans in the states what great stuff’s in store for them? Why is Showtime dragging it’s heels about airing Meridian? Why haven’t you made a big, splashy announcement waving bye bye to Daniel and ushering in Jonas with proud, welcoming arms.

Why aren’t you standing by your ’new’ Dan after having the guts to publically admit to the world - unashamedly and unequivocably - you put the boots to the old one?

Daniel’s old news and Stargate doesn’t need him? Jonas is *Da Man* and as soon as the audience gets one look at him in action in Season Six we’ll immediately fall in love with him and forget all about - what waa his name again? If this is what you really believe - why aren’t you running with it and capitalizing on this brand, new, exciting, *fresh* change?

Hype? Where’s all the hype?

Why hasn’t MGM made a big deal of welcoming Mr Nemec to the fold? Why isn’t the Stargate site plastered with pictures of your shiny new hunk? Why aren’t we seeing scads of cast photos of the ’new improved, fresh’ version of SG-1? Why haven’t the trade magazines and the sci-fi magazines been overflowing with interviews with Mr Nemec being all thrilled and optomistic, with his happy, excited cast members gushing about how much they’re looking forward to the new season and how much *bet-ter* the show is now? Why haven’t we had lots and lots and lots of reports from this happy, excited cast? Why isn’t the press touring the set en masse and seeing all this bliss for themselves so they can come back and shut us all up by telling us how happy and dedicated everyone is about and to the ’new direction’. Why isn’t anyone saying *anything* about what’s *really* happening behind closed doors at Bridge Street Studios? No one, except Mr Mallozzi, that is?

Could it be because in order to do all of this you’d first have to come clean and announce Daniel has actually *left* the show? In order to make a big deal of Jonas you first have to let the unsuspecting still-in-the-dark masses in on the important fact you seem so reluctant to share with them Daniel is *gone*? And maybe, just maybe the only one ’thrilled’ with all of this - is you?

But why should that make a bit of difference to your plans? If as you keep on insisting the character is not essential to the show or the team - and your new character and new direction are so darned great - why should you be afraid to let this particular cat out of the bag? If anything, one would think, if what you’ve now got is in fact, as you have been claiming, so much *bet-ter* - one would think you’d be doing everything you could to capitalize on this and drum up lots of excitement and anticipation for your sure fire winner by telling everyone in the states what cool things were in store for them in season six. The final proof is in the product, right, and if in fact this product you believe in so strongly is as good as you keep claiming it is - what have you got to fear? What are you waiting for? Why aren’t you telling the world what you’ve got and what great things the viewing public has to look forward?

Why?

The show is so great? The new character is so great? The cast is so happy and the set is such a fun place to be right now? So you keep telling us. Howerver, if you don’t mind I’d like to hear that from someone else other than you.

You already got some episodes filmed and ready to go, right? You’ve got some happy, excited, thrilled to be working with the new guy cast members who doubtless can’t *wait* to share with us just how happy and thrilled they are. Why aren’t we hearing from them? Why aren’t we getting lots and lots of media hype about the new season and the new upcoming episodes? Why aren’t we seeing film clips and previews and promos up the whaazoo?

I really want to know! ’Cause for a bunch of people who are oh, so ’wright’ (meaning we’re all wrong), who’ve got nothing to fear and are producing something so great we’ll all be in awe when it airs....you’re sure not *acting* that way.

’Cause, bottom line, my dears, if it’s all as great as you say it is - why do you care what we think and say? You’ll all be vindicated as soon as it airs. Right? So why aren’t you ignoring us, the sad, delusional vocal minority you keep trying to pretend we are and devoting your energies to loudly and proudly publically dumping Daniel and outting Jonas? Going out there with all this great stuff into the world where it really matters? According to you. ’Cause we’re just a small, sad, disaffected minority, our opinion does not count, does not matter, and should barely impact on all the millions of *real* fans out there you *know* will eat all this stuff right up as soon as they find out about it.

So why aren’t you telling them? Putting your money where your mouth is? If you’re right, and we’re wrong - what are you so afraid of? If it’s all so great - and everyone on the set is so darned happy - why don’t you prove it?

Again, Joe, Brad, Hank, Bonnie, I ask you why?

Don Quixote <DQ@woopstheregoesanotherwindmill.com>
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 1:49 PM

Uhm, terrorist are people who blow up buildings and kill innocent people. I don’t see how you can equate fans protesting the loss of a character with the vile creatures that fly hijacked jetliners full of innocent people into the world trade center buildings. Talk about needing to sort reality from not ..sheesh!

As for where can you go? Well let’s see now

http://www.geocities.com/sg1foward http://www.groups.yahoo.com/danielfreezone http://www.groups.yahoo.com/SG1fans

These are all forums very friendly to your point of view. But I have to ask, if you don’t like what’s being said here, why are you here reading it? I mean it’s just a TV show so why should you care what fans are saying about it one way or the other?

**Get a life. This is a television show. Daniel Jackson is a character and not a real person. You people are behaving in manners that the character of Daniel Jackson would abhore.**

Really, but if he’s just a character then he can be anything we want him to be right? Or believe in or say anything we want him to right. So really your idea that a TV character wouldn’t *approve* of us means maybe you need to check out getting a life too..hmmmm.

Now on the other hand, Michael Shanks IS a real person and he has made his thoughts about the SDJ very clear.

**It is not within the fans’ responsibilities to enter a disagreement between an actor and management.**

How true. And we nver did enter into the disagreement. Michael Shanks made his decision on his own based on his talks with the executives. WE weren’t there..honest(or things might have went differently no doubt:)

What we have done and continue to do is air our own concerns about the consequences of that disagreement. About things in the series as a whole that we don’t like and we show support for Michael for his decisions and we are upset that things had to go that way when they could have been done so differently.

So you see, this is our OWN disagreement with the management and the offer of the solutions that WE would like to see (or even a good compromise of).

*As for bringing MS back in more than one ep next season, you people are doing that process more of a disservice because the harder you push, the more likely both MS and TPTB will decide it’s not worth it to bring the character back.*

Well, I can see your idea of this about TPTB having some validity. However, I seriously doubt you can speak accurately for Michael. Besides, we have never been in this to *force* him to come back. We are stating what we want and why. If Michael doesn’t feel it’s right for him, then I for one respect him for that.

*As for the hate mail and death threats posted against those involved with the production of Stargate SG-1--that type of terrorist activity is criminal. Get a grip! You are ruining fandom for the rest of us and giving all fans a bad name.*

Death threats? Really? Posted where? You can of course provide proof of their existence right..names of lists or sites...archived post numbers that kind of thing? I mean you DO want to look credible and be taken seriously right?

*I posted the original w/a false email addy not aware that the addy would show up on the page. Please do not mail hate mail to that email address because it very well may belong to an innocent, unaware person not deserving of your responses. So, do not mail to this address: private@hotmail.com Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 9:27:13 AM *

Oh, I see you now that you don’t really want to be seen as a credible and serious fan to be taken seriously. Oh well.

GateAngel
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 10:29 AM

For those who don’t know these two they were new writers brought in on another show that orchestrated a popular character’s death about 3 years ago or so. The fans began letter campaigns, petitions, etc and the minute the heat was turned up and the fans were winning the argument, they began to make unsubstantiated claims of death threats in order to garner sympathy.

Deja vu

Gem

Gem
USA - Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 12:12 PM

private
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, 7:56 AM

BBD <billybobdelaware@hotmail.com>
Kansas, USA - Monday, April 15, 2002, 9:53 PM

Or is it that TPTB don’t think women--of ANY age--have a right to enjoy a TV series as much as a 20-something male? It almost seems as though we’ve gone back to the 19th century rather than into the 21st. I highly resent the implication that just because I’m a woman over the age of thirty I have no brain.

Laura Crownover <laura@egineering.ucsb.edu>
Santa Barbara, CA - Monday, April 15, 2002, 6:26 PM

I’m not part of the precious demographic you prize so highly, although my brother is. However, I do buy the products advertised on TV, I do have a brain in my head, and I’m perfectly capable of deciding for myself whether or not I should watch a TV show.

I’ve been watching SG-1 from the very beginning, and it was the interaction between Jack and Daniel, and to a lesser extent, theirs with Sam and Teal’c that kept me watching. Seeing how they reacted to each new world, watching how all their different talents combined together made each mission a success.

The past two years have seen fewer and fewer episodes with that wonderful team dynamic (and I’m not EVEN going to go into that stupid Sam and Jack stuff) although there have been enough good episodes that I didn’t cancel my Showtime subscription. However, the second the last episode with Daniel Jackson airs, that will be the day I call Showtime and say bye-bye.

I also have no intention of watching season six on the Sci-Fi channel without Daniel. The spineless traitor you’re replacing him with is... I have no words to describe how angry it makes me. If I were Jack or Sam or Teal’c, Jonas would be coming back from his first official mission in a body bag.

Ms Hammer over at the Sci-Fi Channel is quite proud of the amount of women that have started tuning in since she took over. I’m really sorry to say that I won’t be one of them.

Jenn Thoms-Riley <>
Chico, CA - Monday, April 15, 2002, 4:30 PM

Obviously, my sister watches the show. I’m a 28-year-old male (my sister said it was important to mention that) and work in the chemical engineering field. I’ve been a fan of Science Fiction all my life, and have watched Stargate SG-1 since the beginnning. Being fans of the movie, my sister, my parents and I each subscribed to Showtime in order to see it.

None of us have been thrilled with strange X-file-ish tangent the show took off on a couple years ago, but there were enough good episodes to keep us hooked. However, with the departure of Michael Shanks, and the "death" of Daniel Jackson, one of the most important elements of the show has disappeared: it’s humanity. The one person on the team whom we "normal non-military" types could relate to is gone.

I’m very sorry you (whoever "you" actually are) have seen fit to try and fix something that wasn’t broken by removing the best character on the team and replacing him with... well, I won’t go into that. My sister is currently composing her own letter, and I’m sure it will touch on the lying, thieving, spineless, traitor who’s joined the SG-1 team in Dr Jackson’s place.

Jason Thoms-Riley <>
Chico, CA - Monday, April 15, 2002, 4:11 PM

Dizzy (Again) (PS Gateangel is cool!) <Private>
UK - Monday, April 15, 2002, 3:52 PM

Let me tell you, that if I felt for one moment that something like that would be encouraged or practiced here, I WOULD NOT BE HERE.

If Joe is getting them in private email/mail then I urge him to contact the authorites and take care of it. No one should have to deal with them alone. I also highly recommend http://www.cyberangels.com as they are a wonderful organization for assisting with online stalking and threats. Also I sincerely hope that Joe is not taking poetic license with this whole *getting death threats* thing, as accusing fans of that for any reason is not smart and it only encourages the kind of behavior in fanatical *pro TPTB fans* that I recently had to contact cyberangels about.

<Oh, I don’t mind spoilers being discussed. But I find it kind of silly when people criticize an episode they haven’t seen on the basis of a spoiler. For the most part, the criticism I’ve read is way off base because either a) the information in the spoiler was inaccurate or b) the critics base their take on assumptions they’ve made about the story.>>

I found it kinda puzzling that Joe didn’t take the time to go that one step further with the answer to this question. The step that included how those very same fans will also be very quick to publicly apologize to him for this if he takes the time to let them know that things are inaccurate. That they will freely admit to him in a polite manner that they felt bad for making assumptions.

I certainly hope that Joe is taking the time to relay this kind interaction thing back to BW and PDL as well cause I’m sure it would make them feel better knowing that rumors of unhappy DJ/MS fans being rude and impolite and disrespectful to production crew are greatly exaggerated.

GateAngel
Monday, April 15, 2002, 2:54 PM

The writers (or perhaps the bored actors) have turned Jack into an Over The Top sarcastic idiot, Sam into an unbelievable Super Woman, and both Daniel and Teal’c into "extras." The humanity and compassion from the first three years is missing, as is the wonderful interaction between Jack and Daniel that I so enjoyed.

The fact that you pretty much pushed Michael Shanks out of the show, tells me you could care less about the series itself. Obviously your agenda no longer includes putting out a quality Sci-Fi show.

I watched all five years because I cared about the four members of SG-1. I will not watch Season Six; after Farscape ends, my television set will be turned off.

Scott L. <>
Shawnee Hills, Ohio, USA - Monday, April 15, 2002, 1:38 PM

Mr. Mallozzi has also accused SDJ of being rude and insulting and encouraging other fans to act the same. But on the contrary, SDJ has urged fans to be polite in any correspondence or phone calls they may make to TPTB. Again, anyone who bothers to take the time to read through this site can see that. The people involved with SDJ have conducted themselves with class and dignity. And I’ve been impressed with the way they’ve politely argued their position with logic, reason and intelligence. They make me proud to be a Stargate fan and a supporter of their campaign.

Joy <Baggin606@aol.com>
Maryland, USA - Monday, April 15, 2002, 10:35 AM

Adult Fan
Monday, April 15, 2002, 10:01 AM

"Are the cast & crew aware of the SDJ campaign? Yes, some are more aware of it than others. Unfortunately for the real Daniel Jackson fans out there, the individuals involved in the SDJ campaign have done their cause a disservice by a) being rude and insulting and b) encouraging individuals to be rude and insulting and threatening to those involved in the production. As a result, they’re viewed as an ’out there’ vocal minority by many. And quite frankly, they haven’t helped the character of DJ any."

"How so? Well imagine if you will. You work for a company that makes use of four distributors. You try to give all four distributors an equal amount of business. After a while, one of the distributors complains and no longer wishes to do business with you. Suddenly you begin hearing from associates of the distributor. They are insulting and angrily demanding that you do business with the distributor again. How eager are you going to be to do business with that distributor again?"

Is Mr Mallozi saying that because some fans, which he insists are a minority, have called the "Powers That Be" to task for their decisons, that they would be so incredibly ***unprofessional*** as to let their responding hostility influence their scripts and decisions? To be frank, this sounds exactly like emotional blackmail. I know little about him and already my opinion of him has plummeted to zero. That this person is in a position of authority and power makes me shudder. I hope Michael Shanks never returns to work with people like this. According to Mr Mallozi there is less chance of that happening while people complain because, according to Mr. Mallozi, the character of Daniel and the person of Mr. Shanks are worthless when compared to his own personal hostility towards complaining fans.

I sincerely hope this man does not speak for all "Powers That Be" or else they are all as petty and emotionally-driven and apparently vindictive and threatening as he is.

Disgusted,

Liz

Liz <Lizzymail@tiscali.co.uk>
U.K. - Monday, April 15, 2002, 5:02 AM

RDA does not have or maintain an official website. No RDA related site on the net is endorsed or supported by him. Posting comments to them will not reach him or serve any useful purpose.

The SG1_team@yahoogroups.com has a list of viable address to send RDA letters if you wish ot contact him over this.

gateangel
Monday, April 15, 2002, 10:01 AM

Sir,

For a second time I have seen you mention in an online chat that you have been subjected to death threats. In the latter instance, you specifically mentioned the SDJ campaign as being the source of these threats.

If you have, indeed, received death threats, then I urge you to contact the nearest police for immediate action in this regard. No one should be subject to such threats; emails and standard letters can be traced, and you should avail yourself of that technology and expertise at once.

If, however, you have received no such threats and the comments were merely rhetorical flourishes - this, Sir, is contemptible. As someone who has worked for many years as a member of Amnesty International and a counsellor for those suffering from sexual abuse, I know at first hand how insidious and terrifying such threats are. To accuse a campaign site of such tactics when nonesuch have been made is utterly despicable.

You have declared the SDJ site ’rude and insulting’. I consider myself to be a moderate, well mannered and intelligent person; I have read all the articles posted to this site and can see only well researched and reasoned discussion of the Stargate SG-1 television series. The writers are articulate, impassioned and meticulous in providing examples of their argued points. I was proud to add a small article about Daniel Jackson’s importance to the dynamics of the series, and I can assure you, Sir, that I would not associate myself with a site that exhibited any of the traits you so carelessly attribute to it.

This ill becomes a producer of a television series. Closely argued criticism of any creative product is part of the creative dyad; one does not produce or consume in a vacuum. The people who have created and contributed to the SDJ site have done so as long term fans of the show you currently produce. Whether one agrees with their conclusions or not, to dismiss them with such contempt speaks of a disengagement with any healthy interaction between artist/audience in favour of adherence to sycophancy and self-satisfaction.

I look forward to hearing that those misguided enough to send death threats have been found and cautioned, for your peace of mind; or to your prompt withdrawal of the accusations and apology to those involved with the SDJ campaign. This is not a trivial matter, and should not be regarded as such.

To those involved in the SDJ campaign; I give you express permission to print off this post and forward it to Mr Mallozzi, if you so desire.

Poss <thepossum_au@yahoo.com.au>
Melbourne, Australia - Monday, April 15, 2002, 4:12 AM

M. L Gelissen <pippilou73@yahoo.ca>
2891 University apt 7 windsor, ont. canada N9c1cs - Monday, April 15, 2002, 1:56 AM