jam@dcl-cs.UUCP (John A. Mariani) (10/24/85)
I think you people are all crazy! And this is just the tip of the iceberg! >From: clelau@wateng.UUCP (Eric C.L. Lau) > >Almost had me fooled till I got to the :-)'s at the end. I didn't think anyone >could make that many mistakes in one posting. However I don't think it's a >silly question... > > Eric Lau > ...!{utcsri|ihnp4}!watmath!wateng!clelau > >From: jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) >>James Tiptree, Jr., SHOULD write strong female characters, if anyone can, >>since he is the pseudonym of Alice Sheldon. (We all fall into this trap; >>I even used "his" name in a novelty item I did in OMNI four years ago-- >>"Science Fictional Table of Elements.") >> >>--arlan andrews, analog irregular > >Honestly, sometimes I despair, when even smiley faces are not sufficient! >I especially despair on behalf of SF Lovers everywhere who KNOW that >James Tiptree Jr. and Andre Norton are female > Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo > > >From: mooremj@eglin-vax > >Let me be the Nth to point out that both Tiptree and Norton are female. No I don't think we should let you be the Nth person to point out that both Tiptree and Norton are female. > >From: KFL@MIT-MC.ARPA > > She's not a man. > ...Keith At least you were suscinct in your comment! > >From: nancy@MIT-HTVAX.ARPA > >I'm sure I won't be the only one to say this, but for the umpteenth >time (on this list, anyway)... you've made a few mistakes about the >gender of the writers you cite. One of the reasons that James Tiptree >Jr. and Andre Norton both write about female characters so well is >because they *are* female, not male. Yes, you are right .. you weren't the only person to say this... Why is it that you went ahead anyway? Don't posters to sf-lovers ever read other people's articles? {If there is some tecnhical reason for this multi-answer phenomena .. which I have commented on before .. please point this out to me!} P.S. I know some of the above articles included useful additional info so don't take me too seriously .. on the other hand, with the debate going on in net.flame about a few extra characters for graphic signatures, a lot of replies to Commodore's original article included most of it. So we were treated to its deathless prose again and again and ... Go back and read nettiquette, guys! -- "You see me now a veteran of a thousand psychic wars...." UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!jam DARPA: jam%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Post: University of Lancaster, JANET: jam@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Department of Computing, Phone: +44 524 65201 ext 4467 | Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YR, UK.
jbuck@epicen.UUCP (Joe Buck) (10/30/85)
In article <710@dcl-cs.UUCP> jam@dcl-cs.UUCP (John A. Mariani) writes: >>From: mooremj@eglin-vax >> >>Let me be the Nth to point out that both Tiptree and Norton are female. >No I don't think we should let you be the Nth person to point out that >both Tiptree and Norton are female. >>From: nancy@MIT-HTVAX.ARPA >> >>[yet another sucker] > >Yes, you are right .. you weren't the only person to say this... >Why is it that you went ahead anyway? Don't posters to sf-lovers ever read >other people's articles? >{If there is some tecnhical reason for this multi-answer phenomena .. >which I have commented on before .. please point this out to me!} Well, there are two basic problems. The first is that the Usenet portion of sf-lovers has long propogation delays between various points, so different areas of the net see messages at different times and in different orders. So normally it's a waste of time flaming people for answering a question that's already been answered, because the responses crossed each other on the net. Still, I'd like to know what mooremj@eglin-vax's excuse is. He/she knew, when posting his/her response, that a flood of messages was already out there. Here are some suggestions to improve things: First, there should be a lot less "me too" postings (long inclusions that say "I agree" or "Yes, she's right"). There are too many of us for that. Questions should be answered by mail. If the person is on the other side of the UUCP/ARPA divide from you, before posting because you don't know how to mail, ask yourself if you really are the only person who knows the answer to the question before posting "I couldn't mail this, so...". Finally, if you see a lot of answers to the same question, just wait a few days. They'll die down eventually. If someone has made a mistake, correct them by mail if possible. In this case, a lot of suckers fell for a joke and humiliated themselves in front of the net. In others, it's the original poster that's humiliated. It's better to see a single message saying "Several people have pointed out that I'm wrong" than to have someone flamed from one end of the net to the other for weeks, as we see now. -- Joe Buck | Entropic Processing, Inc. UUCP: {ucbvax,ihnp4}!dual!epicen!jbuck | 10011 N. Foothill Blvd. ARPA: dual!epicen!jbuck@BERKELEY.ARPA | Cupertino, CA 95014