{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3421",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 3421,
    "subject": "\"Not again!\" cried the flea",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "2002-08-21T22:24:22+00:00",
    "last": "2002-08-21T22:24:22+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0208-1595@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi",
        "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com"
      },
      "date": "2002-08-21T22:24:22+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) \"Not again!\" cried the flea",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "Blattid wrote:\nGranted, I've only read about half a dozen of Dickens's novels ... but\nnot a one of the ones I've read (OLIVER TWIST, GREAT EXPECTATIONS,\nDAVID COPPERFIELD, THE PICKWICK PAPERS -- okay, not really a novel --\nA CHRISTMAS CAROL, and I'm pretty sure something else I'm forgetting)\nwas epistolary or even significantly driven by letters."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Oh dear, we're circumcising the flea again!  And here it is my fault, since\nI do not have a Dickens work in mind that is significantly driven by\nletters (then again the so-called \"Pickwick Papers\" comes rather close, in\nits episodic nature, if not in the letter and spirit, or spirit of the\nletter).  I didn't mean to imply that \"epistolary\" and \"Dickens\" are bound\ntogether; I only meant that it was written as a letter and seemed to have\nsome tenuous connection to Dickens (if only in the dog boy's first name and\nhis references to the Victorian author).  So sloppy.\n\nBut enough about me!  Where is your Posthistorical Timeline?  This and all\nsorts of other things Wolfean have been promised us, yet we have seen\nnothing of them!\n\n=mantis="
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}