{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/793",
    "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": 793,
    "subject": "alga vs. Robert Borski",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1998-06-15T14:11:54+00:00",
    "last": "1998-06-15T14:11:54+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0013-0067@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Robert Borski",
        "address": "rborski at coredcs.com"
      },
      "date": "1998-06-15T14:11:54+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) alga vs. Robert Borski",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Still in her balloon-puncturing mode, the chlorophyllic alga has written:\n\n\"Robert Borski is fond of his theory that Aunt Jeanine is actually an abo,\nand to that end has \"'hung fifty pounds of theory on nothing.'\"\n\nI would never attempt to deny this, but I do feel my methodology more\nresembles the 'relaxation' approach cited by Dr. Marsch, which he\nappropriates from engineering. I've picked my various\ndatapoints--Jeannine's crippled nature, the Blount account, etc.,\netc.--then attempted to link them together. This, at best, as Dr. Marsch\nnotes, results in a series of approximations--unfortunately, this is also\nits weakest point. Everybody is entitled to his or her own series of\napproximations as far as I'm concerned, whether it's you, Tony Ellis,\nmantis or me. How many datapoints you plot is also up to you; in my\nrelaxation attempts I've tried to \"clear up\" or resolve as many different\nareas of conflict as I possibly can. And doubtless, yes, much of my data\nwrangling is Procustean. Others have differed with my conclusions and I\nthink this is valuable, because it then gives everyone else who doesn't\nhave an approach yet something to pick from. Should there be no conflicting\ntheories about \"Tracking Song\"? No series of approximations that attempt to\nmake sense of \"Suzanne Delange\"? Of course not. So there you have it. Yes,\nmy various confections are often spun from imaginary sugar. Then again, no\none is required to take a bite of them or swallow them whole, and if you're\non the diabetic side you may be advised to run from them altogether. I\nstill reserve the right to make my own candy."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "What's your Vironese name?"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I made a deal with you, alga, and I intend to honor it. But I also feel the\nneed to speak up for the many subscribers of this list who still continue\nto use their real names. You may fault them ( and me) for being too\nanal-retentive and unimaginative and not exactly getting into the spirit of\nplay because of our refusing to adapt Vironese names, but quite\nfrankly--and please forgive me here if I'm co-opting attitudes that aren't\nnecessarily valid for everyone--many of us simply are not comfortable with\nthe notion of alternate names. Some of us feel it's silly. Some of us feel\nit detracts from our validity as lovers of Wolfe. (\"Hey, guys, let's\ndiscuss some of the heavier aspects of astrophysics--only let's do it under\nKlingon pseudonyms.\") Others of us have nine months to pick out a name for\nour child in utero, only to have it be born and still have no clue what\nwe're gonna call the little bundle of joy. There's also the additional\nburden of picking out a name that's suitably clever, because none of us\nwants to be thought dumb or jejune by our peers. And lastly, if we're ever\nto attract newcomers to the list, some of us feel its important not to have\na singular clubhouse approach to anything because it smacks of cliquishness\nand inbreeding.\n\nMy personal observation is that those of us who've wanted to adopt Vironese\nnames have done so, while those of us who are more comfortable posting with\nour real names have acted similarly. As long as each group continues to\nhonor the other and addresses the poster as he or she wishes, isn't this\nmore important than a single groupthink do-it-my-way-or-else position?\n\nIn other words let's continue to follow the status quo and avoid the\nbullying requests.\n\nThat being said, it's time to unveil my Vironese name. I'm also going to\nstipulate I'm comfortable being called either by it or my true name (I\nintend to use both from now on). \n\nFor a while there I was very fond of 'spiracle'--that way whenever lovely\nalga called me a blowhard, I could more easily convince myself that this\nwas a term of endearment rather than rebuke <g>.\n\nSomehow it didn't look right, however. And so I've chosen otherwise.\n\nErgo, for those of you of Vironese inclination, call me scolex.\n\nFor everybody else I'm plain Robert Borski.\n\nCall me however you please--just not late for dejeuner.\n\nscolex (Robert Borski)"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}