Cilinia's mausoleum

Michael Andre-Driussi31 May 2001, 19:33original

3 quoted lines

Jerry Friedman wrote: (Chap. 19, a mausoleum [apparently not Severian's hideout] in the necropolis

Ah, this has been established (or otherwise achieved consensual validity in excess of 51%)? I hadn't known, I must have missed that . . . it poses a leap I cannot follow. =mantis= Sirius Fiction Has Moved To http://www.siriusfiction.com/ *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.

Michael Andre-Driussi01 Jun 2001, 19:52original

↳ follows, by subject match Michael Andre-Driussi

5 quoted lines · 1–2 deep

I wrote: Jerry Friedman wrote:

(Chap. 19, a mausoleum [apparently not Severian's hideout] in the necropolis

Ah, this has been established (or otherwise achieved consensual validity in excess of 51%)? I hadn't known, I must have missed that . . . it poses a leap I cannot follow.

Nevermind. I withdraw the statement/question. OTOH, it does lead to an interesting notion: what if, instead of a FAQ about a book/series/story, what if there was a position tabulation, sort of like a voting ballet, showing broad points ("Participants like the piece" xx%; "Respondents dislike the piece" xx%), then medium points, down to fine detail points? It would be a digested digest, I suppose. A tallying person would read through the thread, picking out the various points of concensus and contention, then use these to create the ballot. Rather like making an index, in a way. The ballot could then be voted on afresh, or the percentages could just be filled in based on how the discussion seemed to go in the original. At the end of this there would be these handly little one-page summaries of where everybody has been and which sides they were on. Like a busload of tourists posing for a snapshot. That would be something! =mantis= Sirius Fiction Has Moved To http://www.siriusfiction.com/ *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.

Kevin J. Maroney02 Jun 2001, 13:17original

↳ follows, by subject match Michael Andre-Driussi

2 quoted lines

At 07:52 PM 6/1/01 -0700, Mantis wrote: OTOH, it does lead to an interesting notion: what if, instead of a FAQ about a book/series/story, what if there was a position tabulation, sort of like a voting ballet, showing broad points ("Participants like the piece" xx%; "Respondents dislike the piece" xx%), then medium points, down to fine detail points?

Ahah! The Wolfe Seminar! We could all get pink, red, grey, and black balls and vote on whether Severian is his own mother....

Wombat, a.k.a. Kevin Maroney kmaroney at ungames.com Kitchen Staff Supervisor, New York Review of Science Fiction http://www.nyrsf.com *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.

Michael Straight04 Jun 2001, 12:39original

↳ follows, by subject match Kevin J. Maroney

4 quoted lines · 1–2 deep

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Kevin J. Maroney wrote: At 07:52 PM 6/1/01 -0700, Mantis wrote:

OTOH, it does lead to an interesting notion: what if, instead of a FAQ about a book/series/story, what if there was a position tabulation, sort of like a voting ballet, showing broad points ("Participants like the piece" xx%; "Respondents dislike the piece" xx%), then medium points, down to fine detail points?

Ahah! The Wolfe Seminar! We could all get pink, red, grey, and black balls and vote on whether Severian is his own mother....

But can we get the guy who directed Showgirls to pay for it? -Rostrum *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.

matthew.malthouse06 Jun 2001, 14:25original

↳ follows, by subject match Michael Straight

2 quoted lines

On 02/06/2001 18:17:17 Kevin J. Maroney wrote: Ahah! The Wolfe Seminar! We could all get pink, red, grey, and black balls and vote on whether Severian is his own mother....

Oh, c'mon! There ain't still poor readers who don't know that, are there... Matthew

http://www.calmeilles.demon.co.uk/ http://www.calmeilles.demon.co.uk/pride/ *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.

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.