Shooting the moon

James Wynn · 29 Jun 2005, 06:54 · from 2005-June.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: thewynns at earthlink.net (James Wynn)
Date: Wed Jun 29 06:54:23 2005
Subject: (urth) Shooting the moon
Message-ID: <12821475.1120053260638.JavaMail.root at wamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>I said:
>A nasty shot from the bushes IMO, and I'll stand by
>that.
>
>Roy said:
>Do you also stand by this (to Chris)?

>I said:
>If you're offering a defense, it's a lame one. If it is an apology, it's
>worse. Take your best shot, but stand in the open as you do.

>Roy said:
>No, it wasn't a defense; I don't need one. I was demonstrating your
>propensity for reading things into the written word that simply aren't
>there. 

Oooooooooh! Now I *understand*. I went back and read your post and
I must admit I wonder why I didn't see it before:
http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2005-June/001206.html

You had an unstated agenda to forward -- a *bias* to confirm! 
That's why you chose to make a delineation regarding 
page 361 of RTTW when there was *barely* any discernable difference...
and that's is why (I couldn't figure this out but it is all too clear now)
although you typed out other references verbatim to attempt to prove
your point, you didn't post the reference AT ISSUE.
You did that because then it would have been patently clear that your
differences were slight at best...trivial at worst. You wanted to leave
the impression that you were building a federal case! 

Of course you *could* have posted the text said "No, that is not the
only reading. The Rajan does not absolutely DENY that Pas EVER
had ANY intention of ruling the Whorl in person." But *merely* 
disagreeing and proving an alternate reading would not forward your
*actual* agenda of proving that I have *propensity of 
"reading things...that simply aren't there". 

And simply SAYING that that was your intent in the original
post was too up front. You wanted to say it and not say it.

Got it. Well, I repeat, "Take your best shot but stand in the open
as you do it." I'm not hiding. I've made myself available for
potshots. I don't think you should avail yourself of the privilege
and hide at the same time.

>Just seven days ago you wrote:
>"If Roy Lackey and Blattid are correct in their posts that Silk is a clone
>of Typhon [...]"
>I only started posting again to correct that misreading of my posts; I had
>made no such claim.

Oh gosh! I'm terribly sorry about that, Roy. The post Chris referenced
*seemed* to suggest you and Dan'l were discussing in earnest the
merits of the Silk=Typhon's Clone theory. I hadn't read your Creed on
Wolfe's works so I didn't know where you stood. How terrible for you to
see your name bandied about in passing like that. I hope my post didn't
force you to get out your sphygmomanometer. I hope the family didn't
gather 'round to see you one last time. Please accept my apology for that.

~ James Wynn

"She possessed Oreb, as I told you, because she knew he would soon be
brought [to Blue]. She felt sure--she told me this one night--that Pas would
would not have peopled Blue unless he had some way to go there himself
to rule them. 'Lord it' was the phrase she used. She was wrong, as I could
have told her." [361 RTTW]

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net