(no subject) was Gummed

Lee Berman · 16 Dec 2011, 21:22 · from 2011-December.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: severiansola at hotmail.com (Lee Berman)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 16:22:07 -0500
Subject: (urth) (no subject) was Gummed
Message-ID: <SNT123-W5179055598A6B6E1882D5FCFA00 at phx.gbl>

>Dan'l Danehy-Oakes: I know what you mean ... when I joined we had (among others, simply
>from memory) Alice K. Turner ("Alga"), a former fiction editor at Playboy; and Michael 
>Andre-Driussi ("Mantis"), whose work I assume everyone here is familiar with; and Kevin
>Maroney. All these seem to be gone forever. I miss their contributions.

Yeah, I am eternally jealous of you Dan'l, that you were participating in those Golden
Days, though I did get some discourse with Mantis a couple years ago in an online- 
one year Book of the Month Club for the Sun Series. Actually, I think Nutria (James Jordan) 
put a short blurb on here not so long ago. Would be nice if he'd contribute more.

>Daniel Petersen: Well, Lee, I'm one of the newer 'very intelligent, insightful, well-read
>contributors' who is in danger of being chased away even by your 'free thought' postings.  
>But never fear, I won't really run.

Heh. Nice try! I may be a softie but I'm not such a sucker as to fall for that line. Anyway,
I give all kinds of credit to David Stockhoff. He is a better Gerry foil than I ever was.
You can see it in their current exchange. Gerry may see himself as the scorpion, but David
is a fox who ain't going down no matter how many times he gets a stinger aimed at his back.

>Gerry Quinn: Am I to understand from this that you consider that the torrent of largely nonsensical 
>?theories? you post here is in some sense for the betterment of the group?  That it encourages others 
>to post equally nonsensical theories, and that this is good?  Candidly, I have always suspected it.  
>My offence, then, is not so much ?social manipulation? so much as making the list a less comfortable 
>environment for nonsense?

heh. Good one Gerry! Classic Quinn. But nope. The value is in the medium not the message. The
entertainment factor. That's what keeps them in their seats.

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