HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: Charactor Titles
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:09:21 GMT
Organization: HJF AIDS Research Project, Washington DC

Yes, looking it up is a very good way of finding that odd tidbit of
information. My biggest dictionary does indeed tell you how to address
a king, an emporer, the Pope, and various titled people. What it doesn't
say, however, is how a foreigner should address these people.

As a non-catholic, I would not address the Pope as "your holiness".
I don't think he's holy. Similarly, calling a king "your majesty"
would imply that I was one of his subjects, which would be
unconstitutional given my citizenship. I believe "my lord (or lady)
<title>" is standard for foreign nobility/royalty, but I'm not sure.
"My lord Pope" sounds acceptable from a non-catholic.

I guess I'll have to check with a reference librarian.


-- 
==========================================================================
That which is necessary is never evil. If an evil seems necessary, look
to your context; that's where its root lies.  - Charles Perez
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: mfc1493@zeus.tamu.edu (Ratboy)
Subject: Another one...board games???
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 05:32:00 GMT

Yes, t'is I again. I have yet another question for you...

This fits into this category to some degree, but not much, but I don't know
where else to post it...

Has anyone else out there tried to create a board game...or game of any kind...
and how difficult is the gaming market?

My step-father and I have almost completed a Mafia board game. The game is too
large and complicated for an average-sized board game so we are thinking of
making it a computer game. There are still many bugs and some ideas we still
want to put in it, but can't seem to figure out how. Most of all we like playing
the game ourselves, but we have the distant hopes of maybe selling it.

Michael

Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: marcy@sqwest.wimsey.bc.ca (Marcy Thompson)
Subject: Re: Charactor Titles
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Surrey, British Columbia, CANADA
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 21:38:21 GMT

In a recent misc.writing article, nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) wrote:
>
> [good stuff deleted]
>
>Beyond this, there's a world of information out there - wander over to
>the nearest library or bookstore and check things out.  Doing one's
>research may be a bit more work than just asking in public forums, but
>it's usually worth it (I usually discover more than I was looking for,
>and the extra is worth the effort).

Not only that, but if you post to a public forum like this one, you may
get answers which are wrong, answers which are right some of the time
but not in the instance you were thinking of but you didn't post enough
detail so that the answerer knew that, answers which are right in one
part of the world but not in another, and other answers which won't work
for you. But the only way you'll find that out is if you check out the
answers you got, which amounts to doing the research you could have
done in the first place.

In fact, I spotted at least one answer of the right-in-part-of-the-world-
only in the answers which have been posted so far, as well as a fairly
eqregious omission in one of the answer sets posted so far. 

>One rule of writing, of course, is Write What You Know.  Maybe it
>would be more useful to think of this as:  Know What You Write.

Right-o.

Marcy


-- 

Marcy Thompson		
  SoftQuad (West)			
    marcy@sq.com
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: suzanne@mailhub.scf.lmsc.lockheed.com (Suzanne Barrett)
Subject: Re: Proposal for Crawford Killian
Organization: Lockheed Santa Cruz, CA.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 18:46:05 GMT

In article <mtan-190892115547@maureen.cen.uiuc.edu> mtan@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Maureen Tan) writes:

>From: mtan@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Maureen Tan)
>To: Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian)
>Subject: Re: Work in progress
>References: <14387@mindlink.bc.ca>
>Organization: UIUC

>In article <14387@mindlink.bc.ca>, Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford
>Kilian) wrote:

>> I don't want to trot out the storyline, but I will be happy to deal with any
>> questions people may have about the early stages of novel development.



>A PROPOSAL  and an open letter to Crawford K.:

>I don't know if you are willing, but if you are *and* the misc.writing
>people agree...

> It's not often that we netters get in on the very beginning of the novel-
>writing process.  (I suspect we tend more to the scream for help in
>the middle or the alternating insecurity/hope reports at the end.) And
>seeing as how the writer in question is experienced, chatty, and
>disgustingly
>organized...

>W ould anyone else find it fascinating to watch Crawford in a
>"fly-on-the-wall" style as he works through the early stages of his
>novel????

>If you agree to this (and if you're foolish enough to agree to this
>scheme, you really *can* quit anytime you like, Crawford) but you
> have to agree to post the bad stuff too.  And
>perhaps the experience of negotiating with Del Rey--issues like
>deadlines, cover art, y'know all that mysterious stuff.
>Maybe it could be a series of Dear Netters letters.

>I for one loved the letter technique you described and am already
>wondering how you are going to move these characters around the
>board.  Your letter writing technique is not one I've ever tried, but
>after reading your post, I'm definitely going to.

>*I* want to know what  you are going to do next.  (Call it a vicarious
>thrill, if you must...  .)  Wadda ya think???

>Maureen (a.k.a. Jane)


1,too, would be interested in such a posting.  Although we write in 
different genres, good organization is good organization.  Any method that 
will produce well-thought-out, coherent plotting is of gret interest.
I encourage you to have a go at it for the rest of us.
Suzanne (who wishes she had a well-thought-out plot)
-----
suzanne@mailhub.scf.lmsc.lockheed.com
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: mjanzen@healthy.uwaterloo.ca (Michael Edward Janzen)
Subject: Re: "Wow! You're a writer?"
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 19:01:34 GMT

In article <25436@dog.ee.lbl.gov> jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov writes:
>My daily requirement of humility was administered one day by the
>Critter Sitter -- the person who waters the plants and feeds the 

Wow! You're a Critter Sitter Writter!

Newsgroups: misc.writing,rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.written
From: bucknerb@bnr.ca (Brent Buckner)
Subject: Re: Computational Science Fiction (CSF)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ontario, Canada
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:16:04 GMT

In article <bg4m+#r.tmaddox@netcom.com> tmaddox@netcom.com (Tom Maddox) writes:
>In article <1992Aug07.095342.29133@sco.COM> charless@sco.COM (charles stross) writes:
>>However, to twist this topic around to misc.writing: one of the things
>>that has been bugging me for a while is the interesting fact that
>>in the `hard sf' field there have been very few new `hard s''s
>>in the past few years. Despite a veritable explosion of new
>>scientific fields -- dissipative systems, algorithmics, quantum
>>chromodynamics, cellular automata, game theory, queueing theory,
>>chaos theory, applied genetics, and a whole slew of other developments,
>>most hard sf is still trawling the same areas in search of
>>plot McGuffins as in the 1950's. I know Vernor Vinge's been 
>>hinting at algorithmic or information-theoretic stuff in some of
>>his novels, but this seems very much like a completely `open'
>>field in sf right now. 
                      [deleted]
>
>	_The Difference Engine_ explores a number of these ideas, so does 
>my own _Halo_.  And of course there's Rudy Rucker's work, and Pat Cadigan's.
>
        _David's Sling_ by Mark Stigler (? spelling ?)
This covers some hypothetical social consequences of information technologies.
There's even an hypertext version (I'd like to get a copy just to see
a full example of an hypertext novel).

        _In the Country of the Blind_ by Michael F. Flynn
You could stop reading after 150 pages (the size of the original
Analog two-part serial) and still have encountered a lot of nifty
informatics stuff.

-- 
at Bell-Northern Research
voice:        (613) 765-2739
Canada Post:  P.O. Box 3511, Station C, Ottawa, Canada, K1Y 4H7
I do not claim that BNR holds these views.
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: Charactor Titles
From: elle@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Ellen Keyne Seebacher)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:33:19 GMT
Reply-To: elle@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <14207@mindlink.bc.ca> a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) writes:
[discussing forms of address]
>   Knight or Lady -- My Lord
           ^^^^^^^    ^^^^^^^
Don't you think addressing a "Lady" as "My Lord" is a bit excessive?

(Now remind me:  why were we discussing this in misc.writing?  :-))

--
Ellen Keyne Seebacher            elle@midway.uchicago.edu
From: kabir@kabir.Eng.Sun.COM (Ihtisham Kabir)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Strunk and White
Date: 14 Aug 92 00:35:52 GMT
Reply-To: kabir@kabir.Eng.Sun.COM
Distribution: na
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: kabir

Hi, 

I have questions regarding Strunk and White's book on prose style. 

For a long time I thought this book was the last word on English
style. But now I wonder, is this book considered _that_ good
by modern writers? Or, are Strunk and White considered proponents of
a particular style, or "_ism" (with others "_isms," just as good,
that I am unaware of?)

Just trying to broaden my horizons. Thanks for any input,

- Ihtisham Kabir
kabir@sun.com
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: writing insecurities
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:28:31 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Aug12.223310.27698@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> earp@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James K Earp) writes:
 After a little practice and their help I am now very proud 
>of my work and will be submitting a novel to a publisher for the first
>time this month. 

HOORAY!  Congratulations!  Let us know how it does, but even if
(God forbid) it doesn't get published, good on you for writing it
at all!  

What's it about, by the way?


-- 
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
"Happy campers you are, happy campers you have been, and as far as I'm
concerned, happy campers you will always be."
                  --J. Danforth Quayle in American Samoa
From: aerts@media02.UUCP (Ad Aerts)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Looking it up (was: misspelled thread :))
Date: 13 Aug 92 08:26:46 GMT
Organization: Me, myself and I


In article <1992Aug12.213459.14536@midway.uchicago.edu> elle@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
  > My sisters used to tease me unmercifully for reading the dictionary on
  > a warm summer day.  They missed some wonderful essays on etymology --
  > their loss.

Couldn't agree more.  Being a technical writer (actually a linguist) in
a environment of programmers I had great trouble convincing my boss (a
programmer) that I needed good (= expensive) dictionaries.  Now some of
my programmer colleagues also consult these dictionaries 'for fun'.
Isn't that great?

I actually have several dictionaries for each language I read or write
- I use them all.  I'm thinking of buying the American Heritage
Dictionary's newest edition.  Does anyone know this one?

Ad.
--
                                                        //////////////////
Ad Aerts                   e-mail:                      /////////////////   
Sandenburg 77                                           \\\\\      \\\      
2036 PB Haarlem            ad.aerts@let.ruu.nl             \\\\\  \\\       
Netherlands (Europe)       aerts%media02@relay.nluug.nl       \\\\\\        
                                                                 \\\\\\      
                                                                    \\\       
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: ehp@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU ("Didi Pancake")
Subject: Re: Charactor Titles
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 21:07:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.150921.26090@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez) writes:
>
>I guess I'll have to check with a reference librarian.

WOW! What a great idea!! and to think most U.S. public libraries will
find this stuff out for you for free!!! and often by telephone instead of
having to actually go there!!!!

--
|  Didi Pancake         |     "How do you kill mud?"                     |
|  ehp@virginia.edu     |           --Dean Jagger in "X the Unknown"     |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  All the usual disclaimers about the origins of these opinions apply.  |
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: writing insecurities
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:37:39 GMT

In article <92225.154641U52892@uicvm.uic.edu> <U52892@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>Have you ever felt like this?
>
>When people ask me why I like
>journalism, I tell them I'm good at it. But am I really good?

Well so far it appears you have the most important component:  You both
know and can admit that you are good.  Bravo!
>
>Yesterday, I submitted an article to my boss. She told me the
>article was good but needed revisions. At that point, I started
>to have self-doubts on whether I am just not a good writer. I know
>I'm a good reporter but not a good writer. My articles are often
>well-researched and substantial but structure is weak and awkward.
>How will I become a good writer?

You already are a good writer.  You might not be going thru a mid-life
crisis, but you ARE in another crisis and that's the self-doubt stage.
It's very common early in a writing career to be leery of critique.
You want to write jaw-dropping pieces on the first try.

But here's a clue that may change your attitude.  ALL GREAT WRITERS
MAKE REVISIONS.  When you write something, particularly journalism, you
are very very CLOSE to the subject and this will effect what you
write (but not necessarily HOW you write.)  Because you're so close to
the subject you can't really see the whole picture until someone like
your editor gives you a gentle nudge in that direction.  They are not seeing
the article from the writer's standpoint and their critique is very
important.

It's like looking at a great work of art at a distance of one inch.  You
can see a lot of detail but you can't see it in its entirety until
you take a big step back.

As you progress in your career, you will be asked to critique other
writers' work.  It will become more clear to you then.  Meanwhile,
my advice is to take your editor's suggestions, incorporate them as
your talent directs you, and then thank that person profusely for
helping you do the best job you can for your readers.


-Nancy Colucci
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: westphal@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Dorothy Westphal)
Subject: Re: Proposal for Crawford Killian
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 19:05:08 GMT

In article <57680021@hpscit.sc.hp.com> fish@hpscit.sc.hp.com (John Fisher) writes:
>mtan@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Maureen Tan) writes:
>
>>Would anyone else find it fascinating to watch Crawford in a
>>"fly-on-the-wall" style as he works through the early stages of his
>>novel????
>
>>Maureen (a.k.a. Jane)
>
>I'm certainly interested.  There just may be a non-fiction book come out
>of it for you, as well, Crawford.  You are indeed courageous, and thanks
>for the opportunity.
>
 I second the thanks! It's been just the stimulus I've needed to
get back to a project I had shelved. Thanks so much!

-- 
Dorothy Westphal, Sunnyvale, Calif. % Just when things are going your way...%
westphal@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com   %               they get even better!   %
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: "Wow! You're a writer?"
From: tfarmer@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Farmer)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 23:13:07 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <BsvK6y.341@unx.sas.com> saslpo@stevens.unx.sas.com (Len Olszewski) writes:
>
>Gee, I hope not. Speaking as someone who writes *primarily* for the 
>money, I would feel hurt if people thought what I did was evil. It's 
>not, but sometimes my syntax gets out of hand a little. 8*) 

I don't write primarily for the money - I do it because the place
where I work has Usenet access.

[description of tech writer bashing deleted]

>Any other technical writers out there suffer through THAT scenario 
>before?

Yes! My line is, "It's a dirty job but someone has to do it."

I even got some mail the other day which said the following:

"Your writing SOFTWARE MANUALS... Don't you have any pride at all?"

It's obvious that we're just misunderstood.
-- 
    Thomas Farmer | tfarmer@datamark.co.nz    or | Amiga 2.04, AIX 3.1
Datamark Intl Ltd | tfarmer@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz | Win 3.1, OS/2 2.0
 Technical Writer | 			Vote MMP!
    & PC Wrangler | If I had something witty to say I'd put it here.
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: jim@thinkage.on.ca (James Alan Gardner)
Subject: Re: "Wow, You're a Writer!"
Organization: Thinkage Ltd.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:43:37 GMT

Public attitudes toward writers involve a wondrous amount of
double-think.  I have met a degree of awe when I say that I'm
an SF writer.  Then they ask me where I've published, I say,
"Amazing and F&SF," and they say, "Never heard of them."  Kind
of hard to understand why they're awed if they know nothing
about pro SF magazines.

There's also the tendency for many people to believe they too
could be writers if they only sat down and did it.  They have
"great ideas".  Some of them even offer to give you their ideas
and all you have to do is write them up.  (Wow, such a deal.)

I think part of the problem is that people really don't sit
down and try to write.  Compare writing to art -- almost
everyone sits down and tries to draw something early on in
life, and you soon find out that drawing is trickier than
it looks.  From that, most people figure out that art in
general requires the disciplined development of skills and
you can't just be brilliant immediately.  (Disclaimer: I grant
that many people have no appreciation of what goes into abstract
art and are quick to say, "My kid can do better than that.")

On the other hand, few people ever try to write more than a note
to the babysitter.  In addition, few people are ever exposed to
really amateur writing, the way they might be exposed to rinky-dink
art.  Sure, there's a lot of wretched stuff being published, but
even the worst goes through an editor and a proofreader to clean
up the messiest bits.  Furthermore, the average reader is only
exposed to work done by authors with some claim to national or
international stature: best-selling books; glossy magazines on
the newstand; major TV and movie productions; wire-service articles
in the newspaper.  These are all written by people who have made
the big-time in their fields...the work may still be crap, but
the writers have at least learned to give their crap a reasonable
amount of polish.  Because most people don't really encounter
truly amateur writing, they don't recognize how bad bad writing
can be so they don't know how much work good writing requires.

I meet a lot of people who seem to think there's some magic trick
to being published: some secret handshake that will get them in
the door without having to put in much time at the keyboard.  It's
hard to convince such people that it's actually the opposite
that's true -- you have to work your butt off for a long time,
and even then, you have to get the breaks before you can make
that first sale.

		Jim Gardner, Thinkage Ltd.
From: johnh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (John J Humpal)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: Sequels (was Re: Work in progress)
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:33:44 GMT
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore

In article <78070@ut-emx.uucp> andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Some call me...Drew) writes:
> [ Stuff deleted ]
>
>Is this becoming more of a trend in novels?  I would have thought that
>editors would be far more excited to see a new idea explored, rather than
>returning to the same old theme.
> [ ... More stuff deleted ]
>
	Would you really have thought that of editors?  I would assume
that editors, and especially publishers, would be far more excited to see
a previously successful idea repeated, rather than a new idea explored.

-- 
-John

John J. Humpal -- johnh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu -- short .sig, std. disclaimer
From: Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: Sequels (was Re: Work in progress)
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:34:23 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

I'm not a big fan of sequels either, though I had fun turning Empire of Time
into a 3-book series. There also, each book had a very different agenda. (Maybe
that explains why the series didn't do very well, alas...) From the writer's
point of view, a series gives you room to explore the implications of a
setting, a group of characters, a theme of some kind. It may seem odd to those
who haven't completed their first novel yet (and feel daunted by the perceived
*size* of such a writing project), but a single novel of 100,000 words or so
isn't really very long. Really. 
Newsgroups: misc.writing
From: s0067284@ursa.calvin.edu (Jeffrey Veen)
Subject: Re: "Wow! You're a writer?"
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 12:48:27 GMT

casey@well.sf.ca.us (Kathleen Creighton) writes:

>  The rewards are rarely
>financial.  This doesn't bother me particularly, though, since I have no
>desire to support myself full-time with my writing, at which point it would
>just become a "hustle" for me.
>-- 
>Kathleen Creighton

What exactly doe you mean by "hustle?"  Are you implying that the only writing
worth bothering with is that done mearly for pleasure?  Is writing for money
therefore become "evil" because your motives are commercial?  

Jeff
s0067284@calvin.edu
From: johnh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (John J Humpal)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: Any Screenwriters out there?
Date: 22 Aug 92 16:33:21 GMT
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore

In article <1992Aug22.001433.10551@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> ren@Turing.ORG (Karen Prestemon) writes:
>
>I've done a bit of screenwiritng, and I'm looking for other people on
>the net who do the same....  Anyone?
>
	Yes, there are a few of us out here.  I'm dabbling in
screenwriting (i.e., I haven't sold anything, nor made a serious
effort to sell anything).  My primary interest is in short fiction
and drama, but I wouldn't turn up my nose at the kind of money
screenwriters make :-)

-- 
-John

John J. Humpal -- johnh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu -- short .sig, std. disclaimer