HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Sun, 8 Nov 1992 17:14:00 EST
From:         blomberg cepeda <ST402747@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: code
Comments: To: words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

Lobbed on 8 Nov 1992 at 16:58:58 by Graham

>:>At this point I only want to make a couple of clarifications. First, I don't
>:>think that anyone would want Ruth to condone that which she cannot. The dept
>:>of her faith is obvious, and deserves our respect. The question posed by the
>:
>: Thanks.  I was beginning to wonder if rationality had gone out the window.
>
>I let that one by the first time because I thought I'd said enough, but
>this is getting beyond a joke.  Do either of you two even understand the
>meaning of the word rationality?

Why should I have more faith in rationality than in Christ. I am suspicious of
opiates of the masses in any shape, be it Ruth's fundamentalist Christianity,
your fundamentalist rationality, or anyone's Grateful Dead.

>If I understand what you're saying right (and I hope to God I'm wrong),
>you think someone deserves respect on the *strength* of their faith,
>regardless of the details of its contents?

(lots of rocket fuel deleted)

Anyone's personal belief (or disbelief) system deserves respect. What I was
trying to point out to Ruth is basically what you have been trying (I think)
to point out to her, although I think I was doing it a bit more gently and--
dare I say it--rationally. Namely: she has a right to think that by acting on
my natural sexual urges I am going to hell. I have a right to think that by
accepting a literal interpretation of a book* which was never meant to be taken
literally (faith is not rational, literalism has pretentions to being so) she
is wasting an obviously strong intellect and a great deal of energy. However,
I do not have any right to support any measure that would discriminate against
those who feel as she does. I equally believe that she has no right (legally
yes, morally no) to support discrimination against those who love as I do.
     I was trying to find a common vocabulary, instead of ridiculous slinging
of shots with no regard for mutual comprehension. I have apparently been
willfully misunderstood by both sides. I must say that my respect for Ruth's
position suffered a great blow when she mentioned "nailing them" before God
did. Does this mean that the state has a right to "crucify" on moral issues?
Was the extremely bad choice in words accidental (please say yes)?
     You are both preaching to the converted. Please adjust the tone of your
posts and recognize that conversion presupposes a common language (even the
g.d. Mormons know that), or take this to one of those lists already full of
Turks, Armenians, Greeks, Kurds, and that ilk (not an ethnic flame--only a
comment on those who post there).

                          b.c.
From: samant@CS.UCHICAGO.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: chalkos
Date: 12 Nov 92 01:32:20 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <samant@cs.uchicago.edu>

>It's debatable whether you can call it a 'component' of lexicographic
>errors.  There's a continuum between perfect spellers and dyslexics.  All
>errors are just occasional random failures of one of the many systems
>involved in writing.  Some of the systems are at a conscious level and
>others aren't.  Dyslexia is where some of the non-conscious systems have
>an error rate that is higher than the norm.

Actually I don't know why I wrote what I wrote. This is common-sensical
enough.  I guess I was thinking of constant spelling errors like
"definately" and "substraction".

What did our Prof do? One large class of mistakes was writing words like
"mathimitical" and "derivitive" on the board. (If it became necessary to
write "metamathematical" he just gave up. He had started on it valiantly
several times before, but had found he was weak on the follow-through,
which is what matters.)

But there were other things, like blatantly writing a gamma on the board
while calling it delta. All the way through. I wonder whether "normal"
people do this, even "less frequently".

Another incident was when he started writing "SO(3)" on the board and
stopped for some reason to explain a point. This was when "SO" was on the
board. (He always writes all caps, by the way, to reduce more confusion.)
Anyway, after having explained what he had to, he decided he wanted to
write "LOOK AT (something)" on the board. He carried on from the "SO".

A moment later we had to try hard not to laugh when we saw "SOOK AT" on
the board, and heard good old Prof pointing to it and saying "Look at".

I think this mistake is unique in my experience.

tushar
From: maynor@RA.MSSTATE.EDU (Natalie Maynor)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: top secret?
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:03:01 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu

> Two questions.
>    Who owns the directories
>   Who is CDing to them

Moi et moi.  But the only difference is the / before /docs.  From anonymous
ftp, it's docs/words-l.  From my own account on Ra it's /docs/words-l.
   --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:33:15 GMT
From:         Graham Toal <gtoal@RACHEL.IBMPCUG.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: 16 Tons
Comments: To: WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu

	*** Reply to note of 11/06/92 22:14
	Please get my name off this list.
	PS.  I can not handle the mail volume.

Ah, just like old times...

So long, stranger...

G
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
From: jthomas@netsys.com (Jim Thomas)
Subject: Re: Christian bashing
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:37:04 GMT

In article <WORDS-L%92111120514714@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> "Stephen H. Karlson 753-6980 (815)" <TA0SHK1%NIU.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu> writes:
>
>Freedom of association includes the freedom not to associate.
>

But not the freedom to discriminate, and that's what's at issue here.
The US Navy was ordered this week by a federal court to reinstate a gay,
and when the Navy initially refused, the court had to remind the upper
echelon that they were still subject to the Constitution and court order.
The times they are a'changin!

It's also not completely accurate to say (in a deleted part of Steve's post)
that gays have "freedom of association." I remember many a police sweep
"on principle" in Cloud 9, a gay bar a block from my place in San Francisco.
There was also a nasty sweep in Chicago a few years ago. This isn't a
gay issue---in chicago, "sweeps" of hispanics and blacks are still common,
and a Washington DC "hacker" sweep last Friday suggests that the ol'
slippery slope is something to be avoided.

Jim (I'll defend your rights whether you defend mine or not) Thomas


Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: WORDS-L@UGA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"WORDS-L@UGA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CROSEN
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:21:00 EST
From:         CROSEN%BGSUOPIE.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Subject:      Re: legislating behavior (was amendment 2 ...)

Greetings,
G writes: "such as sacking teachers for explaining in sex ed...that
children who wonder if they are gay are not sick and evil, and if that's the
choice they end up making..." (more or less, that's what he writes, anyway)

Is it quibbling to ask about the word "choice" in this context?  I have been
led to believe that "choice" is irrelevant in most instances.

Marty
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Sat, 7 Nov 1992 15:26:38 EST
From:         BGRISSOM@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Subject:      Hard rolls
Comments: To: words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

New England's "spucky" rolls didn't make the AHD3 (printed version at
least), but Buffalo's "k"ummelweck" did: defined as "hard roll containing
caraway seeds and coated with salt. Also called _weck_."

A new bar opened on the edge of campus last night -- Buffalo Wild Wings
and Weck (BW3) -- which features eats served on Kimmelwecks (their sp.).
What's interesting about it is that the bar connects to Sudsy's Laundry.
Eventually an electronic board in the tavern part will let diners/drinkers
know when their washing or drying is done.  I looked in vain, however, for
the promised study carrels and the complimentary periodicals.

I know this is a concept that has been tried with success in many parts
of the country, but this is the first for Lexington.  I wish them well,
while lamenting the fact that I lacked the will and the capital to try
it twenty years ago, when the idea occurred to me.

brad

P.S. My fridge has 12 egg slots in the familiar half-oval shape and
     another 12 in the shape of a "u" -- open on one side.  What are
     these for?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 09:17:55 CST
From:         "Natalie Maynor" <maynor@RA.MSSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Insurance help
Comments: To: WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu

I'm glad abh was able to give a more detailed response to Doris's question
than the brief and flimsy answer I sent as I was logging off last night.
I'll reiterate that my parents have found AARP's supplemental (medigap?)
policy excellent.
   --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu)
     who plans to join AARP 4 months + 10 days from now (but who won't
     be eligible for all AARP goodies that early)
From: EL406045@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU (Tony @ Brownvm)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Help on a word?
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:37:29 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

Posted on 11 Nov 1992 at 12:45:43 by Judith E. Schrier

>>       A similar term I've heard wrt Catholics
>>       is 'lapsed Catholic.'  Are there other denomination-specific terms?
>>
>>[whatever the term is wrt Jews, I'm close]
>
>What I've heard is "non-observant" Jews. Which seems kind of
>wishy-washy. "Lapsed" sounds more like they *mean* it!

There is also the curious term "self hating Jew", which is reserved
for use by Jews of other Jews who criticise policies or actions
of Israel.  Oddly there don't seem to be "self hating Catholics"
or "self hating Mormons" in the same sense, perhaps because Jews
can't be drummed out (and therefore become non Jews) the way
the Catholics, Mormons, etc. can.

Tony H.
(lapsed atheist)
From: harwell@TENET.EDU (Anne Burton Harwell)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Help on a word?
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:36:38 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Comments: To: English Language Discussion Group <WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu>

On Wed, 11 Nov 1992, Judith E. Schrier wrote:

> >       A similar term I've heard wrt Catholics
> >       is 'lapsed Catholic.'  Are there other denomination-specific terms?

An Episcopalian who has not been to Eucharist three times in the past 12
months is referred to as "unchurched." What happens to you then is the
priest suddenly starts paying you lots of visits, and you lose your vote
at the yearly parish meeting.

-abh
From: ap290@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ruth M. Hanschka)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Clinton's 'Mandate'
Date: 6 Nov 1992 06:22:39 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ap290@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ruth M. Hanschka)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, EL406045@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU ("Tony @ Brownvm") says:

>>Just one question Graham, what's "excessively zealous" Christianity?  If you
>>mean rule-bound anal-retentives, no - the Democrats have plenty of those
>>too.  The vociferous Orel Robertsians have sided with Republicans lately
>>because they Republicans took their PAC money.:-)
>>
>>>Do you think it might be genetic?
>>I doubt it, not unless excessively overboard atheism and agnosticism are too.
>
>Hmmm... that leaves us skeptics nicely balanced in the middle as always.
>
What happens when you fall off?  The fence in the middle that is?
The aggressive skeptic is one of the more offenseive breeds - they're worse
than the Civil Rights Atheists.  Besides, stay in the middle, and you'll get
pelted by both sides; we have notoriously poor aim.:-)
-- 
		###	Ruth Hanschka, the Nethead    ###
			- ap290@cleveland.freenet.edu
	      Where anything can happen, and it usually does
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:56:33 MST
From:         Dan Lester <ALILESTE@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: legislating behaviour
Comments: To: English Language Discussion Group <WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu>

On Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:51:52 GMT Graham Toal said:
>It's a common event over here.  The Church of England hypocritically turns
>a blind eye to gay vicars (of which there are a disproportionately high
>number, compared to the general population - I've often wondered if the

  \There are certainly gay priests (of both genders) in the Episcopal
Church of the United States (no longer the Protestant Episcopal.....),
the American member of the Anglican Communion.  Many of them are out.
I'm sure some are not.

>Mind you, this is the same church that's been at daggers drawn this month
>about ordaining female priests.  They're voting today I believe.  Listening

   Ah, they're so slow back in the old country.....they have female
priests here, and one of our good friends is Canon to the Ordinary in
the Diocese of Idaho....(for those not familiar with the arcane
terminology, that means she is the Bishop's right hand, and can speak
with the authority of the Bishop if/when necessary).

>  But suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the
>  man, but to be in silence.")

   Fascinating....US now has a female bishop in NJ, and a black one at
that.  Some questioned her appointment several years ago, but most of
that because was younger and less-experienced than most who become
Bishop, but not a record on either count....

Please do advise how the vote came out....it WILL happen over there someday.

dan
From: harwell@TENET.EDU (Anne Burton Harwell)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Camille Paglia
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:31:12 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Comments: To: English Language Discussion Group <WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu>

On Thu, 12 Nov 1992, (Jim Thomas) wrote:

> heated for awhile. The bulk of the criticism is directed at her op-ed
> pieces in SAAC (sex, art, & american culture). You might enjoy The Well....

I read SAAC last night. She's not a great writer; there's lots of writing on
Words-L that's more interesting and lucid than her reprinted editorials.
The standout piece is the transcript of a lecture she gave at MIT. Here
she really swings for the fence and lets us see her frenetic intellect
leaping from one topic to another. She has no bland opinions, and some of
her remarks and insults are devastating. Paglia is like many
sharp-tongued, intelligent women in that she says what she thinks and
doesn't mind suffering a little for it. She gives as good as she gets and
comes back for more. It was entertaining, probably worth the cost of the
paperback, but make no mistake: she's no Baudelaire.

-abh
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:42:05 EST
From:         "(Rashmi)" <rashmi%Spl3.ECE.Drexel.EDU@COE.DREXEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Nov. 22, 1963
Comments: To: WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu
              "WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu" at Nov 9, 92 4:21 pm

> This weekend, a friend who's 48 or so, was making a big deal of the fact that
> for the first time, the president is *older* than her.  She found it rather
                                       ^^^^^^^
Ooops, I meant younger.

> disconcerting, she said.  Any wordslers feeling the same way?
>
> rashmi
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: WORDS-L@UGA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:21:44 -0500
From:         James R Llewellyn <jrlst14+@PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: HELLO!

My only wonder is how the cases always add up to a half-hour show. I
thought that there may be a discrepancy in Doug Llewelyn's (Three L's)
suit, but they all look alike to me.

Peace, Love, and Equal Justice,
Jim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:47:57 EST
From:         "Tony @ Brownvm" <EL406045@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Church/State re-visited
Comments: To: words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

Posted on 12 Nov 1992 at 11:37:23 by leah

>In Flanders' fields the poppies grow
>Between the crosses, row on row

Usually at this time of year there's some soul searching article about
McRae in the paper: was he a pacifist or not, did he write anything else,
and so on.  I haven't seen one this year - perhaps it's constitutional
overload.

Tony H.
From: jrlst14+@PITT.EDU (James R Llewellyn)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Roddy Llewellyn
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:06:01 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: WORDS-L@UGA.BITNET

I am thrilled to see what the other side of my family has been up to.
After reading the enclosed Princess Margaret joke, one may see why.
(My brilliant British accent cannot be fully reproduced on a computer.
Make-believe.)

    The Queen of England and Princess Diana rode along a country road in
their bright, shiny Bentley, when a masked man appeared and produced a
revolver. He said, "Hey, there, Queenie! Where's that big old ring you
wear?" She showed him her bare hands. "Hey, Princess!", he said,
"where's that fancy tiara I always see you with?" Diana bowed her head
and, to the dismay of the theif, it wasn't there. The crook then took
the driver's wallet, other jewelry, and beat a hasty retreat.
    The Princess turned to the Queen. "I'm sure I saw you with that ring
before we left. Where did you hide it?" The Queen pointed between her
legs and broke into a coy grin. The Queen asked, "I'm sure I noticed the
tiara." Diana admitted that she had used the same hiding place. "It's a
pity.", the Queen added. "If Margaret were here, we could have saved the
Bentley."


Peace, Love, and Objects in Mirror Closer than they Appear,
Jim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <samant@cs.uchicago.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:20:45 CST
From:         samant@CS.UCHICAGO.EDU
Subject:      Re: How elections work

>Tushar posts:
>
>   I wrote:
>
>   >Definitely Indian names: 283
>   >[among them, definitely Indian Muslim names: 191]
>
>   An old vice of mine. I include Pakistan in "India".
>
>   All Pakistan fellows kindly to excuse.
>
>What about Kashmiris...do you or do you not include them?

They don't stand a chance in hell - bundled unmercifully with
Indians, make no mistake about that.

After all. "Indian" is a word I can choose to use as I want.

tushar

gar firdaus bur ru-e-zameen ast
hameen ast
From: ktw@MHWPA.ATT.COM
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: re: grungy city
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:26:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original-From: mhwpa!ktw (Kenneth T Wolman +1 201 564 2866)
Comments: To: English Language Discussion Group <WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu>

Has anyone mentioned flying into or out of Chicago on a clear day?
If the plane leaves O'Hare and flies to the north, then heads out over
Lake Michigan, the view is unbelievable.

Even better: flying into Seattle from Chicago, you sit on the left
side of the plane, and as the plane descends you look at Mt. Rainier.

My favorite view: drive into New York on Route 3 through Clifton,
New Jersey.  You come over the top of a small incline (not really
a proper hill) and in front of you is the entire midtown area of
Manhattan, about 12 miles away.  If the air and light are right,
it looks like a floating island.

Ken
From: haycock@marley.think.com (Anne Haycock)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Help on a word?
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:52:37
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: marley.think.com
In-reply-to: blomberg cepeda's message of Thu, 5 Nov 1992 00:10:32 EST

bc offers:

   I do no know for sure, but if Mormons don't call it their "mission", might it
   be instead their "ministry"?

				blomberg cepeda   st402747@brownvm

Mission.  Definitely Mission.

//anne, paternal half's fambly from SLC//
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Current Science Tel: +44 71 323 0323 Fax: +44 71 580 1938
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:13:57 GMT
From:         Graham Toal <gtoal@CURSCI.CO.UK>
Subject:      Roddy Llewellyn
Comments: To: Words-L and the Bandwidth Hogs <words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu>

On Wed, 11 Nov 1992 05:06:41 GMT, "(Ruth M. Hanschka)"
 <ap290@CLEVELAND.FREENET.EDU> wrote:
> In a previous article, gtoal@RACHEL.IBMPCUG.CO.UK (Graham Toal) says:
>
> >	I suppose I should introduce myself. I am James Richard Llewellyn,
> >	descendant of the first prince of Wales, and consequently, possessor of
> >	a tremendous ego problem.
> >OK, who's going to start the Roddy Llewellyn/Princess Margaret jokes off?
> >
> I would if I knew any.  What's a Roddy Llewellyn?  And isn't "Princess
> Margaret joke" redundant?  [maybe I shouldn't have said that....oh well]

RL was Princess Margaret's lover a few years ago.  There were several
jokes going round at the time, which I doubt you would approve of since
almost all of them for some unknown reason included the word 'bugger'...

G
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:58:47 EST
From:         BGRISSOM@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Subject: Re: HELLO!
              12 Nov 1992 16:42:59 CST from <maynor@RA.MSSTATE.EDU>

>Ok. Come to Knoxville.
>   --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu)

  Finally, we will know how American printing practice led to
  the use of <."> instead of <".> !  That is, if Natalie will
  share her findings with us.

  --brad
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:43:09 -0500
Reply-To:     "(Ruth M. Hanschka)" <ap290@cleveland.Freenet.Edu>
From:         "(Ruth M. Hanschka)" <ap290@CLEVELAND.FREENET.EDU>
Subject:      Re: amendment 2
Comments: To: words-l@uga.cc.uga.edu

In a previous article, gtoal@PIZZABOX.DEMON.CO.UK (Graham Toal) says:

>:What a maroon.<sigh>  Just look at all the lovely buzz-words.  All the
>:liberal left jargon.  Can't you think of a few new things to say for
>:yourself?  Can't you reason on your own?  Sauce for the goose, dearie.
>
>New things?  Personally I'd settle for 20-yr old morality rather than
>2000-yr old morality.  Don't point out the mote in my eye when there's
>a beam in yours.

And vice versa.  I'd rather have something with a proven track record.
>
>May I quote?
If I said it, feel free.  If I have to eat my own words, pass the salt.

>RH> "You'll never convince me I'm wrong"
>
>Do unto others as you would have them do unto you...
>
Give up trying to convince you I could be right?  Quote the GOlden Rule?
If I am doing something wrong, I want it pointed out, preferably in large
letters in case my glasses are off.  If you want to table this whole mess,
then by all means let's table it.  If you still think I'm wrong, tell me
why, don't throw brickbats at straw men.  This post did get a bit of temper
tossed in, and for that I'll apologize.


--
		###	Ruth Hanschka, the Nethead    ###
			- ap290@cleveland.freenet.edu
	      Where anything can happen, and it usually does