HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rcampb@cac.washington.edu (Russ Campbell )
Subject: Re: Hello Confrancisco?
Organization: UW Computing
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:40:18 GMT

In article <51XoVB4w165w@lunacity.com>, mwallis@lunacity.com (Michael Wallis) writes:
|> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:
|> >        For many Art Shows, the show has to impose some selection
|> > criteria.
|> 
|> THAT's where we differ, Jim. I can see art shows imposing SPACE
|> limitations, but I don't agree with imposing "selection criteria".  I
|> suspect it's a fundimental issue, and one we're not likely to change the
|> others mind on.

NOW we get to the sticky point.  I'm with Michael on this and agree that
we're all going to have to agree to disagree on this because we're
definitely not going to change each other's minds.  

What Durlyn and I do for the show at Dreamcon is "first come, first
served".  If we're filled up then a waiting list starts.  Doesn't matter
who you are (Michael Whelan, Frank Frazetta, or Jane Wannabe), if you
dally getting your reservation form in for space then you'll end up on the
waiting list.  Naturally we're open to the idea of immediately trying to
find or manufacture extra space if the waiting list fills up with first
rank artists like Whelan, Frazetta, and Boris but this is generally not a
problem for smaller conventions, regardless of the size of their art show,
as these artists are unlikely to display where there is less money
available to chase after their works.  This FCFS policy works well and is
the only truly fair way to limit things, IMHO.  We've also generally found
that at least 3 or 4 people on the waiting list end up getting space
since when you're dealing with 50+ artists there's always going to be a
few who dont/can't show up and either cancel or forfeit their reservations.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|  Russell  D.  Campbell        : No new snappy quote or saying.   |
|  rcampb@u.washington.edu      : I'm just tired of the old one.   |
|  (206)543-0846 @UW in Seattle :                                  |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Anyone can have an opinion, but very few people ever bother to   |
| educate themselves before expressing one.                        |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: exile@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Heresiarch)
Subject: Re: Arisia vs. Boskone
Reply-To: exile@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Organization: The Torch of Chaos and Doubt
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 21:41:17 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.055239.16813@netcom.com> figmo@netcom.com (Lynn Gold) writes:

   Not being familiar with east coast fan politics, what IS the
   difference between Arisia and Boskone (other than their names, dates,
   and locations)?  What is the "battle" all about?

sometimes arisia vs. boskone flamage is light-hearted and funny.
sometimes it's not.  i'm a die-hard arisia-goer and occasional concom
member and i still think boskone bashing is rather unbecoming.  if you
don't like boskone don't go.

speaking as someone who never went to a boskon and is relatively new
on the con scene:

boskone is a long established con that got very big and awkward.  this
lead to amongst other things moving the con outside of boston and
increasing numbers of rules.  while the rules may have been
reasonable, most fans don't deal well with having people tell them
what to do.  boskone rules have been a source of not-so-good-natured
humor in the boston area ever since.

arisia was actually not started in opposition to boskone, though lots
of disaffected boskone fans joined up.  it was started by the same
people who started njac (not just another con, amherst).  it ended up
in the same month as boskone for a while because that's when they
could get a hotel.  bang.  instant rivalry.  for the names, boskone
and arisia were rival organizations in some old sf books i haven't
read.  arisia started out as working name and stuck due to lameness.

while both of them seem to be good cons, boskone has a reputation for
stuffiness and arisia seems to be picking up both the younger, more
energetic fans.  whether this makes arisia a better place to be, or
merely a refuge for troublemakers, is yet to be determined.


--
<SIG>___________________________________________________________________
It's an old wall, Avon.  It waits.  I just hope you reach it
before you die.                                                    </SIG>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
From: chris@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris Croughton)
From: djdaneh@pbhyc.PacBell.COM (Dan'l DanehyOakes)
Subject: 10-Fan Quorum and like that
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:01:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.113741.1@fnala.fnal.gov> higgins@fnala.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.012352.3561@nic.csu.net>, shogun@sutro.SFSU.EDU (Mike M. Tatsugawa) writes:

>> If 10 fans want to put on a panel and
>> can take care of the logistics, we will provide the forum...

>As a sometime organizer of programming for ink-and-paper SF
>conventions, I find this really strange.  
>
>Ten people is too many for a panel... some number between three and
>five is usually right to keep a discussion going for an hour or so.

I think this is a misunderstanding.

The idea seems to be that they'll put on any panel if (a) sufficient interest
[as defined by at least 10 con attendees, or members anyway, stating interest]
is shown and (b) someone is willing to do the "logistics," i.e., round up a
group of panelists.


>Where I come from, if somebody wants to hold a panel, he contacts the
>program department head (or other functionary.)   The PDH(ooF) makes a
>decision about whether the idea is good...

Sounds fascistic to me:*)

Seriously, this "10-fan quorum" offers the opportunity for ideas which might
appeal to a large group of attendees, but which hit the PDH(ooF) in a "blind
spot," to get put on.  Also might open up the panel world a bit -- after a few
cons they all start looking alike.


>> For obvious reasons, we can't advertise what will be shown at the con.
>
>Wrong.  The reasons aren't obvious to me.

Simple.  If they advertised what would be shown, the companies which owned the
copyrights to those films might find out that they were being shown at a 
function for which attendance was being charged -- in effect, a film festival.

You know that "FBI Warning" at the beginning of all the videos you rent or buy?
If you haven't ever bothered reading it, it says you can't charge admission to
watch the damn thing.

The studios take this stuff seriously, kiddies, and one day some concom is going
to find itself with one _whopping_ lawsuit on its furry little paws.


		When you're stuffing yourself at the Christmas parties,
		don't be surprised when I tell you to take a running jump.
		You're missing the point I'm sure does not need making:
		the Christmas spirit is not what you drink.
			--Ian Anderson

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, Net.Roach
My opinions do NOT represent Pacific Bell,
Professional Development, or anyone else.
But I'm willing to share.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.fandom:1255 rec.arts.sf.science:3728 rec.arts.sf.misc:3442
From: Tazzie@cup.portal.com (Jon S Novak)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom,rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.sf.misc
Subject: New Mailing List (TIME TRAVEL)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 14:55:51 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

I AM HAPPY TO ANNOUNCE THE NEW "Time Travel" Mailing List


This list is for discussing the implications of time-travel, its
ramifications, possibilities, etc. from both a sci-fi standpoint,
and a scientific standpoint.  This is for all science and science fiction
fans.  To join the mailing list, send email to:


SERVER@Momad.LI.NY.US

The first line of your e-mail should read:

SUBSCRIBE Time-Travel



It's that simple!   Join today!


--Taz
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: O2NY <O2NY@UNB.CA>
Subject: Re: Heinlein and "wimmin"
Organization: The University of New Brunswick
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:28:03 GMT

In article <1g83rcINNnig@hp-col.col.hp.com> lpj@col.hp.com (Laura Johnson) writes:
>jean@beldar.dgi.COM (Jean Kim) writes:
>>
>> uh... scuze me... what exactly is wrong with wanting to be a wife
>> and having a family?   Hmmm???
>>
>> Just because it's fashionable to be a super/career-woman these days,
>> does not mean that EVERYONE should want the same thing.
>
>Exactly. So why do ALL Heinlein women (ultimately) want the same thing?
>(babies!)
>--
>Laura Johnson
>lpj@col.hp.com
>Opinions expressed are my own, but may be licensed for a nominal fee.
>.
Who do those women want to have babies with? Yes the answer is men!
Men also want to children. Heinlein promotes the idea that ALL humans
be they male or female, want to have children. Frankly, I don't see
what is wrong with that. If there is any greater contribution to
humankind than procreating, I would really like to know what it is.
Please don't try to make Heinlein an arguement for 'wimmins' rights,
if there is any author who tried to portray women as equal (if not
superior in some cases) it would be RAH!

David Szemerda
the cursed SF fan
From: levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Heinlein and "wimmin"
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:42:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BzD2Eo.Hts
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters) writes:

(About Heinlein.)

>To summarize:  I disagree with the extremists on both sides of this
>argument.  I think H was a good, sometimes great, writer, who rose above
>an amazing number of the prejudices and biases that were installed in
>him at an early age.  He was neither the ideal enlightened citizen of
>the 20th century, nor a recalictrant, unreconstructed old curmudgeon. 
>He was a man of above average intelligence, lucky enough to see through
>many of our cultural stereotypes, and a gifted writer.  No more, no less.

>In my rather arrogant opinion.  :-)

I essentially agree. Would just like to add, that Heinlein impresses 
me most for one particular reason. Ever notice how well he, in the mid 20th
century, caught the flavor of the late 20th century?

(Note: One of the reasons I don't like cyberpunk that much, is a
gut-level feeling they haven't really caught the flavor of the
future, at all.)
From: chrisb@lynx.ps.uci.edu (Chris Barrus)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: !@#!%## sequels
Date: 16 Dec 92 20:55:11 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Physics, Univ. of California, Irvine
In-reply-to: std_mcgill@hg.uleth.ca's message of Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:28:43 GMT


In article <1992Dec15.012843.893@honte.uleth.ca> std_mcgill@hg.uleth.ca writes:

   Coul d anyone please tell me if they've read (or found0 ) sequels to 
   Diane Duane's _Door into Shadow_ and David R. Palmer's _Threshold_.
   I've been lookinfg for these for years, and haven't been abole to find
   them up North.  Perhaps they'r e out in the States?

   Micki MCGill
   University of Lethbridge

==============================================

I don't know about the Duane book, but the sequel to _Threshold_ will not
appear at all.  From what I understand, Palmer began working on a sequel -
didn't like what he was doing - and shelved it permanently.  Quite honorable
if you ask me.

Chris

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Barrus - P.O. Box 5115 - Irvine - CA - 92716 - chrisb@lynx.ps.uci.edu

           Sacred cows make the best hamburger - Abbie Hoffman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Laurie Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Auto-buy lists
Date: 18 Dec 1992 17:39:04 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Distribution: world
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: ansible.pubs.stratus.com

    Ursula K. Le Guin
    Jane Yolen (other than children's books)
    Pat Murphy
    Brenda Clough
    Susan Palwick
    Laura Mixon
    Steven Gould
    Emma Bull
    Kate Wilhelm
    Harlan Ellison

In many ways, this is a hard list for me to write.  I tend to prefer
short fiction, and as we subscribe to most of the major
magazines, we get most short fiction already.  My husband Jim is
a prolific book buyer, and buys many new releases.  But these are
people he probably wouldn't buy that I would.   If he does not
post an answer to this, I'd also add Silverberg, Card, Bear and
Benford since Jim buys them pretty religiously and I like most
of their books.

*  In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak *
*  because I wasn't a Communist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I *
*  didn't speak because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade *
* unionists, and I didn't speak because I wasn't a trade unionist... *
*Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up.*
*  Rev. Martin Niemoeller     [Why to March on Washington in April]  *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: mwnorman@bcarh929bnr.ca (Michael Norman)
Subject: Re: Why Heinlein's folk want babies
Organization: Bell-Northern Research
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:22:25 GMT

In article <BzFBvB.3B6@boi.hp.com>, ahill@boi.hp.com (Andy Hill) writes:
>Dave Schweisguth (dcs@neutron.chem.yale.edu) wrote:
>>
>> So, why do Heinlein's folk want colonies?
>> 
>The real question is "Why do Heinlein's folk want to colonize?".
>
>They want to do that because they can't stand crowds, and the reduction
>in personal freedoms that result from crowding too many people into too
>small of a space.  To mangle a quote from "Time Enough for Love":
>"If you put too many animals into a cage, they will go insane.  Man is the
>only animal who does this voluntarily to himself".  This is the viewpoint
>of colonist-type material - a city-dweller mentality would have a hard
>time understanding the quote.

Throughout "Time Enough for Love", Lazarus talks about 'following
the wild geese' - he is the classic wanderer.  Even when he fits
in well with a society (he DESIGNED the society on Tertius to suit
himself), he still feels the need to travel: back to Earth and lots
of other places ("Number of the Beast", "The Cat Who Walked Through
Walls", etc, etc).

I agree that R.A.H. had a few characters he used over and over, but
he did write other characters, too:
   - the bureaucrat in "Star Beast"
   - the wife in "Farnham's Freehold" - she abused alcohol and drugs
         (Secondal, a common prescription tranquilizer of the '50s)
   - the 'secret agent' Fader in 'Coventry' (Lazarus ??)
   - the acolyte-turned-soldier in 'If this Goes On ...'
politians, bureaucrats, rich men, poor men, 'the competent man',
'the competent woman', lots of different types.

Hey, if you want to complain about authors that 'do' one thing
over and over and over and over again, how about Stephen King:
you know, whenever I visit Maine, I find it to be just like
everywhere else: no possesed houses, peoples, dogs, cats, etc, etc :-)

------------
Mike Norman,c/o Bell-Northern Research 
P.O. Box 3511 Station 'C' Ottawa 
Ontario Canada K1Y 4H7 M/S 115      Internet: mwnorman@bnr.ca
tel: (613) 763-7717 (FAX:613-763-7742) 
"Hasta la vista, Baby!" A. Schwarzenegger
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: stud12@cc4.kuleuven.ac.be (Stefan Schepers)
Distribution: world
Date: Tuesday, 15 Dec 1992 18:14:50 +01
Organization: K.U.Leuven - Academic Computing Center
Subject: Name that book request
Keywords: Rico_Cook go

A whole time ago someone on the net mentioned a book written by Rick_Cook
centered around the game of go. It had go terms as chapter titles. Does
someone remember the title/publisher?

Reply by email, please.

--
EEy
stud12@cc4.kuleuven.ac.be
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,soc.history
From: glhewitt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Gary Livingston Hewitt)
Subject: Re: Civil War Alternate Histories
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:46:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.164841.28266@genie.slhs.udel.edu> nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz) writes:
>In article <D2150056.ladc96@erics.infoserv.com> erics@infoserv.com writes:
>>The slave-based agricultural economy of the South was not compatible
>>with industrialization, and this country was bound to industrialize.
>>Unless the South could have figured out how to change their plantation
>>economy to a slave-based industrial one, then either slavery had to
>>be ended (by force or mutual agreement), or the South had to go its
>>separate way. And I doubt the North would have stood for the South's
>>industrializing on a slavery base. If pro-slavery forces lost the
>>battle for expansion into new territories, and therefore their balance
>>in Congress, slavery as an institution was doomed.
>
>I've heard arguments that slavery for agriculture became uneconomical--
>I've never heard any sort of reason why keeping slaves as personal
>servants is uneconomical, but it's obvious that such slavery doesn't
>exist in industrialized countries (except for some scams involving
>illegal immigrants). Any theories about why?

A possible theory is that in a political sense, the abolition of slavery
enables a full conversion to a free-labor economy, that is, a system in
which one is required to sell one's labor-power in a market (or _the_
market, for that matter), in which the relationship between employer
(say, owner of land/capital) and employee is mediated only by a wage.
In this argumetn, the existence of slavery _in_any_form_ tends to
undermine this abstracted relationship, and so the political result is
that capitalists like to abolish slavery, in order that their new labor
system which involves fewer responsibilities towards their employees can
be justified.  This is often accompanied by Arminian religion, by the
way.

This does not preclude, of course, the existence of slavery on the
periphery of wage-labor capitalist regions, because there (say, in
America), there is little threat to the core.  Until the antislavery
ideas of humanitarianism start building steam, so by 1834 you get
abolition in the UK and its colonies.

Just one attempt, I guess.

Gary

-- 
  ++====+========+==========+=======+===++
  ||    |    Gary| L. Hewitt|       |   ||  HELP!  I've been imprisoned
  || glh|ewitt@ph|oenix.prin|ceton.e|du ||  by my .signature!  HELP!
  ++====+========+==========+=======+===++
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: pkeller@sam.math.ethz.ch (Philipp Keller)
Subject: Re: Auto-buy lists
Keywords: tigana
Organization: Seminar for Applied Mathematics, ETH Zurich.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 08:31:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.015418.23388@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, colin@callisto.pas.rochester.edu (Colin Roald) writes:
|> swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
|> >Yes.  Kay is now on my (very short) auto-buy list.
|> >[Along with David Brin].
|> 
|> I'm suddenly curious--what authors are on other people's "auto-buy" lists?
|> Meaning that if you see one of their books and you don't have yet and the 
|> money is in your pocket, you buy it--no further questions asked.
|> 
|> Myself, I've got David Brin and Lois McMaster Bujold.  I also have a couple
|> of probationary candidates, like Norman Spinrad (RUSSIAN SPRING just blew
|> me away) and Terry Pratchett.  (I hesitate with Pratchett because he fails
|> the strict criteria above--I don't always buy his new stuff, partly because
|> I have a lingering suspicion of over-the-top comedy, and partly because
|> I know buying one is going to nuke the rest of my day, and I can't always
|> afford that.)

Harry Harrison
James P. Hogan
Charles Sheffield
Robert. L. Forward
Niven + Pournelle
Allan Steele
Gregory Benford
David Brin
Stephen Baxter
(and all Star Trek books although I don't read them anymore)

pkeller@sam.math.ethz.ch
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: mmetzger@athena.mit.edu (Michael J Metzger)
Subject: Re: Heinlein purchase?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 22:48:50 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.102359.6194@desire.wright.edu> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>In article <burt.724050813@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca>, burt@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca (Burt Voorhees) writes:
>> jahb@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JENNIFER A. HEISE) writes:
>> 
>>>>In article <j7=2l1m@rpi.edu> kasprj@rpi.edu writes:
>>>>>|> Friday is female, extremely competent, and very much her own boss in most
>>>>>|> ways...
>>>>> Yes. And what does she ultimately end up doing with her life? Settling down
>> ,
>>>>>getting married and making babies. She sees this as the culmination of her
>>>>>life; it's implied that this is what she _really_ wanted to do all along.
>>>>>It's a bit of a slap in the face to show a strong, self-sufficient woman and
>>>>>then turn her into a housewife.
>> 
>> You might note that one of the main themes
>> in the book was Friday's search for a family, for
>> somewhere that she felt she belonged.  A big
>> issue for an artificial person!!!  She did not
>> just "settle down" she became involved, and
>> one would presume took quite a vocal interest
>> in her community.  What she wanted was to
>> belong (and was decieved by her first "family"
>> who bounced her unceramoneously on finding
>> that she was artificial.)  The book, on that
>> theme, is about the human need to belong.
>> 
>
>To the extent of marrying one of her rapists?  Give me a break!
>
>
>>>To the people who do not read the book all the way through--
>>>Friday did NOT end up making babies. She popped out ONE, the one implanted in
>>>her. Her infertility was never reversed, though she said she thought doing it
>>>like a cat wasn't so bad-- but she was just as glad she couldn't.
>> 
>> Yea, could end up littering up the landscape...
>> 
>> bv

Could be a catastrophe

						Michael
From: swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: linguistics in science fiction
Date: 17 Dec 92 00:31:43 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <168B9ADCC.UPP201@rhrz.uni-bonn.de>, UPP201@rhrz.uni-bonn.de (Michael Burschik) writes:
|>  
|> Then, you might argue that any sf story featuring intelligent machines
|> or communication with aliens is opposed to the Sapir-Whorf-hypothesis
|> to some extent.

Considering that most linguists are currently rather skeptical of SW, this would
not really be much of a problem, if I believed it!  Bit since we manage to
communicate quite adequately with people form other cultures here on Earth,
it seems as if even if SW if true it does not really preclude communication,
only limit it.

|>The possibility of communication across the boundaries
|> of vastly different languages seems to imply the existence of some
|> more or less objective reality, to which our thought processes can
|> relate directly (i.e. independent of language).

Well, maybe not objective exactly, but I *strongly* suspect that evolution will
drive towards similar mechanisms for dealing with the world.  Thus aliens will
tend to more or less view the world the way humans do (modulo subtle differences
in sensory modalities).

Certainly, unless they have some way of communicating that is not sequential,
the constraints on sequentializing concepts will limit the structure of thier
language to a range not much larger than that covered by human languages.

Remember, we humans show so much cultural variation amoung ourselves that I
cannot see how a viable alien culture could fall far enough out of the range
of human cultures to be beyond our understanding.

|> And would a story centering on language be interesting without the
|> hypothesis? So Aldeberan B might have a most intricate postpositional
|> syntax and lexicalized aspect system, but so what? This might be of
|> interest for a linguist, but it isn't exactly the kind of stuff a
|> reader would be looking for --- unless of course this aspect system
|> was the root of the mental super-powers of Aldeberanians.
|>  
Well, I rather liked Tolkien's approach, just work the language into a story
about something else.

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written