From: LIBPACS@UHUPVM1.BITNET (Public-Access Computer Systems Forum)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pacs-l
Subject: End of Modesty
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:24:04 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

3 Messages, 115 Lines
*-----

From:         Kate <MCCAINKW@DUVM>
Subject:      vanity e-mail and the personalzine

Without getting into personalities (though I must admit that my finger
tends to go quickly to the <delete> key when Hart's byline appears)
I think we are seeing the appearance in electronic form of a strong version
of a print serial known as the "personalzine."  Some readers may be aware
of "fanzines" -- magazine published by and for fans -- primarily in science
fiction though all genres have their equivalents.  Some fanzines are so
strongly focused on the editor's interests that they serve primarily as
a vehicle for his/her opinions, fiction, etc. Hence the name.  BITNET lists
apparently serve the same purpose -- fairly informally up to now -- with
genre-related EDGs for all sorts of topics -- some with such a limited list
of active participants that they DO become personal communication vehicles.
Hart's recent communications would seem to be an extreme form of this.
To the extent that feedback suggests a decreasing readership for ANYTHING
he has to say -- I hope he will consider whether his messages are having
the intended effect. I can pass up a personalzine on the newsstand. I have
no facility to eliminate its appearance on my screen when it is sent to an
EDG other than the Project Gutenberg newsletter, which I dropped from my
subscription list for this very reason.

Katherine McCain
College of Information Studies
Drexel University

mccainkw@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu
*-----

From:         "Michael S. Hart" <HART@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu>
Subject:      Re: End of Modesty:Part I

On Wed, 14 Oct 1992 09:06:26 CDT Clyde W. Grotophorst said:
>
>Am I the only person who's getting a bit tired of Michael
>Hart (1) and his use of the Internet as a vanity press? (2)
>
Just to encourage those who might not wish to say anything
publicly. . .if even a small percentage of the memberships
of any list I am on (much less than 10% would do) would be
willing to send me a note saying to lighten up on notes, I
would be happy to, even though I don't believe in "tyranny
of the majority". . .much less "tyranny of the minority."

However, I do believe that people are less likely to voice
negative opions in public, and that not enough people talk
in these discussion groups.

As far as vanity press goes, many of these notes will soon
be available (publication-wise soon, not this year) in the
ever popular "book" format on paper, along with hints from
me on how to use the nets.

These notes do take time and effort so I am more likely to
withdraw them than fight for them to spend the time/effort
on other things.

However, the current ratio of flames to thanks for a notes
string of this nature is running at about 8.75 note for to
1.00 notes against, and the notes are being widely used in
a variety of classes on networking and libraries.

Please send your votes on Fridays, if you can.

Thank you for your interest,

Michael S. Hart, Professor of Electronic Text
Executive Director of Project Gutenberg Etext
Illinois Benedictine College, Lisle, IL 60532
No official connection to U of Illinois--UIUC
hart @uiucvmd.bitnet or hart@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu
*-----

From:         Source unavailable
To:           PEMMONS  <PEMMONS@WCU>

 Although one may not agree with Michael Hart's every word, he is thought
 provoking; and is there any reason not to wish Project Gutenberg all the
 best luck in the world?  I for one worry far less about the future of books
 than in that of those who don't read them.  My confidence is such that I
 perceive in Project Gutenberg only the expansion of one's options; no threat
 to other continuing needs I see and to what-- admittedly, in the case of books-
 - I love.

 I worry a little, however, about one cloud on this blue-sky horizon which is
 primarily psychological.  This is the phenomenon that people lose interest
 in what has been accomplished and tend to equate a trivial task with a trivial
 issue. A colleague remarked on this phenomenon with regard to a "reverse
 dictionary" of the English language.  For years, he said, certain scholars
 yearned for this resource.  Finally one appeared.  Now there is no interest
 in developing it and very little interest in using it.

 Needless to say, the computer was crucial in making this project feasible--
 indeed, almost trivial to achieve.  When the computer can relieve human
 labor in a relatively mechanical process, who can withhold a hurrah?

 Project Gutenberg, however, depending on how it is touted and marketed,
 could be another matter.  Will the promise be that it relieves the drudgery
 of scrutinizing page after page for a remembered quotation, or of studying
 an author's use of a word?  Or is it that you can now spend $50.00 for 5000
 classics to put in your CD drawer and-- presto-- you have then Absorbed the
 Wisdom of the Ages and have with one quick coup taken care of that little
 item on life's agenda called "a liberal education?"

 Mr. Hart, tell me true: how many of the Great Books of the Western World
 have you personally read cover-to-cover (as we used to say) by scrolling
 through it at a computer terminal?  What the computer can help mightily
 with is something like the Great Books Syntopicon.  But, then, that is
 something which-- if only because it is something which has been accomplished--
 critics now tend to dismiss, justly or not, with scorn.

 Paul Emmons, West Chester University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU