HIGHLA-L Digest - 25 Jul 2006 to 26 Jul 2006 (#2006-114)
HIGHLA-L automatic digest system (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Wed, 26 Jul 2006 22:00:08 -0400
There are 17 messages totalling 551 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Forever Knight S3 DVDs (No HL)
2. HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113) (8)
3. moderator issues (3)
4. This is a test (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:49:03 +0200
From: T'Mar <tmar@polka.co.za>
Subject: Re: Forever Knight S3 DVDs (No HL)
>the Season 3 dvd set has actually been announced.
Oh, hallelujah! I've been waiting and waiting!
I ordered the Pretender 4th season already! :)
- Marina.
--
They used dogs. They used probes. They used cardio plate
crossoffs. They used teepers. They used bribery. They used
stick tites. They used intimidation. They used torment. They
used torture. They used finks. They used cops. They used
search and seizure. They used fallaron. They used betterment
incentives. They used finger prints. They used the bertillion
system. They used cunning. They used guile. They used
treachery. They used Raoul-Mitgong but he wasn't much help.
They used applied physics. They used techniques of criminology.
And what the hell, they caught him. (Harlan Ellison, "Repent,
Harlequin, said the Tick-Tock Man")
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 22:16:49 -0700
From: FKMel <sgt_buck_frobisher@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
I'd be willing to go either way, I already am active
on LJ and it'd just be one more group in the ton I
have already LOL. But I'd also be willing to stay here
since most of the group seems to want to.
Mel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 09:33:23 -0700
From: Elaine Nicol <elainen@inguz.co.uk>
Subject: Re: moderator issues
>>1) Limp along the way we are (the guy at .psu says he'll be happy to
deal with occassional spamming issues or other problems.) or<<
Has Debbie said she is going to stop moderating? I've been off line for
nearly 2 weeks so maybe I missed something.
I am very happy to stay with this list, I've always found Debbie to be
very fair and unbiased, not something you get on all lists. I try to
run my own lists in this way, allowing every to say what they want as
long as they are not abusive. By the way I run a number of lists and
websites including one for Highlander. (not a very active one, I prefer
to come here.)
>>2) Start a new list; or<<
That is always an option.
>>3) Bag it and everyone leave for LJ land.<<
Also a option.
It would be sad to see this list go as it is a place where discussion is
free and varied.
Elaine
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:42:42 -0700
From: Danni Butterfuss <bfuss@wbcable.net>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
.............pokes head up from computer lurker mod............
I have been lurking since since November 1995 and active since February
1996. Debbie took the time to teach me how to cut and paste and set
preferences for using email. ( Late husband used early IE and stayed w/
it; I used and still use Netscape) My first post to any list was a "me,
too" w/ a hugh quote above it. I will stay until Debbie closes the list.
I left for a while and have been just a lurker since I have been back. I
would also be interested in a new list, but HIGHLA-L is Debbie's list
and always will be to me.
Not that my opinion matters, there it is. ...........back to
lurking...........
Danni Butterfuss
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:03:04 -0700
From: Lynn Hocker <penumbra9star@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
I don't always post but I too would prefer to stay. Maybe the list will =
start up again (ever hopeful) lol=20
Lynn~
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:09:38 +0200
From: T'Mar <tmar@polka.co.za>
Subject: Re: moderator issues
>I do have some of the more classic posts stashed somewhere but
>on discs my computer no longer reads.
I also have some. I saved them all together in huge files, some pretty
much without dates, etc., but they're there.
I have offered them to SOME PEOPLE *coughWendycough* before
but they didn't seem interested. It doesn't matter, I just kept them for
myself in the first place.
- Marina.
--
"I don't think that much mucous is ever a good sign." - Lorne;
"Rain of Fire" (Angel)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:18:48 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
From: "FKMel" <sgt_buck_frobisher@yahoo.com>
> I'd be willing to go either way, I already am active
> on LJ and it'd just be one more group in the ton I
> have already LOL. But I'd also be willing to stay here
> since most of the group seems to want to.
>
*meh* I'm already on LJ. I'm on usenet and I'm on
mailing lists. T'ain't a problem either way.
Jette Goldie
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:20:08 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: moderator issues
From: <Dotiran@aol.com>
>
>>>>>3) Bag it and everyone leave for LJ land.
>
>
> Nope. LJ just doesn't do anything for me. I can't get "into" it. It's
> way
> too complicated to find out how to find anything on LJ. It seems more
> "ingroup" than lists.
Not that I've noticed.
Jette Goldie
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:31:21 -0400
From: kageorge <kageorge1@verizon.net>
Subject: This is a test
I sent out an email to the list three hours ago, and it has not
appeared. Either that email has mysteriously been delayed, been made to
go away, or some or all of my messages have been blocked. This email is
to test which of those might be the case.
MacGeorge
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 09:37:20 -0400
From: kageorge <kageorge1@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
Danni Butterfuss wrote:
> .............pokes head up from computer lurker mod............
> I have been lurking since since November 1995 and active since
> February 1996. Debbie took the time to teach me how to cut and paste
> and set preferences for using email. ( Late husband used early IE and
> stayed w/ it; I used and still use Netscape) My first post to any list
> was a "me, too" w/ a hugh quote above it. I will stay until Debbie
> closes the list. I left for a while and have been just a lurker since
> I have been back. I would also be interested in a new list, but
> HIGHLA-L is Debbie's list and always will be to me.
> Not that my opinion matters, there it is. ...........back to
> lurking...........
My only question is - if this is "Debbie's list", then why does she
refuse to moderate?
That kind of deliberate neglect irks me as being irresponsible, and
since she *knows* (as demonstrated by her very brief, rude appearance
during the last rebellious kerfluffle) the list members would prefer to
have the list actively moderated, yet neither does so, nor allows anyone
else to do so, it smacks of a kind of rude "f**k you and the horse you
rode in on" message that I, personally, find obnoxious and disrespectful.
But that's just me.
Since those who have popped up to express an opinion appear to prefer
the status quo, I'll fold my tent on trying to do anything about the
modertor issues.
On a final note, with regard to the whole livejournal phenomenon, I
hated moving to lj, frankly, and was very late in doing so. The
conversational audience is far more limited, and the quirks of the
system mean that it is much easier for a good discussion to end too
soon. Unfortunately, however, that *is* where the conversations are
happening now.
So, I had a choice. Stay with the lists because that was my confort
zone, enjoy the growing silence and be happy in my sense of loyalty to a
dying system, or go somewhere a lot more active. I decided I could
chose to keep up and move on, or stay bogged down in the past, thereby
losing out on a lot of interesting goings on. I may be getting older,
but I try not to be inflexible or to stop learning or changing. So I
reluctantly decided to go where the action was. When lj is replaced by
something else, as eventually it surely will be, I hope I will still
have the mental and emotional flexibility to be willing to change with
the times.
MacGeorge
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:42:10 -0400
From: kageorge <kageorge1@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: This is a test
kageorge wrote:
> I sent out an email to the list three hours ago, and it has not
> appeared. Either that email has mysteriously been delayed, been made
> to go away, or some or all of my messages have been blocked. This
> email is to test which of those might be the case.
>
> MacGeorge
>
Interesting, within moments of my "this is a test" email appearing
(which took about 5 minutes between posting and receiving), the previous
email also appears. It seems our moderator is paying more attention
than I formerly believed.
As I stated in my earlier posted (but later appearing) email, I retire
from the field on the moderator issue.
MacG
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:54:55 EDT
From: Dotiran@aol.com
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
In a message dated 7/26/2006 12:36:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kageorge1@verizon.net writes:
>>>When lj is replaced by
something else, as eventually it surely will be, I hope I will still
have the mental and emotional flexibility to be willing to change with
the times.
Yes, I agree. I'm one of the only one of my friends in my age range who uses
computers at all, most have given up ever being able to learn.
My problem with L J is that I can't figure out where to jump in.
When someone gives me a link I go there and see a particular conversation
that has started to which I have been pointed. But don't you have to be
"invited" all the time? Is there anyway of searching for the
journals/conversations you want? Aren't many of the groups closed except to friends? Perhaps if
I had a mini course on how to dive into L J I wouldn't be so put off by it
all.
[And I'm sorry if I wasn't "meant" to respond to your previous email. You
said that you wondered why I responded at all. That comment confused me because
I didn't take your informative post to be coercive at all. But I didn't
realize it wasn't "comment -on- able " :)
It is just that the first two url's you gave that I checked out were both
talking about fan fic and while I am told you are one of the very best writers
there is in that field, I just am not into it. Not a judgement, just a
preference, and I hope you didn't take offense at my not wanting to read it.]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:33:08 -0400
From: kageorge <kageorge1@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
Dotiran@aol.com wrote:
>
>In a message dated 7/26/2006 12:36:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>kageorge1@verizon.net writes:
>
>
>
>>>>When lj is replaced by
>>>>
>>>>
>something else, as eventually it surely will be, I hope I will still
>have the mental and emotional flexibility to be willing to change with
>the times.
>
>
>
>Yes, I agree. I'm one of the only one of my friends in my age range who uses
>computers at all, most have given up ever being able to learn.
>My problem with L J is that I can't figure out where to jump in.
>When someone gives me a link I go there and see a particular conversation
>that has started to which I have been pointed. But don't you have to be
>"invited" all the time? Is there anyway of searching for the
>journals/conversations you want? Aren't many of the groups closed except to friends? Perhaps if
>I had a mini course on how to dive into L J I wouldn't be so put off by it
>all.
>
>
I can absolutely understand. I had exactly the same issues when I
first tried lj. The key is really the "communities", which you can
search out using key words. Those are sort of like lists - a
conglomeration of 'friends' and anyone who looks at the postings who are
interested in a particular topic - and you can always respond to posts,
but if you don't have an lj identity, you end up posting as "anonymous",
which can be frustrating. Once you establish an lj identity, you form a
'friends' list, which includes people you know and whose posts you are
interested in, plus any communities you have joined. Then you can
bookmark your 'friends' page, and it will always show the last 25 posts
to all those places, and you can read and respond as you wish. Most of
all these things are done by a simple click on an icon.
And yes, some posts are 'friends' locked (flocked, in lj parlance) which
means only those the poster has friended can see it, which is sometimes
just for privacy, but often it is petty, clubbish stuff because the
poster only wants to hear from people who already agree
with/admire/commiserate with them, etc. But then a lot of petty stuff
happened on lists that I didn't like, too, so if you let the negatives
keep you from enjoying something, then I think it is a 'cutting off the
nose to spite the face' thingy.
Anyway, it took me a few months to start really understanding and using
lj once I had put my toe in the water by establishing an lj identity in
a free account (which was a little intimidating, but if you just assume
that you can't really screw up *too* badly, and plow ahead, it really
isn't that bad).
>
>[And I'm sorry if I wasn't "meant" to respond to your previous email. You
>said that you wondered why I responded at all. That comment confused me because
>I didn't take your informative post to be coercive at all. But I didn't
>realize it wasn't "comment -on- able " :)
>
>
I would have expected anyone not interested in the links to simply
ignore them rather than to make such a firm public declaration of their
intention to not read them, which certainly implies (intentionally or
otherwise) taking offense that it was even discussed.
>
>It is just that the first two url's you gave that I checked out were both
>talking about fan fic and while I am told you are one of the very best writers
>there is in that field, I just am not into it. Not a judgement, just a
>preference, and I hope you didn't take offense at my not wanting to read it.]
>
>
/Cacun a son gout/. I have no objection to your *not* wanting to read
it so long as you don't object to or deride those who do. ;)
MacG
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:05:04 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2006 to 25 Jul 2006 (#2006-113)
From: <Dotiran@aol.com>
>
> Yes, I agree. I'm one of the only one of my friends in my age range who
> uses
> computers at all, most have given up ever being able to learn.
Goodness, I didn't realise you were that old, Dottie - my LJ friends
range in age from mid-20s to late 80s. Most of us are in our
50s.
Jette Goldie
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:02:37 -0400
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: This is a test
kageorge <kageorge1@verizon.net> wrote:
>I sent out an email to the list three hours ago, and it has not appeared. Either that
>email has mysteriously been delayed, been made to
>go away, or some or all of my messages have been blocked.
I had recently sent an e-mail to the List which took over a day to appear in my inbox from the List. So you're not the only one.
....Gregory Mate....
gmate@rogers.com
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napoleon Bonaparte
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:02:30 -0400
From: "K. Morgan Ladd" <kmladd@mac.com>
Subject: Re: This is a test
MacGeorge comments:
>Interesting, within moments of my "this is a test" email appearing
>(which took about 5 minutes between posting and receiving), the
>previous email also appears. It seems our moderator is paying more
>attention than I formerly believed.
It is a sad truth of the Internet in general that the amount of time
passing between sending an email and having it arrive to the
recipient (or to the recipients of a listserv) cannot be accurately
predicted--by anyone. Each and every email sent travels via a
different route through the ethernet, and sometimes there will be
hangups along the way that have nothing to do with the sender or the
recipient.
More than once I have sent a very important business email which did
not arrive to the recipient for anywhere from several hours to
several days, while followup emails sent minutes later arrived almost
instantly.
Knowing that, I myself would hesitate to attribute email arrival
times to the positive or negative favor of a list owner.
Morgan
List Witch since 1995
kmladd@mac.com | morrigan13@earthlink.net | www.drgourmet.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:29:03 -0400
From: kageorge <kageorge1@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: This is a test
K. Morgan Ladd wrote:
> MacGeorge comments:
>
>> Interesting, within moments of my "this is a test" email appearing
>> (which took about 5 minutes between posting and receiving), the
>> previous email also appears. It seems our moderator is paying more
>> attention than I formerly believed.
>
>
> It is a sad truth of the Internet in general that the amount of time
> passing between sending an email and having it arrive to the recipient
> (or to the recipients of a listserv) cannot be accurately
> predicted--by anyone. Each and every email sent travels via a
> different route through the ethernet, and sometimes there will be
> hangups along the way that have nothing to do with the sender or the
> recipient.
>
> More than once I have sent a very important business email which did
> not arrive to the recipient for anywhere from several hours to several
> days, while followup emails sent minutes later arrived almost instantly.
>
> Knowing that, I myself would hesitate to attribute email arrival times
> to the positive or negative favor of a list owner.
It's possible you are correct, but call me a cynic, given the content of
the particular email in question, and that it seems to be the only email
so affected. Perhaps she is paying no attention and it's just a strange
and unlikely coincidence.
MacG
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 25 Jul 2006 to 26 Jul 2006 (#2006-114)
***************************************************************