>From [log in to unmask] Wed Jan 29 11:27:45 1997
>Received: from rs8 (rs8.loc.gov [140.147.248.8])
> by rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
> id NAA133948; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:53:57 -0500
>Received: from RS8.LOC.GOV by RS8.LOC.GOV (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with
> spool id 62114 for [log in to unmask]; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:53:44
-0500
>Received: from rs8 (rs8.loc.gov [140.147.248.8]) by rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4)
> with SMTP id NAA67268 for <[log in to unmask]>; Wed, 29 Jan 1997
> 13:53:44 -0500
>Approved-By: [log in to unmask]
>Received: from tundra.wr.usgs.gov ([130.118.177.65]) by rs8.loc.gov
> (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id NAA118008 for <[log in to unmask]>; Wed,
> 29 Jan 1997 13:36:42 -0500
>Received: (jschnidr@localhost) by tundra.wr.usgs.gov (8.6.8/8.6.4) id
SAA23368;
> Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:35:51 GMT
>X-NUPop-Charset: English
>Approved-By: [log in to unmask]
>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:36:53 AHST
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>Sender: Science Fiction and Fantasy Listserv <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Jill Schneider <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Star Wars and condemnation
>To: Multiple recipients of list SF-LIT <[log in to unmask]>
>Rick wrote:
>>> What I mean by this is that all too much (for my tastes
>>> anyway) of the talk on this list is, I'm afraid, trivial,
>>> self-evident, uninformed, irrelevant, anti-intellectual, or
>>> just plain nasty and mean-spirited (and I think all those
>>> adjectives apply to Mr. Prendergast's comments).
>
>& Nicola wrote:
>> Unfortunately, you're right here. Much of the talk here is "trivial,
>self-evident, uninformed, >irrelevant, anti-intellectual, or just plain
>nasty and mean-spirited". I hope I haven't been anti-intellectual, >nasty
>and mean-spirited in my postings, and I am guilty for having been trivial,
>self-evident, uninformed, >irrelevant.
>----------------------------------------------------
>well, i have to disagree about the "anti-intellectual, nasty, &
>mean-spirited" parts - yes, every once in a while someone gets on a high
>horse about something or other, but i think, -in general-, we are quite
>tolerant of each others' opinions, attitudes, & shortcomings. And i think
>we have had some great discussions on incredibly intellectual topics (& some
>not so, too, but then this list certainly wouldn't be much fun if we
>couldn't be trivial or irrelevant once in a while).
>
>i probably sound like a mama bear defending her cubs....
>
>p.s. "de gustibus non est disputandum" (=pleasures cannot be argued) - i.e.,
> to each, his/her own.
>
>ttfn - jill in alaska.
Another way to say that in contemporary Ebonics is: "Different strokes for
different folks."
---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------
|