MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 406 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) "Jake(Rynath *OIB*)"sig by dbush-+AT+-usa.pipeline.com (dbush) 2) Companions by "Katherine M. Brielmaier" 3) Re: Silvermoon and PA by Soljan-+AT+-aol.com 4) Re: acronyms, was RE: Copyright ethics and other fun stuff by Becky Anne Christensen 5) magic/technology by Roger Dahl 6) Why you shouldn't use acronyms by Roger Dahl 7) Re: Coconut fight? by Becky Anne Christensen 8) Re: acronyms by Becky Anne Christensen 9) Re: Out Of Print - Copyright Ethics (fwd) by Becky Anne Christensen 10) Re: Countries by "those little weenies, playing their little weenie games" 11) Re: Brad Pitttttt? Bleeech! by Becky Anne Christensen 12) RE: YKYBRTMMLW.. (fwd) by "those little weenies, playing their little weenie games" 13) Homepage! by Becky Anne Christensen 14) YKYBRTTMMLW (WANA) by Priest 15) Re: Why you shouldn't use acronyms by The Master of Karma 16) Re: Out Of Print - Copyright Ethics (fwd) by The Master of Karma 17) Re: Out Of Print - Copyright Ethics (fwd) by mealink-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com (Kerry Mealing) 18) Re: Companions by "deanca" 19) Re: Hunks by "deanca" 20) Re: Why you shouldn't use acronyms (long) by "Jake (Rynath *OIB*)" <102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com> 21) Re: Theifing Misty's Work (In Jest, Of Course) by "Jake (Rynath *OIB*)" <102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com> 22) Re: Companions by "Jake (Rynath *OIB*)" <102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 01:46:54 -0500 From: dbush-+AT+-usa.pipeline.com (dbush) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: "Jake(Rynath *OIB*)"sig Message-ID: <199603100646.BAA29983-+AT+-pipe4.h1.usa.pipeline.com> "Any significantly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" This is Clarke's Law--as in Arthur C. Clarke ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 96 02:22:34 CST From: "Katherine M. Brielmaier" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Companions Message-ID: <24457.brie0030-+AT+-gold.tc.umn.edu> OK, I tossed this out quite a while ago, but nobody got into it then, so I thought maybe I'd give it another shot, since it's still bugging me. Maybe I'll get a little nibble or two. How do Companions know who to choose? Think about it. There are thousands of people in Valdemar. Of those thousands, there are probably hundreds with Potential (since Companions only choose those with Potential or Active Gifts). That's a heck of a lot of people. They can't *all* wander into Haven on their own, right? And even if they do, how do the Companions know where to find them? I mean, do they have some sort of radar-tracking facility in the Grove, keeping tabs on every Potential Herald in and out of Valdemar? Do they pore over sheets of data, debating over each person's capabilities? I keep getting this image of white horses in combat boots and green berets, setting up access routes and putting pins in maps. Any ideas? Heeeeeere fishy fishy fishy fishy....... (anybody ever see that Sesame Street skit? Bert and Ernie? I laugh harder watching it now than I did when I was 3!) Just a thought from my crazed, overworked brain...and a result of reading *way* too much 18th century literature. Damned Augustans.... 's e do bheatha, Kaatje What has roots as nobody sees, Is taller than trees, Up, up it goes, And yet never grows? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:31:34 -0500 From: Soljan-+AT+-aol.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Silvermoon and PA Message-ID: <960310103134_346811645-+AT+-emout07.mail.aol.com> Mat wrote: >Uh-oh. The NAME has been said. I think that Gyr is about to dispatch >the you-know-who. On second thought, they (TMIW - in case someone >didn't catch my meaning) might have a recruit here. I mean, someone >who actually _likes_ PA and _wants_ to read IIPTNIG!!!!!<--5 > > Whoa. Hold your horses(or Companions.) I never said I wanted to be one of TMIW. A-I'm female. B- I don't like Piers as much as I like Lackey. C- I want to join TLIG and being a member of both would make me weirder than I am. (I didn't think that was possible, but...) I think it would be something like this: "Let's get TLIG!" "Ummmm. I have a problem with that..." The next day "Let's get TMIW!" "Ummm...I can't do that.." And so on. I don't think anyone wants poor Silvermoon going batty. (Don't answer that!) Silvermoon :-0 ___________________________________________________________________ "There's no help here. For that you've got to push F-27." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:25:44 -0800 (PST) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: acronyms, was RE: Copyright ethics and other fun stuff Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Mar 1996, Tammy Harris wrote: > On Fri, Mar 8, Rynath wrote: > > (AND IIRC = If I remember correctly) > FWIW = for what it's worth > IMHO/IMNSHO = in my (not so) humble opinion > BTW = by the way (etc.etc.etc.) > > Tammy > Maybe the comonly used acronyms should be put into the FAQ? It is definitely something that is frequently asked. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:36:19 +0000 (GMT) From: Roger Dahl To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: magic/technology Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Mar 1996, Marissa K Lingen wrote: > I wouldn't be completely averse to seeing more > technology in Velgarth--if you can have a pre-feudal society, why not > ever an Industrial Revolution of sorts? I'm not proposing that > Havens be torn down to build a strip mall--far from it. I think that > Velgarth could do technology the way it *ought* to be done, because > of the moral aspects of their system of government. I'd like to see > Misty play with the magic/technology interaction. Maybe I'm the only > one who thinks this, but TECHNOLOGY IS NOT EVIL. > Laissez-faire. > --Morticia > When you said this I came to think about Patrick Tilley's "The Amtrak Wars" which basically describes the fight between technology and magic in a future world. That really works, and the books are some of the best I've ever read. Btw, I've only got hold of books 1-5 in that series. Would anyone know if there is more and if so where I can get them? -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*# Roger Dahl - rd-+AT+-redleaf.bbs.no #*+- Now Hounds of Love are Hunting ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 11:27:27 +0000 (GMT) From: Roger Dahl To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Why you shouldn't use acronyms Message-ID: Acronyms are not good things, particularly not unestablished and rare ones as those used rather extensively on this mailing-list. There's several good reasons not to use acronyms. The first is that a sentence containing an acronym takes longer to read. Comming to an acronym, the reader has to stop and look the acronym up in his mind, and after that he will spell the acronym out in his mind just as if he had read it on paper, 'inserting' it as full spoken words into the text. So the process takes longer than just reading it directly. For that same reason it's no use trying to shorten a sentence or make writing more compact using acronyms. The reader will fill in the entire 'expanded' acronym making the sentence again. So in the readers mind the sentence is as long as it would have been had the acronym not been there. Misunderstandings. If someone is not sure of an acronym it's easy to start guessing at them. I saw a list posted recently where "IMHO" was "in my humble opinion". I always thought it was 'in my honest opinion'. What's correct I don't know. Stereotyped writing. An acronym is sort of a standardized way of saying something, and when using it diversity and shades of writing are sacrified. An example is 'IIRC' (if I rember corectly) which is much used here. What about "I think", "I can vaguely recall", "I wouldn't be surprised if", "Wasn't there..?", etc ad infinitum... The acronyms makes for more sterile writing. Also, the acronyms are confusing and not easy to learn to newcommers. Just look at at all the mail like the one under here that has been posted recently. -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*# Roger Dahl - rd-+AT+-redleaf.bbs.no #*+- Now Hounds of Love are Hunting On Thu, 7 Mar 1996, deanca wrote: > > OIB. TMIW, LIG Cat People, and all others... > 'scuse me, I haven't been here long, umm, what do these stand for? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 09:28:53 -0800 (PST) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Coconut fight? Message-ID: On Sat, 9 Mar 1996 JR9332-+AT+-cub.uca.edu wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Mar 1996 Raingcats-+AT+-aol.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > Excuse me, but who (or what) is MontyPython? Everybody seems to know but > > > me!!!!!!!! Sorry, you will have to forgive my occasionally > > > ignorant questions! > > > > > > > > > Lady Moonsong > > Monty Python was a British sketch comedy show (and several movies) in the > > seventies. They did spoofs on everything from the Search for the Holy > > Grail (which is where all this coconut stuff comes from) to the Life of > > > > - Elisa > > http://mmm.mbhs.edu/~eshapiro > > > > i am a work in progress > > dressed in the fabric of a world unfolding > > - ani difranco > > > I believe that should be The Quest for the Holy Grail and the Life > of Brian (Brian being the guy who was born in the barn next door to > Christ). > -Schrodinger's Cat > > Actually I think it's just Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I don't remember anything about quests or searches in the title, it explains it in the movie. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:03:06 -0800 (PST) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: acronyms Message-ID: On Fri, 8 Mar 1996, STOKES J wrote: > > To all the Newbies welcome and here is a list of the acronyms > most used on this list, More Acronyms follows behind this one:- > > Lord Jason[OIB] > > >IIRC: if i remember correctly > >ROTFL: rolling on the floor laughing > >LMFAO: laughing my (figure it out for yourself) ass off. > >IMO: in my opinion > >IMHO: in my humble opinion > > > >these are the only ones i can think of right now. anyone else? Well, what about the all important ones?: TMIW- The Men in White TLIG- The Ladies in Green TOIB- The Ones in Black Uhhh, forgot the rest, early in the morning stage five memory failure, must go get coffee, need caffeine, where's the coffee maker...?..... Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:40:28 -0800 (PST) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Out Of Print - Copyright Ethics (fwd) Message-ID: On Sat, 9 Mar 1996, The Master of Karma wrote: > On 7, March 1996 Kerry Mealing wrote: > > [much snippage of stuff concerning the legality of copying copyrighted > material and the reasons for not doing it.] > > I just have to give Kerry snaps for her courageous choice to defend the > position of honor. Copyright infringement is "not good." So for > everyone who is contemplating stealing from our beloved Misty: > > Kenneth Allen Hyde | No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife We;re not contemplating stealing from Misty. We were talking about copying part of Marion Zimmer Bradley's book, that is out of print, and can't be found anywhere by me. Then many people pointed out how illegal it would be, and all the posts about getting around the ten percent were jokes! We're not seriously going to get ten people, and each get a different part of the book, and trade it around, or anything like that! (Well, not yet anyways :) (just a note: previous line was a joke) I'm not trying to steal from anyone! I don't see how it could be stealing, if there is no other way to get it. She can't be losing money because I'm not actually buying the books, because there are no more books to buy. And our library doesn't have them. They did have the Mists of Avalon though, just finished reading it, it's a great book, if you haven't read yet, mentally file it away as book to be read ASAP. Anyways back to the point: Can't remember the point, oh well. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 13:44:16 -0500 (EST) From: "those little weenies, playing their little weenie games" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Countries Message-ID: On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, K.J.F. Loveman wrote: > 'Nother point... I'm slightly confused about what our attitude is > supposed to be to the original Son of the Sun. IIRC in Vanyel's time the > original S of S instituted a some kind of coup, got the royal family on > side and started torching any one he felt like. However in the storms > books Solaris seems to be claiming that she is reinstituting the original > Son's creeds and that the original Son was pretty liberal as Karsites go. > Eh? Does this mean that Solaris only has one bonfire a year or was there > another Son of the Sun before Vanyel's time? > Not making a lot of sense > Kate i think there was another one before then. i remember in storm warning karal (sp?) (me-+AT+-school....) looking over those ancient books and having an incredibly hard time making them out. it seems improbable to me that the writing could have changed that much in only a few hundred years, so i think there was one before that. becky ---------- With my luck, the entrance exam to Heaven will have logarithms on it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 10:55:28 -0800 (PST) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Brad Pitttttt? Bleeech! Message-ID: On Sat, 9 Mar 1996, Rosario Holsen-Baker wrote: > On Sat, 9 Mar 1996, Adrienne York wrote: > > > On Fri, 8 Mar 1996, Tammy Harris wrote: > > > > > > > Even more pressing--who would Harrison Ford play?? > > > > > alberich, alberich, alberich, and alberich! > > > No, no, no and no! Rutger Hauer gets to be Alberich! Harrison > Ford can be........ummmmm........Jaysen? Anyway, he's not mean enough for > Alberich. > > *****LADY JAGUAR***** > Leader of the Cat People > Lady in Green > LGMCB, DHTBB > "The mice may have the right > but the cat has the claws." > ********************* > > Harrison Ford can be Jaysen, I guess, can't think of anyone better at the moment. But Alberich has to be Sean Connery! He would be perfect for Alberich, he is Alberich. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 13:49:35 -0500 (EST) From: "those little weenies, playing their little weenie games" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: RE: YKYBRTMMLW.. (fwd) Message-ID: On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, SHE WHO THINKS GEORGE COOPER IS THE PERFECT MAN wrote: > Hmmmm.... I have a question... how many of these, well, conditions would > we have to apply to before we officially RTMML????? (snip) > > >28) You're dealing with new users, and start telling yourself, "Ground > >boy, ground and center." (snip) Actually, I've never said this as a result of dealing with new users. However, I'm an actress, and I use that as part of my focusing mantra (or, if I have time, the first half of the first stanza of the poem). Does that count? :) Becky ---------- With my luck, the entrance exam to Heaven will have logarithms on it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 12:06:48 -0800 (PST) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Homepage! Message-ID: Well, I finally got around to it, I put made my homepage public! It had been sitting on our machine, and the only people that could get to it were people that had accounts on our machine. But now it's open to everyone, which means I want everyone to go see it! I'm not sure if all the pics and pages are public, I thought I got all of them, but I could have missed some. So, go see it, and if there's anything at all that doesn't look right, or if it is so boring you want to die, please tell me! I can't make it better unless you tell me what sucks. It's at: http://www.valleynet.com/~deb/becky And of you can think of anything that you think should be there, tell me, I need more stuff. And if you think I should chuck the whole thing and start over, tell me that too. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 12:46:09 -0800 (PST) From: Priest To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: YKYBRTTMMLW (WANA) Message-ID: I was hoping someone could send me the full list of You Know You've Been Reading Too Much Mercedes Lackey When... I am finally constructing my homepage and I wanted to include that in the miscellaneous section for Mercedes Lackey. Please don't ask when the homepage will be up, because I don't know when I'll be able to afford a private internet provider. :-) Priest -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-patw-+AT+-clark.edu=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- System messages we don't want to see: Keyboard not connected. Press F1 to continue. Enter any 23 digit prime number to continue -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:01:56 -0500 (EST) From: The Master of Karma To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Why you shouldn't use acronyms Message-ID: On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, Roger Dahl wrote: > Acronyms are not good things, particularly not unestablished and rare > ones as those used rather extensively on this mailing-list. > > There's several good reasons not to use acronyms. > > The first is that a sentence containing an acronym takes longer to read. > Comming to an acronym, the reader has to stop and look the acronym up in > his mind, and after that he will spell the acronym out in his mind just as > if he had read it on paper, 'inserting' it as full spoken words into the > text. So the process takes longer than just reading it directly. For that > same reason it's no use trying to shorten a sentence or make writing more > compact using acronyms. The reader will fill in the entire 'expanded' > acronym making the sentence again. So in the readers mind the sentence is > as long as it would have been had the acronym not been there. Hmmm. Well, I assume that you can back this claim up with some kind of evidence? Frankly, I don't think that there is any. Basically, you are assuming that acronyms are not lexicalized. This is in fact not true. There is ample evidence of lexicalized acronyms (for example, they can serve as roots for morphological structure). Besides, this whole idea that looking up a term in one's mind would "take longer than just reading it directly" is a fallacy. Lexical access (which occurs with every single word that a person reads) is exactly that sort of process. Admittedly, looking up an unusual and infrequent acronym takes more time than looking up a frequent and familiar one, but the same is true of words. For example, psycholinguistic experiments have shown that high frequency words are more quickly accessed in the lexicon, whereas very low frequency words take more time to access. Hmmm. Now that I am thinking about this, I will have to do some research and see what others in field say (who knows, maybe someone has done some studies on this very subject.) > Misunderstandings. If someone is not sure of an acronym it's easy to > start guessing at them. I saw a list posted recently where "IMHO" was > "in my humble opinion". I always thought it was 'in my honest opinion'. > What's correct I don't know. The most frequently attested definition in the literature is "In my humble opinion," but the fact that you don't interpret it that way doesn't mean that you are wrong. Just that you may speak a slightly different dialect of internet English. > Stereotyped writing. An acronym is sort of a standardized way of saying > something, and when using it diversity and shades of writing are > sacrified. An example is 'IIRC' (if I rember corectly) which is much > used here. What about "I think", "I can vaguely recall", "I wouldn't > be surprised if", "Wasn't there..?", etc ad infinitum... The acronyms > makes for more sterile writing. Um. Excuse me, but ALL words are a "standardized way of saying something." This argument is like saying that there is something wrong with using a particular word. OK, now stylistically, it is occasionally nice to use synonyms and the like to vary the text, but on the other hand, functional terms (and most acronyms that have seen fall into that category) tend to be a limited set with almost no synonyms. Besides, brevity being the soul of wit, stylistics would argue for using the more economical and (perhaps) accurate acronyms than a longer locution. If I want to say IIRC, I don't mean "I can vaguely recall," or anything else. I mean IIRC. Same with IMHO. > > Also, the acronyms are confusing and not easy to learn to newcommers. > Just look at at all the mail like the one under here that has been posted > recently. Any new dialect is going to present challenges to new learners. And one expects that the largest problems will be lexical. How is learning a vocabulary of acronyms any more difficult than learning professional jargon, or regional variation. Personally, I don't think that LIG is any harder to learn that "ridding up" Anyway, this is what happens when you start making claims about language around a linguist. Sorry, if I come across as flaming. That wasn't exactly what I intended. Kenny Kenneth Allen Hyde | No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife Univ. of Delaware | between the shoulder blades will seriously Dept. of Linguistics | cramp his style -- Old Jhereg proverb kenny-+AT+-strauss.udel.edu | A mind is a terrible toy to waste! -- Me ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 16:19:13 -0500 (EST) From: The Master of Karma To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Out Of Print - Copyright Ethics (fwd) Message-ID: On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, Becky Anne Christensen wrote: > We;re not contemplating stealing from Misty. We were talking > about copying part of Marion Zimmer Bradley's book, that is out of print, Have you tried to contact the publishers directly? You would probably be surprised. Even when the books are no longer in active printing, they may still be found in the publisher's warehouse. At least, that was my experience with Random House. (Of course, DAW is not a RH subsidiary, so I don't know how they work.) > I'm not trying to steal from anyone! I don't see how it could be > stealing, if there is no other way to get it. She can't be losing money > because I'm not actually buying the books, because there are no more > books to buy. I find it hard to imagine that a series as popular as S&S (and I think that the fact that it has produced an anthology a year for the last 10+ years gives an idea of the popularity) would be completely unavailable. > Anyways back to the point: Can't remember the point, oh well. > > Lady Becky Hmmm. I *like* her! Lady Becky, that is. I have had that same experience of not being able to remember the point more times that I really care to contemplate. =) It takes a special type of person to be able to admit it though. Kewl. We need more people like Lady Becky. The world would be a lot more fun and interesting. Kenny Kenneth Allen Hyde | No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife Univ. of Delaware | between the shoulder blades will seriously Dept. of Linguistics | cramp his style -- Old Jhereg proverb kenny-+AT+-strauss.udel.edu | A mind is a terrible toy to waste! -- Me ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 96 09:19:46 EST From: mealink-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com (Kerry Mealing) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Out Of Print - Copyright Ethics (fwd) Message-ID: <9603102319.AA17765-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com> On Sat, 9 Mar 1996, The Master of Karma wrote: > On 7, March 1996 Kerry Mealing wrote: > > [much snippage of stuff concerning the legality of copying copyrighted > material and the reasons for not doing it.] > > I just have to give Kerry snaps for her courageous choice to defend the > position of honor. Copyright infringement is "not good." So for > everyone who is contemplating stealing from our beloved Misty: > > Kenneth Allen Hyde | No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife *grin* Err, not to be pedantic or anything, but it's "his" - I'm male. :) And courageous.. Hmmm, I don't know about that (read "Yes Prime Minister" anyone? Courageous is one of the most damning insults..), but I'll take it as a compliment. :) On another note, my mailer died over the weekend here, losing all mail received in that time - if anyone's expecting a reply to anything they've sent or posted, please resend it to me (privately, not to the list). No ObMisty, it's monday morning & it's raining. :) Cheers, Kerry. "Few are we who felt the touch of Magic's guiding light Fewer still in years ahead are those prepared to fight." -- Shadowstalker. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 18:26:42 +0000 From: "deanca" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions Message-ID: <199603102329.SAA07101-+AT+-edweb.concord.wvnet.edu> > How do Companions know who to choose? > And even if they do, how do the Companions know where to find them? I mean, do > they have some sort of radar-tracking facility in the Grove, keeping tabs > on every Potential Herald in and out of Valdemar? Well, since Companions are Gaurdian Spirits, maybe that is your answer. Either a diety tells them, or something to do with being embodied Gaurdian Spirits... -Free Bard Oriole ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "You're SO nice! You're not good, you're not bad, you're just NICE! I'm not nice I'm not good, I'm just RIGHT!..." -The Witch from "Into The Woods" (written by Stephen Sondheim) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 18:39:10 +0000 From: "deanca" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Hunks Message-ID: <199603102341.SAA07126-+AT+-edweb.concord.wvnet.edu> > > > Yea!!! Someone else who thinks Brad Pitt is "less than adorable". Still, > > > I could imagine him as say... Mornelithe? oooo! ooo ! ooo! It just hit me! Antonio Branderas would make a GREAT Mornelithe Falconsbane! He's good at being evil. -Free Bard Oriole ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "You're SO nice! You're not good, you're not bad, you're just NICE! I'm not nice I'm not good, I'm just RIGHT!..." -The Witch from "Into The Woods" (written by Stephen Sondheim) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 96 18:55:37 EST From: "Jake (Rynath *OIB*)" <102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com> To: M-L mailing list Subject: Re: Why you shouldn't use acronyms (long) Message-ID: <960310235536_102744.2515_GHT71-4-+AT+-CompuServe.COM> Oh boy, oh boy! Something heady to talk about!! The Master of Karma wrote on March 10: .On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, Roger Dahl wrote: . .. .> Acronyms are not good things, particularly not unestablished and rare .> ones as those used rather extensively on this mailing-list. How can an acronym which we use extensively here be, then, rare? Internet English (cyber-speak, of sorts) stems from regular english (a sub-culture of english, of sorts) and the terminology on this mailing list stems from Internet English in places, couched with other languages (such as Shin'a'in, etc...) In our sub-set of english, therefore, these words may not seem, at least to me, as rare as you claim them. .> There's several good reasons not to use acronyms. .> .> The first is that a sentence containing an acronym takes longer to read. .. .Hmmm. Well, I assume that you can back this claim up with some kind of .evidence? Frankly, I don't think that there is any. Basically, you are .assuming that acronyms are not lexicalized. This is in fact not true. .There is ample evidence of lexicalized acronyms (for example, they can .serve as roots for morphological structure). Besides, this whole idea .that looking up a term in one's mind would "take longer than just reading .it directly" is a fallacy. Lexical access (which occurs with every .single word that a person reads) is exactly that sort of process. I haven't studied linguistics, but I have studied general semantics, something similar. I agree with Ken, though... Words merely symbolize the objects they represent. Just like the english word "apple" denotes a lexical symbol for some type of fruit existing in reality, the english acronym "IIRC" denotes a lexical symbol for the word phrase "If I Remember Correctly." And it seems to me that people use similar recall processes to remember what "apple" denotes and to recall what "IIRC" stands for. And (in a similar vein) what about using non-lexical symbols, like pictures? Or ideograms (sp?), which don't use letters per se, but symbols? (Not on the internet but IRL [In Real Life], that is) .. .> Stereotyped writing. An acronym is sort of a standardized way of saying .> something, and when using it diversity and shades of writing are .> sacrified. An example is 'IIRC' (if I rember corectly) which is much .> used here. What about "I think", "I can vaguely recall", "I wouldn't .> be surprised if", "Wasn't there..?", etc ad infinitum... The acronyms .> makes for more sterile writing. .. .Um. Excuse me, but ALL words are a "standardized way of saying .something." This argument is like saying that there is something wrong .with using a particular word. .Besides, brevity being the soul of wit, stylistics would argue for using the more .economical and (perhaps) accurate acronyms than a longer locution. If I .want to say IIRC, I don't mean "I can vaguely recall," or anything else. .I mean IIRC. Same with IMHO. I, at least, find it much quicker (and cheaper, depending upon your internet provider) to type or download "IIRC" than to type "If I Remember Correctly." Or, to take it further, to type "YKYBRTMML" instead of "You Know You've Been Reading Too Much Mercedes Lackey." And why would we say things that we would not mean? Using IIRC (for example) isn't a requirement, just an option. If I mean I Can Vaguely Recall I would use something more like ICVR. :) .> Also, the acronyms are confusing and not easy to learn to newcommers. .> Just look at at all the mail like the one under here that has been posted .> recently. .. .Any new dialect is going to present challenges to new learners. And one .expects that the largest problems will be lexical. How is learning a .vocabulary of acronyms any more difficult than learning professional .jargon, or regional variation. Personally, I don't think that LIG is any .harder to learn that "ridding up" New learners *everywhere* must catch up on new terms. That's why they are called "new learners." When I learned Internet English, it was a whole bunch of new words. Just like when I started to work in public relations for TCG (a telephone company) and had to learn a bunch of terms dealing with telephony. I try and explain ridiculous internet abbreviations, but there are standard ones such as IMHO and IIRC and others which mostly everyone uses (even outside of our sheltered mailing list). It's like learning lingo for your new job and trying to remember what in the nine Shin'a'in Hells a SONET ring is or ATM phone technology is. There are books out there that explain what some abbreviations mean. Internet abbreviations are part of the "slang" here. Just because the internet is available to everyone with an address, that doesn't mean that the sub-language will neccesarily (sp?) change because of that. Obmisty: It seems that Mercedes Lackey doesn't use these type of acronyms in her writing. :D :D Rynath (OIB) 102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 96 18:55:31 EST From: "Jake (Rynath *OIB*)" <102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com> To: M-L mailing list Subject: Re: Theifing Misty's Work (In Jest, Of Course) Message-ID: <960310235530_102744.2515_GHT71-3-+AT+-CompuServe.COM> Lady Becky wrote: .We;re not contemplating stealing from Misty. We were talking .about copying part of Marion Zimmer Bradley's book, that is out of print, .and can't be found anywhere by me. Then many people pointed out how .illegal it would be, and all the posts about getting around the ten .percent were jokes! We're not seriously going to get ten people, and each .get a different part of the book, and trade it around, or anything like .that! (Well, not yet anyways :) (just a note: previous line was a joke) ! LOL ! LOL ! .I'm not trying to steal from anyone! I don't see how it could be .stealing, if there is no other way to get it. She can't be losing money .because I'm not actually buying the books, because there are no more .books to buy. Bear with me, I don't mean what I'm about to say really, I'm just trying to point out something. (Devil's Advocate Mode On) Okay. In theory, Misty could lose money on this. Let's say for the sake of argument that Misty accessed the list and saw her legions of devoted fans begging for copies of _Sword and Sorcery III,_ simply because it's got that Tarma and Kethry story in it. And she is extremely moved by the experience and decides to help us! So, she gets together with a bunch of other authors and puts out some sort of short story collection, in which is included that story (what is the name of that story anyway?) but no other Misty work. Enter the Misty Fan who has an illegal copy of that story. Would she buy the new book just because it has a story she already has in her possession? Well, from a rational standpoint, no. (Although, on second thought, rational is a vaguely defined term on this list. Being a true Misty fan, you might just buy it anyway) (Devil's Advocate Mode Off) Although, now after having re-read what you said, I realize that you said there was no other way to get it. Oops. .And our library doesn't have them. They did have the Mists .of Avalon though, just finished reading it, it's a great book, if you .haven't read yet, mentally file it away as book to be read ASAP. Who wrote _Mists of Avalon?_ Zha'hai'allav'a! ======================== Rynath (OIB) / Jake ===================== "There is nothing wrong with my sense of reality. I have it thoroughly serviced every fortnight." -- Zaphod Beeblebrox ======================102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com ================= ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 96 18:55:25 EST From: "Jake (Rynath *OIB*)" <102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com> To: M-L mailing list Subject: Re: Companions Message-ID: <960310235525_102744.2515_GHT71-1-+AT+-CompuServe.COM> Kaatje wrote: .How do Companions know who to choose? .. .Think about it. There are thousands of people in Valdemar. Of those .thousands, there are probably hundreds with Potential (since Companions .only choose those with Potential or Active Gifts). That's a heck of a lot .of people. They can't *all* wander into Haven on their own, right? And .even if they do, how do the Companions know where to find them? I mean, do .they have some sort of radar-tracking facility in the Grove, keeping tabs .on every Potential Herald in and out of Valdemar? Do they pore over sheets .of data, debating over each person's capabilities? I keep getting this .image of white horses in combat boots and green berets, setting up access .routes and putting pins in maps. .. .Any ideas? Destiny? Fate? The Companions are magical creatures. This may seem like a lame answer, but perhaps they just "know" who to choose. A kind of magical instinct built into them of sorts. Not like a Jennifer Roberson-esque prophecy, just a kind of instinct.. I always envisioned a Grand Master Plan when it came to choosing heralds... that the Companions would know who their Herald would be when they came to be and they would just wait until the appropriate time to tell them. That also seems why it's futile to resist being called as a Herald, and why few Chosen actually repudiate the responsibility. I *do* like the idea about Commando Companions, though... :) .Heeeeeere fishy fishy fishy fishy....... (anybody ever see that Sesame .Street skit? Bert and Ernie? I laugh harder watching it now than I did .when I was 3!) !!!!! (5) I thought I was the only one who still watched the Muppets. Especially Friday evening, when I watched _Muppets Tonight_ (I am 21 years old) and my mom just *looked* at me, with an expression that said, "?!?!" Especially when "A Segment from the Elvis History of the World" or whatever that was called was on. And my brother still laughs when he catches me watching Sesame Street... .What has roots as nobody sees, .Is taller than trees, . Up, up it goes, . And yet never grows? This is a good one... I'm a riddle person myself and I can't figure this out yet. Thanks a lot, you! Now I'm going to be thinking about the answer to this until I figure it out... and slapping my forehead when I realize what a simple answer it probably is. (Just don't tell me the answer...) Zha'hai'allav'a! ======================== Rynath (OIB) / Jake ===================== "There is nothing wrong with my sense of reality. I have it thoroughly serviced every fortnight." -- Zaphod Beeblebrox ======================102744.2515-+AT+-compuserve.com ================= ------------------------------ End of MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 406 *********************************