@! Parties?
rath...@inland.com
Is there a (semi)formal definition for an @! party? Are they
usually open to all netters, or is it an invite-only thing?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Katie Rathslag * rath...@research.inland.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"OUCH!," I said, as a hapless victim of superhighway slugbug.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey
> Is there a (semi)formal definition for an @! party? Are they
> usually open to all netters, or is it an invite-only thing?
The way it was explained to me, years ago (stop me if you've heard this):
There is a bouncer stationed at the door. A party-hopper approaches.
The bouncer asks, "What's your at-sign?"
If the party-hopper responds with something plausible like,
"hig...@fnal.fnal.gov," he is admitted.
If the party-hopper says, "I don't have one," he is admitted.
If the party-hopper says, "What?" he is politely turned away.
(Did I get it right?)
Novell presents "Accessing the Internet" | Bill Higgins
Don't miss this opportunity to learn: [...] | Fermilab
How to communicate with over 15 billion users | Bitnet: higgins@fnal
world-wide. --Local ad | Internet: hig...@fnal.fnal.gov
Michael A. Bloom
hig...@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
>The bouncer asks, "What's your at-sign?"
>
>(Did I get it right?)
A good answer, but more concise might be:
If she answers "pis...@gemini.com", she is admitted.
If she just answers "gemini", she is turned away, since "gemini" is not
a fully qualified domain name.
v.k.tipton
>You Hoo! It's me again!
>
>Is there a (semi)formal definition for an @! party? Are they
>usually open to all netters, or is it an invite-only thing?
Hmmm-- you are looking at an evolving process here. The historical
basis for the @ party has been an address in the form "jo.phan@box.
domain", but in the late 80's I was allowed into the party with a !
style address (att!orncrc!ktipton). Maybe it was because I was
the only woman there :-) (Evelyn-- didn't we miss each other by
minutes?)
The biggest change at Chicon (besides the crush of over 200 attendees)
was the newbies from commericial nets like CompuServe. It didn't
feel like the old nerdly beer-bust anymore. We did manage to pull
in a few celebrities, but the @ party had forever changed. We
also had a big problem with people giving us fake ids-- someone
went around downstairs handing out little pieces of paper with
net addresses on them. I suppose I should be proud that we
actually had crashers, but it got way too crowded. Also, crashers
don't contribute to the hat.
You can ask Brad Templeton how he handled three straight nights
of @ parties at Magicon. There was a new fan who held the party
in the ANA at ConFrancisco, but I didn't go since it was a long
walk late at night. Anyone know how admission was handled there?
There are also a few net.group parties that have sprung up at
WorldCon, including some that most of us can't get into (like the
alt.sex.bondage private gathering). I foresee that special
interest parties will become more and more common.
As for Conadian, I don't think an @ address is going to be
enough, so we're going to have a few extra questions for the
greeter. They'll be easy for anyone who's been reading netnews
or Saul's sf-lovers, or who has a general knowledge of the
Internet.
I still need volunteers-- you can email me at ktipton@orncrc.
att.com or even this address (ki...@cbnewsi.att.com), although
this account could be yanked at any time. I'm pretty sure
we'll run the party Saturday night, from 9 to 1. Look for
the @ Hosptitality Suite on whatever they're calling the
party board this year to find out where. Leave me a message
at the con message center if you want to help out.
Bring food! Bring bheer! Bring your laptop! (but we can't
tie up the phone line reading email...) Look for the lady in
the crinkly black pantsuit and the silver tanktop-- that's
one of your hostesses-- say hi!
See you there...
Kimiye Tipton Melissa Wauford
kti...@orncrc.att.com mwau...@utkvx.utk.edu
leave message at Con Message Center or
at Place Louis Riel starting Thursday
Herbert Leong
>In article <1994Aug29....@inland.com> rath...@inland.com writes:
>
>You can ask Brad Templeton how he handled three straight nights
>of @ parties at Magicon. There was a new fan who held the party
>in the ANA at ConFrancisco, but I didn't go since it was a long
>walk late at night. Anyone know how admission was handled there?
>
>
fan. He brought _all_ the party supplies to san francisco from _Los_Angles_
in his car. Everything was done ahead of time as much as possible and it
turned out very nicely....
/herb
--
gr...@futon.sfsu.edu
gr...@wet.com [Paste Standard Disclaimer Here]
Member, X-NeXT Club
Lynn Gold
me running the "Badge-A-Matic I" and the "Cut-A-Circle II"), and I've
heard Bob Larson talk about how he ran it at ConFrancisco.
Neither of them were picky about who got in. If anything, the parties --
especially the one at ConFrancisco -- were so crowded it didn't MATTER;
even if you DID have a net address, it was hard to get into the room!
--Lynn
--
Lynn Gold "net.fogey" fi...@netcom.com
(415) 968-7366 or lag...@us.oracle.com
"I want patience, and I want it NOW, DAMMIT!"
Hazel Boston-Baden
: You Hoo! It's me again!
@! parties at Loscon, Baycon, and Westercon are open parties. They do
their darndest to be the best party at the convention, and typically stay
open all night. They're also known to have "real food" - you can make a
sandwich out of cold cuts, at the very least; often there's hot food
available. And "drinks you won't find at the other parties."
--
hazel...@netcom.com - Home of Margarita Jell-O, an alcoholic use for lime
jello. Email me w/ "request margarita" in subject or as 1st line of message
and a robot will send you the recipe. More recipes, ftp.netcom.com:/pub/hazel
*** For L.A.con III (1996 Worldcon) info, write to lacon...@netcom.com ***
Join for $90 payable to L.A.con III, PO Box 8442, Van Nuys CA 91409.
Tom Galloway
v.k.tipton <ki...@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> wrote:
>basis for the @ party has been an address in the form "jo.phan@box.
>domain", but in the late 80's I was allowed into the party with a !
>style address (att!orncrc!ktipton). Maybe it was because I was
Nope, !s were allowed since the early 80s when Usenet and SF-L got
connected.
>The biggest change at Chicon (besides the crush of over 200 attendees)
>...
>also had a big problem with people giving us fake ids-- someone
>went around downstairs handing out little pieces of paper with
>net addresses on them. I suppose I should be proud that we
Which, I was told, led to the door guards doing seriously something I'd
been doing as a joke during my guard duty stint. Namely adding a second
question beyond "What's your address?" which was "Word association: Kent
Paul Dolan" (this being right after the first sf-l reorg attempt. Anyone
who belonged there would have had a definite response to those words).
>of @ parties at Magicon. There was a new fan who held the party
>in the ANA at ConFrancisco, but I didn't go since it was a long
>walk late at night. Anyone know how admission was handled there?
It really didn't matter. That @ party could best be described as a well
meant failure. Wrong hotel (see above) and an incredibly small room.
At any moment the majority of attendees were in the hallway, and there
weren't anywhere near the number who should have been at a NoCal @ party.
>As for Conadian, I don't think an @ address is going to be enough, so we're
>going to have a few extra questions for the greeter. They'll be easy for
>anyone who's been reading netnews or Saul's sf-lovers, or who has a general
>knowledge of the Internet.
Y'know, had I read this and attended Conadian, I would've been *very*
tempted to have shown up at the door wearing my 1981 vintage first design
SF-Lovers t-shirt and challenged the greeter's qualifications if they
didn't just wave me through due to it...:-) [note: since this was back during
the days when SF-L could *not* be mentioned in public, the words "SF-Lovers",
"Arpanet", "Usenet", or even "SF-L" are not on the shirt...except for the
letters "S" "F" and "L" being rather non-obviously unless you know what to
look for on the shirt. Means the greeter would have to know what the actual
shirt graphic was].
Or you could have just asked who Roger Duffey was.
Brad Templeton
Denvention.
I say it's time to kill them. It used to mean something, it used to be
a way to find people with a particular specialty interest within a con,
and a chance to meet people you had only met online, in the flesh.
But today everybody's online. Well, anybody worth e-mailing that is. :-)
Of course this is not to say that theme parties aren't a good idea, because
there sure are enough general parties.
But I say tie down the theme a bit more. Perhaps parties for specific
newsgroups, or specific aspects of online culture.
--
Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp.
The net's #1 electronic newspaper (circulation 65,000) -- in...@clarinet.com
v.k.tipton
>I hosted the @ party at Magicon, and attended the 2nd ever @ party at
>and a chance to meet people you had only met online, in the flesh.
>
I agree. The @ party we held at ConAdian will be the last for
me. It was lots of fun, but too crowded and too many strangers
who remained strangers. Brett Glass' coffee @ the next night
was more like the old days, and the small room helped keep the
crowd down.
Melissa will be posting the attendance list and the comments in
a couple of days.
I will say that plans for an @ party at Glasgow should be made,
since it will be a great opportunity to meet our UK and European
e-mail pals. How to keep the crowd under control will be a
challenge.
Kimiye
kimi@cbnewsi@att.com
Laurie D. T. Mann
> In article <Cvp2o...@clarinet.com> br...@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
> >I hosted the @ party at Magicon, and attended the 2nd ever @ party at
> >a way to find people with a particular specialty interest within a con,
> >and a chance to meet people you had only met online, in the flesh.
> I agree. The @ party we held at ConAdian will be the last for me.
I'm sorry that @ parties have gotten that out of hand over the
last two years, but I'm not surprised.
Mebbe we need a "!First Fandom" group...("hey, remember the olden days
of Internet, when we thought the net would collapse when they took
away that backbone (inhp?) back in 1988?) You can get in if you know
what ! in an E-mail address meant...<g>
Another alternative---get people to kick in money up front so
a function room could be acquired. Have some munchies and soda
and have a cash bar.
Since fan lounges in the British Isles are notoriously excellent,
perhaps "@" folks could have an "@ Night at the Fan Lounge."
I relate what everyone has said about size and all, but I hate to
see a good party die.
--
****Laurie Mann * * lm...@telerama.lm.com * * Laurie.Mann (GEnie)****
***I would like to believe in God, but I just believe in Billy Wilder***
*Director of Belle Epoque, 1993 Best Foreign-language Film Oscar winner*
* Geek: GAT d@ -p+ c++@ l- u+ e+ m*@ s+/++ n+l-- h- f+ g+ w+ t+ r x+ *
Alan L. Bostick
>I hosted the @ party at Magicon, and attended the 2nd ever @ party at
>Denvention.
>I say it's time to kill them. It used to mean something, it used to be
>a way to find people with a particular specialty interest within a con,
>and a chance to meet people you had only met online, in the flesh.
>But today everybody's online. Well, anybody worth e-mailing that is. :-)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Of course this is not to say that theme parties aren't a good idea, because
>there sure are enough general parties.
>But I say tie down the theme a bit more. Perhaps parties for specific
>newsgroups, or specific aspects of online culture.
>--
>Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp.
>The net's #1 electronic newspaper (circulation 65,000) -- in...@clarinet.com
I've been having this fight for years with friends: the "Everyone (that
matters) is online" fight. The problem is that that point of view is
dangerously tautological. I've seen too many people lose track of the
not-connected world because making phone calls or sticking stamps on
envelopes doesn't provide instant gratification of communication.
Was the @! party at Conadian too large? What a surprise! Parties at
worldcons tend to be too large. That doesn't mean there's a problem
with @! parties.
--
| "...In 1988, Richard Berry, [composer of the
-- Alan Bostick | song `Louie Louie'], finally confirmed there
abos...@netcom.com | is no comma in the song's title, laying to
| rest a question that had baffled copyeditors
| for three decades."
| Greil Marcus, MYSTERY TRAIN
Brad Templeton
no longer a useful significator for finding interesting people to party
with.
On the other hand, neither is interest in "XXX in 199X" though I attend these
parties as well. In truth, the quality of those parties, and the @ party
as well, depends on who throws them, not on their theme. I'm simply saying
that the theme is no longer of particular special interest.
Steve Glover
v.k.tipton <ki...@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> wrote:
>I will say that plans for an @ party at Glasgow should be made,
>since it will be a great opportunity to meet our UK and European
>e-mail pals. How to keep the crowd under control will be a
>challenge.
Erm... this looks like my job ;-)
co-area head for fan programming and as close as UK fandom seems to have to
long term net.junkie...
I've just got 'proper' job in Scotland, so can liaise with local folks more
effectively. Also, we are looking seriously at net.items/equipage and have gey
little shame about accepting loans of equipment/free bandwidth supplies in
exchange for advertising ;-) ;-)
Steve Glover
PS interfan...@smof.demon.co.uk for joingin of fan program mailing list
--
((@@@*@@@)) All the Steve Glover
(*@|||@*) Talk (Fan programme, Intersection: 1995 Worldcon)
||| Of the (__ OVDG, Evolution: 1996 British Eastercon)
\\|||// Market (\/ This space intentionally left blank)
Steve Brinich
>me. It was lots of fun, but too crowded and too many strangers
>who remained strangers. Brett Glass' coffee @ the next night
>was more like the old days, and the small room helped keep the
>crowd down.
I don't know how crowded it got (I dropped by Brett Glass' @ party for
a while at the very beginning, partly because I like it better before it
gets too crowded and partly because I was supposed to meet somebody
later that evening), but I see your point about how it's harder for
people to properly meet face-to-face when the gathering gets too large.
--
<ste...@access.digex.net> ****====== I love the Republic
<GEnie: S.BRINICH1> ****====== but I fear the Empire
PGPrint (finger for 05/94 key) ==========
89B992BB E67F7B2F 64FDF2EA 14374C65 ========== Steve Brinich
Carlos Benitz
V.>Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 14:09:37 GMT
V.>As for Conadian, I don't think an @ address is going to be
V.>enough, so we're going to have a few extra questions for the
V.>greeter. They'll be easy for anyone who's been reading netnews
V.>or Saul's sf-lovers, or who has a general knowledge of the
V.>Internet.
As it turned out, there was no one at the door on Sunday. The only
obvious hat-tip to @ was a piece of paper taped to the wall where people
who were so inclined could write their @ address.
Maybe we should use the @ addresses to create a mailing-list for future
party announcements, and then not announce the party at the con?
Thanks to the party's hosts for that taste of chocolate ice-cream!
___
X SLMR 2.1a #0517 X Slower traffic KEEP RIGHT!
* Origin: The Airtight Garage, San Francisco, Cal. 415-641-0348 (8:914/219)
Erik Olson
>party announcements, and then not announce the party at the con?
>
net, in the right places, before the con. If they didn't see the invite,
then they aren't net.fen, ci?
*****************************************************************************
* Erik V. Olson * This is not a clever message *
* er...@bix.com * All .sigs have a clever message *
* Just this guy, ya know * Therefore, this is not a .sig *
*****************************************************************************
Gabe Helou
: >... basis for the @ party has been an address in the form "jo.phan@box.
: >domain", but in the late 80's I was allowed into the party with a !
: >style address (att!orncrc!ktipton). Maybe it was because I was
:
: Nope, !s were allowed since the early 80s when Usenet and SF-L got
: connected.
So how long before we start having @!::% parties?
--
----- ---- --- -- - - - - - - - <ga...@mystery.com>
Machetes don't kill people. People kill people.
-- NRA (National Rwandan Army)
Seth Breidbart
>>Maybe we should use the @ addresses to create a mailing-list for future
>>party announcements, and then not announce the party at the con?
>>
>The obvious way to make an @ party happen would be posting the info on the
>net, in the right places, before the con. If they didn't see the invite,
>then they aren't net.fen, ci?
There is the minor problem of learning what room you're going to be in
that early. Of course, you could always post the decryption key for
the party announcement :-)
Seth
Randolph Fritz
>me. It was lots of fun, but too crowded and too many strangers
>who remained strangers. Brett Glass' coffee @ the next night
>was more like the old days, and the small room helped keep the
>crowd down.
>
Well, thanks for running it; I had a good time there (& would be
saying this by e-mail, but it keeps bouncing back!)
Randolph Fritz
rand...@netcom.com
Erik Olson
>that early. Of course, you could always post the decryption key for
>the party announcement :-)
Erik Olson
Tom Digby
: >There is the minor problem of learning what room you're going to be in
: >that early. Of course, you could always post the decryption key for
: >the party announcement :-)
: Or publish the "magic words" to get into the party. ;)
[chop]
Another group I was in posted their parties as "business meetings" of the
group. So come up with some "club" name that people reading these groups
will know, and post on paper in the hotel that that organization's
"business meeting" will be in such-and-such a room at such-and-such a
time, members only. "Members" would be defined as anyone reading the
relevant net groups, but non-readers won't know that.
--
-- Tom
bub...@well.sf.ca.us
Erik Olson
>group. So come up with some "club" name that people reading these groups
>will know, and post on paper in the hotel that that organization's
>"business meeting" will be in such-and-such a room at such-and-such a
>time, members only. "Members" would be defined as anyone reading the
>relevant net groups, but non-readers won't know that.
be dicussed...
Boston-Baden
: Another group I was in posted their parties as "business meetings" of the
: group. So come up with some "club" name that people reading these groups
: will know, and post on paper in the hotel that that organization's
: "business meeting" will be in such-and-such a room at such-and-such a
: time, members only. "Members" would be defined as anyone reading the
: relevant net groups, but non-readers won't know that.
Would that be the Discordian Business Meeting?
Dr Gafia
writes:
And boy, do I wish I were not such a newbie/neo here--then I'd know how to
include a quote of what you said. Perhaps you need no memory
refresher--it wasn't the primary reason I was writing.
No. The primary reason I'm writing is to request you to fill me in on
your internet newspaper. If I subscribed wd I find out how to incorporate
quotes from the posting I'm responding to in my response? Or...what?
Tom Digby
: In article <Cvp2o...@clarinet.com>, br...@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
: writes:
[choppage, with some confusion on levels of quoting]
: No. The primary reason I'm writing is to request you to fill me in on
: your internet newspaper. If I subscribed wd I find out how to incorporate
: quotes from the posting I'm responding to in my response? Or...what?
How you incorporate quotes from the posting you're replying to into a
response depends on how your local system is set up. Here, I have a
choice of newsreaders and the one I'm using (tin) is set to include the
entire posting by default, so I just chop out the parts I don't want to
quote.
I think this boils down to finding some local discussion area on your
system where discussion of your system's handling of news, etc., is
appropriate and asking there. For example, this system (Netcom) has a
bunch of netcom.* groups that don't go outside Netcom. The WELL has an
Internet conference. AOL may have an Internet board or forum in its
conferencing system. And so on. Ask there.
--
-- Tom
bub...@well.sf.ca.us