JMS: A Rant
Jan
I've got to say that my gratitude toward WB for making TLT at all is wearing
thin.
You told us that sales were going to be key in the decision as to whether
there'll be more disks so why is it that the advertising campaign WB has for TLT
seems to consist of A) word of mouth by the fans following your appearances and
posts, B) You and the actors and crew doing interviews and C) some review copies
being sent out? I'd like to be able to count the appearance that Bruce and
Tracy and Doug did at the Best Buy event on release day...except that reports
are that it was pretty empty since nobody'd even heard about it. Except for
some websites putting up buttons for people to buy it from Amazon, there haven't
even been any banner ads on the web that I've noticed. And as often as I do
searches on all things B5, I really should have.
I was on a panel to discuss TLT at DragonCon this weekend and we actually
weren't able to discuss it at all because I was in a room that mostly held
people who hadn't even *heard* of the Lost Tales before seeing the panel in the
program and came to find out what it was.
Credit where credit is due, there do seem to be a fair number of ways for people
to experience this first offering, whether it's the HD version or On Demand or
buying the DVD but maybe they'd get more sales if there was a promotional budget
of more than sixty cents and a bunch of free copies?
And while I'm on a rant, is there any way of getting through to WB that maybe,
just maybe it's time to stop with the experiments and timidity when it comes to
putting out new B5 material to the fans? They tested the market when it came to
the VHS tapes - Columbia House ran out within hours. Again with the bare-bones
DVD edition of "The Gathering" and "In the Beginning" - a success again, as were
the rest of the DVD releases. That's why they approached you about doing more
B5. Now for the Lost Tales, you once again had to wear three or four hats in
order to get the thing done for the budget they gave you and they even leave it
up to you to *tell* anybody about it.
Is there any way of communicating to WB that you've done your part, the fans
have done their very best, now it's up to Warner Bros. to put up or shut up? If
they're going to greenlight more Lost Tales disks, maybe they need to put up the
money for them in batches of five or ten with enough money to do the originally
planned three stories per disk, and an advertising campaign before and after
each release. It's time for them to show some faith in the B5 universe.
</rant mode> Seriously, if there's a way that we can communicate that to WB, I
know at least a few people who'd write letters.
Jan
--
Here, gathered together in common cause
We agree to recognize this singular truth and this singular rule:
That we *must* be kind to one another.
Citizen G'Kar
J. Michael Straczynski
Andrew Swallow
[snip]
>
> Credit where credit is due, there do seem to be a fair number of ways for people
> to experience this first offering, whether it's the HD version or On Demand or
> buying the DVD but maybe they'd get more sales if there was a promotional budget
> of more than sixty cents and a bunch of free copies?
In the UK I have seen magazine adverts for the Lost Tales. They were
not by Warner Brothers but DVD shops. The one in TV Zone was by
Virgin Megastores. PLay.com ran an advert in a second magazine.
Warner Brothers USA may wish to copy this.
Andrew Swallow
Kevin K
[snip]
> You told us that sales were going to be key in the decision as to whether
> there'll be more disks so why is it that the advertising campaign WB has for TLT
> seems to consist of A) word of mouth by the fans following your appearances and
> posts, B) You and the actors and crew doing interviews and C) some review copies
> being sent out?
[snip]
Sci-Fi channel was running 30 second TV ads for the TLT DVD from about
1 or so weeks before release to about 2 weeks after. Not an expert,
but this seems to me to be mostly in line for the advertising you see
for major theatrical releases on DVD.
--Kevin K
Mac Breck
news:fbifu...@drn.newsguy.com...
> JMS,
>
> I've got to say that my gratitude toward WB for making TLT at all is
wearing
> thin.
A rant...from Jan?!?!?! She doesn't *rant*. What did you do with the
real Jan?
> You told us that sales were going to be key in the decision as to
whether
> there'll be more disks so why is it that the advertising campaign WB
has for TLT
> seems to consist of A) word of mouth by the fans following your
appearances and
> posts, B) You and the actors and crew doing interviews and C) some
review copies
> being sent out?
...plus the back of the program at SDCC, right? I haven't seen even one
ad. for B5-TLT, on TV or in print. The only reason my friends know
about it is that I've told them about it. Hell, I even bought copies
for three of them. Before I told them, *nobody* had heard of the new B5
DVD.
> I'd like to be able to count the appearance that Bruce and
> Tracy and Doug did at the Best Buy event on release day...except that
reports
> are that it was pretty empty since nobody'd even heard about it.
Wow that must have been embarrassing. :-( I feel bad for Bruce, Tracy
and Doug. WB Marketing machine hard at work, I guess.
> Except for
> some websites putting up buttons for people to buy it from Amazon,
there haven't
> even been any banner ads on the web that I've noticed. And as often
as I do
> searches on all things B5, I really should have.
>
> I was on a panel to discuss TLT at DragonCon this weekend and we
actually
> weren't able to discuss it at all because I was in a room that mostly
held
> people who hadn't even *heard* of the Lost Tales before seeing the
panel in the
> program and came to find out what it was.
Wonder if WB will blame us for not getting the word out. Admit it,
would that surprise you?
> Credit where credit is due, there do seem to be a fair number of ways
for people
> to experience this first offering, whether it's the HD version or On
Demand or
> buying the DVD but maybe they'd get more sales if there was a
promotional budget
> of more than sixty cents and a bunch of free copies?
>
> And while I'm on a rant, is there any way of getting through to WB
that maybe,
> just maybe it's time to stop with the experiments and timidity when it
comes to
> putting out new B5 material to the fans?
Good grief, Jan's channeling....me :-O
> They tested the market when it came to
> the VHS tapes - Columbia House ran out within hours. Again with the
bare-bones
> DVD edition of "The Gathering" and "In the Beginning" - a success
again, as were
> the rest of the DVD releases. That's why they approached you about
doing more
> B5. Now for the Lost Tales, you once again had to wear three or four
hats in
> order to get the thing done for the budget they gave you and they even
leave it
> up to you to *tell* anybody about it.
Didn't WB say there was going to be marketing for this DVD?
> Is there any way of communicating to WB that you've done your part,
the fans
> have done their very best, now it's up to Warner Bros. to put up or
shut up?
Don't say it like that, 'cause they'll turn the wrong way.
> If
> they're going to greenlight more Lost Tales disks, maybe they need to
put up the
> money for them in batches of five or ten with enough money to do the
originally
> planned three stories per disk, and an advertising campaign before and
after
> each release. It's time for them to show some faith in the B5
universe.
WB probably just had a heart attack at the thought.
> </rant mode> Seriously, if there's a way that we can communicate that
to WB, I
> know at least a few people who'd write letters.
And after writing them, read them a couple days later
--
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999)
Durkani: It doesn't matter if they believe us. Sooner or later the
truth's going to come out. The truth is...
Kendarr: Out of fashion.
Jan
>
>"Jan" <janmsc...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:fbifu...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> JMS,
>>
>> I've got to say that my gratitude toward WB for making TLT at all is
>wearing
>> thin.
>
>A rant...from Jan?!?!?! She doesn't *rant*. What did you do with the
>real Jan?
>
Oh, she rants plenty. She just doesn't usually press the send button. And I
was already concerned about how many people I encountered at SDCC who'd never
even heard of TLT (B5 tote bags are great conversation starters at conventions)
so when I was faced with a room where the majority hadn't heard of it kicked me
over the edge.
>
>...plus the back of the program at SDCC, right?
Yes, there was a really nice ad that took up the entire back cover of the SDCC
souvenir qrogram. Some more in JMS comics would have made sense. And there
should have been countless website banners.
>I haven't seen even one
>ad. for B5-TLT, on TV or in print. The only reason my friends know
>about it is that I've told them about it. Hell, I even bought copies
>for three of them. Before I told them, *nobody* had heard of the new B5
>DVD.
>
That's exactly my concern. There are only so many people the fans can reach on
their own and the fact that TLT has achieved the sales rankings it has, even
before Amazon started sending emails, is pretty amazing.
>
>> I'd like to be able to count the appearance that Bruce and
>> Tracy and Doug did at the Best Buy event on release day...except that
>reports
>> are that it was pretty empty since nobody'd even heard about it.
>
>Wow that must have been embarrassing. :-( I feel bad for Bruce, Tracy
>and Doug. WB Marketing machine hard at work, I guess.
>
I don't have any attendance figures at all, but listening to the Babylon Podcast
where Jeffrey Willerth went to see the cast and do interviews for the broadcast,
it seemed that there was more than enough time to visit and interview while the
cast and Doug Netter were 'on stage'.
>
>Wonder if WB will blame us for not getting the word out. Admit it,
>would that surprise you?
>
I don't expect that they'll blame (or credit) anyone. They'll look at the cold,
hard numbers and say yea or nay.
>> And while I'm on a rant, is there any way of getting through to WB
>that maybe,
>> just maybe it's time to stop with the experiments and timidity when it
>comes to
>> putting out new B5 material to the fans?
>
>Good grief, Jan's channeling....me :-O
>
As my friend at work puts it, this latest experience was the drop that filled
the cup. I understood it back with the VHS tapes and even the DVDs since TV
shows being offered that way was still a novelty (and, iirc, the DVD rumors did
put a damper on VHS sales). But it really should be obvious by now that 'if
they make it, we will buy'. The message that I want to send them is that they
need to revise that to "If they make it WELL, we will buy."
>
>Didn't WB say there was going to be marketing for this DVD?
>
JMS mentioned in one of the Script Book newsletters that:
"For more information, keep an eye on www.babylon5.com as well as
Babylon5scripts.com. WB will be integrating the internet as a key component
for promoting B5:TLT and we are pleased to be a part of that effort."
And they did update the web page and they did release the Video Diaries. The
web page was definitely going after a very young demographic and I assume that
the fact that the Video Diaries were found on YouTube and MySpace and the like
means the same. Hell, they didn't even include half of the Diaries on the DVD!
>> Is there any way of communicating to WB that you've done your part,
>the fans
>> have done their very best, now it's up to Warner Bros. to put up or
>shut up?
>
>Don't say it like that, 'cause they'll turn the wrong way.
>
In the words of the immortal Matthew Gideon, "Screw 'em."
>> If
>> they're going to greenlight more Lost Tales disks, maybe they need to
>put up the
>> money for them in batches of five or ten with enough money to do the
>originally
>> planned three stories per disk, and an advertising campaign before and
>after
>> each release. It's time for them to show some faith in the B5
>universe.
>
>WB probably just had a heart attack at the thought.
>
In the words of the immortal... Oh, used that one already. How about the words
of the immortal John Sheridan, "Enough is enough."
Jon Schild
There was also an ad in a recent TV Guide here in the US.
--
Sufficiently advanced spam is indistinguishable from content.
Wes Struebing
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Jan" <janmsc...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:fbifu...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> JMS,
>>
>> I've got to say that my gratitude toward WB for making TLT at all is
>wearing
>> thin.
>
>A rant...from Jan?!?!?! She doesn't *rant*. What did you do with the
>real Jan?
>
<snip>
Indeed. She posts only cogent arguments (and the original post was no
exception)
<OK, Jan, I'll be looking for my check any day now...SNICKER>
--
Wes Struebing
Jan. 20, 2009 - the end of an error
Amy Guskin
(in article <46ddd8da$0$24592$ecde...@news.coretel.net>):
> "Jan" <janmsc...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:fbifu...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> JMS,
>>
>> I've got to say that my gratitude toward WB for making TLT at all is
> wearing
>> thin.
>
> A rant...from Jan?!?!?! She doesn't *rant*. What did you do with the
> real Jan?<<
I have to add an amusing little aside to this. When I went into the queue to
moderate and saw a new thread with the subject line, "A Rant," my blood
froze. I mean, contrary to the opinion of some, moderators really do _not_
like bouncing posts. We _want_ to approve them. But when someone starts by
outright calling their post a rant, I figured they were plenty angry about
something, and I'd have to read it really, reaaaalllly carefully. Because
who _knows_ what a person on a rant might say, right?
But then I scrolled back to see who'd posted it, and saw that it was from
Jan.
:-D
Amy
--
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
W. Bush, May 24, 2005
Jan
>
>
><OK, Jan, I'll be looking for my check any day now...SNICKER>
Do you take PayPal, Wes? ;-)
Jan
says...
>
>I have to add an amusing little aside to this. When I went into the queue to
>moderate and saw a new thread with the subject line, "A Rant," my blood
>froze. I mean, contrary to the opinion of some, moderators really do _not_
>like bouncing posts. We _want_ to approve them. But when someone starts by
>outright calling their post a rant, I figured they were plenty angry about
>something, and I'd have to read it really, reaaaalllly carefully. Because
>who _knows_ what a person on a rant might say, right?
>
>But then I scrolled back to see who'd posted it, and saw that it was from
>Jan.
You still read it really carefully, though, didn't you, Amy? Just in case I
managed to slide a really horrible threat in somehow? Or even a terrible joke?
I mean, I might have simply snapped at the stress of being on a panel without
you there to give me courage, right? And then to not be able to make any of the
nifty points I'd prepared (since we couldn't talk about TLT spoilers)... Yep, it
was the stress, you see.
Not that I'd ever take it out on JMS anyway but I guess I'd better get some more
practice at this ranting thing, huh? Sigh...
Jan
kinda glad that JMS is probably too busy to see the post anyway
Amy Guskin
(in article <fbku9...@drn.newsguy.com>):
>
> Not that I'd ever take it out on JMS anyway but I guess I'd better get some
> more
> practice at this ranting thing, huh? Sigh... <<
I think I speak for many people here when I say: please stay just the way you
are, Jan. :-)
Jan
>
>
>There was also an ad in a recent TV Guide here in the US.
>
That's good to hear, Jon, thanks.
Mac Breck
> In article <46ddd8da$0$24592$ecde...@news.coretel.net>, Mac Breck
says...
> >
> >"Jan" <janmsc...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:fbifu...@drn.newsguy.com...
> >ad. for B5-TLT, on TV or in print. The only reason my friends know
> >about it is that I've told them about it. Hell, I even bought copies
> >for three of them. Before I told them, *nobody* had heard of the new
B5
> >DVD.
> >
>
> That's exactly my concern. There are only so many people the fans can
reach on
> their own and the fact that TLT has achieved the sales rankings it
has, even
> before Amazon started sending emails, is pretty amazing.
Just imagine what sales could have been like with better advertising.
> >Wonder if WB will blame us for not getting the word out. Admit it,
> >would that surprise you?
> >
>
> I don't expect that they'll blame (or credit) anyone. They'll look at
the cold,
> hard numbers and say yea or nay.
I can see 'em saying "Well, there just weren't enough fans to turn
enough of a profit. Sorry."
> >> And while I'm on a rant, is there any way of getting through to WB
> >that maybe,
> >> just maybe it's time to stop with the experiments and timidity when
it
> >comes to
> >> putting out new B5 material to the fans?
> >
> >Good grief, Jan's channeling....me :-O
> >
>
> As my friend at work puts it, this latest experience was the drop that
filled
> the cup. I understood it back with the VHS tapes and even the DVDs
since TV
> shows being offered that way was still a novelty (and, iirc, the DVD
rumors did
> put a damper on VHS sales). But it really should be obvious by now
that 'if
> they make it, we will buy'. The message that I want to send them is
that they
> need to revise that to "If they make it WELL, we will buy."
"If they make it WELL, we will buy." means a bigger budget, and if this
one didn't sell well enough (according to them), a bigger budget is the
opposite of the way they'd want to go. Scary, I know. Can sock puppets
be far behind?
> >Didn't WB say there was going to be marketing for this DVD?
> >
>
> JMS mentioned in one of the Script Book newsletters that:
>
> "For more information, keep an eye on www.babylon5.com as well as
> Babylon5scripts.com. WB will be integrating the internet as a key
component
> for promoting B5:TLT and we are pleased to be a part of that effort."
>
> And they did update the web page and they did release the Video
Diaries. The
> web page was definitely going after a very young demographic and I
assume that
> the fact that the Video Diaries were found on YouTube and MySpace and
the like
> means the same. Hell, they didn't even include half of the Diaries on
the DVD!
Yeah, that last part bums me out.
> >> Is there any way of communicating to WB that you've done your part,
> >the fans
> >> have done their very best, now it's up to Warner Bros. to put up or
> >shut up?
> >
> >Don't say it like that, 'cause they'll turn the wrong way.
> >
>
> In the words of the immortal Matthew Gideon, "Screw 'em."
LOL! In the words of Draal, "I like you. You're trouble." :D
Wish JMS could see all the interest in Crusade on some of the B5 forums
these days :D, but he can't go there because of the possibility story
ideas, plus there's not enough time in the day to check out all of these
places. I have a hard enough time keeping up with here, and on b5tv and
jmsnews.
Jan
>
>
>"If they make it WELL, we will buy." means a bigger budget, and if this
>one didn't sell well enough (according to them), a bigger budget is the
>opposite of the way they'd want to go. Scary, I know. Can sock puppets
>be far behind?
>
Nope, simply no more Lost Tales. Because both JMS and Doug Netter have said
that any future disks will require an adequate budget to do it right and make it
better. I trust them and I'd back that stand 100% even if it did mean no
more...until WB misses the revenue stream again.
Jan
hanging on to her SDCC sock puppet just in case JMS needs some sock-ish
background actors anyway. <g>
Jan
says...
>
>>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 20:46:25 -0400, Jan wrote
>(in article <fbku9...@drn.newsguy.com>):
>>
>> Not that I'd ever take it out on JMS anyway but I guess I'd better get some
>> more
>> practice at this ranting thing, huh? Sigh... <<
>
>I think I speak for many people here when I say: please stay just the way you
>are, Jan. :-)
>
Aw, thanks.
Jan
hoping Amy takes PayPal, too.
jms...@aol.com
on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count to
14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
jms
Dennis (Icarus)
news:1188985978.8...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> The problem with any studio is that they're terrified of losing money
> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>
> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>
> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
I'm very glad to hear that! :-)
>
> More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
>
> Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count to
> 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
Dennis
.
Wendy of NJ
>Jan
>kinda glad that JMS is probably too busy to see the post anyway
Yeah, right. Your posts are the few he consistently responds to :)
-Wendy
Jan
jms...@aol.com says...
>
>However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
>several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
>
>More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
That's good news, thanks.
>Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count to
>14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
Hmmm...some things. This should be interesting.
Iva
money
> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give
the
> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>
> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>
> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
Well, given the history of B5 fans' buying habits, they *should* have
anticipated the volume of sales. <g>
> More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
>
> Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count
to
> 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
> jms
Ooooo, another "Eep" game!
-----
Iva
JanMSchroeder
I was thinking about this. Since he's talking multiples it might be
more complex. Let me see what I can come up with. It's been too
testy around here and an Eep Game may be just what we need.
Jan
Charlie Edmondson
Charlie
robin...@gmail.com
Fantastic, cheers!
Look forward to hearing more as and when you can say anything, on B5
and other fronts. :^)
JanMSchroeder
Charlie Edmondson wrote:
>
> I was really, really tempted to ask Joe if this was an Eep at SDCC...
>
> Charlie
If you mean Eep as in news of new B5 disk or series, as I recall he
made it clear that whatever he couldn't talk about *wasn't* B5
related.
Good news about other JMS stuff...Hmm...guess we really need to come
up with a new name.
Jan
Mac Breck
> In article <46de12a8$0$24580$ecde...@news.coretel.net>, Mac Breck
says...
> >
> >
> >"If they make it WELL, we will buy." means a bigger budget, and if
this
> >one didn't sell well enough (according to them), a bigger budget is
the
> >opposite of the way they'd want to go. Scary, I know. Can sock
puppets
> >be far behind?
> >
>
> Nope, simply no more Lost Tales. Because both JMS and Doug Netter
have said
> that any future disks will require an adequate budget to do it right
and make it
> better. I trust them and I'd back that stand 100% even if it did mean
no
> more...until WB misses the revenue stream again.
>
> Jan
> hanging on to her SDCC sock puppet just in case JMS needs some
sock-ish
> background actors anyway. <g>
That was merely an attempt at humor. At least I got a <g> out of you.
:-)
Mac Breck
message news:31ksd3926s6f8h2d6...@4ax.com...
> ...one of the last resisting the No-DRM meme....
? How's about a def.? It's customary to define an acronym before using
it, unless it's widely known in the area where you're using it. DRM
isn't ringing any bells for me, and I've been here awhile.
Mac Breck
> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>
> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>
> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
They continue to underestimate B5.
Matt Ion
> "Aleks A.-Lessmann" <XaXlX...@lessmann-consulting.com> wrote in
> message news:31ksd3926s6f8h2d6...@4ax.com...
>
>
>> ...one of the last resisting the No-DRM meme....
>
> ? How's about a def.? It's customary to define an acronym before using
> it, unless it's widely known in the area where you're using it. DRM
> isn't ringing any bells for me, and I've been here awhile.
Digital Rights Management. The thing that limits your usage of music
bought online.
Mac Breck
Amy Guskin
(in article <46ded350$0$24592$ecde...@news.coretel.net>):
> "Aleks A.-Lessmann" <XaXlX...@lessmann-consulting.com> wrote in
> message news:31ksd3926s6f8h2d6...@4ax.com...
>
>
>> ...one of the last resisting the No-DRM meme....
>
> ? How's about a def.? It's customary to define an acronym before using
> it, unless it's widely known in the area where you're using it. DRM
> isn't ringing any bells for me, and I've been here awhile. <<
Digital rights management.
Doug Freyburger
> <jmsa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count
> > to 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
Maybe even a Ben Bova reference? Co-author projects are often
fabulous ...
Iva
> Charlie Edmondson wrote:
>>
>> I was really, really tempted to ask Joe if this was an Eep at
>> SDCC...
>>
> made it clear that whatever he couldn't talk about *wasn't* B5
> related.
>
> Good news about other JMS stuff...Hmm...guess we really need to come
> up with a new name.
The Non-Eep game? <g>
-----
Iva (sorry, I just couldn't resist it)
Andrew Swallow
> The problem with any studio is that they're terrified of losing money
> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>
> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>
> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
One order of magnitude is 10 times
Two orders of magnitude is 100 times
Three orders of magnitude is 1000 times
Four orders of magnitude is 10,000 times
Allowing for Hollywood hype they may have sold 10 to 100 times as
many B5:TLT DVDs as they feared.
>
> More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
>
Two episodes a year would be one every 6 months possibly in the summer
and winter.
Four episodes a year would be a new one every season.
Twelve episodes a year would be one a month and will have the
side effect of turning the DVD shops into a "tv" channel. Magazines
are published this often.
> Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC,
> count to
> 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
Obviously a riddle, on the surface it appears to say in about
two weeks time a new science fiction show will be announced.
Other possibilities.
"14" "take" one is 13, thirteen in the title normally signifies
a horror show.
"Skies" could refer to the Sky Network, so the new show may be
for one of the satellite channels.
"14 days give" could be 15 nights. That sounds like a porn film
but JMS does not do porn.
"give or take" could be a quiz show, a big change of direction
for JMS.
>
> jms
>
>
Richard Fallstrom
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> <jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1188985978.8...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> > The problem with any studio is that they're terrified of losing money
> > on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
> > ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> > end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
> >
> > Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
> >
> > However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> > several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
>
> They continue to underestimate B5.
Or the power we fans truly hold...
Rick (sometimes is a GentleRF and sometimes is not)
Richard Fallstrom
<"jms...@aol.com"> wrote:
> The problem with any studio is that they're terrified of losing money
> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>
> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>
> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
>
> More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
>
as if a bean counting suit will honestly tell you what it means...
> Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count to
> 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
> jms
>
>
Will do Joe.
Wes Struebing
>In article <jtrrd3tscuisn5l0c...@4ax.com>, Wes Struebing says...
>>
>>
>><OK, Jan, I'll be looking for my check any day now...SNICKER>
>
>Do you take PayPal, Wes? ;-)
>
Of course! (and you got in at a good time. I've got a special
going...<G>)
--
Wes Struebing
Jan. 20, 2009 - the end of an error
Wes Struebing
You're gonna be on a shuttle launch? Kewl!
<grinning>
Wes Struebing
Ot-eep? (pronounced oh teep)
As in off-topic eep?
(slinking away)
Wes Struebing
<am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
<JMS comments-or not-snipped>
>
>Two episodes a year would be one every 6 months possibly in the summer
>and winter.
>Four episodes a year would be a new one every season.
>Twelve episodes a year would be one a month and will have the
>side effect of turning the DVD shops into a "tv" channel. Magazines
>are published this often.
>
....and they'd think it's a movement,. And that's what it is; the JMS
"take over the network" movement, and all it take to join is to sing
out the next time the chorus comes around and...
....oops...
Brian O'Neill
Yeah...it could be on the order of "Sales were great...thanks for the
money. Now we have the capital to do that Dune remake..."
> Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count to
> 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
Oh, not again...*ducks and covers*
-Brian
Shabaz
> The problem with any studio is that they're terrified of losing money
> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>
> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>
> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
>
> More on this when I know more about what this actually *means*.
>
I'm really happy to hear that they apparently are happy with the sales
numbers. Though I quite agree with Jan; it seems TLT has very much
been approached as something for the old fans rather than banking on
bringing in new ones, but that doesn't mean all the old fans
automatically know of it simply because they were really into the
original show. The people who hang out in places like this or who
would otherwise actively seek out B5 news are probably a small subset
of all B5 fans. And unless you happened to catch some of the articles
in some niche publications, with the lack of some focussed marketing
the news of the existence of TLT could've very easily passed you by.
> Meanwhile, on some of the things I couldn't announce at SDCC, count to
> 14 days give or take and start watching the skies....
>
> jms
Hmmm... very, very curious what this will end up being. :)
-Shabaz
Chris
JanMSchroeder <janmsc...@aol.com> wrote:
> I was thinking about this. Since he's talking multiples it might be
> more complex. Let me see what I can come up with. It's been too
> testy
well, testes usually come in sets of two. well, they also come another
way, but that's an entirely different spelling of the verb.
>around here and an Eep Game may be just what we need.
well, "start watching the skies" could mean a lot of things...
perhaps that asteroid named after JMS is on it's way to earth?
perhaps the migrating birds will start migrating a little early and
dropping coconuts on us all? of course, the european swallow IS
non-migratory.
perhaps JMS is in contact with the centaurum and they are about to come
give us a visit?
perhaps that "b5 artifact to be carried into space" thread was more
prescient than we all knew, and JMS is going into space?
perhaps JMS is going to be writing the next Toy Story/Buzz Lightyear
movie? "reach for the sky!" being woody's catchphrase.
JMS himself is pretty tall, so it's possible that maybe he's just saying
that he'll be holding a giant cardboard sign over his head and we'll all
have to look up to see it?
maybe he finally found lucy?
perhaps he means for us to think of this phrase... "look! up in the sky!
it's a bird! it's a plane!" (my personal favorite choice)
or, maybe he was being literal, and simply wants us, in two weeks, to go
to our music player of choice, select "Deep Purple, Watching The Sky"
and press "start"
...Chris
Wendy of NJ
<am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
*brain explodes*
Good Lord, man! I'll choose to believe that in about a fortnight,
we'll hear an announcement regarding yet ANOTHER project or 6 from our
favorite writer/producer.
Remind me never to have a discussion about religion with you. ;-)
-Wendy (pleased to be able to use the word "fortnight" in a sentence)
Kurt Ullman
Wendy of NJ <voxw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -Wendy (pleased to be able to use the word "fortnight" in a sentence)
Cool usage. My recent "win" was actually to be able to use flapdoodle
in context. (g).
alvin...@gmail.com
I'm sure the fanbase thinktank has looked at this question from more
angles than I have... But I seriously wonder what we can do to offer
more fan support and exposure?
Which brings me to a thought, regarding the Internet as a medium...
B5:TLT materials... are there right-to-use licenses with them? There
are, of course, various community supported forms of technology and
tools out there which are constrained by strict licensing.
Image use on Wikipedia comes to mind, as well as various others.
What are we as a fanbase allowed to use? And what are the RTU
governance?
If I were to make, say, a desktop theme which was B5-centric... Would
it be considered suitable for Open Source?
Cheers,
- alvinc
Josh Hill
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
><jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:1188985978.8...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>> The problem with any studio is that they're terrified of losing money
>> on something, anything, so they hedge their bets...they don't give the
>> ad money you want because they're afraid sales won't support it, and
>> end p with a self-fulfilling prophecy more times than not.
>>
>> Your appraisal of the situation with WB is spot on.
>>
>> However, despite this, they are most pleased as sales have been
>> several orders of magnitude beyond what they anticipated.
>
>They continue to underestimate B5.
No ability to tell the truly good from the superficial, methinks. They
don't understand the difference between a show that attracts 10
million wrestling fans and a show that attracts 10 million people
looking for good television: to them, they're the same, because it's
easier to compare numbers than it is to assess art. And then they're
surprised when the wrestling fans don't buy the DVD's for their show,
and the good television people do buy the DVD's for theirs. And then
they still won't understand. They'll assign the good show "cult"
status, on the assumption that the folks who are watching it are being
hypnotized by snakes or something. They'll hand the show to executive
producers whose last names begin with "B" and let them turn it into
fluff for wrestling fans and wonder why no one wants to watch it
anymore.
Ah, well, rant mode off. It's always easier to second guess the folks
whose careers depend on not making a mistake than it is to be those
folks, and this is good news, not bad! Reason to hope for many more
stories, each with the munificent budget and cast of millions they
deserve.
--
Josh
"This keeps out the stalkers, the obsessed, the dysfunctional, the abusive, and
the general, all-around jerks who get off on turning a group so toxic that nobody's
left after a while but the person and some of his associates or collaborators.
It's the slow poisoning of a group." - J. Michael Straczynski
StarFuryG7
>
> Much silliness.
>
> Against my better judgment, as the person for whose benefit this group
> was formed in the first place, let me chime in here for a moment.
>
> It's been said, repeatedly, that this group functions for all intents
> and purposes as a private party.
And yet it's open to the public, since anyone can breeze in and
join.
> Those who the group want to hang
> around are invited in to play; those who the group doesn't want to
> hang around, or who behave in ways obnoxious to the hosts and guests
> are not invited in to play.
That's a clique.
> This keeps out the stalkers, the
> obsessed, the dysfunctional, the abusive, and the general, all-around
> jerks who get off on turning a group so toxic that nobody's left after
> a while but the person and some of his associates or collaborators.
> It's the slow poisoning of a group.
You're giving me far too much credit with respect to the latter, and
I resent being lumped into that group of misfits altogether in point of
fact. But no matter --I'm just one person who is clearly outnumbered here,
and I have no "collaborators" as surely you have noticed.
> This newsgroup has been along for a very long time, operating under
> the most onerous and difficult circumstances, and always honorably,
> the moderators always ready to give the benefit of the doubt
> repeatedly, despite often doubting the benefit.
Very poetic, but you're taking it upon yourself to speak on their
behalf only. Who speaks for the others who have had encounters with them
that you were not there to either witness or even hear about? Your
contention is that they have never done anything wrong, but they're people
who are just as fallible and prone to basic human weaknesses as most anyone
else out there in the world, and it is quite simply impossible for you to
know everything that has taken place between them and others, either
privately, or here within the group too for that matter. There is simply no
way you can possibly be that omniscient, sir, as to know it all.
> And every so often, some loudmouth breezes into town and tries to make
> the discussion all about himself, about how he thinks he should be
> treated...he shouts at the moderators to maintain standards that he
> himself shows no desire to meet, as though they were employees
> answerable to him...when in fact they are not answerable to anyone
> other than the quiet turning of their own considered conscience.
Even though they are the ones in charge, have placed themselves
voluntarily into that position, and therefore have both a duty and an
obligation to carry out their assigned responsibilities honorably and
according to the rules and guidelines that they either established
themselves, or agreed to abide by and enforce once they took on the job, and
which involves public relations as a matter of course. So yes, like it or
not, they are also answerable to others, especially the people they
summarily impose judgment and punishment on, allowing little-to-no recourse
to the so-called "offenders" who dared to disagree with them about any of
their edicts.
If "standards" were really so sacred to the people here they
wouldn't be breaking the rules they expect others to follow left and right
just to dump on me, and moderators wouldn't be boldfaced lying to the member
that it's happening to. I'm supposed to care about following rules when they
don't give a damn about breaking them and will do so at my expense, and then
lie right to my face about it as though I'm just an idiot? Yeah, right --I
don't think so.
> You say you got dog piled. Well, yeah, when you crash a party and
> start behaving obnoxiously toward the guests and the hosts, you get
> dog-piled. Where in this is the surprise? Where the unfairness? You
> seem to feel you can act any way you want, and if anybody so much as
> says a word about your boorish and inappropriate behavior, it's
> *their* fault, *they're* being bad and unfair and censorious.
>
> Nonsense.
Actually, No ...for starters, I don't even agree with your
description of the situation, because all I did initially was express a
complaint--and not even all that harsh of a complaint at that if you were to
actually go back and take a look at it. I did not carry on, or stamp my
feet, or behave "obnoxiously" in the way you describe. I simply let it be
known that I felt something was perhaps amiss. And I didn't accuse anyone of
anything initially either for that matter. Now, people here could have
reacted to what I had to say in any number of ways, starting with their
simply ignoring it as one possibility. Or they could have acknowledged it,
said something along the lines of "Sorry you feel that way, but maybe the
group no longer functions the way you remember it." However, they chose the
"dog pile" approach, which was very "rude" and "obnoxious" on their parts in
return, and which in essence you certainly appear to be saying I deserved,
so you're advocating a "two wrongs make a right" defense because it's the
best you've got, and it's utterly indefensible on your part.
> The problem is you. You like being at the center of attention. You
> like twisting arguments around so that you look like the offended
> party when you are the one being offensive.
How closely did you actually even pay attention to this thread from
where the ongoing argument began? Or did you even pay any attention to it at
all, jumping in only much later on, and basing your conclusions on what
others--especially your most trusted moderators--have said about me
according to their own biased and "toxic" agendas much further in?
You claim I like twisting arguments around supposedly, yet it was
your friends who were intent on putting words in my mouth, asserting things
left and right that I never said (I repeatedly asked your favored moderator
to point out where I called her a liar for instance, and yet she never
bothered, because she couldn't, because I never said it), they were the ones
deliberately mischaracterizing things I actually did say and twisting them
into something other than what I meant.
> You like making people
> upset so that when they *act* upset you can gleefully point out that
> they're being upset.
Voicing a simple straightforward complaint may well make some people
"upset," but grownups actually know how to deal with it without acting like
an out of control mob of spoiled children out to make sure that there's a
public lynching. The people here chose that latter course, however, and
that, sir, was a decision that _they_ chose to make, not me on their behalf.
> You want the discussion to be about *you*,
That just isn't true --your friends reveled in turning it all into a
spectacle about me, but I would have been more than content had the whole
thing just dropped after my having said what was on my mind.
> about how other people
> should live up to *your* standards (which are nonexistent)
And you base that latter conclusion about my having "no standards" on
what exactly --my actions here, predominantly in response to a bunch of
nasty, hostile people out to make me so disgusted that I would simply leave,
completely fed up because I dared to open my mouth and express a criticism
that they can't take hearing? Or is it that you're saying I have "no
standards" period?
Either way, how dare you.
> and justify
> why *you* should remain here before you "waste your time" in the
> company of such individuals.
Actually, I stated that after I had been placed on "hand moderation"
and wasn't sure if my messages _would be allowed to pass beyond the
gatekeepers_, so you, like so many others here, have just grossly
mischaracterized what I was actually saying at the time --something I've
grown very accustomed to here in this particular "group".
If you're going to take the time to write a long message with the
intent of posting it to a public board, but it won't show up, and you know
this because the people in charge have made it clear by their actions and
"warnings," is it actually worth sitting there, spending your time writing
something most people won't get to see and read?
That's what I was talking about the time, NOT that you bothered to
actually notice obviously.
> (In terms, I might add, that I find
> curiously familiar.)
Isn't that nice. Have any bells gone off for you now? Or are you
still stuck in the cobwebs up there?
> The people in this group have nothing to prove to you. The moderators
> have nothing to prove to you.
Courtesy is a two-way street, and if they expect common courtesy,
then they should behave courteously themselves. And my experience here with
them has shown me that their special brand of 'courtesy' is reserved for a
very select group of people.
I've also grown very tired of the "Your post must have disappeared
into the ether" malarkey every time a message of mine does not appear here;
regardless of what account, newsreader or service I happen to post it from.
I have been here on and off for _a long time_ ...almost as long as you have
in fact, though not as consistently, but nonetheless, a pattern has emerged
that I no longer care to ignore or simply tolerate. I made that known; it
was not the end of the world, however, and should not have been treated as
such, and my having spoken my mind on the matter dos not justify the weeks
of berating nonsense that ensued as a result no matter how you try to
justify it.
> They have worked for *years* to make
> and preserve this as a pleasant place for people to come and talk.
And you consider their actions in this very long thread as an all
around exemplary case in point?
If so, then that sure does explain a lot.
Look, I proved previously that one of your precious moderators had
made out-and-out false statements to me, claiming that I had not been flamed
by anyone who took part in this thread, and when I replied with examples
(that's called "proof" by the way), my posts were no longer allowed through.
Whose fault is that --mine, or the moderator's? She's there to enforce a set
of rules of conduct, but then only acknowledges the conduct in a very
one-sided way, and the guy who has been targeted by them, and most everyone
else here, is then told flat-out lies right to his face rather than just
seeing one of them simply acknowledge the truth. It's one thing if she
didn't want to apologize to me because she didn't feel she owed me an
apology in spite of the obvious, but then just say that, and don't lie to my
face and then shut me out when I provide evidence.
> You are a guest in someone else's home. Act like it. Or frankly, get
> out.
>
> jms
I'm not going to apologize for expressing a complaint, and a rather
benign one at that, and you haven't justified their collective ugly conduct
in my direction here in recent weeks.
And this isn't "someone else's home" either. It's a public board that
anyone can read or take part in if they choose to join --unless they get
shut out by a small group of people in charge.
And rather than "a private party," I have a better analogy for you. I
see it more like a small town (in fact, I believe you even figuratively
referred to this place as a "town" earlier on here), with me as someone on
vacation who was merely passing through at the time, decided to stop and get
out of my car to stretch my legs, get a cup of coffee at the local coffee
shop, saw fit to express a complaint about something at the counter, and the
next thing I know I have the Town sheriff, his deputy, and an angry mob of
the Town folk all looking to run me out of town, if not worse, over
something I simply said. Disgusting. You should all be ashamed of
yourselves. Forget my behavior. Look at your own.
I recall themes such as this --the little guy voicing dissent about
the government in power-- and being subjugated, oppressed and punished for
having done so in your work. However, it seems to me that if you're going to
preach about themes such as that in what you write, then you shouldn't be a
hypocrite by being so closed to others speaking their minds and expressing
themselves in ways that you may disagree with in a small forum such as this,
specially when they're being pounced on by a group of malc0ntents and are
outnumbered.
=======================
from the "Newsgroup back" (and so-called) "Common Courtesy" thread
=======================
StarFuryG7
> No. You really don't understand the difference between differing opinions
> and fl^ming. I owe you nothing.
This is just more in the way of the usual condescending nonsense
that I've been treated to here during my recent brief stay. However, if
you'll allow me for a moment nonetheless, to contradict you with the
following quotes:
====================================
Don't let the door hit you
in the ass on your way out, kthxbye.
Matt Ion s Aug 17, 10:57 am
====================================
And, why can I not think of any good insults to add to Amy when I want
to... 8-)
Like, maybe, You talk funny! and your momma dresses you funny...
Naw, too generic. I mean, we can REALLY insult Amy much beter than this
toaster... ;-)
Charlie Edmondson
Aug 17, 11:54 am
====================================
My two favorite (although they obviously do not apply to Amy) are"
Were you toilet trained at gunpoint?
Which weekend do you have custody of your family's brain cell.
Kurt Ullman Aug 17, 12:11 pm
====================================
You've obviously exchanged "having a life" for this memory.
Or maybe it's just selective memory, to go
with your selective censorship.
Matt Ion Aug 17, 9:33 pm
====================================
That's where I stopped going through the thread --are you going to
sit there, with a straight face, and tell me that does not constitute
"fl^ming," even though they're all clearly insults made at my expense?
You were saying, or should I dig a deeper?
I'm also fond of the one where I was called "a boor" by another of
your friendly members here.
> And incidentally, please stop with the "Miss Guskin" and the "my dear" and
> the like. It really grates on my nerves. We're all quite friendly here,
> dude -- just call me "Amy" or nothing at all.
Oh, so you're commenting on what you perceive to be an apparent air
of _condescension_, are you, even though technically, I've broken no rules
or guidelines for you to speak of in relation to the group FAQ and/or
charter?
Gee, how interesting, _Amy_.
> >>> because whether you
> >> believe it or not, your understanding of this is _incorrect_.
>
> > Then show me with irrefutable, incontrovertible evidence --
> > cite a source, provide a link, do _something_ rather than expecting me
> > to just take your words for it necessarily. <<
>
> Sorry, people pay me for that kind of training.
Not here they don't, and if you're going to take part in a
discussion, then there are no half measures; either hold up your end or
don't, but then don't be surprised when you get called on it.
> There's piles of information
> -- free information, just use Google to find it -- all over the place that
> backs up what we've all been saying here.
I did do some research, a lot of it not informing me of things I
didn't already know.
> Really. And at this point, if you
> persist in this, I'm going to suggest to the other moderators that we
> bounce
> your subsequent messages -- the ones reiterating your rightness -- as
> tr0lling.
Of course you would --can't say that would surprise me one bit.
However, I provided documentary data that supported what I was saying, even
though you people refused to acknowledge any of it as substantiating or
legitimate in even the slightest regard. In fact, everything I had said was
supposedly wrong because that was the game you people decided you were going
to play in hopes of getting me so disgusted that I would simply leave.
Well, it didn't work out that way, did it.
> And so there's no misunderstanding that I'm simply name-calling,
> let me back it up with some evidence based on my observation of this
> thread:
> at this point, after this much discussion and assertion from this many
> people
> who have _no_ reason to make a fool out of you or lie to you, you really
> do
> seem to be being willfully ignorant, so I'm forced to assume that perhaps
> this whole "I'm a fan of Babylon 5" persona was just a set-up for your
> tr0lling this newsgroup.
Right, now I'm a liar too, again--only this time according to one of
the moderator's of this group. Gee, why am I not at all surprised?
Uh huh --sure; that's why I posted a review of the new TLT movie
here _well before_ I even got involved in this thread. In fact, I made it a
point to run out and buy the TLT DVD _on the day it was released_, but of
course, what "fan" would do such a thing, right?
I also recently Scanned a copy of the Limited Edition comic that
came with some of the DVDs for a person who bought the movie from Amazon
without the comic, and she happened to be a moderator in another Forum by
the way, on another Service as a matter of fact. Just thought I'd mention
it, as I don't appreciate your characterization of me.
But I guess I did that because I'm *not a fan* too, eh.
> >> That is why you are now (finally, the
> >> gods/esses bless you, Cheryl!) on hand moderation.
>
> > Translation: Because we don't like you and the way you express
> > yourself, we'll decide whether or not to let your posts through while
> > everyone else piles on you and has free reign in that regard. <<
>
> We've bounced exactly _how_ many messages of yours in this thread? Oh,
> that's right: none.
And I found that rather interesting, believe me -until you people
reverted back to being true-to-form two weeks ago, not liking the fact that
I challenged every claim you made in your last post to me that I'm
responding to right here now, with evidence to show where you were wrong on
virtually every claim you made, and you just couldn't stand it, could you.
> I'm really sorry for you that you see correction of misinformation as
> "piling
> on," but no one's behavior has been untoward, except maybe yours.
Right, like the quotes I provided at the start of this reply that
showed an obvious trend developing in this thread from much earlier on. All
my imagination, mind you, obviously, even though the quotes are right there
in black and white, and the posts still here in the thread, with lots more
that I could cite if only you people would allow me without shutting me out
the way you did a couple of weeks ago simply because you couldn't take the
heat of what I was saying.
> >> That's what you're really saying, otherwise, just let me have
> > my say like everyone else who's been lobbing grenades at me; and they
> > know who they are --and so do you. <<
>
> You've had it. How much more rope would you like?
Suspending this so-called "hand moderation" would have been a good
start, but you were more content to just lock me out entirely.
> I throw up my hands in despair. You will not find a legitimate source of
> information that backs up your assertions in this case.
Okay . . . please read the following:
=====================================
The American Heritage Science Dictionary
Internet (in't?r-net') Pronunciation Key
A system connecting computers around the world using TCP/IP, which stands
for Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, a set of standards for
transmitting and receiving digital data. The Internet consists primarily of
the collection of billions of interconnected webpages that are transferred
using HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol), and are collectively known as the
World Wide Web. The Internet also uses FTP (File Transfer Protocol) to
transfer files, and SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) to transfer e-mail.
The American Heritage Science Dictionary
Copyright 2002 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
American Psychological Association (APA):
Internet. (n.d.). The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural
Literacy, Third Edition.
Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
Internet. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural
Literacy, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Internet (accessed: August 24, 2007).
Modern Language Association (MLA):
"Internet." The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy,
Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005. 24 Aug. 2007. <Dictionary.com
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Internet>.
=====================================
Now, just so we're absolutely clear on the matter, since evidently
it's necessary, what I was specifically interested in getting from you here,
was having you point out to me just where the distinction is with respect to
the terms "Internet" and "Web" not being synonymous in the above definition
of the term "Internet." Because that is what the disagreement had boiled
down to in essence, did it not? Or is that really just too loaded a question
for you? Because I think it's pretty simple and really straightforward, and
I would have really liked an answer. If I'm so *Wrong* in the way you claim,
in _every_ regard, as you have all insisted, then how come the above
definition doesn't really attest to it?
Your buddy Jay sent me a snooty, sarcastic, typically smarmy-ass
email when you both shut me out a couple of weeks ago, and regardless of
what he claimed then, the above definition really does not make the
distinction of the Internet and the Web being two wholly separate entities.
In fact it makes them sound more tied together than not, and it was in fact
what I referenced when I pursued the ongoing disagreement that ensued here.
> Again, you have not been censored even _once_ in this thread. The more
> you
> shout about something that hasn't happened, the more bizarre this
> conversation gets.
I was put on "hand moderation," and then shut out, or does that not
amount to a form of censoring, that interestingly enough, no one else
participating in this particular thread had been subjected to?
> As I said the other day, this thread has beaten the horse into death, back
> into another reincarnation, and back into death once again. Let's just
> all
> move along, please. We are done, here.
In your opinion we were, in mine we were not. I had been subjected
to all sorts of crap throughout this thread, and from where I'm sitting,
weren't quite through yet.
> You have had your say, and we all
> know that you think that you are right, and that we are all terrible
> people
> here who don't let any voices of dissent post.
In my opinion your own collective conduct attests to what kind of
people you are.
> We'll have to agree to
> disagree. Now _move along_, and post about TLT or something else.
>
> Amy
Now why would I want to do that? After all, I'm a Tr0ll, you said so
yourself - your buddy Jay said so in an e-mail to me after starting it off
like a real schmvck by advising me that if I didn't calm down that I would
not be allowed to participate, and then ending that very e-mail by calling
me a Tr0ll and telling me pointedly to "get lost," as though that was
supposed to calm me down, so why would a Tr0ll care to discuss anything
remotely related to what this forum is supposed to be devoted to? What
incentive have you people given me to even want to bother?
=======================
from the "Newsgroup back"/ (and so-called) "Common Courtesy" thread
=======================
Kurt Ullman
"StarFuryG7" <StarF...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Aug 24, 8:56 pm, Amy Guskin <aisl...@fjordstone.com> wrote:
> > No. You really don't understand the difference between differing opinions
> > and fl^ming. I owe you nothing.
>
>
> ====================================
> My two favorite (although they obviously do not apply to Amy) are"
> Were you toilet trained at gunpoint?
> Which weekend do you have custody of your family's brain cell.
>
> Kurt Ullman Aug 17, 12:11 pm
Speaking for myself these were generic insults. Not aimed
even remotely at you or any one person. So, why take them personally?
> That's where I stopped going through the thread --are you going to
> sit there, with a straight face, and tell me that does not constitute
> "fl^ming," even though they're all clearly insults made at my expense?
Mine weren't even remotely.
Dennis (Icarus)
news:CYgKi.288$Ac7...@newsfe12.lga...
<snip>
I really don't think you'd want to hear my opinion of your statements in
these threads - it's not "little guy voicing dissent" or "complaining
visitor".
I'd recmmend letting it go StarFury, or just talk to the moderators
directly.
Let it go.
Dennis
.
Dennis (Icarus)
>
> You were saying, or should I dig a deeper?
>
> I'm also fond of the one where I was called "a boor" by another of
> your friendly members here.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/boor
>
> > And incidentally, please stop with the "Miss Guskin" and the "my dear"
and
> > the like. It really grates on my nerves. We're all quite friendly
here,
> > dude -- just call me "Amy" or nothing at all.
>
> Oh, so you're commenting on what you perceive to be an apparent
air
> of _condescension_, are you, even though technically, I've broken no rules
> or guidelines for you to speak of in relation to the group FAQ and/or
> charter?
She's stating a preference as to what she'd like to be called.
Personally, I like being called Dennis.
<snip of admission of stealing JMS' work>
It's a REALLY BAD THING to make copies of copyrighted work for other folks.
It's a particularly boorish thing to do so where the author of said work can
learn of this.
You do know that, right?
Please go back to that other forum.
Please stay there.
<snip>
Dennis
.
Carl
Why are you rehashing this after a month?
Why are you rehashing it at all?
Are you expecting to change someone's mind?
What's the point?
Matt Ion
That's kinda what I was thinking. Didn't this looney go away once already?
Mac Breck
news:7oGdnQvPPdhcI2Tb...@comcast.com...
>
> "StarFuryG7" <StarF...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:CYgKi.288$Ac7...@newsfe12.lga...
> > On Aug 25, 11:04 pm, "jmsa...@aol.com" <jmsa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Why are you rehashing this after a month?
Exactly. I thought this was over.
> Why are you rehashing it at all?
> Are you expecting to change someone's mind?
> What's the point?
Seeing that the heartburn had subsided, he decided to try to stir up
some more? But why? To drive JMS away and take away the main reason
for the group existing? Seems to me that JMS pretty much nailed it.
Bottom Line: This is the case of the argumentative person who feeds on
arguments, and finds it almost impossible to let it go, and the desire
is to be destructive not constructive.
Dave Hayslett
And with a different email address, too. (I only noticed because this
latest round of ... posts didn't get killed as expected.)
--
Dave
Now is the time on Sprockets when we dance!
Mac Breck
news:8Omdnd7acKh...@giganews.com...
> Carl wrote:
> > "StarFuryG7" <StarF...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> > news:CYgKi.288$Ac7...@newsfe12.lga...
> >> On Aug 25, 11:04 pm, "jmsa...@aol.com" <jmsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Why are you rehashing this after a month?
> > Why are you rehashing it at all?
> > Are you expecting to change someone's mind?
> >
> > What's the point?
>
> And with a different email address, too. (I only noticed because this
> latest round of ... posts didn't get killed as expected.)
You're talking about your own killfile, right? I didn't think he'd been
banned from the group, but then again I didn't read every post of the
threads he was in. I haven't killfiled him yet, but I'm considering it.
JanMSchroeder
> "Dave Hayslett" <haysl...@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
>
> > And with a different email address, too. (I only noticed because this
> > latest round of ... posts didn't get killed as expected.)
>
> You're talking about your own killfile, right? I didn't think he'd been
> banned from the group, but then again I didn't read every post of the
> threads he was in. I haven't killfiled him yet, but I'm considering it.
>
Not banned, but he was put on hand moderation. Chances are, he just
changed emails specifically so that he could post. I'm sure it'll be
taken care of shortly.
For now the best thing we can to to help the moderators is to ignore
him completely until and unless he decides to actually join in the
conversations.
Jan
Jon Schild
StarFuryG7 wrote:
> On Aug 24, 8:56 pm, Amy Guskin <aisl...@fjordstone.com> wrote:
>
>>No. You really don't understand the difference between differing opinions
>>and fl^ming. I owe you nothing.
>
>
> This is just more in the way of the usual condescending nonsense
> that I've been treated to here during my recent brief stay. However, if
> you'll allow me for a moment nonetheless, to contradict you with the
> following quotes:
<YAWN!>
Matt Ion
> On Aug 24, 8:56 pm, Amy Guskin <aisl...@fjordstone.com> wrote:
>> No. You really don't understand the difference between differing opinions
>> and fl^ming. I owe you nothing.
>
> This is just more in the way of the usual condescending nonsense
> that I've been treated to here during my recent brief stay. However, if
> you'll allow me for a moment nonetheless, to contradict you with the
> following quotes:
And if we don't...?
lizardgirl
> For now the best thing we can to to help the moderators is to ignore
> him completely until and unless he decides to actually join in the
> conversations.
>
> Jan
i'll second that.
lg
John W. Kennedy
> Bottom Line: This is the case of the argumentative person who feeds on
> arguments, and finds it almost impossible to let it go, and the desire
> is to be destructive not constructive.
Honestly, I think it's a perfectly sincere persecution complex.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne
of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts"
-- J. Michael Straczynski. "Babylon 5", "Ceremonies of Light and Dark"
Wendy of NJ
What are the odds that this post was written in a much more timely
fashion and, in the perverse ways of the Internet, has just finally
shown up?
"posts get lost in the ether malarkey", indeed.
-Wendy
Matt Ion
Pretty low, considering this thread is only a couple weeks old.
Mac Breck
news:1190819308....@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 26, 10:05 am, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Dave Hayslett" <haysl...@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > And with a different email address, too. (I only noticed because
this
> > > latest round of ... posts didn't get killed as expected.)
> >
> > You're talking about your own killfile, right? I didn't think he'd
been
> > banned from the group, but then again I didn't read every post of
the
> > threads he was in. I haven't killfiled him yet, but I'm considering
it.
> >
>
> Not banned, but he was put on hand moderation. Chances are, he just
> changed emails specifically so that he could post. I'm sure it'll be
> taken care of shortly.
Either that or he got fed-up with AOL, which, at times, I've heard
people call AOHell.
> For now the best thing we can to to help the moderators is to ignore
> him completely until and unless he decides to actually join in the
> conversations.
That's why I haven't been replying to *his* posts.
Wendy of NJ
<soun...@gmail.com> wrote:
I respond before reading all the new posts. It's pretty obvious I was
stone cold wrong after 10 more minutes of reading the board yesterday.
Would not be the first time I was mistaken about something. :)
-Wendy
Bill
> Why are you rehashing this after a month?
> Why are you rehashing it at all?
> Are you expecting to change someone's mind?
>
> What's the point?
He's rehashing it because he's too broke to get an appointment with
his local Professional Dominatrix and he still needs a spanking to
keep him in line.
Bill
lizardgirl
cut him some slack, bill. not everyone out there is able to ask
politely for what comes natural.
lg (who is currently rummaging her special box for something supple
and appropriate to the occasion.)
Amy Guskin
(in article <1191191028.3...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>):
> On Sep 28, 9:53 am, Bill <feline_ran...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 25, 10:06 pm, "Carl" <cengm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why are you rehashing this after a month?
>>> Why are you rehashing it at all?
>>> Are you expecting to change someone's mind?
>>
>>> What's the point?
>>
>> He's rehashing it because he's too broke to get an appointment with
>> his local Professional Dominatrix and he still needs a spanking to
>> keep him in line.
>>
>> Bill
>
> cut him some slack, bill. not everyone out there is able to ask
> politely for what comes natural. <<
And I just thought I ought to mention here: in case anyone out there is
feeling paranoid or wondering, the _whole newsgroup_ was down since last
Wednesday. No one's been singled out, we're not blocking anyone's posts,
etc. etc. If you posted something and it hasn't appeared, post it again.
Thanks.
Amy
--
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
W. Bush, May 24, 2005
Dennis (Icarus)
news:0001HW.C325C2BF...@news.verizon.net...
> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 18:23:48 -0400, lizardgirl wrote
> (in article <1191191028.3...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>):
>
>
> And I just thought I ought to mention here: in case anyone out there is
> feeling paranoid or wondering, the _whole newsgroup_ was down since last
> Wednesday. No one's been singled out, we're not blocking anyone's posts,
> etc. etc. If you posted something and it hasn't appeared, post it again.
> Thanks.
"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
Dennis
.
Joseph DeMartino
wrote:
> "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
"Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!"
<g>
Joe
Wes Struebing
wrote:
>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 18:23:48 -0400, lizardgirl wrote
>(in article <1191191028.3...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>):
>
>> On Sep 28, 9:53 am, Bill <feline_ran...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Sep 25, 10:06 pm, "Carl" <cengm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are you rehashing this after a month?
>>>> Why are you rehashing it at all?
>>>> Are you expecting to change someone's mind?
>>>
>>>> What's the point?
>>>
>>> He's rehashing it because he's too broke to get an appointment with
>>> his local Professional Dominatrix and he still needs a spanking to
>>> keep him in line.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>
>> cut him some slack, bill. not everyone out there is able to ask
>> politely for what comes natural. <<
>
>And I just thought I ought to mention here: in case anyone out there is
>feeling paranoid or wondering, the _whole newsgroup_ was down since last
>Wednesday. No one's been singled out, we're not blocking anyone's posts,
>etc. etc. If you posted something and it hasn't appeared, post it again.
>Thanks.
>
Ahhh! Equal opportunity repression!
(just kidding, Amy! Really...)
--
Wes Struebing
Jan. 20, 2009 - the end of an error