info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Two Book Recommendations
529 views
Skip to first unread message
Brian M. Scott
Aug 19, 2015, 12:48:09 AM8/19/15
to
A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
mentioned a couple of books that he’s self-published. I’ve
now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
For starters, they’re probably like nothing else that
you’ve ever read. In the author’s words, the first of
these tales of the Commonweal is
_The March North_: Egalitarian heroic fantasy.
Presumptive female agency, battle-sheep, and bad,
bad odds.
The second is
_A Succession of Bad Days_: Egalitarian heroic fantasy.
Experimental magical pedagogy, non-Euclidean ancestry,
and some sort of horror from beyond the world.
Graydon’s voice is unique in my experience, and it requires
the reader to pay attention, but the payoff is more than
worth it. However, I must note that if you don’t like
being dropped into the deep end of the pool to figure
things out as you go along, you should probably give these
books a wide berth.
The setting is very, very, very far in the future, long
after the introduction of magic has changed the world and
its inhabitants in all sorts of ways, some of which are by
no means immediately obvious. Graydon has clearly put a
lot of thought into the consequences of the long-ago
development that he postulates, and the resulting world
makes increasingly good sense the more we (slowly) learn
about it and its past.
The first book is the story of a military expedition by the
minimal forces not already engaged in dealing with an
existential threat to the Commonweal. If you can’t abide
military fantasy, it’s not for you, but there’s a lot more
to it than that: it’s also an introduction to the world of
the Commonweal and to some of its inhabitants.
The second book takes place shortly after the end of the
first and features (among others) some of the same
characters. It’s not a true sequel, and one could read and
enjoy it without having read the first, but I don’t
recommend this: having read the first really does add to
one’s enjoyment of the second and probably also makes the
second a bit easier to follow.
The second is a very different kind of story from the
first, being the story of an experiment in training a group
of sorcerers come so late to their power that they would
almost certainly not survive the traditional training
methods. In the process we get to see a remarkable amount
of well thought out magical engineering. And this book,
unlike the first, is laugh-aloud funny in spots.
The characters in both are fully developed, and many of
them are very easy to like – even the ones who ought to
scare the pants off any reasonable person.
For information on how to obtain these books see Graydon’s
blog post at
<http://dubiousprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/05/committing-book-again.html>.
Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.
mentioned a couple of books that he’s self-published. I’ve
now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
For starters, they’re probably like nothing else that
you’ve ever read. In the author’s words, the first of
these tales of the Commonweal is
_The March North_: Egalitarian heroic fantasy.
Presumptive female agency, battle-sheep, and bad,
bad odds.
The second is
_A Succession of Bad Days_: Egalitarian heroic fantasy.
Experimental magical pedagogy, non-Euclidean ancestry,
and some sort of horror from beyond the world.
Graydon’s voice is unique in my experience, and it requires
the reader to pay attention, but the payoff is more than
worth it. However, I must note that if you don’t like
being dropped into the deep end of the pool to figure
things out as you go along, you should probably give these
books a wide berth.
The setting is very, very, very far in the future, long
after the introduction of magic has changed the world and
its inhabitants in all sorts of ways, some of which are by
no means immediately obvious. Graydon has clearly put a
lot of thought into the consequences of the long-ago
development that he postulates, and the resulting world
makes increasingly good sense the more we (slowly) learn
about it and its past.
The first book is the story of a military expedition by the
minimal forces not already engaged in dealing with an
existential threat to the Commonweal. If you can’t abide
military fantasy, it’s not for you, but there’s a lot more
to it than that: it’s also an introduction to the world of
the Commonweal and to some of its inhabitants.
The second book takes place shortly after the end of the
first and features (among others) some of the same
characters. It’s not a true sequel, and one could read and
enjoy it without having read the first, but I don’t
recommend this: having read the first really does add to
one’s enjoyment of the second and probably also makes the
second a bit easier to follow.
The second is a very different kind of story from the
first, being the story of an experiment in training a group
of sorcerers come so late to their power that they would
almost certainly not survive the traditional training
methods. In the process we get to see a remarkable amount
of well thought out magical engineering. And this book,
unlike the first, is laugh-aloud funny in spots.
The characters in both are fully developed, and many of
them are very easy to like – even the ones who ought to
scare the pants off any reasonable person.
For information on how to obtain these books see Graydon’s
blog post at
<http://dubiousprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/05/committing-book-again.html>.
Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.
William December Starr
Aug 19, 2015, 3:45:44 AM8/19/15
to
In article <1sn5pe732ddib.w...@40tude.net>,
exist electronically, with no print editions?
-- wds
"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> said:
> For information on how to obtain these books see Graydon's
> blog post at
>
> <http://dubiousprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/05/committing-book-again.html>.
Am I correct in concluding from that page that the books only
> For information on how to obtain these books see Graydon's
> blog post at
>
> <http://dubiousprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/05/committing-book-again.html>.
exist electronically, with no print editions?
-- wds
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 19, 2015, 9:15:03 AM8/19/15
to
In article <1sn5pe732ddib.w...@40tude.net>,
whether rasf-w was still alive, and I said, More or less.
This was after I'd read his books (having found them mentioned on
Patricia Wrede's blog).
I sit in awe of Graydon's ability to do things with words.
>For starters, they’re probably like nothing else that
>you’ve ever read. In the author’s words, the first of
>these tales of the Commonweal is
>
.....
>Graydon’s voice is unique in my experience, and it requires
>the reader to pay attention, but the payoff is more than
>worth it. However, I must note that if you don’t like
>being dropped into the deep end of the pool to figure
>things out as you go along, you should probably give these
>books a wide berth.
Except if you can get past page two or three, you're hooked. Or
at least I was.
>
>The setting is very, very, very far in the future ...
Actually, not. A different world entirely, not future Earth at
all. I asked him about this, and if it's a different world why
does it use the French Revolutionary calendar? And he said, To
clue the reader that the society depicted did undergo a profound
revolution a few centuries before.
>....Graydon has clearly put a
got two pages into it and observed a character I'd seen before,
not named by name but described by chosen appearance, and I said,
"Oh, that's [Name,] good; everything's going to be all right."
This took Graydon back a bit.
is, almost, a school story, in which the students are taught what
amounts to Zen physics.
>The characters in both are fully developed, and many of
>them are very easy to like – even the ones who ought to
>scare the pants off any reasonable person.
Like [Name] mentioned above.
back. I compared his prose to the artwork of the Book of Kells.
Gosh he's good.
He's now doing the final tidying-up on a third, hoping to publish
next spring. Several more are in the works.
/gleefully rubs hands together
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.
Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>mentioned a couple of books that he’s self-published. I’ve
>now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
Seconded. Graydon dropped in because he asked me, in email,
>A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>mentioned a couple of books that he’s self-published. I’ve
>now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
whether rasf-w was still alive, and I said, More or less.
This was after I'd read his books (having found them mentioned on
Patricia Wrede's blog).
I sit in awe of Graydon's ability to do things with words.
>For starters, they’re probably like nothing else that
>you’ve ever read. In the author’s words, the first of
>these tales of the Commonweal is
>
>Graydon’s voice is unique in my experience, and it requires
>the reader to pay attention, but the payoff is more than
>worth it. However, I must note that if you don’t like
>being dropped into the deep end of the pool to figure
>things out as you go along, you should probably give these
>books a wide berth.
at least I was.
>
>The setting is very, very, very far in the future ...
Actually, not. A different world entirely, not future Earth at
all. I asked him about this, and if it's a different world why
does it use the French Revolutionary calendar? And he said, To
clue the reader that the society depicted did undergo a profound
revolution a few centuries before.
>....Graydon has clearly put a
>lot of thought into the consequences of the long-ago
>development that he postulates, and the resulting world
>makes increasingly good sense the more we (slowly) learn
>about it and its past.
>
>The first book is the story of a military expedition by the
>minimal forces not already engaged in dealing with an
>existential threat to the Commonweal. If you can’t abide
>military fantasy, it’s not for you, but there’s a lot more
>to it than that: it’s also an introduction to the world of
>the Commonweal and to some of its inhabitants.
>
>The second book takes place shortly after the end of the
>first and features (among others) some of the same
>characters. It’s not a true sequel, and one could read and
>enjoy it without having read the first, but I don’t
>recommend this: having read the first really does add to
>one’s enjoyment of the second and probably also makes the
>second a bit easier to follow.
The second book does share a few characters with the first. I
>development that he postulates, and the resulting world
>makes increasingly good sense the more we (slowly) learn
>about it and its past.
>
>The first book is the story of a military expedition by the
>minimal forces not already engaged in dealing with an
>existential threat to the Commonweal. If you can’t abide
>military fantasy, it’s not for you, but there’s a lot more
>to it than that: it’s also an introduction to the world of
>the Commonweal and to some of its inhabitants.
>
>The second book takes place shortly after the end of the
>first and features (among others) some of the same
>characters. It’s not a true sequel, and one could read and
>enjoy it without having read the first, but I don’t
>recommend this: having read the first really does add to
>one’s enjoyment of the second and probably also makes the
>second a bit easier to follow.
got two pages into it and observed a character I'd seen before,
not named by name but described by chosen appearance, and I said,
"Oh, that's [Name,] good; everything's going to be all right."
This took Graydon back a bit.
>
>The second is a very different kind of story from the
>first, being the story of an experiment in training a group
>of sorcerers come so late to their power that they would
>almost certainly not survive the traditional training
>methods. In the process we get to see a remarkable amount
>of well thought out magical engineering. And this book,
>unlike the first, is laugh-aloud funny in spots.
The first is a battle story, set out in gory detail. The second
>The second is a very different kind of story from the
>first, being the story of an experiment in training a group
>of sorcerers come so late to their power that they would
>almost certainly not survive the traditional training
>methods. In the process we get to see a remarkable amount
>of well thought out magical engineering. And this book,
>unlike the first, is laugh-aloud funny in spots.
is, almost, a school story, in which the students are taught what
amounts to Zen physics.
>The characters in both are fully developed, and many of
>them are very easy to like – even the ones who ought to
>scare the pants off any reasonable person.
>
>For information on how to obtain these books see Graydon’s
>blog post at
>
><http://dubiousprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/05/committing-book-again.html>.
I wrote a review of the second book and posted it here, a while
>For information on how to obtain these books see Graydon’s
>blog post at
>
><http://dubiousprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/05/committing-book-again.html>.
back. I compared his prose to the artwork of the Book of Kells.
Gosh he's good.
He's now doing the final tidying-up on a third, hoping to publish
next spring. Several more are in the works.
/gleefully rubs hands together
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 19, 2015, 9:15:04 AM8/19/15
to
In article <mr1c76$qqb$1...@panix2.panix.com>,
Alas, you're right. I have no handheld, but was able to read it
through gmail.
through gmail.
grayd...@gmail.com
Aug 19, 2015, 10:23:34 AM8/19/15
to
On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:45:44 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
> Am I correct in concluding from that page that the books only
> exist electronically, with no print editions?
You are.
> Am I correct in concluding from that page that the books only
> exist electronically, with no print editions?
Print is beyond my means, for all the usual reasons of competent design not coming cheap and moving physical books being expensive.
The second book Brian so kindly mentions is of a length that makes print specialized and tricky, too; I don't think print-on-demand would work well.
And while I have been absolutely delighted to find out that these books have found more friends than I expected them to find, it's not in absolute terms a large number. I would be very surprised were an established publishing house to express an interest.
So unless POD gets unexpectedly much better, I don't foresee any print editions.
Sorry!
Graydon
Michael R N Dolbear
Aug 19, 2015, 11:40:35 AM8/19/15
to
Graydon wrote
Smashwords Direct allows you to upload your own professionally designed
.epub file to Smashwords. You can use Smashwords Direct to replace a
Smashwords Meatgrinder-generated .epub with your own EPUB file, or you can
use it when uploading a new title (simply upload the EPUB rather than an MS
Word DOC file). We support direct upload of both EPUB2 and EPUB3 files.
{...}
Limitation: If you upload an .epub file for a new book, that will become
the only available format
==
So freeing you from Word.
>>> for non-Americans, Smashwords pays by PayPal only
If your CU will accept direct credits and send direct debits this isn't a
problem. My bank knows nothing about PayPal except that they are authorised.
Greetings and Conga Rats from rec.arts.sf.composition.
--
Mike D
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 19, 2015, 12:00:05 PM8/19/15
to
In article <2450ba8b-3df2-4c1d...@googlegroups.com>,
general.
<grayd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>And while I have been absolutely delighted to find out that these books
>have found more friends than I expected them to find, it's not in
>absolute terms a large number. I would be very surprised were an
>established publishing house to express an interest.
Alas, you're right. I love your work, but it is caviar to the
>
>And while I have been absolutely delighted to find out that these books
>have found more friends than I expected them to find, it's not in
>absolute terms a large number. I would be very surprised were an
>established publishing house to express an interest.
general.
Brian M. Scott
Aug 19, 2015, 12:25:02 PM8/19/15
to
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:10:48 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote
in<news:ntBzA...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
[...]
>>The setting is very, very, very far in the future ...
> Actually, not. A different world entirely, not future
> Earth at all.
Ah, okay. A world with a very long past behind it, then.
[...]
<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote
in<news:ntBzA...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
[...]
>>The setting is very, very, very far in the future ...
> Actually, not. A different world entirely, not future
> Earth at all.
[...]
David DeLaney
Aug 19, 2015, 12:47:59 PM8/19/15
to
On 2015-08-19, Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
> mentioned a couple of books that he???s self-published. I've
> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
> now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
DAMMIT GRAYDON. (And Connolly.) I didn't want to start buying e-books en
masse...
Dave, will trade time for money and money for books, for food
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://gatekeeper.vic.com/~dbd/ -net.legends/Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 19, 2015, 1:15:03 PM8/19/15
to
In article <qfzjnrmubw81.5...@40tude.net>,
animal, and none-of-the-above) are the descendants of long-ago
sorcerous bioweapons.
Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:10:48 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
><djh...@kithrup.com> wrote
>in<news:ntBzA...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>> In article <1sn5pe732ddib.w...@40tude.net>,
>> Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>The setting is very, very, very far in the future ...
>
>> Actually, not. A different world entirely, not future
>> Earth at all.
>
>Ah, okay. A world with a very long past behind it, then.
>
>[...]
Yes, and a nasty one. All the vicious "weeds" (monsters plant,
>On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:10:48 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
><djh...@kithrup.com> wrote
>in<news:ntBzA...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>> In article <1sn5pe732ddib.w...@40tude.net>,
>> Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>The setting is very, very, very far in the future ...
>
>> Actually, not. A different world entirely, not future
>> Earth at all.
>
>Ah, okay. A world with a very long past behind it, then.
>
>[...]
animal, and none-of-the-above) are the descendants of long-ago
sorcerous bioweapons.
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 19, 2015, 1:15:03 PM8/19/15
to
In article <b6qdnTjI-O-hLknI...@earthlink.com>,
kind of handheld electronic reader. But it did eventually become
possible to read them on my PC via googlereads or something like
that.
David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>On 2015-08-19, Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>> mentioned a couple of books that he???s self-published. I've
>> now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
>
>DAMMIT GRAYDON. (And Connolly.) I didn't want to start buying e-books en
>masse...
I didn't either. As I said somewhere upthread, I don't have any
>On 2015-08-19, Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>> mentioned a couple of books that he???s self-published. I've
>> now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
>
>DAMMIT GRAYDON. (And Connolly.) I didn't want to start buying e-books en
>masse...
kind of handheld electronic reader. But it did eventually become
possible to read them on my PC via googlereads or something like
that.
Lynn McGuire
Aug 19, 2015, 3:01:58 PM8/19/15
to
On 8/19/2015 11:47 AM, David DeLaney wrote:
> On 2015-08-19, Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>> mentioned a couple of books that he???s self-published. I've
>> now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
>
> DAMMIT GRAYDON. (And Connolly.) I didn't want to start buying e-books en
> masse...
>
> Dave, will trade time for money and money for books, for food
"Read to Live, Live to Read".
> On 2015-08-19, Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>> mentioned a couple of books that he???s self-published. I've
>> now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
>
> DAMMIT GRAYDON. (And Connolly.) I didn't want to start buying e-books en
> masse...
>
> Dave, will trade time for money and money for books, for food
Lynn
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 19, 2015, 4:15:08 PM8/19/15
to
which for their length isn't so bad. Apparently Graydon is
selling more copies than he anticipated, but he still isn't gonna
quit his day job.
Don Bruder
Aug 19, 2015, 4:23:22 PM8/19/15
to
(Just make sure to bring a spare set of cheaters...)
--
Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q
Robert Bannister
Aug 19, 2015, 10:42:16 PM8/19/15
to
except when I'm away on holiday, which doesn't happen very often.
--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia
Magewolf
Aug 21, 2015, 10:37:03 AM8/21/15
to
have only had a chance to read the first few pages but it reminds me a
bit of The Black Company so far.
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 21, 2015, 11:00:05 AM8/21/15
to
Perhaps when you've finished it, you can post again and tell us
about similarities and dissimilarities?
Brian M. Scott
Aug 21, 2015, 2:27:01 PM8/21/15
to
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:36:49 -0400, Magewolf
<Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote
in<news:mr7cv5$5qc$1...@dont-email.me> in rec.arts.sf.written:
[...]
> After all the praise here I went ahead and bought The
> March North. I have only had a chance to read the first
> few pages but it reminds me a bit of The Black Company
> so far.
You’re not the first to make that observation. That’s
about the only comparison that I can come up with, though
overall it doesn’t really satisfy me.
<Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote
in<news:mr7cv5$5qc$1...@dont-email.me> in rec.arts.sf.written:
[...]
> After all the praise here I went ahead and bought The
> March North. I have only had a chance to read the first
> few pages but it reminds me a bit of The Black Company
> so far.
about the only comparison that I can come up with, though
overall it doesn’t really satisfy me.
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 21, 2015, 4:15:03 PM8/21/15
to
In article <pdke1yiq4jds.s...@40tude.net>,
me of mostly was a real war story, one from maybe WWII, following
a smallish group through a largish battle.
Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:36:49 -0400, Magewolf
><Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote
>in<news:mr7cv5$5qc$1...@dont-email.me> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>[...]
>
>> After all the praise here I went ahead and bought The
>> March North. I have only had a chance to read the first
>> few pages but it reminds me a bit of The Black Company
>> so far.
>
>You’re not the first to make that observation. That’s
>about the only comparison that I can come up with, though
>overall it doesn’t really satisfy me.
>
As I said, I haven't read _The Black Company._ What it reminded
><Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote
>in<news:mr7cv5$5qc$1...@dont-email.me> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>[...]
>
>> After all the praise here I went ahead and bought The
>> March North. I have only had a chance to read the first
>> few pages but it reminds me a bit of The Black Company
>> so far.
>
>You’re not the first to make that observation. That’s
>about the only comparison that I can come up with, though
>overall it doesn’t really satisfy me.
>
me of mostly was a real war story, one from maybe WWII, following
a smallish group through a largish battle.
David DeLaney
Aug 21, 2015, 4:20:18 PM8/21/15
to
On 2015-08-21, Magewolf <Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> On 8/19/2015 12:48 AM, Brian M. Scott wrote:
>> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>> mentioned a couple of books that he???s self-published. I???ve
> On 8/19/2015 12:48 AM, Brian M. Scott wrote:
>> A little while back Graydon Saunders dropped in and
>> now read them, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them.
>
>
> After all the praise here I went ahead and bought The March North. I
> have only had a chance to read the first few pages but it reminds me a
> bit of The Black Company so far.
I have read The March North over the past couple of days, and give it about
> have only had a chance to read the first few pages but it reminds me a
> bit of The Black Company so far.
seven stars out of five. Military epic fantasy, with power level turned up
past eleven, because, really, when one of the qualifications for becoming
a top-rank sorcerer is _successfully_ completing the ritual that makes you
immortal (well, unaging and rather hard to damage or sicken), over the
centuries top-rank sorcerers tend to accumulate, IF there's a social contract
that's magically enforceable in place that stops them killing each other off
and/or becoming the next Dark Lord and enslaving some tens or hundreds of
miles around them.
And one of the obvious uses for top-rank sorcerers is in the military, of
course. (Several of the obvious uses are, actually.)
Oh, and for those of you who are amused by the descriptions here of FOOF,
about the third-worst-possible oxidizer for rockets ever dreamed up, and
the pipeline.corante.com blog? Take a look at chapter 17...
Reminiscent of the Black Company, yes, but curiously easier to absorb the
background slow-reveals and worldbuilding info on, and I found the characters
easier to understand. More human, ironically enough. Good show!
Dave, not only are there easter eggs, but they're EXPLOSIVE ones
ps: will start book 2 pretty soon
David Goldfarb
Aug 22, 2015, 3:30:13 AM8/22/15
to
In article <RN-dnelinKudFUrI...@earthlink.com>,
I'm not quite two-thirds of the way through _A Succession of Bad Days_
and I'm still wondering if it's ever going to develop a plot. But it's
engaging enough that I don't mind.
It does contain what I'm pretty sure is wish-fulfillment fantasy about
the kind of smithcrafting you could do if you were telekinetic and
didn't have to faff about with actual material tools but could just
shape molten metal directly with your mind; also some wish-fulfillment
about what kind of house Graydon would live in if he had infinite money.
(And access to telekinetic smiths.)
But hey, I've often wished I were telekinetic myself.
--
David Goldfarb |"It's okay to disagree with me. However, once I
goldf...@gmail.com |explain where you're wrong you're supposed to
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu |become enlightened and change your mind.
|Congratulating me on how smart I am is optional."
| -- Karl Johanson
I'm not quite two-thirds of the way through _A Succession of Bad Days_
and I'm still wondering if it's ever going to develop a plot. But it's
engaging enough that I don't mind.
It does contain what I'm pretty sure is wish-fulfillment fantasy about
the kind of smithcrafting you could do if you were telekinetic and
didn't have to faff about with actual material tools but could just
shape molten metal directly with your mind; also some wish-fulfillment
about what kind of house Graydon would live in if he had infinite money.
(And access to telekinetic smiths.)
But hey, I've often wished I were telekinetic myself.
--
David Goldfarb |"It's okay to disagree with me. However, once I
goldf...@gmail.com |explain where you're wrong you're supposed to
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu |become enlightened and change your mind.
|Congratulating me on how smart I am is optional."
| -- Karl Johanson
Magewolf
Aug 22, 2015, 3:51:04 PM8/22/15
to
transformation magic or alchemy would be way more powerful then anything
that actually shows up in most fantasy stories. I mean if you could make
Chlorine trifluoride and set up tanks of it ready to break at will all
around what kind of army would you have to worry about?
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 22, 2015, 5:15:03 PM8/22/15
to
Bad Old Days, which covers not only the past times of vicious
sorcerous wars, but all the other realms outside and around the
Commonweal. Both popular feeling and the laws of the Commonweal
are passionately against doing that kind of thing.
Instead, magical alchemy is used for separating component
elements out of plain old dirt, and using them to construct
unbelievably beautiful buildings.
Magewolf
Aug 22, 2015, 7:23:34 PM8/22/15
to
the equivalent to be passionately against it. The hard part would be
surviving to have any opinion at all.
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 22, 2015, 9:00:12 PM8/22/15
to
books, do not take the Independents at face value. One of them
looks like a sweet young thing, another like a leathery old mountain
man, one like a nice old granny who is always knitting. You begin to
notice that maybe they're not what they seem when you see the
critters they're riding.
Magewolf
Aug 23, 2015, 10:41:52 AM8/23/15
to
The Independents seem to have a bit in common with The Ten Who Were
Taken thought I have only gotten to chapter 9. Of course the
Independents seem much nicer so far. The Ten did not really play well
with others.
Garrett Wollman
Aug 23, 2015, 10:01:21 PM8/23/15
to
>I think it would not take much interaction with Chlorine trifluoride or
>the equivalent to be passionately against it. The hard part would be
>surviving to have any opinion at all.
OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>the equivalent to be passionately against it. The hard part would be
>surviving to have any opinion at all.
it is:
It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
measured. It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth,
wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and
water-with which it reacts explosively. It can be kept in some
of the ordinary structural metals-steel, copper, aluminium,
etc.-because of the formation of a thin film of insoluble
metal fluoride which protects the bulk of the metal, just as
the invisible coat of oxide on aluminium keeps it from burning
up in the atmosphere. If, however, this coat is melted or
scrubbed off, and has no chance to reform, the operator is
confronted with the problem of coping with a metal-fluorine
fire. For dealing with this situation, I have always
recommended a good pair of running shoes.
(John Clark, /Ignition!/, via Derek Lowe)
This is why the idea of using ClF3 as an oxidizer for liquid-fuel
rockets was discarded early on. It IS produced in fairly large
industrial quantities nowadays -- it's used in the semiconductor
industry to clean oxides off of surfaces.[1] More Derek Lowe:
There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
forgot. That process, I should add, would necessarily have
been accompanied by copious amounts of horribly toxic and
corrosive by-products: it's bad enough when your reagent
ignites wet sand, but the clouds of hot hydrofluoric acid are
your special door prize if you're foolhardy enough to hang
around and watch the fireworks.
-GAWollman
[1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen
itself. Nasty, nasty stuff.
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Dorothy J Heydt
Aug 23, 2015, 10:30:02 PM8/23/15
to
In article <mrdttf$1qp3$4...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:
>
>OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>it is:
>
> It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
> problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
> rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
> measured.
Gee, sounds like thiotimoline.
>
>OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>it is:
>
> It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
> problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
> rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
> measured.
Cryptoengineer
Aug 23, 2015, 11:24:38 PM8/23/15
to
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:ntKEE...@kithrup.com:
> In article <mrdttf$1qp3$4...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
> Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:
>>
>>OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>>it is:
>>
>> It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
>> problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
>> rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
>> measured.
>
> Gee, sounds like thiotimoline.
The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_some_e
mpirical_findings.php
"Ignition" is here:
http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf
pt
> In article <mrdttf$1qp3$4...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
> Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:
>>
>>OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>>it is:
>>
>> It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
>> problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
>> rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
>> measured.
>
> Gee, sounds like thiotimoline.
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_some_e
mpirical_findings.php
"Ignition" is here:
http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf
pt
Cryptoengineer
Aug 23, 2015, 11:26:09 PM8/23/15
to
Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:XnsA4FFEE2509...@216.166.97.131:
> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
> news:ntKEE...@kithrup.com:
>
>> In article <mrdttf$1qp3$4...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
>> Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>>>it is:
>>>
>>> It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
>>> problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
>>> rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
>>> measured.
>>
>> Gee, sounds like thiotimoline.
>
> The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
^ClF3
> http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_so
news:XnsA4FFEE2509...@216.166.97.131:
> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
> news:ntKEE...@kithrup.com:
>
>> In article <mrdttf$1qp3$4...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
>> Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
>>>it is:
>>>
>>> It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the
>>> problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so
>>> rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been
>>> measured.
>>
>> Gee, sounds like thiotimoline.
>
> The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
> http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_so
William Vetter
Aug 24, 2015, 12:11:25 PM8/24/15
to
Garrett Wollman wrote:
>
> [1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen
> itself.
This statement is wrong. There are a lot of things that clean off
>
> [1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen
> itself.
oxides.
Garrett Wollman
Aug 24, 2015, 1:23:28 PM8/24/15
to
In article <XnsA4FFEE2509...@216.166.97.131>,
medicinal chemistry), which has a category "Things I Won't Work With".
The blog has changed hosts; it's now at
<http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/> and the pages in this category
are at
<http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/things-i-wont-work-with>.
-GAWollman
Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_some_e
>mpirical_findings.php
Correction: it's the "In the Pipeline" blog (whose primary topic is
>The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_some_e
>mpirical_findings.php
medicinal chemistry), which has a category "Things I Won't Work With".
The blog has changed hosts; it's now at
<http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/> and the pages in this category
are at
<http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/things-i-wont-work-with>.
-GAWollman
David DeLaney
Aug 24, 2015, 7:55:55 PM8/24/15
to
is NOT the definition of "is a stronger oxidizer than whatever compounded into
the rust or tarnish". Fluorine is most definitely a stronger oxidizer than
oxygen; when they compound, the _fluorine_ gets the electrons. This is part of
- well, most of - the reason why gaseous fluorine is so INCREDIBLY dangerous
to work with, and fluorine compounds of certain types almost as much or
sometimes more so.
Dave
Steve Coltrin
Aug 24, 2015, 8:00:07 PM8/24/15
to
begin fnord
And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
does not appear but is relevant:
http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org Google Groups killfiled here
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
wol...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) writes:
> In article <mrb06c$gno$1...@dont-email.me>, Magewolf <Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>I think it would not take much interaction with Chlorine trifluoride or
>>the equivalent to be passionately against it. The hard part would be
>>surviving to have any opinion at all.
>
> OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
> it is:
[snipped; read it. -ed]
> In article <mrb06c$gno$1...@dont-email.me>, Magewolf <Mage...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>I think it would not take much interaction with Chlorine trifluoride or
>>the equivalent to be passionately against it. The hard part would be
>>surviving to have any opinion at all.
>
> OK, is that the cue for the obligatory quote from "Ignition!"? Here
> it is:
And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
does not appear but is relevant:
http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org Google Groups killfiled here
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
David DeLaney
Aug 24, 2015, 8:01:48 PM8/24/15
to
On 2015-08-24, Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:
> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
>>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_some_e
>>mpirical_findings.php
>
> Correction: it's the "In the Pipeline" blog (whose primary topic is
> medicinal chemistry), which has a category "Things I Won't Work With".
> The blog has changed hosts; it's now at
> <http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/> .
> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>The "Things I Won't Work With" blog has a nice entry on Cf3:
>>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/05/chlorine_trifluoride_some_e
>>mpirical_findings.php
>
> Correction: it's the "In the Pipeline" blog (whose primary topic is
> medicinal chemistry), which has a category "Things I Won't Work With".
> The blog has changed hosts; it's now at
Has it now... oh, okay, the notice at the top of its pages says so (but,
annoyingly, not in clickable form; clicking on the element takes you right
back to pipeline.corante.com ).
I'd noticed it had been having periods, for me, where it gave some sort of
HTML error rather than displaying, earlier this year on and off. Hope the
move helps with that!
Oh, and I see his related category "Things I'm Glad I Don't Do" has a post
from to-day, on a related subject!
William Vetter
Aug 24, 2015, 8:19:13 PM8/24/15
to
David DeLaney wrote:
> On 2015-08-24, William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>>> [1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen itself.
>>
>> This statement is wrong. There are a lot of things that clean off
>> oxides.
>
> No, Garrett's perfectly correct. "Cleans rust or tarnish off what it grew on"
> is NOT the definition of "is a stronger oxidizer than whatever compounded
> into the rust or tarnish". Fluorine is most definitely a stronger oxidizer
> than oxygen; when they compound, the _fluorine_ gets the electrons. This is
> part of - well, most of - the reason why gaseous fluorine is so INCREDIBLY
> dangerous to work with, and fluorine compounds of certain types almost as
> much or sometimes more so.
>
He said that if any chemical etchant cleans absorbed or compounded
> On 2015-08-24, William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>>> [1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen itself.
>>
>> This statement is wrong. There are a lot of things that clean off
>> oxides.
>
> No, Garrett's perfectly correct. "Cleans rust or tarnish off what it grew on"
> is NOT the definition of "is a stronger oxidizer than whatever compounded
> into the rust or tarnish". Fluorine is most definitely a stronger oxidizer
> than oxygen; when they compound, the _fluorine_ gets the electrons. This is
> part of - well, most of - the reason why gaseous fluorine is so INCREDIBLY
> dangerous to work with, and fluorine compounds of certain types almost as
> much or sometimes more so.
>
oxygen from a surface (which may exist as O2, O-, or O<dot>), it must
necessarily be a stronger oxidant than O2. That is very different from
saying that F2 is a stronger oxidant than O2, which is what you're
saying here.
Cryptoengineer
Aug 24, 2015, 8:55:49 PM8/24/15
to
David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:s56dnQvyPqSVMkbI...@earthlink.com:
> On 2015-08-24, William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>>> [1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen
>>> itself.
>>
>> This statement is wrong. There are a lot of things that clean off
>> oxides.
>
> No, Garrett's perfectly correct. "Cleans rust or tarnish off what it
> grew on" is NOT the definition of "is a stronger oxidizer than
> whatever compounded into the rust or tarnish". Fluorine is most
> definitely a stronger oxidizer than oxygen; when they compound, the
> _fluorine_ gets the electrons. This is part of - well, most of - the
> reason why gaseous fluorine is so INCREDIBLY dangerous to work with,
> and fluorine compounds of certain types almost as much or sometimes
> more so.
Its worth recalling that CF3 will set fire to sand, and burn it.
Sand is Silicon Dioxide, the ashes of Silicon burnt in oxygen.
pt
news:s56dnQvyPqSVMkbI...@earthlink.com:
> On 2015-08-24, William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>>> [1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen
>>> itself.
>>
>> This statement is wrong. There are a lot of things that clean off
>> oxides.
>
> No, Garrett's perfectly correct. "Cleans rust or tarnish off what it
> grew on" is NOT the definition of "is a stronger oxidizer than
> whatever compounded into the rust or tarnish". Fluorine is most
> definitely a stronger oxidizer than oxygen; when they compound, the
> _fluorine_ gets the electrons. This is part of - well, most of - the
> reason why gaseous fluorine is so INCREDIBLY dangerous to work with,
> and fluorine compounds of certain types almost as much or sometimes
> more so.
Sand is Silicon Dioxide, the ashes of Silicon burnt in oxygen.
pt
Garrett Wollman
Aug 24, 2015, 9:49:03 PM8/24/15
to
In article <mrgc6k$5u9$1...@dont-email.me>,
William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>He said that if any chemical etchant cleans absorbed or compounded
>oxygen from a surface
No I didn't.
>He said that if any chemical etchant cleans absorbed or compounded
>oxygen from a surface
William Vetter
Aug 24, 2015, 10:29:41 PM8/24/15
to
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <mrgc6k$5u9$1...@dont-email.me>,
> William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> He said that if any chemical etchant cleans absorbed or compounded
>> oxygen from a surface
>
> No I didn't.
>
> -GAWollman
This is where this came from above in the thread:
> In article <mrgc6k$5u9$1...@dont-email.me>,
> William Vetter <mdha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> He said that if any chemical etchant cleans absorbed or compounded
>> oxygen from a surface
>
> No I didn't.
>
> -GAWollman
it's used in the semiconductor
industry to clean oxides off of surfaces.[1]
[1] Which is to say that it's a more powerful oxidizer than oxygen
itself.
As I read this, "which is to say" means that these two statements are
itself.
equivalent. I maintain that they are not.
Robert Bannister
Aug 24, 2015, 11:07:54 PM8/24/15
to
On 24/08/2015 10:01 am, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> [1] More Derek Lowe:
>
> There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
> completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
> forgot. That process, I should add, would necessarily have
> been accompanied by copious amounts of horribly toxic and
> corrosive by-products: it's bad enough when your reagent
> ignites wet sand, but the clouds of hot hydrofluoric acid are
> your special door prize if you're foolhardy enough to hang
> around and watch the fireworks.
>
Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
> [1] More Derek Lowe:
>
> There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
> completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
> forgot. That process, I should add, would necessarily have
> been accompanied by copious amounts of horribly toxic and
> corrosive by-products: it's bad enough when your reagent
> ignites wet sand, but the clouds of hot hydrofluoric acid are
> your special door prize if you're foolhardy enough to hang
> around and watch the fireworks.
>
Cryptoengineer
Aug 24, 2015, 11:41:00 PM8/24/15
to
Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
@mid.individual.net:
Some of us are ambidextrous.
Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
pt
@mid.individual.net:
Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
pt
Steve Coltrin
Aug 25, 2015, 12:17:57 AM8/25/15
to
begin fnord
Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> writes:
> On 24/08/2015 10:01 am, Garrett Wollman wrote:
>
>> [1] More Derek Lowe:
>>
>> There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
>> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
>> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
>> completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
>> forgot.
>>
> On 24/08/2015 10:01 am, Garrett Wollman wrote:
>
>> [1] More Derek Lowe:
>>
>> There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
>> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
>> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
>> completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
>> forgot.
>>
> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
America, fuck yeah!
Kevrob
Aug 25, 2015, 7:34:43 AM8/25/15
to
On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 12:17:57 AM UTC-4, Steve Coltrin wrote:
> begin fnord
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> writes:
>
> > On 24/08/2015 10:01 am, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> >
> >> [1] More Derek Lowe:
> >>
> >> There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
> >> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
> >> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
> >> completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
> >> forgot.
> >>
> > Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
>
> America, fuck yeah!
>
Meter, yard: close enough for rock and roll.
> begin fnord
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> writes:
>
> > On 24/08/2015 10:01 am, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> >
> >> [1] More Derek Lowe:
> >>
> >> There's a report from the early 1950s ... of a one-ton spill
> >> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
> >> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
> >> completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever
> >> forgot.
> >>
> > Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
>
> America, fuck yeah!
>
I've explained "meter" to the SI-impaired as a "metric yard" often enough.
You have to remember the meter is longer. Foot doesn't translate as well,
and if you try to use a 100 yard football gridiron for an association
match, you have to back one goal into the end zone a little over 9 yards.
Kevin R
Robert Carnegie
Aug 25, 2015, 9:27:51 AM8/25/15
to
and one measured by Scientists and reported as such
to the Board of Inquiry.
Indeed, if a chemistry lab survives unscathed for a
while, then it may be using SI measures in a building
of non-SI dimensions. But then, as I say, I suppose
you have to instruct your builders in Republican scale.
(Which is often exactly the same as Imperial, and
often a different size but using the same name.)
Greg Goss
Aug 25, 2015, 10:06:46 AM8/25/15
to
Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote
>>> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
>>> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
>>>
I treat a meter as approximately a yard and tune out the mix.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
>Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote
>>> of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete
>>> floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath,
>>>
>> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
>>
>
>Some of us are ambidextrous.
>Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
I have problems with mixing systems, but for conversations like this,
>>
>
>Some of us are ambidextrous.
>Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
I treat a meter as approximately a yard and tune out the mix.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Greg Goss
Aug 25, 2015, 10:10:41 AM8/25/15
to
Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Meter, yard: close enough for rock and roll.
>
>I've explained "meter" to the SI-impaired as a "metric yard" often enough.
>You have to remember the meter is longer. Foot doesn't translate as well,
>and if you try to use a 100 yard football gridiron for an association
>match, you have to back one goal into the end zone a little over 9 yards.
Canadian football uses a 110 yard field.
>Meter, yard: close enough for rock and roll.
>
>I've explained "meter" to the SI-impaired as a "metric yard" often enough.
>You have to remember the meter is longer. Foot doesn't translate as well,
>and if you try to use a 100 yard football gridiron for an association
>match, you have to back one goal into the end zone a little over 9 yards.
Canada went metric in 1977. But that's not why the football field is
longer.
(I think in Celsius for room and outdoor temperatures, Fahrenheit for
oven temperatures, Km for driving distances, miles for walking /
biking distances, inches and feet for measurements appropriate to
those measures -- never used yard much at all.)
pete...@gmail.com
Aug 25, 2015, 10:50:04 AM8/25/15
to
I tend to use metric for anything scientific, or anything I'm making new, or
connected to something already metric.
Otherwise, I tend to use what other people around me are using. Sitting here in
the US, that means non-metric for room, weather, and cooking temperatures,
travel distances, human height and weight, etc.
Outside the US, I'd switch most of those to metric, though some things I'm
still more used to in non-metric (non-technical temperatures, human height
and weight, forex).
For work on my house, I use non-metric, because its a non-metric house (built
in 1845).
pt
Gene Wirchenko
Aug 25, 2015, 3:50:17 PM8/25/15
to
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 15:50:51 -0400, Magewolf <Mage...@nc.rr.com>
wrote:
[snip]
>I have often thought that a good knowledge of chemistry and any kind of
>transformation magic or alchemy would be way more powerful then anything
>that actually shows up in most fantasy stories. I mean if you could make
>Chlorine trifluoride and set up tanks of it ready to break at will all
>around what kind of army would you have to worry about?
In Modesitt's _The Imager Portfolio_ (a series, not just one
novel), he covers the issue of magically creating (imaging in the
series) dangerous things as part of Rhennthyl's (main character)
imager training.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
wrote:
[snip]
>I have often thought that a good knowledge of chemistry and any kind of
>transformation magic or alchemy would be way more powerful then anything
>that actually shows up in most fantasy stories. I mean if you could make
>Chlorine trifluoride and set up tanks of it ready to break at will all
>around what kind of army would you have to worry about?
novel), he covers the issue of magically creating (imaging in the
series) dangerous things as part of Rhennthyl's (main character)
imager training.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Robert Bannister
Aug 25, 2015, 11:44:15 PM8/25/15
to
David DeLaney
Aug 26, 2015, 2:17:08 AM8/26/15
to
Bad Days. And it covers this ground as well, in various ways. (I also note
that it does indeed have a rather well-defined plot, which is visible from
the beginning ... but it's not what about Edgar, Dove, Zora, Chloris, etc.
are _doing_. Rather, it's 'a young man's coming-of-age' for a newly-realized
sorcerer. (Well, his hatching, in this case, though nobody realizes this till
about halfway through. (Except Halt, of course.)))
Two extradimensional thumbs up.
Greg Goss
Aug 26, 2015, 10:54:24 AM8/26/15
to
Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>On 25/08/2015 11:40 am, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
>On 25/08/2015 11:40 am, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
>>> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
>>>
>>
>> Some of us are ambidextrous.
>> Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
>>
>> pt
>>
>I seem to remember a certain rocket.
Google for "Gimli Glider"
>>>
>>
>> Some of us are ambidextrous.
>> Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
>>
>> pt
>>
>I seem to remember a certain rocket.
Kevrob
Aug 26, 2015, 12:06:07 PM8/26/15
to
On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 10:54:24 AM UTC-4, Greg Goss wrote:
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
> >On 25/08/2015 11:40 am, Cryptoengineer wrote:
> >> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
>
> >>> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Some of us are ambidextrous.
> >> Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
> >>
> >> pt
> >>
> >I seem to remember a certain rocket.
>
> Google for "Gimli Glider"
> --
The GG wikipedia page leads one to:
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
> >On 25/08/2015 11:40 am, Cryptoengineer wrote:
> >> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
>
> >>> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Some of us are ambidextrous.
> >> Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
> >>
> >> pt
> >>
> >I seem to remember a certain rocket.
>
> Google for "Gimli Glider"
> --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Another units of measurement fail.
Kevin R
pete...@gmail.com
Aug 26, 2015, 12:24:15 PM8/26/15
to
I agree that those engaged in a given enterprise should be working
with the same unit system. All I'm saying is that I'm not religious
about which I use - I'll conform to what's already in place.
pt
Robert Bannister
Aug 26, 2015, 10:26:07 PM8/26/15
to
On 26/08/2015 10:54 pm, Greg Goss wrote:
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>> On 25/08/2015 11:40 am, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
>
>>>> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some of us are ambidextrous.
>>> Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
>>>
>>> pt
>>>
>> I seem to remember a certain rocket.
>
> Google for "Gimli Glider"
>
Great story. Glad nobody got killed.
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>> On 25/08/2015 11:40 am, Cryptoengineer wrote:
>>> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:d424g7Fts2sU2
>
>>>> Interesting mixture of measures: foot, metre.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some of us are ambidextrous.
>>> Some of us have no problem with mixed systems.
>>>
>>> pt
>>>
>> I seem to remember a certain rocket.
>
> Google for "Gimli Glider"
>
Kevrob
Aug 27, 2015, 7:35:23 AM8/27/15
to
trying to use a hang-glider!
Kevin R
,
David Goldfarb
Aug 31, 2015, 3:45:03 AM8/31/15
to
In article <4-udnUzf8OV9xEDI...@earthlink.com>,
("Plot is a literary convention. Story is a force of nature."
-- Teresa Nielsen Hayden)
I don't think the book can be said to have a plot as such; it's
basically what the title says: a succession of days. That doesn't
mean it's not well-constructed and enjoyable to read.
--
David Goldfarb |"Feeling smug about one's opinions is the very
goldf...@gmail.com | lifeblood of the Net."
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | -- Dawn Friedman
David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>As a followup to the original recs, I have now finished A Succession of Very
>Bad Days. And it covers this ground as well, in various ways. (I also note
>that it does indeed have a rather well-defined plot, which is visible from
>the beginning ... but it's not what about Edgar, Dove, Zora, Chloris, etc.
>are _doing_. Rather, it's 'a young man's coming-of-age' for a newly-realized
>sorcerer. (Well, his hatching, in this case, though nobody realizes this till
>about halfway through. (Except Halt, of course.)))
I would say that that's a *story*, but that it's not a *plot*.
>As a followup to the original recs, I have now finished A Succession of Very
>Bad Days. And it covers this ground as well, in various ways. (I also note
>that it does indeed have a rather well-defined plot, which is visible from
>the beginning ... but it's not what about Edgar, Dove, Zora, Chloris, etc.
>are _doing_. Rather, it's 'a young man's coming-of-age' for a newly-realized
>sorcerer. (Well, his hatching, in this case, though nobody realizes this till
>about halfway through. (Except Halt, of course.)))
("Plot is a literary convention. Story is a force of nature."
-- Teresa Nielsen Hayden)
I don't think the book can be said to have a plot as such; it's
basically what the title says: a succession of days. That doesn't
mean it's not well-constructed and enjoyable to read.
--
David Goldfarb |"Feeling smug about one's opinions is the very
goldf...@gmail.com | lifeblood of the Net."
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | -- Dawn Friedman
William December Starr
Oct 20, 2015, 8:36:27 AM10/20/15
to
In article <m2zj1gj...@kelutral.omcl.org>,
complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
-- wds
Steve Coltrin <spco...@omcl.org> said:
> And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
> does not appear but is relevant:
>
> http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
> does not appear but is relevant:
>
> http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
-- wds
pete...@gmail.com
Oct 20, 2015, 9:20:45 AM10/20/15
to
pt
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Oct 20, 2015, 9:46:49 AM10/20/15
to
In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
Though I am reminded of when Bullwinkle was playing for Wassamata U
and would always run the same way regardless of what quarter it was..
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Though I am reminded of when Bullwinkle was playing for Wassamata U
and would always run the same way regardless of what quarter it was..
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Steve Coltrin
Oct 20, 2015, 10:02:43 AM10/20/15
to
begin fnord
has surely been pointed out to him, and his revised editions did not
correct them, I suspect he doesn't give a shit.
wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) writes:
> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
The Merchant Princes books are replete with Commonwealthisms. As this
> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
has surely been pointed out to him, and his revised editions did not
correct them, I suspect he doesn't give a shit.
pete...@gmail.com
Oct 20, 2015, 10:33:44 AM10/20/15
to
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 9:46:49 AM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:27 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
> >> In article <m2zj1gj...@kelutral.omcl.org>,
> >> Steve Coltrin <spco...@omcl.org> said:
> >>
> >> > And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
> >> > does not appear but is relevant:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
> >>
> >> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> >> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
> >> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
> >> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
> >> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
> >> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
> >
> >The first, I think, is also an American usage. The second is not.
>
> In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:27 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
> >> In article <m2zj1gj...@kelutral.omcl.org>,
> >> Steve Coltrin <spco...@omcl.org> said:
> >>
> >> > And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
> >> > does not appear but is relevant:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
> >>
> >> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> >> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
> >> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
> >> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
> >> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
> >> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
> >
> >The first, I think, is also an American usage. The second is not.
>
> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
I'll accept that.
1. My knowledge of sportsball is very limited.
2. My own vocabulary is a hopeless jumble of English and American usages,
due to my expatriate upbringing.
But looking it up, I find that 'own goal' is used by this side of the pond,
for example
http://www.puckreport.com/2010/11/today-in-nhl-history-ryan-obyrnes-own.html
...though there's a risk that's contaminated by Canadians.
pt
Robert Carnegie
Oct 20, 2015, 12:40:21 PM10/20/15
to
On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 14:46:49 UTC+1, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:27 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
> >> In article <m2zj1gj...@kelutral.omcl.org>,
> >> Steve Coltrin <spco...@omcl.org> said:
> >>
> >> > And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
> >> > does not appear but is relevant:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
> >>
> >> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> >> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
> >> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
> >> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
> >> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
> >> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
> >
> >The first, I think, is also an American usage. The second is not.
> >
> >pt
>
> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
> In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:27 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
> >> In article <m2zj1gj...@kelutral.omcl.org>,
> >> Steve Coltrin <spco...@omcl.org> said:
> >>
> >> > And maybe a link to Charles Stross' story "A Tall Tail", in which ClF3
> >> > does not appear but is relevant:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.tor.com/2012/07/20/a-tall-tail/
> >>
> >> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
> >> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
> >> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
> >> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
> >> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
> >> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
> >
> >The first, I think, is also an American usage. The second is not.
> >
> >pt
>
> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
Kevrob
Oct 20, 2015, 12:58:49 PM10/20/15
to
who follow the kinds of sports (hockey {field or ice}, association football,
lacrosse) where this is likely to come up. It has been known to happen in
basketball, for instance, when a player contesting a rebound accidentally
tip the ball in the basket he's defending. More rarely, a player dribbles
the ball in the wrong direction, confused about which goal his team is
attacking, and sinks a bucket. Due to the "backcourt violation" rule,
the play is likely to be whistled dead before he can shoot, if he crosses
the center line, but if it all happens in the backcourt, say, after a
stolen ball or intercepted pass, it can count.
Most sports terms in the USA come from baseball or gridiron football.
You can't have an own goal in baseball, and that would be an "own run."
US Football has the safety, where the ball carrier is tackled in his own
end zone: penalty is 2 points and the team scored upon has to kick off
to the team that scored (a "free kick.") There is "he lost yardage on
the play" or variations which have the meaning of not just not making
progress, but losing ground, but being tackled for a loss, or even
turning the ball over on downs is not as serious as running the ball into
the wrong end zone for 6 points.
I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
all that often.
Kevin R
lal_truckee
Oct 20, 2015, 1:24:38 PM10/20/15
to
On 10/20/15 6:46 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
Agree.
> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
I even have one to my credit (long ago college intramural game) and
aside from knowing the phrase's meaning have never heard it expressed in
inter-American conversation that I recall.
Of course, if I was a soccer-mom, my cohort would be different.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Oct 20, 2015, 2:03:00 PM10/20/15
to
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:58:44 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
>I've seen "own goal" in US usage, but it is more common among those
>who follow the kinds of sports (hockey {field or ice}, association football,
>lacrosse) where this is likely to come up. It has been known to happen in
>basketball, for instance, when a player contesting a rebound accidentally
>tip the ball in the basket he's defending. More rarely, a player dribbles
>the ball in the wrong direction, confused about which goal his team is
>attacking, and sinks a bucket. Due to the "backcourt violation" rule,
>the play is likely to be whistled dead before he can shoot, if he crosses
>the center line, but if it all happens in the backcourt, say, after a
>stolen ball or intercepted pass, it can count.
>
>Most sports terms in the USA come from baseball or gridiron football.
>You can't have an own goal in baseball, and that would be an "own run."
>US Football has the safety, where the ball carrier is tackled in his own
>end zone: penalty is 2 points and the team scored upon has to kick off
>to the team that scored (a "free kick.") There is "he lost yardage on
>the play" or variations which have the meaning of not just not making
>progress, but losing ground, but being tackled for a loss, or even
>turning the ball over on downs is not as serious as running the ball into
>the wrong end zone for 6 points.
>
>I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
>phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
>all that often.
I think that sums it up pretty well, but I'd add one more detail -- an
American seventy years old did not grow up with soccer, and wouldn't
use it. A reasonably cosmopolitan thirty-something well might.
(Incidentally, I've never heard it used in the context of hockey that
I can remember; only soccer. And I grew up in Boston when the Bruins
were huge.)
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
wrote:
>I've seen "own goal" in US usage, but it is more common among those
>who follow the kinds of sports (hockey {field or ice}, association football,
>lacrosse) where this is likely to come up. It has been known to happen in
>basketball, for instance, when a player contesting a rebound accidentally
>tip the ball in the basket he's defending. More rarely, a player dribbles
>the ball in the wrong direction, confused about which goal his team is
>attacking, and sinks a bucket. Due to the "backcourt violation" rule,
>the play is likely to be whistled dead before he can shoot, if he crosses
>the center line, but if it all happens in the backcourt, say, after a
>stolen ball or intercepted pass, it can count.
>
>Most sports terms in the USA come from baseball or gridiron football.
>You can't have an own goal in baseball, and that would be an "own run."
>US Football has the safety, where the ball carrier is tackled in his own
>end zone: penalty is 2 points and the team scored upon has to kick off
>to the team that scored (a "free kick.") There is "he lost yardage on
>the play" or variations which have the meaning of not just not making
>progress, but losing ground, but being tackled for a loss, or even
>turning the ball over on downs is not as serious as running the ball into
>the wrong end zone for 6 points.
>
>I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
>phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
>all that often.
American seventy years old did not grow up with soccer, and wouldn't
use it. A reasonably cosmopolitan thirty-something well might.
(Incidentally, I've never heard it used in the context of hockey that
I can remember; only soccer. And I grew up in Boston when the Bruins
were huge.)
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Kevrob
Oct 20, 2015, 2:35:03 PM10/20/15
to
consecutive Stanley Cup streak ring any bells? That's pure
Canadian-ness, there, but stateside hockey fans knew of it.
I'm an Islanders' fan. The Oilers broke our consecutive streak,
the "drive for five," so schadenfreude was involved in keeping it
in my memory.
The Bruins are still big, especially Chara.
Kevin R
William Hyde
Oct 20, 2015, 2:57:55 PM10/20/15
to
On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 3:45:03 AM UTC-4, David Goldfarb wrote:
> In article <4-udnUzf8OV9xEDI...@earthlink.com>,
> David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
> >As a followup to the original recs, I have now finished A Succession of Very
> >Bad Days. And it covers this ground as well, in various ways. (I also note
> >that it does indeed have a rather well-defined plot, which is visible from
> >the beginning ... but it's not what about Edgar, Dove, Zora, Chloris, etc.
> >are _doing_. Rather, it's 'a young man's coming-of-age' for a newly-realized
> >sorcerer. (Well, his hatching, in this case, though nobody realizes this till
> >about halfway through. (Except Halt, of course.)))
>
> I would say that that's a *story*, but that it's not a *plot*.
> ("Plot is a literary convention. Story is a force of nature."
> -- Teresa Nielsen Hayden)
"The King died and then the Queen died" - story.
> In article <4-udnUzf8OV9xEDI...@earthlink.com>,
> David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
> >As a followup to the original recs, I have now finished A Succession of Very
> >Bad Days. And it covers this ground as well, in various ways. (I also note
> >that it does indeed have a rather well-defined plot, which is visible from
> >the beginning ... but it's not what about Edgar, Dove, Zora, Chloris, etc.
> >are _doing_. Rather, it's 'a young man's coming-of-age' for a newly-realized
> >sorcerer. (Well, his hatching, in this case, though nobody realizes this till
> >about halfway through. (Except Halt, of course.)))
>
> I would say that that's a *story*, but that it's not a *plot*.
> ("Plot is a literary convention. Story is a force of nature."
> -- Teresa Nielsen Hayden)
"The King died and then, out of grief, the Queen died" - plot.
According to E. M. Forster, at any rate (in "Aspects of the Novel").
William Hyde
Brian M. Scott
Oct 20, 2015, 3:14:04 PM10/20/15
to
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:57:51 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
<wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:4b5fad34-af0c-41ad...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:
By that definition-by-example I’d say that _A Succession of
Very Bad Days_ does have a plot.
> According to E. M. Forster, at any rate (in "Aspects of
> the Novel").
‘The King was poisoned by the Seneschal, who successfully
accused the Queen of the murder, for which she was then
beheaded.’ - plot plot
Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.
<wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:4b5fad34-af0c-41ad...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:
Very Bad Days_ does have a plot.
> According to E. M. Forster, at any rate (in "Aspects of
> the Novel").
accused the Queen of the murder, for which she was then
beheaded.’ - plot plot
Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.
Greg Goss
Oct 20, 2015, 8:07:25 PM10/20/15
to
t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
>In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:27 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
>>> or am I correct in
>>> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
>>> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
>>> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
>>
>>The first, I think, is also an American usage. The second is not.
>
>In article <e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>,
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:36:27 AM UTC-4, William December Starr wrote:
>>> or am I correct in
>>> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
>>> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
>>> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
>>
>>The first, I think, is also an American usage. The second is not.
>
>I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>
>Though I am reminded of when Bullwinkle was playing for Wassamata U
>and would always run the same way regardless of what quarter it was..
I'm sure I've heard the term used for kids hockey and soccer.
>
>Though I am reminded of when Bullwinkle was playing for Wassamata U
>and would always run the same way regardless of what quarter it was..
Robert Bannister
Oct 20, 2015, 8:13:16 PM10/20/15
to
On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>
> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>
But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>
> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>
rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
one has to ask, is there any sport apart from soccer where there is such
a thing as "own goal"?
Greg Goss
Oct 20, 2015, 8:21:42 PM10/20/15
to
Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>
>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>
>
>But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
>one has to ask, is there any sport apart from soccer where there is such
>a thing as "own goal"?
It has to be something with "goals". That would include Hockey.
>On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>
>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>
>
>But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
>one has to ask, is there any sport apart from soccer where there is such
>a thing as "own goal"?
Someone has said that US football specifically excludes the term. I
would assume that the same carve-out would apply to Canadian football
with different but related rules.
John F. Eldredge
Oct 20, 2015, 8:43:46 PM10/20/15
to
accidentally score for the other team by heading for the wrong end of the
field. Not being much of a sports enthusiast, I can't say for certain.
Brian M. Scott
Oct 20, 2015, 9:20:26 PM10/20/15
to
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 06:20:40 -0700 (PDT),
<pete...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:
Mostly amongst those who are interested in soccer or read a
a fair bit of British prose, I think.
At least he didn’t make it ‘playing onto his own wicket’.
(Or being given out ‘hit wicket’ because he ‘just didn’t
quite get his leg over’! Poor Brian Johnston.)
> The second is not.
<pete...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:e370453f-6394-4fe3...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:
a fair bit of British prose, I think.
At least he didn’t make it ‘playing onto his own wicket’.
(Or being given out ‘hit wicket’ because he ‘just didn’t
quite get his leg over’! Poor Brian Johnston.)
> The second is not.
Gary R. Schmidt
Oct 20, 2015, 9:39:11 PM10/20/15
to
On 21/10/2015 11:13 AM, Robert Bannister wrote:
> On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>
>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>
>
> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
> rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Oh yes there is!
> On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>
>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>
>
> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
> rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
Two causes I have seen:
- Concussion (not sure if real or claimed as an excuse afterwards)
- A strong wind towards the goals and the back-pocket kicking across the
goal mouth (because he's an idiot!)
Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
When men talk to their friends, they insult each other.
They don't really mean it.
When women talk to their friends, they compliment each other.
They don't mean it either.
Kevrob
Oct 20, 2015, 9:50:20 PM10/20/15
to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Own_goal and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Own_goal#American_football and
especially,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Own_goal#American_football_2
yields situations where teams may take a safety on purpose and
a couple of notable "own touchdowns" - much rarer than own goals
in that FIFAish other football code.
Kevin R
Robert Bannister
Oct 20, 2015, 10:13:34 PM10/20/15
to
On 21/10/2015 8:21 AM, Greg Goss wrote:
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>
>> On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>>
>>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>>
>>
>> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>> rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
>> one has to ask, is there any sport apart from soccer where there is such
>> a thing as "own goal"?
>
> It has to be something with "goals". That would include Hockey.
Agreed. Ice hockey and field hockey are possibilities.
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>
>> On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>>
>>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>>
>>
>> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>> rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
>> one has to ask, is there any sport apart from soccer where there is such
>> a thing as "own goal"?
>
> It has to be something with "goals". That would include Hockey.
There are such things as "goals" in rugby football, but you can't score
one against your own side. It is a tactic in Australian Rules when all
else fails and gives the opposition 2 points, but it's not a 6 point goal.
Robert Bannister
Oct 20, 2015, 10:15:11 PM10/20/15
to
On 21/10/2015 9:34 AM, Gary R. Schmidt wrote:
> On 21/10/2015 11:13 AM, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>>
>>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>>
>>
>> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>> rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Oh yes there is!
Oh no there's not. It's not a goal; it's just 2 points.
> On 21/10/2015 11:13 AM, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 21/10/2015 12:40 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>>
>>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>>>
>>
>> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't in
>> rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American football, so
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Oh yes there is!
Gary R. Schmidt
Oct 21, 2015, 1:39:16 AM10/21/15
to
from the VFL, I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire.
Kay Shapero
Oct 21, 2015, 1:59:53 AM10/21/15
to
In article <n05cg8$54l$1...@panix3.panix.com>, wds...@panix.com says...
Not familiar with the former, not a sports fan particularly either so
I'll leave that to the others. As for the second one, I have
encountered "light touchpaper and retire" as a reference to lighting the
fuse on a bomb, though generally used metaphorically, such as throwing
out a statement in usenet then exiting the newsgroup before all the
noisy responses start coming in.
--
Kay Shapero
Address munged, try my first name at kayshapero dot net.
I'll leave that to the others. As for the second one, I have
encountered "light touchpaper and retire" as a reference to lighting the
fuse on a bomb, though generally used metaphorically, such as throwing
out a statement in usenet then exiting the newsgroup before all the
noisy responses start coming in.
--
Kay Shapero
Address munged, try my first name at kayshapero dot net.
Robert Carnegie
Oct 21, 2015, 6:34:24 AM10/21/15
to
On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
> all that often.
How about "friendly fire"?
> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
> all that often.
Raymond Daley
Oct 21, 2015, 6:46:31 AM10/21/15
to
"Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:eaed2dd3-804c-41d6-a67c-
Blue On Blue.
Or at least that's what the RAF calls it. Or called it when I served.
I believe the US version is "Oh look, people on our side! Fire anyway with
no trigger discipline!"
One day Hollywood will release a movie that portrays the US Military as
people who've actually been taught to fire a weapon correctly, ie:- single
shots unless otherwise ordered. (This will never happen)
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Oct 21, 2015, 11:41:53 AM10/21/15
to
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Oct 21, 2015, 12:03:10 PM10/21/15
to
In article <jhcf2b5qkehe4ikrq...@reader80.eternal-september.org>,
more like "they shot themselves in the foot".
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 03:34:20 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
><rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
>>> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
>>> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
>>> all that often.
>>
>>How about "friendly fire"?
>
>THAT term is familiar.
>
But unlikely to be used like "own goal", I think. Probably something
>On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 03:34:20 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
><rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
>>> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
>>> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
>>> all that often.
>>
>>How about "friendly fire"?
>
>THAT term is familiar.
>
more like "they shot themselves in the foot".
Kevrob
Oct 21, 2015, 4:09:02 PM10/21/15
to
Kevin R
J. Clarke
Oct 21, 2015, 6:19:48 PM10/21/15
to
In article <72KVx.168482$He3....@fx37.am4>, raymon...@ntlworld.com
says...
club last week. Woops, my mistake, it's a bunch of terrorists."
> One day Hollywood will release a movie that portrays the US Military as
> people who've actually been taught to fire a weapon correctly, ie:- single
> shots unless otherwise ordered. (This will never happen)
One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six rounds,
too.
says...
>
> "Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:eaed2dd3-804c-41d6-a67c-
> > On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
> >> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
> >> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
> >> all that often.
> >
> > How about "friendly fire"?
>
> Actually that's a phrase for civilians. The correct Military term would be
> Blue On Blue.
> Or at least that's what the RAF calls it. Or called it when I served.
> I believe the US version is "Oh look, people on our side! Fire anyway with
> no trigger discipline!"
No, it's "Oh, look, that bunch of smarmy Brits who insulted us at the
> "Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:eaed2dd3-804c-41d6-a67c-
> > On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
> >> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
> >> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
> >> all that often.
> >
> > How about "friendly fire"?
>
> Actually that's a phrase for civilians. The correct Military term would be
> Blue On Blue.
> Or at least that's what the RAF calls it. Or called it when I served.
> I believe the US version is "Oh look, people on our side! Fire anyway with
> no trigger discipline!"
club last week. Woops, my mistake, it's a bunch of terrorists."
> One day Hollywood will release a movie that portrays the US Military as
> people who've actually been taught to fire a weapon correctly, ie:- single
> shots unless otherwise ordered. (This will never happen)
too.
David Johnston
Oct 21, 2015, 6:50:13 PM10/21/15
to
On 10/21/2015 4:45 AM, Raymond Daley wrote:
> "Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:eaed2dd3-804c-41d6-a67c-
>> On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
>>> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
>>> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
>>> all that often.
>>
>> How about "friendly fire"?
>
> Actually that's a phrase for civilians. The correct Military term would be
> Blue On Blue.
> Or at least that's what the RAF calls it. Or called it when I served.
> I believe the US version is "Oh look, people on our side! Fire anyway with
> no trigger discipline!"
Well most of us are civilians, and I'm pretty sure the RAF does and
> "Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:eaed2dd3-804c-41d6-a67c-
>> On Tuesday, 20 October 2015 17:58:49 UTC+1, Kevrob wrote:
>>> I think most of us USians would get the sense of "own goal," but the
>>> phrase isn't loasded in our cliche quiver, and we don't let it loose
>>> all that often.
>>
>> How about "friendly fire"?
>
> Actually that's a phrase for civilians. The correct Military term would be
> Blue On Blue.
> Or at least that's what the RAF calls it. Or called it when I served.
> I believe the US version is "Oh look, people on our side! Fire anyway with
> no trigger discipline!"
should have a whole different jargon set from American ground forces.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Oct 21, 2015, 7:11:32 PM10/21/15
to
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Oct 22, 2015, 12:07:49 AM10/22/15
to
current TV show. It was unusual enough that I noticed that it
happened, but not so amazing I remember the details.
Greg Goss
Oct 22, 2015, 12:41:32 AM10/22/15
to
"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <72KVx.168482$He3....@fx37.am4>, raymon...@ntlworld.com
>says...
>In article <72KVx.168482$He3....@fx37.am4>, raymon...@ntlworld.com
>says...
>> One day Hollywood will release a movie that portrays the US Military as
>> people who've actually been taught to fire a weapon correctly, ie:- single
>> shots unless otherwise ordered. (This will never happen)
>
>One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six rounds,
>too.
Apparently there was a lot of nerd-bait in Titanic.
>> people who've actually been taught to fire a weapon correctly, ie:- single
>> shots unless otherwise ordered. (This will never happen)
>
>One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six rounds,
>too.
The camera viewpoint in the opening sequence cut across one of the
smokestacks so you could see that there was no (significant) opening
in the flat-topped stack like you'd expect from a CGI model that was
never expected to be looked at from above. The revolver had seven
shots. There were three or four other "continuity errors".
But the fourth stack was a dummy, with only a tiny opening for the
kitchen cookstoves. The revolver was an oddball model designed for
seven shots. Etc.
lal_truckee
Oct 22, 2015, 10:08:36 AM10/22/15
to
On 10/21/15 3:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six rounds,
> too.
Six round revolvers is not universal. Lots of 5 through 10 shot
> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six rounds,
> too.
revolvers were made. Reference to such is what google is for.
J. Clarke
Oct 22, 2015, 6:27:12 PM10/22/15
to
In article <n0aqgu$6ml$1...@dont-email.me>, lal_t...@yahoo.com says...
So how many hundred-round or thousand-round revolvers are there?
You've clearly missed the point.
You've clearly missed the point.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Oct 22, 2015, 7:24:26 PM10/22/15
to
"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six
> rounds, too.
>
Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in a movie is
when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark while reloading.
--
Terry Austin
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six
> rounds, too.
>
when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark while reloading.
--
Terry Austin
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Brian M. Scott
Oct 22, 2015, 7:46:48 PM10/22/15
to
On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:24:22 -0700, Gutless Umbrella
Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:XnsA53BA6E456A...@69.16.179.42> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
>> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at
>> six rounds, too.
> Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in
> a movie is when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark
> while reloading.
Not even for the occasional ‘Oh, shit!’ moment? (Serious
question, since my experience of movies is very limited.)
Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:XnsA53BA6E456A...@69.16.179.42> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
>> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at
>> six rounds, too.
> Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in
> a movie is when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark
> while reloading.
question, since my experience of movies is very limited.)
Jaimie Vandenbergh
Oct 22, 2015, 9:32:47 PM10/22/15
to
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:02:39 -0600, Steve Coltrin <spco...@omcl.org>
wrote:
>begin fnord
>has surely been pointed out to him, and his revised editions did not
>correct them, I suspect he doesn't give a shit.
As per his blog posts, he does, but the corrections often don't come in
in time for the paperback and the publishers don't care enough after
that.
The recent re-edit/re-issue of the Merchant Princes set was supposed to
capture and fix those, but I've not re-read - and might not spot them
anyway, being a Brit.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
To every complex problem there is a solution which is simple, neat and wrong.
-- HL Mencken
wrote:
>begin fnord
>wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) writes:
>
>> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
>> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
>> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
>> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
>> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
>> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
>
>The Merchant Princes books are replete with Commonwealthisms. As this
>
>> Finally got around to reading that. What caught my attention was a
>> complete side point: am I ignorant of large swathes of U.S. culture
>> that are quite unlike the parts I grew up with, or am I correct in
>> thinking that somebody should tell Charlie Stross that
>> seventy-year-old white lifetime mainstream Americans don't generally
>> talk about "scoring own goals" or "lighting the blue touch paper"?
>
>has surely been pointed out to him, and his revised editions did not
>correct them, I suspect he doesn't give a shit.
As per his blog posts, he does, but the corrections often don't come in
in time for the paperback and the publishers don't care enough after
that.
The recent re-edit/re-issue of the Merchant Princes set was supposed to
capture and fix those, but I've not re-read - and might not spot them
anyway, being a Brit.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
To every complex problem there is a solution which is simple, neat and wrong.
-- HL Mencken
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Oct 22, 2015, 10:14:04 PM10/22/15
to
On 10/22/15 7:24 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six
>> rounds, too.
>>
> Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in a movie is
> when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark while reloading.
>
Or for an appropriate dramatic moment.
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at six
>> rounds, too.
>>
> Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in a movie is
> when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark while reloading.
>
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
William December Starr
Oct 23, 2015, 8:16:20 AM10/23/15
to
In article <MPG.30932cc34...@news.eternal-september.org>,
"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> said:
> lal_t...@yahoo.com says...
(It sure as hell revolved.)
-- wds
"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> said:
> lal_t...@yahoo.com says...
>
>> Six round revolvers is not universal. Lots of 5 through 10 shot
>> revolvers were made. Reference to such is what google is for.
>
> So how many hundred-round or thousand-round revolvers are there?
Hmm. Technically speaking, would a Gatling gun be an N-round revolver?
>> Six round revolvers is not universal. Lots of 5 through 10 shot
>> revolvers were made. Reference to such is what google is for.
>
> So how many hundred-round or thousand-round revolvers are there?
(It sure as hell revolved.)
-- wds
William December Starr
Oct 23, 2015, 9:17:04 AM10/23/15
to
In article <d8o3ko...@mid.individual.net>,
As has been pointed out, gridiron football has the 'safety,' in
which a player with the football is tackled within his own team's
end zone[1]. This is not good but in terms of point totals is on
average proportionately much less damaging to his team than an own
goal in soccer[2], and in some situations a team will for tactical
reasons deliberately take a safety[3].
-----------
*1: Or, a player with possession of the football within his own
team's end zone goes out of bounds directly from said end zone;
"player with the ball goes out of bounds from the field of
play" is always the functional equivalent of "player with the
ball is tackled within the field of play," except that the
former causes the game clock to stop while the latter does not.
-----------
*2: There are three ways to score points in U.S. gridiron football
(Canadian football has a fourth, a rarely occurring thing that
I've never fully understood called a 'rouge' that's worth one
point.)
Field goal (player on Team A successfully kicks a football,
which is in contact with the ground when his foot makes
contact, through the uprights located at the end of Team B's
end zone): three points for Team A.
Touchdown (player on Team A has possession of the ball while in
Team B's end zone): six points for Team A _and_ a Team A is
given a one-play opportunity, called a 'conversion,' to attempt
either a very high likelihood-of-success play to score one
additional point or a much more difficult play to score two
additional points. Except in cases where they desperately need
the two points teams virtually always try for the one-point
conversion, thus it's very common to speak of a touchdown as
being worth seven points.
Safety (player on Team B, with possession of the ball, is
either tackled within or goes out-of-bounds directly from Team
B's end zone): two points for Team A and Team B must then
kickoff the ball to Team A from Team B's twenty-yard line
(normally, the team which has just scored, rather than the one
scored against, kicks off the ball to the other team from their
own, um, thirty-yard line I believe... when I was a yute it was
the forty but it's been moved back over the years as kickers'
legs have become mightier).
-----------
*3: Depending on the score, the amount of time left in the game,
etc., sometimes when Team A has possession of the ball deep
with their own end of the field -- often called "being in the
shadow of their own end zone" -- it's more advantageous for
them to deliberately 'score' a safety and give Team B two
points in exchange for being able to then freely kick-off the
ball to Team B from their own twenty-yard line rather than risk
accidentally turning the ball over to Team B on, say, Team A's
own one-yard line, i.e., handing Team B a golden opportunity to
subsequently produce a touchdown or field goal of their own.
-- wds
Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> said:
>> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>
>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>
> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't
> in rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American
>> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>> I have never heard "own goal" used by an American.
>>
>> Maybe now that there's a college Quidditch league?
>
> But is there such a thing as "own goal" in Quidditch? There isn't
> in rugby union, rugby league, Australian football or American
> football, so one has to ask, is there any sport apart from soccer
> where there is such a thing as "own goal"?
As has been pointed out, gridiron football has the 'safety,' in
which a player with the football is tackled within his own team's
end zone[1]. This is not good but in terms of point totals is on
average proportionately much less damaging to his team than an own
goal in soccer[2], and in some situations a team will for tactical
reasons deliberately take a safety[3].
-----------
*1: Or, a player with possession of the football within his own
team's end zone goes out of bounds directly from said end zone;
"player with the ball goes out of bounds from the field of
play" is always the functional equivalent of "player with the
ball is tackled within the field of play," except that the
former causes the game clock to stop while the latter does not.
-----------
*2: There are three ways to score points in U.S. gridiron football
(Canadian football has a fourth, a rarely occurring thing that
I've never fully understood called a 'rouge' that's worth one
point.)
Field goal (player on Team A successfully kicks a football,
which is in contact with the ground when his foot makes
contact, through the uprights located at the end of Team B's
end zone): three points for Team A.
Touchdown (player on Team A has possession of the ball while in
Team B's end zone): six points for Team A _and_ a Team A is
given a one-play opportunity, called a 'conversion,' to attempt
either a very high likelihood-of-success play to score one
additional point or a much more difficult play to score two
additional points. Except in cases where they desperately need
the two points teams virtually always try for the one-point
conversion, thus it's very common to speak of a touchdown as
being worth seven points.
Safety (player on Team B, with possession of the ball, is
either tackled within or goes out-of-bounds directly from Team
B's end zone): two points for Team A and Team B must then
kickoff the ball to Team A from Team B's twenty-yard line
(normally, the team which has just scored, rather than the one
scored against, kicks off the ball to the other team from their
own, um, thirty-yard line I believe... when I was a yute it was
the forty but it's been moved back over the years as kickers'
legs have become mightier).
-----------
*3: Depending on the score, the amount of time left in the game,
etc., sometimes when Team A has possession of the ball deep
with their own end of the field -- often called "being in the
shadow of their own end zone" -- it's more advantageous for
them to deliberately 'score' a safety and give Team B two
points in exchange for being able to then freely kick-off the
ball to Team B from their own twenty-yard line rather than risk
accidentally turning the ball over to Team B on, say, Team A's
own one-yard line, i.e., handing Team B a golden opportunity to
subsequently produce a touchdown or field goal of their own.
-- wds
Kevrob
Oct 23, 2015, 11:25:51 AM10/23/15
to
pistols, but there were certainly all sorts of revolving
long guns, either of the personal type, or the more artillery-
piece style of the Gatling gun or its competitors, all of
whom are ancestors of the "machine gun" we all know from
WWI and later conventional conflicts.
Like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_revolving_rifle
Kevin R
pete...@gmail.com
Oct 23, 2015, 11:36:16 AM10/23/15
to
as described in the linked article. They never became
popular.
pt
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Oct 23, 2015, 12:31:03 PM10/23/15
to
"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in news:1duddwinl65sb
$.1wpwdc9i3tec5$.d...@40tude.net:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:24:22 -0700, Gutless Umbrella
> Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote
> in<news:XnsA53BA6E456A...@69.16.179.42> in
> rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>>> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at
>>> six rounds, too.
>
>> Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in
>> a movie is when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark
>> while reloading.
>
> Not even for the occasional ‘Oh, shit!’ moment? (Serious
> question, since my experience of movies is very limited.)
>
Generally speaking, "Oh, shit" moments are opportunities for smart-
ass remarks. Not, perhaps, by the gunman saying "Oh, shit," but
*somebody* will respond with a smart-ass remark.
$.1wpwdc9i3tec5$.d...@40tude.net:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:24:22 -0700, Gutless Umbrella
> Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote
> in<news:XnsA53BA6E456A...@69.16.179.42> in
> rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:MPG.3091d989c...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>>> One of these days they'll show a revolver going empty at
>>> six rounds, too.
>
>> Revolver? The only time _any_ firearm runs out of ammo in
>> a movie is when the pacing calls for a smart-ass remark
>> while reloading.
>
> Not even for the occasional ‘Oh, shit!’ moment? (Serious
> question, since my experience of movies is very limited.)
>
ass remarks. Not, perhaps, by the gunman saying "Oh, shit," but
*somebody* will respond with a smart-ass remark.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages