Vimes, promotion
terry
Psiogen
Lord Protector of Ankh-Morpork? ;)
Sylvan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------
A rampant chicken teaser, cheese log poacher, grand piano stacker, projectile
vomiter, and stark raving pathological liar. You have been warned.
Anna1558
In article <19990128195501...@ng-fa1.aol.com>, psi...@aol.com
(Psiogen) writes:
>>What will Sam Vimes next promotion will be?
>
>Lord Protector of Ankh-Morpork? ;)
Let's do a quick run down, shall we?
spoiler space for all Watch books
At the end of MAA he was knighted and made commander.
At the end of FOC he gets a pay rise.
At the end of J he was made a duke and a statue of Stoneface Vimes was to be
erected at the top of Broad Way.
I suggest he become Patrician. It would certainly be interesting.
Anna
--
Anna...@bigfoot.com, ICQ number 7292578
Be a MAN in the City Watch! The City Watch needs MEN! (and miscellaneous)
Join today at http://members.xoom.com/annacox/watch.html!
Medusa
<anna...@aol.comnospam> writes
>spoiler space for all Watch books
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At the end of MAA he was knighted and made commander.
>At the end of FOC he gets a pay rise.
>At the end of J he was made a duke and a statue of Stoneface Vimes was to be
>erected at the top of Broad Way.
>I suggest he become Patrician. It would certainly be interesting.
Nooooooooo! Then we'd have to get rid of Vetinari, and my life just
wouldn't be worth living then!!!!!!!!!!
--
Medusa
Geek, feminist, and part-time gorgon
Change jinkx to euryale to reply
Sandra Ruth Nicholson
Anna1558 wrote in message <19990129131820...@ngol01.aol.com>...
>
>In article <19990128195501...@ng-fa1.aol.com>, psi...@aol.com
>(Psiogen) writes:
>
>>>What will Sam Vimes next promotion will be?
>>
>>Lord Protector of Ankh-Morpork? ;)
>Let's do a quick run down, shall we?
>
>
>I suggest he become Patrician. It would certainly be interesting.
>
>Anna
>--
>Anna...@bigfoot.com, ICQ number 7292578
>Be a MAN in the City Watch! The City Watch needs MEN! (and miscellaneous)
>Join today at http://members.xoom.com/annacox/watch.html!
By all the gods in Dunmanifestin, Vimes as Patrician??!!!!
[And yes I know 'they' say about multiple exclamation marks]
That's almost as unthinkable as the Librarian being turned back into a
human.
I do like the 'Lord Protector of Ank-Morpork' idea though.
francesco...@tafensw.edu.au
Medusa <Med...@jinkx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <19990129131820...@ngol01.aol.com>, Anna1558
> <anna...@aol.comnospam> writes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >At the end of FOC he gets a pay rise.
> >At the end of J he was made a duke and a statue of Stoneface Vimes was to be
> >erected at the top of Broad Way.
>
> wouldn't be worth living then!!!!!!!!!!
>
and than spending his time *not* interfering with Vimes administration.
Francesco
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
WildKim
wrote:
>
>In article <19990128195501...@ng-fa1.aol.com>, psi...@aol.com
>(Psiogen) writes:
>
>>>What will Sam Vimes next promotion will be?
>>
>>Lord Protector of Ankh-Morpork? ;)
>Let's do a quick run down, shall we?
>
>spoiler space for all Watch books
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At the end of MAA he was knighted and made commander.
>At the end of FOC he gets a pay rise.
>At the end of J he was made a duke and a statue of Stoneface Vimes was to be
>erected at the top of Broad Way.
>I suggest he become Patrician. It would certainly be interesting.
>
Perhaps he could be the Assistant Patrician :)
Kim
Martin G Bridges
>
>Perhaps he could be the Assistant Patrician :)
>
(British politics reference for you there!)
Cheers,
Martin
********************************************************************************
* Martin G Bridges - Consultant, Communications Division, Logica UK Ltd. *
* Tel. +44 171 637 9111 http://www.logica.com email: bridgesm(at)logica.com *
* All opinions expressed are mine, but may be shared. *
********************************************************************************
Rob Barrett
francesco...@tafensw.edu.au wrote in message
<792phb$lke$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <2GZWBKA5...@euryale.demon.co.uk>,
> Medusa <Med...@jinkx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <19990129131820...@ngol01.aol.com>, Anna1558
>> <anna...@aol.comnospam> writes
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >At the end of MAA he was knighted and made commander.
>> >At the end of FOC he gets a pay rise.
>> >At the end of J he was made a duke and a statue of Stoneface Vimes was
to be
>> >erected at the top of Broad Way.
>> >I suggest he become Patrician. It would certainly be interesting.
>>
>> wouldn't be worth living then!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>Not neccicaraly imagine Vetinari retiring, engeneering Vimes as his
successor
>and than spending his time *not* interfering with Vimes administration.
Or Vetinari is called away to attend to *very* important and lengthy
business in, I don't know, Al Khali, and he puts Vimes temporarily in his
place?
Rob Barrett
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
rob_bar...@geocities.com (<-- Remove spam)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Starship/7905
ICQ: 16770248
Olof S. Krüger
> >
> >Perhaps he could be the Assistant Patrician :)
> >
> Yes, I can just see him as the John Prescott to the Patrician's Tony Blair!!
>
> (British politics reference for you there!)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Martin
>
Yeah, folks, just go on like this! 'I Think Carrot could be the leader of the Watch
by arresting Vimes...' (Or any variation of '..what could've been...')
This is just the right attitude (i.e. thread) that will make pterry leave this forum
as well! Having read pterrys last 'contribution' to alt.fan.pratchett I was rather
disappointed reading this thread. Although this is actually my first contribution at
all - and I haven't followed all of the threads - I am rather angry. Who will be the
first to sue pterry for having read anything about his books...?
Olof S. Krueger
PS: I don't suppose pterry is reading this, but: is there anybody right now sueing
him or is he just scared off?
Martin G Bridges
[snipped my original light-hearted joke, which I thought was rather good but never mind]
>Yeah, folks, just go on like this! 'I Think Carrot could be the leader of the
> Watch
>by arresting Vimes...' (Or any variation of '..what could've been...')
>This is just the right attitude (i.e. thread) that will make pterry leave this
> forum
>as well! Having read pterrys last 'contribution' to alt.fan.pratchett I was
> rather
>disappointed reading this thread. Although this is actually my first
> contribution at
>all - and I haven't followed all of the threads - I am rather angry. Who will
> be the
>first to sue pterry for having read anything about his books...?
>
longer feels he can participate in the newsgroup(s). Yes, I can understand his
reasons. But to go around having a go at people for posting the odd
light-hearted quip is ridiculous.
Anyway, I'll shut up now in case I make any more first time posters angry.
Jonathan Ellis
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
>Or Vetinari is called away to attend to *very* important and lengthy
>business in, I don't know, Al Khali, and he puts Vimes temporarily in his
>place?
I have a suspicion that this is *exactly* what is beginning to happen
in Jingo, and Lord Vetinari's real purpose in stepping down is to test Vimes
in exactly this way. Never mind Lord Rust's pretensions, it is Vimes who
takes the matter in hand - with a subtle hint from Vetinari ("To Sir Samuel
Vimes, Knight"...) Admittedly he doesn't remain in Ankh-Morpork, but he gets
the job done - of saving Ankh-Morpork from (1) Klatch and (2) Ankh-Morpork.
The war is already as good as over before Vetinari reaches Cadram - the men
are playing football and Cadram is at the wrong end of Vimes's crossbow,
meanwhile Lord Rust is simply being pushed aside.
What might have happened next if Vetinari hadn't arrived is open to
speculation: one can never predict what might have happened - but we know
that 71-hour Ahmed knows that Vimes wouldn't have actually dared to shoot
Cadram [1], but Cadram didn't know that: all he knew is that Ahmed was
backing Vimes, leaving Cadram with the options of surrender [2], run [2],
fight [3] or stay put waiting for Vimes to move [4] - a classic case of
double jeopardy, in which Vimes has the advantage as long as he keeps his
nerve and his cool.
But of course, Vetinari then turns up just as Vimes gets himself into
that situation - "Well done, Vimes. I see you've got the donkey up the
minaret." A perfect metaphor for the way Vetinari does things himself -
Cadram (implicitly compared to the donkey) has to either back down or keep
going, jump off and go splat - in both cases, coming off worst. But it's
also clear that this is only the first part of a test - the second, of
course, being to get it down again and make sure it *doesn't* jump off: by
implication, how and when to *seem* to give way, but be still in charge of
the situation afterwards (look at Vetinari leading the donkey back down out
of the minaret: notice it's still following his lead... compare this to the
fact that he gives way over Leshp, only for Klatch to realise that they've
got absolutely nothing out of the deal and Vetinari is still in charge of
the situation. Meanwhile, any warships that happened to actually be moored
at Leshp would have been dragged down with the island when it sank - thus
destroying the Klatchian fleet...)
So Vimes is pushed aside for a while (not being yet up to part 2 of the
"test", as I see it), but rewarded with a promotion (unwanted - Vimes still
hates the idea, and this is exactly the reason the Patrician gives him it:
explained perfectly in FoC. "It appears that you have managed to retain this
(anti-authoritarian streak) even though you *are* authority.") which puts
him in a more senior position than most of the current nobility.
[1] Apart from anything else, it would have reinforced the calls in
Klatch for war on A-M.
[2] Losing all credibility. (Yes, this footnote is referred to twice.)
[3] And then - let's just say it's amazing what you can get away with
in the name of "self-defence", or when the other guy is "resisting
arrest"...
[4] Which would work if he managed to convince Vimes to back down, or
if Vimes decided to shoot first (and then see [1]). But if Vimes also
decides to wait for his enemy to make the move, then that throws the problem
back on Cadram - meanwhile, the situation outside is becoming more and more
football-ish and less and less war-ish, and the Klatchian army is heading
home... forcing Cadram to make the move eventually, and then see [2] or [3].
Jonathan.
Richard Eney
Jonathan Ellis <jona...@franz-liszt.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
<spoiler space inserted>
some spoiler space kept but actually, I've removed all the
speculative "analysis"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
> I have a suspicion that this is *exactly* what is beginning to happen
>in Jingo, and Lord Vetinari's real purpose in stepping down is to test Vimes
<snip>
> What might have happened next if Vetinari hadn't arrived is open to
>speculation: one can never predict what might have happened
No it isn't!
<snip extended speculation>
Jonathan and everybody,
_Please_ don't do detailed 'what may happen next' or 'what might
have been' speculations on alt.books.pratchett. That sort of thing has
already forced Terry to leave alt.fan.pratchett. Discuss what _does_
happen in the books, sure, but please don't speculate on further
developments. I for one appreciate reading Terry's opinions on things and
I don't want to have to start reading whatever that gaming ng is that he
sometimes is on.
=Tamar
Mary Sophia Novak
Eney) wrote:
> Jonathan and everybody,
> _Please_ don't do detailed 'what may happen next' or 'what might
> have been' speculations on alt.books.pratchett. That sort of thing has
> already forced Terry to leave alt.fan.pratchett. Discuss what _does_
> happen in the books, sure, but please don't speculate on further
> developments. I for one appreciate reading Terry's opinions on things and
> I don't want to have to start reading whatever that gaming ng is that he
> sometimes is on.
>
Argh, indeed.
When I saw Terry's afp resignation, I had a feeling this would happen.
I've been gone too long to have any kind of oldtimer-cred, but I was
beginning to read abp again because of the publication of the exquisitely
juicy Carpe Jugulum. No sooner do I resubscribe...I am probably the only
person who is every bit as dismayed by this situation because of the
effect it has on _abp_ as because Terry has left afp.
Look, I love Terry's participation in his own fangroups as much as
everyone else, but this group-switch thing with the terms as Tamar states
them above is completely bizarre. IMNSHO, some of the best discussions
that have ever taken place on abp were of exactly the general speculative
nature that is apparently now prohibited--think back to just before FoC
was published and we had eternal discussions speculating on the exact same
topic, the fascinating interplay between Vimes, Vetinari, and Carrot,
where it had been and where it would go. That we turned out to be right
almost as often as not made it all the sweeter. Most of the discussion
was in the vein of what Jonathan posted. I don't recall Terry ever
expressing any worries about future plagiarism accusations coming out of
that. Nor, admittedly, do I recall him seeming too enthused, but I do
recall him following the threads and occasionally joining in.
I realize that Terry, now, has that many more years of
post-afp-traumatic-stress-disorder behind him, and I am terribly sorry
that obnoxious people have left him so shellshocked. But I don't see the
logic of defecting from the fan group to the book group because the book
group can be trusted not to talk about the books. At the very least, it
bears some measured discussion of the new parameters and ramifications so
that we all know where we stand.
I *do*, and always *did*, know about and understand the long-standing ban
against fan fiction, but fan-fic is very different from what Jonathan
posted.
God forbid that this post should drive Terry out of abp, too. Terry,
don't you DARE--I am NOT looking to get tossed on a funeral pyre by angry
mourners. But can we talk amongst ourselves about a solution? Is there
ANY way to set boundaries of what's acceptable, and where, and what
isn't? Are there any parameters beyond "don't speculate what might
happen, ever"? Or, maybe just maybe, is the idea that the book group can
be trusted to talk about the books without turning around and making
profoundly moronic accusations of plagiarism later? (An activity whose
ban I heartily support in ALL Pratchett forums.) Is there any room for
common sense?
My best guess, since things have progressed to this sorry state all
without my active participation in about two years (eerily, my absence
coincided with my earning a master's degree, which, it turns out, will
when combined with 99 cents just about get me a bag of Cheetos) is that
perhaps we can create a Bizarro-ABP on afp. Tell y'all what--if nothing
else, when I've reread CJ and settled my thoughts on it, I'll drop a note
here and let you know that I've posted something relevant on afp. Perhaps
others can do the same?
And if not there, then where? Doesn't this fundamentally affect the
original purpose of abp? What is the central purpose of abp if it isn't
the place where a handful of obsessives can explore every teensy
ramification of the damn books to death if they want, without hassling or
being hassled by those who like to chat amongst themselves about every
other topic on earth?
(By the way, now that I'm thinking back to the "halcyon days" of early
abp--aka, back when I posted a lot--if anyone knows where Victoria Martin
is, and how she can be reached, I'd be profoundly grateful if you'd
*E-MAIL* me with that information. Miss you, gal.)
Bemusedly yours,
Mary Sophia Novak
msn...@mail.internetcds.com
Terry Pratchett
Sophia Novak <msn...@mail.internetcds.com> writes
>I realize that Terry, now, has that many more years of
>post-afp-traumatic-stress-disorder behind him, and I am terribly sorry
>that obnoxious people have left him so shellshocked. But I don't see the
>logic of defecting from the fan group to the book group because the book
>group can be trusted not to talk about the books.
It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
Traditionally, at least, abp has been a low-traffic group and the
discussion had been just that -- a discussion about the ways books have
gone and DW is going. I've tended to be more sure, because of the
nature of the threads, that the posters weren't likely to pop up a year
or two later saying 'that was my idea'. Don't ask why, it just seemed
to feel that way.
As I keep pointing out, I fully understand that speculating about future
plots, twists, themes, etc, etc, is a basic part of fandom. It can't
and shouldn't be taken away. I want to make that clear. But, like
other 'cult' authors who have been down this road, I realize I'm totally
exposed to any duckweed who wants to run with a 'TP stole my story'
case. The problem isn't legal, it's to do with PR. You don't sell a
lot of books or, in the UK, even get to be moderately successful,
without annoying a few people. It'd run all right. People 'out there'
don't understand how fandom works, either.
I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting this. There's
fanfic around, but I don't see it. To find it, I'd have to go looking.
I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do -- but in
reality discussion wanders all over the place, and I don't think this
problem can be 'organized' away.
--
Terry Pratchett
Heather Knowles
>
>Look, I love Terry's participation in his own fangroups as much as
>everyone else, but this group-switch thing with the terms as Tamar states
>them above is completely bizarre. IMNSHO, some of the best discussions
>that have ever taken place on abp were of exactly the general speculative
>nature that is apparently now prohibited--think back to just before FoC
>was published and we had eternal discussions speculating on the exact same
>topic, the fascinating interplay between Vimes, Vetinari, and Carrot,
>where it had been and where it would go. That we turned out to be right
>almost as often as not made it all the sweeter. Most of the discussion
>was in the vein of what Jonathan posted. I don't recall Terry ever
>expressing any worries about future plagiarism accusations coming out of
>that. Nor, admittedly, do I recall him seeming too enthused, but I do
>recall him following the threads and occasionally joining in.
Sorry, Mary Sophia, but Tamar is right. The relevant section of Terry's
post says:
'But, despite everything, RSN someone is going to plonk down some theme
or situation which is right in the *heart* of a story that I'm planning.
I do not want to end up faced with a public accusation of plagiarism or
theft; the fact that it might well have no legal foundation is beside
the point. You don't have to be hugely imaginative to see that this
could be damaging in other ways.'
Speculation about the future of characters is *exactly* what has
prompted him to stop reading afp.
<snip>
>And if not there, then where? Doesn't this fundamentally affect the
>original purpose of abp? What is the central purpose of abp if it isn't
>the place where a handful of obsessives can explore every teensy
>ramification of the damn books to death if they want, without hassling or
>being hassled by those who like to chat amongst themselves about every
>other topic on earth?
Absolutely - but that's going to have to mean obsessing over the
published works, not trying to second-guess future developments.
Anyway, who you calling obsessive? Just cos I got all the books and the
videos and the screensavers and.... Ah. See what you mean <embarrassed
g>.....
--
lotsa luv, Heaven xxxxxxx
cat, n. - a soft, indestructible automaton provided by nature
to be kicked when things go wrong in the domestic circle
- Ambrose Bierce, 'The Devil's Dictionary
Gidjabolgo
news:MdVmJKAG...@unseen.demon.co.uk...
>
>It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
Hey! You plagiarized that line from my fiancee!
Ok, that wasn't very funny, but it was intended to be, ok? And she
has, in fact, said something very close to that, which impressed me,
since she's only five.
<snip>
>I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting this.
There's
>fanfic around, but I don't see it. To find it, I'd have to go
looking.
>I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do -- but
in
>reality discussion wanders all over the place, and I don't think this
>problem can be 'organized' away.
But the problem is twofold, really. The first is the assimilation of
ideas, puns, character developments from your point of view. I can
understand that you don't want to get struck by the thought that an
idea might be remembered from afp, abp or fanfiction instead of being
an original, creative impulse from your own brain. And here I'd better
add that from my POV, it would be your idea, even though the
inspiration came from an external source. After all, the trick is not
so much getting an idea, but to write the actual story or subplot
based on it and making it believable and 'live' to the reader. Which
is one of the explanations we have the annotation file. But as I said,
for your own conscience, it'd probably be better to be sure the ideas
are yours. As I understand it, one book is actually inspired by a line
from an afp/abp'er - Hogfather. But the fact that the foundation of
the story came from an external source doesn't make it any less a work
of your creativity. I mean, if that was the case, that Shakespear guy
could sue you all the way to Saturn. Oh, hes been dead for a while,
has he? But I hope you see what I mean - there aren't that many
original stories, really. I think it's just seven, really. Tamar?
The other side of the problem is trickier. There is no way you can
prove you have not seen a particular piece of fanfic or speculation.
Even if you have publicly resigned from afp, you could still,
theoretically, lurk, or do a deja-news search, which is what the
lawyer would explain to the jury. If you wanted to pick up
speculations, you could do so without risk of tracing. What it comes
down to then is, basically, the odds that someone comes up with the
same idea as you. Concerning the future of Vimes, you have given
enough insight in both his and Vetinari's personalities and situations
to provide many readers with plausible ways to go. The story in MP, on
the other hand is harder to come up with, since it is so much more
than "Hey! Why don't you do a Hollywood parody?". Am I saying what I
want to say here? I mean that speculation is based on what you have
already written, and suggesting that Vimes might become a father is
not that ingenious, considering that he has married. Those things are
rather common, right? In that case, I doubt the case would even come
to court. Oh dear, we have Merkins here? Ok, so it might, and the PR
damage would be done. Bugger! But I hope you see what I mean. Unless
you settle down on a Desert Island with nothing but a 'puter - without
any internet connection - a hat to shade your eyes and a supply of
banana dakry's to keep you ke3l, you could be sued for picking up
someone's speculation.
The first issue is not that much of a problem, I believe, since by
now, you ought to be sufficiently sure of your own creative talent to
dismiss such doubts. But the other is trickier. I don't know if it has
been tried in court, but theoretically, everybody with net access has
also access to everything published on the net. I don't know what can
be done about this, unless alt.fan.pratchett.silent is created and
moderated.
Gidjabolgo, sad about the state of the world, really
--
Home at http://hem2.passagen.se/gidjabol/
Mail to gidj...@hem2.passagen.se
A Non-Humerus Sig (tm)
Colin Rosenthal
Gidjabolgo <gidj...@hem2.passagen.se> wrote:
>Terry Pratchett <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:MdVmJKAG...@unseen.demon.co.uk...
>>
>>It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
>
>Hey! You plagiarized that line from my fiancee!
>
>Ok, that wasn't very funny, but it was intended to be, ok? And she
>has, in fact, said something very close to that, which impressed me,
>since she's only five.
>
><snip>
>
>>I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting this.
>There's
>>fanfic around, but I don't see it. To find it, I'd have to go
>looking.
>>I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do -- but
>in
>>reality discussion wanders all over the place, and I don't think this
>>problem can be 'organized' away.
I think I have the solution. I will immediately start a wholly spurious lawsuit
accusing Pterry of plagiarising his ideas from, say, an essay I wrote in
Primary School. I will, of course, lose but the damage to his reputation will
have been done (no smoke, etc.) and he will then be able to continue reading
afp without having to worry about any further damage. Will this work?
--
Colin Rosenthal
Astrophysics Institute
University of Oslo
Terry Pratchett
<gidj...@hem2.passagen.se> writes
>
>The other side of the problem is trickier. There is no way you can
>prove you have not seen a particular piece of fanfic or speculation.
>Even if you have publicly resigned from afp, you could still,
>theoretically, lurk, or do a deja-news search, which is what the
>lawyer would explain to the jury.
But lawyers are not the problem, for once. I don't trawl the net
looking for DW fanfic. It's quite a different thing from posting DW
ideas on a ng I'm *known* to frequent, surely. The argument that the
mere *existence* of something *somewhere* on the entire electronic
network *must* mean that the 'defendant' has seen it has so many
implications that all creative artists should junk their modems right
now!
--
Terry Pratchett
Tony Sheppard
>(Snip)
>
>[Terry]
|>I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting
|>this. There's fanfic around, but I don't see it.
|>To find it, I'd have to go looking.
|>I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do
|> -- but in reality discussion wanders all over the place,
|>and I don't think this problem can be 'organized' away.
>I think I have the solution. I will immediately start a wholly spurious
lawsuit
>accusing Pterry of plagiarising his ideas from, say, an essay I wrote
in
>Primary School. I will, of course, lose but the damage to his
reputation will
>have been done (no smoke, etc.) and he will then be able to continue
reading
>afp without having to worry about any further damage. Will this work?
There is an easier solution. Because of l-space all book that will ever
be
written have already been written so Terry is just copying up his
already written
notes.
Tony
--
Dyslexia is not a condition but a way of loaf
Gidjabolgo
news:36BB0D42...@bwctc.northants.sch.uk...
>
>There is an easier solution. Because of l-space all book that will
ever
>be
>written have already been written so Terry is just copying up his
>already written
>notes.
With that reasoning, I could claim that I will write the original T5E
in seven years time, but Terry has copied what I will write through
L-Space and is going to publish it before. I'll still have to write
it, since Terry's publishing of it proves that in seven years time I
will have written it, but when I try to get it published I will be
called plagiarizer and thrown out head first. I know, since this will
have happened me oh so many times ever since I wrote TCoM back in
1999...
Right?
Gidjabolgo, confused
Tony Sheppard
>Tony Sheppard wrote
>>There is an easier solution. Because of l-space all book that will
>>ever be written have already been written so Terry is
>>just copying up his already written notes.
>
>With that reasoning, I could claim that I will write the original T5E
>in seven years time, but Terry has copied what I will write through
>L-Space and is going to publish it before. I'll still have to write
>it, since Terry's publishing of it proves that in seven years time I
>will have written it, but when I try to get it published I will be
>called plagiarizer and thrown out head first. I know, since this will
>have happened me oh so many times ever since I wrote TCoM back in
>1999...
>
>Right?
>
>Gidjabolgo, confused
At this point I shall leave all speculation about the future
possibilities
of possible futures to those really understand what it was they we
were talking about in the first place (or even second or third)
(Quickly walks out the room as Socrates enter with a large knife,
with Albert Einstein following, mumbling something about relativity)
Gidjabolgo
>
>But lawyers are not the problem, for once. I don't trawl the net
>looking for DW fanfic. It's quite a different thing from posting DW
>ideas on a ng I'm *known* to frequent, surely.
Yes, that's quite different, but only in a probabilistic sense. Yes,
the probability that you have read something published on a newsgroup
you are known to frequent is higher than the probability that you have
read something published on a homepage.
But anyone slimy and mollusc-like to accuse you of theft could as well
accuse you of trawling the net. And that's my point. If, the day after
T5E's release, someone comes yelling "That's my idea! See, I put that
up on the net as fanfic back in 1997!" the court would look at the
similarities to try to judge if the two works are dissimilar enough
for you to be deemed author instead of copyist. We, the fans, would
free you even beforehand, dismissing the accusation as an obvious lie,
but the general public would probably not. So the damage to your
reputation would be done.
The obvious repartee from your side is that the probability of such
speculations, ie those that are close enough to what you are planning,
emerging on a ng related to you is higher. That may very well be the
case, but the question to ask here is really the probability of anyone
accusing you of theft. As have been said many times earlier on afp -
without anyone objecting - the most likely reaction would be either
"See? I had it right!" or possibly "Wow! He has built upon something I
have said".
The point is that no matter what people suggests or speculates, that
in itself has no literary value. It is your handling of ideas that
makes a book, not the ideas in themselves. Your language, your style,
your way of telling a story is what makes a book your work. Many of
the ideas are frequent guests in other authors' works too, but they
doesn't handle them the way you do, right?
Oh, my. Now I've managed to say that you haven't had an original idea
in your whole life...
Ok, I blame the fact that I'm using my second language here. I want to
say that the possibility of someone accusing you of theft is the same
whatever you do, unless you move on to that island. It's not about
where you are seen, it's where you *could* go. If someone suspects you
to steal ideas, they surely wouldn't stoop to call you a liar when you
say you haven't read afp, for instance. The well-known fact that you
are connected would be enough.
What it boils down to, then, is the relative importance of idea versus
style. Your style is your own, and it is the way you handles ideas
that is the core of your authorship, and no one could claim that you
have stolen your style, the way you can take a well-known thought and
twist it aroud so we are forced to look at it in a new light. A book
by you is not just a plot, and that's the point I'm trying to make.
How am I doing?
The inspirations you have been influenced by are increasingly
speculated upon in the [A] posts. If someone accused you of stealing
an idea or a character, they would find it has already been suggested
that you got this from a Mongolian sitcom that ran two and a half
episode in May 1978, or from a book of nursery rhymes only published
in Swedish, in the village of Getbyn, printed in 13 issues. Well, you
know what I mean, don't you?
>The argument that the
>mere *existence* of something *somewhere* on the entire electronic
>network *must* mean that the 'defendant' has seen it has so many
>implications that all creative artists should junk their modems right
>now!
That exact argument is one of the things that puts food on the tables
for patent lawyers, and makes engineers nervous when someone says
about their latest baby "Wow! That's really obvious when you say it! I
wonder why noone has thought about that before?".
But this is the reason you shouldn't have to worry. What an engineer
comes up with is much easier to define in unambigious terms.
Gidjabolgo, sadly uneloquent
Richard Eney
few: the interplay of themes; just what was going on in a given scene; how
a particular scene or even plot-thread interrelates with the perceived
'main' plot thread, overall meaning or underlying subtext. (These are what
led to my original huge analyses.)
Just ask yourself a question about anything in a book: such as, what does
this particular scene demonstrate to the reader about the characters in
it? Does this scene prefigure a later scene? Does it introduce a theme
that is continued with other characters later? Does the author's choice
of a specific word here imply more than is immediately obvious - e.g.,
when Granny Weatherwax uses a dialect sentence structure or a word we
moderns consider 'archaic usage' on Earth, is it to establish her as a
woman lacking sophistication, or is there some meaning in the particular
word that might illuminate a sub-theme?
And IMO there is only one plot. Despite that Italian who wrote a book
called _The 36 Dramatic Situations_, and all the wild guesses with the
favorite numbers of everyone who has misquoted him ever since (astrologers
tend to prefer the number 12.) The way I see it, there is only one basic
plot - human life and development - but it is something like a faceted
solid existing through time and there are gazillions of ways to peer into
it, each of which emphasizes some facets and relegates others to the
background. (Then there's the question of whether you are looking into it
or through it at something else, and how it distorts your view of that,
but we don't do religion threads here, right? Right.)
=Tamar
Joerg Ruedenauer
<snip>
>
>I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting this. There's
>fanfic around, but I don't see it. To find it, I'd have to go looking.
>I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do -- but in
>reality discussion wanders all over the place, and I don't think this
>problem can be 'organized' away.
>
I really don't know about laws referring to newsgroups, but couldn't it be
possible to make a rule saying that everyone who posts to this ng,
declares, by posting here, that he'll not claim something like 'You've
stolen my idea'. You could write that rule to the FAQ's. But that'd only
work if everyone has got to read the FAQ's before he posts, and (s.a.) I
don't know about that.
Joerg
--
"Quoth the raven: Nevermore!" -- E.A.Poe
Laurabelle
not to but forgot to change it back from AFP to ABP... which means that I
posted it to AFP untagged. Argh!)
[ Article reposted from alt.fan.pratchett ]
[ Author was Laurabelle ]
[ Posted on 5 Feb 1999 23:26:49 GMT ]
Joerg Ruedenauer (j.rued...@usa.net) wrote:
> I really don't know about laws referring to newsgroups, but couldn't it be
> possible to make a rule saying that everyone who posts to this ng,
> declares, by posting here, that he'll not claim something like 'You've
> stolen my idea'. You could write that rule to the FAQ's. But that'd only
> work if everyone has got to read the FAQ's before he posts, and (s.a.) I
> don't know about that.
The problem with bringing legality into this is that Usenet is
international. Any law you want to instate would have to be passed in
every country in thee world, I think (somebody will doubtless correct me
in particulars, but I think I'm right in asserting that this has
complications). Besides, what kind of law should it be? If you post an
idea here, it becomes the property of Terry Pratchett? That's neither
logical nor fair.
Laws are not the way to solve this problem. The root of it is a mentality
(as said earlier and probably better by others) which leads people to try
to bring down others who have the god luck to succeed. I believe that
legislation cannot by itself change society or solve problems.
--
Laurabelle
AFPfriend to Jonathan, AFPsister to 8 ' Flesh Eating Dragon
"If this man had not twelve thousand [pounds] a year, he would be a
very stupid fellow." -- Jane Austen, _Mansfield Park_ ICQ #24582661
lam...@my-dejanews.com
colin.r...@astro.uio.no wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 10:41:57 +0100,
> Gidjabolgo <gidj...@hem2.passagen.se> wrote:
> >>
> >>It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
> >
> >Hey! You plagiarized that line from my fiancee!
> >
> >Ok, that wasn't very funny, but it was intended to be, ok? And she
> >has, in fact, said something very close to that, which impressed me,
> >since she's only five.
> >
> >
> >>I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting this.
> >There's
> >>fanfic around, but I don't see it. To find it, I'd have to go
> >looking.
> >>I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do -- but
> >in
> >>reality discussion wanders all over the place, and I don't think this
> >>problem can be 'organized' away.
>
lawsuit
> accusing Pterry of plagiarising his ideas from, say, an essay I wrote in
> Primary School. I will, of course, lose but the damage to his reputation will
> have been done (no smoke, etc.) and he will then be able to continue reading
> afp without having to worry about any further damage. Will this work?
Sadly no. The sort of idiot who will take such a lawsuit seriously will be
even more impressed when there is a PATTERN of such lawsuits that TP wins ONLY
because he has more money for lawyers.[4]
Psst Pterry, I have a great idea[3] for a book, howabout I tell you my idea,
you write the book, and we split the proceads, huh, huh?[1]
DougL
[1} :) for the irony impared.[2}
[2] Do the Irony impared actually read abp?
[3] Boy meets girl.[5]
[4] The truth is out there, and it is amazing how easily conspiracy nuts can
miss it.
[5] Original, huh?[1]
Mary Sophia Novak
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
Fair 'nuff, since...
>
> Traditionally, at least, abp has been a low-traffic group and the
> discussion had been just that -- a discussion about the ways books have
> gone and DW is going. I've tended to be more sure, because of the
> nature of the threads, that the posters weren't likely to pop up a year
> or two later saying 'that was my idea'. Don't ask why, it just seemed
> to feel that way.
...this gives me a clearer idea of how (I would like) to interpret your
parameters. May I wind it up and see how it spins?
I thought about this on a looooong bus ride home today, and it seems to me
that the difference between most of the speculative threads that have run
on abp and the schmuck-of-the-mill "Pterry Pinched This Bit From 'Joanie
Loves Chachi'" threads is that the abp discussions (at least the ones I'm
defending) aren't of the "Wouldn't it be cool if Carrot organized the
Guards to claim the throne?" nature. (Not a speculation: if that happens
for anything less than a contextually-perfect reason, I speculate I will
resign my fanhood on the spot and crying plagiarism will be the last thing
on my mind.) It's generally pretty clear, as it was in Jonathan's post,
that the poster is speaking from a close examination of the past Discworld
books, and that said poster believes that clues to future Discworld
developments can be found there.
In other words, it's emphatically clear that the person believes that
*Terry already thought of what the poster thinks s/he sees*, and therefore
Terry could not in future be accused of plagiarizing an idea that he had
before the poster came up with it. And the Discworld is riddled with such
things--my favorite mind-blower is that the fundamental nature of Elves
theoretically could have been predicted going back at least as far as Wyrd
Sisters, or to whatever is the first book where someone speculated a
charismatic-but-maybe-effeminate character "might be a bit Elvish." Which
resonated first with "might be a bit of a fairy" and later with "might be
a bit of a Elvis" but which also always could resonate with "might be a
bit suspiciously charismatic and glamorous."
Figuring out Elves would have been a much longer stretch than figuring out
a lot of the Patrician's background and foreground before we started
getting closer looks at Vetinari in FOC and Jingo. I would argue, and
*have* argued, that practically everything that has evolved in the
Vimes-Vetinari connection is hindsight-visibly rooted in their final
exchange in G!G!.
I agree that this situation can't be resolved by organization alone. But
is it possible that we can delineate the distinction between discussing a
future that one believes is visible in past works, versus pitching out
ideas blindfolded in the hopes that this is the freakish but theoretically
possible universe in which one of them turns out to be a home run?
Incidentally, I'm not saying that reading textual tealeaves is the only
kind of worthwhile discussion that goes on here, or that I would
definitely stop reading abp if it were absolutely prohibited. It's just
that I remember how easily juicy discussions of past works tend to turn to
"It seems to me that Vetinari needs Vimes because..." and the "because"
might now be interpreted as verboten. I'm relieved that that doesn't seem
to be what Terry intended--that there really is a level of trusting the
book group to discuss the books *thoughtfully*. I'm also all for internal
vigilance and for landing on any "duckweeds" with both feet. Civil
intra-group policing can be a tremendous tool for change.
With a statement as strong as you've made, here in this little forum, I
don't think you'll lack for defenders...I'm also watching the watchmen.
Mary Sophia Novak
(who has already dogeared about 25 pages of her
spendy-and-worth-every-penny CJ for possible discussion points...nice to
be back.)
msn...@mail.internetcds.com
MegaMole
<j.rued...@usa.net> writes
>I really don't know about laws referring to newsgroups, but couldn't it be
>possible to make a rule saying that everyone who posts to this ng,
>declares, by posting here, that he'll not claim something like 'You've
>stolen my idea'. You could write that rule to the FAQ's. But that'd only
>work if everyone has got to read the FAQ's before he posts, and (s.a.) I
>don't know about that.
>
as The Only Way to get Terry Back on AFP - but the proportion of trolls,
goats, dribblewits and lemon-flavoured pusboils seems to have increased.
IOW, people who perversely squeal "It's a fr33 country - I can p0st w0t
1 like" when confronted with etiquette. (Of course, there are a number
of clueful newbies too). The reluctant conclusion people have come to
is that it just *won't* work for practical, and legal, purposes.
Would it also create some sort of legal precedent for postings on Usenet
_in general_ which might have worrying future repercussions? I don't
know. And such an idea worries me.
So, with intense regret, we've had to wave his _readership_ of the group
goodbye.
--
MegaMole
Anna1558
>I don't know what can
>be done about this, unless alt.fan.pratchett.silent is created and
>moderated.
alt.fan.pratchett.silent? A whole newsgroup made up of lurkers? Now that would
be interesting...we could all sit there, and no one would post *anything*...
John Underwood
wrote in alt.books.pratchett:
(Reference: <79frab$aua$3...@library.lspace.org>)
>Terry Pratchett wrote:
>
><snip>
>>
>>I'd be overjoyed if there was really some way of sorting this. There's
>>fanfic around, but I don't see it. To find it, I'd have to go looking.
>>I *could* avoid particular tags and let it be known that I do -- but in
>>reality discussion wanders all over the place, and I don't think this
>>problem can be 'organized' away.
>>
>I really don't know about laws referring to newsgroups, but couldn't it be
>possible to make a rule saying that everyone who posts to this ng,
>declares, by posting here, that he'll not claim something like 'You've
>stolen my idea'. You could write that rule to the FAQ's. But that'd only
>work if everyone has got to read the FAQ's before he posts, and (s.a.) I
>don't know about that.
>
>Joerg
Would it be necessary to ensure that everyone read the FAQ? If it were
accepted that the working rules for a group were published regularly,
say in a FAQ, then there would be no necessity, as I understand English
law, to prove that an individual had actually read it. Isn't this the
circumstance to which the tag "ignorance is no defence" applies?
However, it would not answer the major point being made, by Mr Pratchett
and others. Such action would not prevent someone entering into
litigation over an imaginary plagiarism. They would lose, but they could
still do irreparable damage to our hero's reputation.
--
John Underwood
Terry Pratchett
<PSmit...@countertenor.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>Would it also create some sort of legal precedent for postings on Usenet
>_in general_ which might have worrying future repercussions? I don't
>know. And such an idea worries me.
Let's explore some of the ideas mooted here.
We know there's millions of books and if, for example, someone claims
that 'Shakespeare in Love' bore a certain resemblance to a now not-very-
well-known book called 'No Bed for Bacon', the author could quite
rightly point out that out these millions of books no one [1] could have
been expected to have read more than a few tens of thousands -- and
could certainly not search for a particular idea or theme among the rest
of them.
However, on the 'net it is very easy to home in on anything, m'lud (at
least, in theory). The author is known to have an account with a service
provider. Ergo, it would be so easy to have found my client's piece of
fan fiction. published on 'Mi Reel K00wel Page', exhibit A.
And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts something on a web
page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it could be claimed to
have been there for some time?
--
Terry Pratchett
Terry Pratchett
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>We know there's millions of books and if, for example, someone claims
>that 'Shakespeare in Love' bore a certain resemblance to a now not-very-
>well-known book called 'No Bed for Bacon', the author could quite
>rightly point out that out these millions of books no one [1] could have
>been expected to have read more than a few tens of thousands -- and
>could certainly not search for a particular idea or theme among the rest
>of them.
I forgot the footnote. How could I forget?
[1] Except me.
--
Terry Pratchett
Tim Bagot
> And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts something on a web
> page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it could be claimed to
> have been there for some time?
If the relevant files are accessible via a shell account or the web server
is poorly configured this is really rather easy. Of course, *proving* that
it had been there for some time would be another matter entirely. Which is
why the only way they could come close to convincing people is if it was
held by a reputable, secure provider of web space where this would not be
possible. Where it wouldn't^Wshouldn't happen in any case. Hmmm.
Tim Bagot
Paul Johnson
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes
>But lawyers are not the problem, for once. I don't trawl the net
>looking for DW fanfic. It's quite a different thing from posting DW
>ideas on a ng I'm *known* to frequent, surely.
It depends where you are going to be judged. If the Trial by Law is not
the problem then that only leaves Trial by Media. And I don't see you
losing that one. Since you are a seriously popular author, lots of
people already know quite a lot about the DW and know from their own
experience that it is very inventive. Most people know a Pratchett fan
or two. Anyone arguing that you pinched their idea is going to have a
big struggle against that. Hence I simply can't see a "Terry Pratchett
ate my story" story selling any newspapers. And if it doesn't sell
papers then there is no problem.
And even if it did sell papers I don't think it would have any
measurable impact on your income. You have fans who know the truth, and
they would keep on buying your books. I don't know what percentage of,
say, CJ readers have never brought a Pratchett book before, but I don't
imagine its very high.
> The argument that the
>mere *existence* of something *somewhere* on the entire electronic
>network *must* mean that the 'defendant' has seen it has so many
>implications that all creative artists should junk their modems right
>now!
Conversely if the press *did* decide to run a plagiarism story then
simple facts like this will not stop them. "I posted this story to the
fan-fic list. He must be subscribed under an assumed name." After all,
Freeserve doesn't do any validation on its subscribers. You can't prove
otherwise, and that is all a muckraker needs.
Paul.
--------------------------------+---------------------------------
Paul Johnson | Protect Privacy: PGP Fingerprint
Email: Pa...@treetop.demon.co.uk | 878F 2B72 C89D 4864 69E4 23EF
paul.j...@gecm.com | CB1D A36F 8DFE 8B69
Paul Johnson
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes
>However, on the 'net it is very easy to home in on anything, m'lud (at
>least, in theory). The author is known to have an account with a service
>provider. Ergo, it would be so easy to have found my client's piece of
>fan fiction. published on 'Mi Reel K00wel Page', exhibit A.
Hang on a minute: are we envisaging Law or Media as the battleground?
The rules are quite different. The Law has some very specific rules
about evidence and inference. The Media does not. If you see it being
in court then presumably your publishers pay someone to worry about
that, and you can ask their advice.
>And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts something on a web
>page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it could be claimed to
>have been there for some time?
Ahh. A technical question. Here I can talk out of my mouth for a
change.
Of course you could always write "This page last modified 3rd March
1996" at the top. Anything more convincing is trickier. Computers keep
a "last modified" date as part of the file information (select
"View -> Details" in Windows Explorer to see yours). This date is
transmitted as part of HTTP (select "View -> Document Info" in Netscape
to see it).
Whether this file date is honest depends on the web server. Most home
pages are uploaded onto ISP servers (a very few techies run private
servers for their home pages, mostly to show how clever they are). I
don't know whether the ISPs mostly use the date the file was uploaded or
the date stamp that came with the file from the home PC. The Right
Thing would be the date the file was uploaded because the main reason
for transmitting the date is to let page caches know when they have out
of date information. Assuming that this policy is adhered to by all
ISPs, it is impossible for someone to put up a dishonest "last modified"
date without first breaking into the web server. This is a good way of
getting your account terminated with extreme prejudice.
Of course the accuser could claim that he wrote the page in 1996 but has
uploaded it repeatedly since then every time something else on the site
was modified. Or maybe he noticed a couple of formatting problems last
month and fixed them without bothering to change the "last modified"
line at the top.
In short there is no real way to *prove* that information on the web was
not posted a long time ago. On the other hand if someone did post
information in 1996 and decided then that it was worth perpetuating
evidence then this can be achieved in several ways. The ISP date stamps
I described above are a start. Digital time-stamping services are also
available which can generate incontrovertible evidence that something
existed at a certain date. The problem with all these are that they are
not automatic. The accuser can always claim that it didn't seem worth
it back in 1996. It really comes down to credibility: he claims to have
posted it then, you claim you didn't see it until after your book was
published.
With newsgroups its a different matter. Everything on here is archived
on Alta-vista, and possibly Deja-news (I'm not sure if they include
"alt" groups). There may also be other topic-specific archives. Does
abp get archived by lspace.org? Such an archive could be used to settle
an argument provided that the archive goes back far enough.
If I can be of any more help on this topic then please let me know by
email. And I really appreciate your efforts to stay involved in this
forum.
Paul Johnson
<heaven...@fanged.demon.co.uk> writes
>Sorry, Mary Sophia, but Tamar is right. The relevant section of Terry's
>post says:
>
>'But, despite everything, RSN someone is going to plonk down some theme
>or situation which is right in the *heart* of a story that I'm planning.
>I do not want to end up faced with a public accusation of plagiarism or
>theft; the fact that it might well have no legal foundation is beside
>the point. You don't have to be hugely imaginative to see that this
>could be damaging in other ways.'
I hadn't seen this post before.
I think Terry can protect himself against this without over-much
trouble. Simply print out notes and works in progress once a month and
lodge them with some suitably independent third party. Possibly his
publishers could help here.
Or, if you prefer, you can get proof digitally, by use of PGP and a
digital time stamping service. Email me for details if you want them,
but basically you stick a copy of the relevant files into a Zip file,
generate a small "hash" file from that, and email it to the time
stamping service. The service will send back a digital signature which
proves that the zip file existed at that date. The service is free.
The only problem you may have is explaining to a judge what the hell a
digital signature is. Or you could just post the hash file to abp with
a request for people to archive it. A few dozen fans testifying that
they had this hash file on a certain date would be pretty conclusive.
The key thing is that you don't need to publish the actual file, just
the hash. Later on you can hand the zip file to an independent third
party who can re-generate the hash and confirm that it matches the
original one.
A public accusation of theft which can be easily and completely refuted
is pure libel-bait. No newspaper is going to run with that. Our libel
laws may often be a lottery, but not to that extent. And if Terry isn't
wealthy enough to initiate legal action in such a case then someone is
ripping us both off.
Meg, the Magpie
(Anna1558) said :
>
>In article <79eeeq$l8n$1...@library.lspace.org>, "Gidjabolgo"
><gidj...@hem2.passagen.se> writes:
>
>>I don't know what can
>>be done about this, unless alt.fan.pratchett.silent is created and
>>moderated.
>alt.fan.pratchett.silent? A whole newsgroup made up of lurkers? Now that would
>be interesting...we could all sit there, and no one would post *anything*...
>
It's already there - unless people are actually talking in
alt.talk.mended-drum. Last time I looked (a couple of months back)
they were all staring morosely into their beer.
--
Meg the Magpie
email: mag...@megabitch.tm
Terry Pratchett
Tim Bagot <t...@earth.li> writes
>On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Terry Pratchett wrote:
>
>> page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it could be claimed to
>> have been there for some time?
>
>is poorly configured this is really rather easy. Of course, *proving* that
>it had been there for some time would be another matter entirely.
But the whole point is that proof is not required -- increasingly, in
the UK, mere accusation (of just about anything) is quite sufficient.
--
Terry Pratchett
Terry Pratchett
<Pa...@treetop.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>I think Terry can protect himself against this without over-much
>trouble. Simply print out notes and works in progress once a month and
>lodge them with some suitably independent third party. Possibly his
>publishers could help here.
>
>Or, if you prefer, you can get proof digitally, by use of PGP and a
>digital time stamping service.
I really don't want to be nasty, but there is no way on Earth any author
could possibly live like that.
Really, I don't think there could ever be a *legal* threat. Things have
to be *very* similar before that's likely, and cases are rare.
--
Terry Pratchett
John Barberio
<Pa...@treetop.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <WW2Q7CAM...@unseen.demon.co.uk>, Terry Pratchett
><tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>>However, on the 'net it is very easy to home in on anything, m'lud (at
>>least, in theory). The author is known to have an account with a service
>>provider. Ergo, it would be so easy to have found my client's piece of
>>fan fiction. published on 'Mi Reel K00wel Page', exhibit A.
>
>Hang on a minute: are we envisaging Law or Media as the battleground?
>The rules are quite different. The Law has some very specific rules
>about evidence and inference. The Media does not. If you see it being
>in court then presumably your publishers pay someone to worry about
>that, and you can ask their advice.
The Broadsheets will usualy only latch onto it if they are quite sure
they are right, as there have been a few times when unchecked
journalistic flair has led to legal writs.
The Tabloids will go on about anything, usualy puting it in the "In my
opinion" loophole. (As I recal, you may only be sued for libal for
claiming a slander to be fact, expressing an opinion is not libal. But
IANAL) Of course, tabloids do this all the time, and almost never say
sorry if they are wrong. (Unless forced to, in which case they print a
small retraction buried somewhere below "My Brothers Step Mom Once Got
Sweared At By Gazza")
>With newsgroups its a different matter. Everything on here is archived
>on Alta-vista, and possibly Deja-news (I'm not sure if they include
>"alt" groups). There may also be other topic-specific archives. Does
>abp get archived by lspace.org? Such an archive could be used to settle
>an argument provided that the archive goes back far enough.
Actualy, it is easy to fake a false date on a post. Seting the date
header is left upto the software posting. So it is posable to change
the date at your end, and can even be done by having an badly set up
system. If you do, you will get a e-mail from some servers that check
for incorect dated messages, but the messages will not be cancled, so
they will get archived.
So this rules out dates on usenet messages as proof of posting time.
Of course, you'd be incredably Anal to want to have a recorded and
time stamped copy of all your netnews posts.
- J
--
123456789|123456789|123456789|123456789|123456789|123456789|123456789|12
ClueRuler SigVersion 5.1 <j...@gruk.algonet.se> A Small Guide To .sig Style
A nice .sig is a tidy .sig (John Barberio) Kids - ASCII art, Just Say No
My sig has 4 lines of 72 characters. Good sigs start with "-- <newline>"
Scott Hadley
Terry Pratchett wrote in message ...
>>We know there's millions of books and if, for example, someone claims
>>that 'Shakespeare in Love' bore a certain resemblance to a now not-very-
>>well-known book called 'No Bed for Bacon', the author could quite
>>rightly point out that out these millions of books no one [1] could have
>>been expected to have read more than a few tens of thousands -- and
>>could certainly not search for a particular idea or theme among the rest
>>of them.
The way I see internet newsgroup posting is this.
When you post a message to a newsgroup it instantly becomes public domain.
As public domain the author has no claim to the ideas in that text. I don't
know how the law sees it, but to my mind this is the most sensible.
If anyone on this newsgroup tried to take Pterry to court, I think most of
us here would cheerfully stone them to death. (Metaphorically Speaking)
well that's my 1d's worth :)
Scott
Robin Halligan
<sc...@skhadley.spam.freeserve.co.uk>
and they spake thus :
>The way I see internet newsgroup posting is this.
>When you post a message to a newsgroup it instantly becomes public domain.
>As public domain the author has no claim to the ideas in that text. I don't
>know how the law sees it, but to my mind this is the most sensible.
The trouble is the law (In most countries) doesn't see it that way,
what you post here is still your property and you still retain full
control of it, it would only become public Domain if you publicly stated
it to be so.
>If anyone on this newsgroup tried to take Pterry to court, I think most of
>us here would cheerfully stone them to death. (Metaphorically Speaking)
and get in trouble with the Silicon deformation league i don't think so,
How about we tie them down and make them watch friends for days at a
time.
I'm a K one W one
from the land of the long white cloud
From the day I begun till the day I'm Done
I'm a K1W1
Melody Shanahan-Kluth
Scott Hadley wrote in message <79j8j2$fkf$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>...
Big Snip
>If anyone on this newsgroup tried to take Pterry to court, I think most of
>us here would cheerfully stone them to death. (Metaphorically Speaking)
Oh.....metaphorically :o(
Oh well, there goes my entertainment out of the window <g> Especially after
having kept up to date with the Billy Reubens thread
Mwahhahahahaha
Melody
XX
Miq
>The Tabloids will go on about anything, usualy puting it in the "In my
>opinion" loophole. (As I recal, you may only be sued for libal for
>claiming a slander to be fact, expressing an opinion is not libal. But
>IANAL)
Nope, wrong. Saying 'in my opinion', or even 'allegedly', is no
protection at all from a libel suit, certainly not in the UK.
What Terry is worried about, if I'm reading him correctly, is
neither the law nor the 'media', both of which are (contrary to
popular opinion) quite easy to keep onside, but people like *us*.
People who can write what the heck we like on groups exactly like
this one, and never be called to account for a single word of it.
(Oh, in theory we can. But has it ever actually happened? And
would you let that prospect deter *you*?)
And before everyone goes into their "but we'd *never* do something
like that!!" routine, just take a look at some recent threads on
afp. Heck, take a look at this thread. We just can't let it die.
--
Miq, losing patience
Rick Hodger
details
removed" out on their keyboard...
>> If the relevant files are accessible via a shell account or the web
server
>> is poorly configured this is really rather easy. Of course, *proving*
that
>> it had been there for some time would be another matter entirely.
It could be possible using HTTP1.1, as when you download a file from a
server that has a 1.1 compatible daemon running, it sends a "last updated"
string back to the browser....it could be proved through that but I'm sure
someone has a way to fake that.
> But the whole point is that proof is not required -- increasingly, in
> the UK, mere accusation (of just about anything) is quite sufficient.
Yeah, but surely unless they can actually *prove* that they had the idea
first, then there's nothing they can do.
--
<sb>Rick Hodger - rick . thehub @ bigfoot . com
<sb>Anti Spam Sig - Remove the spaces
<sb>
<sb>It's bad luck to be superstitious.
Jamie Crowther
<mucho snippetty>
> And even if it [trial by media of TP] did sell papers I don't think it would have any
> measurable impact on your income.
I really don't think that income is the issue. Terry is pretty much rich
enough now to live very comfortably into his old age. The issue he is
concerned about here (and who wouldn't be with his status) is his
*reputation*. And you may claim that such an insubstantial thing matters
very little, but tell me this: does the whole Craig Charles 'cocaine n'
rape' trial not leave a little tiny bad taste in the mouth when you
watch Red Dwarf nowadays (if you did in the first place)? - and he was
acquitted of all charges (I think). When the *possibility* of any such
deviation from a previously respected position raises its ugly head,
then the damage is done.
>You have fans who know the truth, and
> they would keep on buying your books. I don't know what percentage of,
> say, CJ readers have never brought a Pratchett book before, but I don't
> imagine its very high.
Like I said - I don't think that this is what is worrying the man. And,
sadly, I have to say that technical solutions like those you have
postulated just bear little weight in the face of a hypothetical
downward slide in reputation. Unfortunately, as has been stated many
times over the last few days on both afp and abp, I suspect Terry has
taken the right course of action.
Jamie
Sorry for the overly long sentences - I tend to do that when ranting...
Martin O'Nions
Terry Pratchett <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes:
> In article <Pine.LNX.3.96.99020...@c32.keble.ox.ac.uk>,
> Tim Bagot <t...@earth.li> writes
>>On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Terry Pratchett wrote:
>>
>>> And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts something on a web
>>> page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it could be claimed to
>>> have been there for some time?
>>
>>is poorly configured this is really rather easy. Of course, *proving* that
>>it had been there for some time would be another matter entirely.
>
> the UK, mere accusation (of just about anything) is quite sufficient.
>
and prospective DW readerships have no real comprehension of how the
'net and associated concepts are really implemented - even within this
newsgroup there are varying degrees of understanding. It's all well and
good our making statements to the effect of "no-one here would ever
suggest that Terry had...", but UK sales of Carpe Jugulum alone are
running at nearly 100,000 copies and we've not got quite that number of
readers, even allowing for a hefty contigent of lurkers.
In the event of a newspaper running with the story that Terry had been
accused of plagiarism, much of his UK readership would become aware of
the accusation. Few would be in a position to comment on the likelyhood
or otherwise, especially since it is in fact remarkably difficult to
prove when exactly something became accesible on the Internet. Of course
a legal case would be doomed to failure - even with films, where the
concept can be considered to be intellectual property in its own right,
very few actions succeed. The issue is though, that a large number of
people who haven't ben privy to all the background that AFP/ABP readers
have would still have the nagging suspicion that this nice author that
people keep recommending is actually a fraud. That can be enough to stop
people buying - not the loyal readership of ABP maybe, but all those who
might have picked a copy of Jingo up whilst waiting for a train, or quite
liked the plot of Hogfather when they were browsing in a bookshop. Above
all, it unfairly tarnishes the reputation of a hard-working and creative
human.
Make no mistake, people do modify their buying patterns on the basis of
their feelings about the author or artist. Since most of Terry's readership
won't have had any dealings with him, their impressions will be formed on
the basis of media portrayal.
Martin
--
Martin O'Nions mar...@catch22.demon.co.uk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"So just forget it Doc . I think it's really cool that you're concerned,
but we'll have to try again after the silence has returned" - Suzanne Vega
Joe
ley.spam.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>Terry Pratchett wrote in message ...
>>>We know there's millions of books and if, for example, someone claims
>>>that 'Shakespeare in Love' bore a certain resemblance to a now not-very-
>>>well-known book called 'No Bed for Bacon', the author could quite
>>>rightly point out that out these millions of books no one [1] could have
>>>been expected to have read more than a few tens of thousands -- and
>>>could certainly not search for a particular idea or theme among the rest
>>>of them.
>
>
>
>When you post a message to a newsgroup it instantly becomes public domain.
>
>As public domain the author has no claim to the ideas in that text. I don't
>know how the law sees it, but to my mind this is the most sensible.
>
>us here would cheerfully stone them to death. (Metaphorically Speaking)
>
>
copyright. It doesn't matter where or when they are published, the first
publication (even to just one other person) establishing copyright.
Quotations of any great length are breaches of copyright, even when they
are of newsgroup posts.
On the other hand, breach of copyright is a civil offence, not a
criminal one, and generally court action only occurs when the copier
actually makes money, theoretically depriving the original author of it.
Literary ideas aren't copyrightable, and a plagiariser just has to
suffer being called names. Indeed, if this causes him to lose money he
may sue the name-callers.
Most people are civilised about it. When Arthur Clarke and Charles
Sheffield almost simultaneously published novels based on the same
rather esoteric subject, both were quite relaxed about it and quoted the
'idea whose time has come' explanation.
--
Joe
Terry Pratchett
<J.P.L.C...@durham.ac.uk> writes
>The issue he is
>concerned about here (and who wouldn't be with his status) is his
>*reputation*. And you may claim that such an insubstantial thing matters
>very little, but tell me this: does the whole Craig Charles 'cocaine n'
>rape' trial not leave a little tiny bad taste in the mouth when you
>watch Red Dwarf nowadays (if you did in the first place)? - and he was
>acquitted of all charges (I think). When the *possibility* of any such
>deviation from a previously respected position raises its ugly head,
>then the damage is done.
You have summarised it exactly.
As an aside, I was interested to see, in a RD newsgroup around the time
of Craig's arrest, a number of fans who automatically assumed that he
was guilty; some took the view that the accusation *itself* was
sufficient proof of guilt.
I wonder in what frame of mind Stephen King wrote 'Misery' :-)
--
Terry Pratchett
Allan
>>prove you have not seen a particular piece of fanfic or speculation.
>>Even if you have publicly resigned from afp, you could still,
>>theoretically, lurk, or do a deja-news search, which is what the
>>lawyer would explain to the jury.
>
>But lawyers are not the problem, for once. I don't trawl the net
>looking for DW fanfic. It's quite a different thing from posting DW
>mere *existence* of something *somewhere* on the entire electronic
>network *must* mean that the 'defendant' has seen it has so many
>implications that all creative artists should junk their modems right
>now!
All this nonsense takes the fun out of it. There was no legal considerations
or political problems when I read my first newsgroup.
In general "damn the buggers and do what you will". If I had an idea used in
a book, I'd be chuffed, if I could work out where it was...
Some people are sharks, plain and simple. They deserve to be associated with
the humble potatoe.
Allan.
Jonathan Ellis
Laurabelle wrote in message <36bb7...@nap.mtholyoke.edu>...
>Laurabelle
>AFPfriend to Jonathan,
Which Jonathan? There's more than one of us here, you know...
Jonathan.
Jonathan Ellis
Richard Eney wrote in message <79dn1i$8hf$1...@saltmine.radix.net>...
>In article <79d0um$mh0$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>,
>Jonathan Ellis <jona...@franz-liszt.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
><spoiler space inserted>
>
>some spoiler space kept but actually, I've removed all the
>speculative "analysis"
>
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>10
>
>> I have a suspicion that this is *exactly* what is beginning to happen
>>in Jingo, and Lord Vetinari's real purpose in stepping down is to test
Vimes
><snip>
>> What might have happened next if Vetinari hadn't arrived is open to
>>speculation: one can never predict what might have happened
>
>No it isn't!
><snip extended speculation>
>
>Jonathan and everybody,
> _Please_ don't do detailed 'what may happen next' or 'what might
>have been' speculations on alt.books.pratchett
Sorry. My post was not intended in any way to be to do with the future
of the characters, but it became an analysis of a book that *has already
been written* [1] - and a justification for some of the actions of the
characters in that book, i.e. possible reasons as to *why* Vetinari stepped
down: certain people have said that Vetinari's stepping down from his job
and going to Klatch was only one of a number of out-of-character things in
Jingo - my point is that it is entirely *in* character if his reasoning is
to leave Vimes to take charge, which he himself hints at in his "blank"
letter to Vimes: Pterry's own writing, not mine. And how Vimes coped with
the situation, and can thus have been said to have passed a test of sorts
(indeed, in Vetinari's own words again - see below): the fact being that he
*has already* been left in charge, and coped successfully with the problems
in a way that Vetinari considers "satisfactory but incomplete" - as his own
donkey-and-minaret comparison directly implies.
Perhaps it was the speculation on exactly *why* Vimes was in the
advantageous position that caused your problem with this: but as I am
entirely dealing with events that *had already happened* in Pterry's
writing, I find it a little difficult to see how this could impinge on any
*future* plots written by Pterry - any more than, say, people posting long
posts about exactly how the time lines fit together in The Last Continent
and debating about whether The Lady has played a role in the events of that
book... or the current debate, which has been going on for some considerable
time and is still going strong, on the nature of werewolves (which may well
impinge on future books much more than the chances of Cadram and Vimes
actually coming face-to-face again...)
Other people have posted "analysis" of Pratchett books here, with
varying degrees of speculation, as well... it's when people start coming up
with "future" plans, rather than talking about what has already happened,
that the problem surely begins. And I don't think I ever wrote or meant any
of "what may happen next", only speculation that "this is a possible reason
for the events that have already happened." As a discussion of a book that
already exists, I think this is entirely relevant to ABP, and indeed is the
very sort of thing that ABP was originally for: discussion of existing
Pratchett books.
[1] Partly because I got fed up of people rubbishing Jingo, which I
think is one of his best books. The main justification for this was that the
characters seemed to have changed - "Vetinari stepping down and juggling
melons? I don't believe it!", and my contention is that they haven't (given
the thread that I was contributing to, which began with someone else
speculating that Vimes would be left in charge when Vetinari was out of town
in a future book - my point being that he _had already done_ this, and in a
much more subtle way than the previous poster realised.)
Jonathan.
Terry Pratchett
writes
>
>And for another example, I suspect you've stopped telling your little
>anecdote about meeting Arthur C. Clarke in the toilet... :-(
>
Good grief, no. It's gets a bigger laugh now:-)
--
Terry Pratchett
Colin Rosenthal
Terry Pratchett <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <Pine.LNX.3.96.99020...@c32.keble.ox.ac.uk>,
>Tim Bagot <t...@earth.li> writes
>>On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Terry Pratchett wrote:
>>
>>> And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts something on a web
>>> page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it could be claimed to
>>> have been there for some time?
>>
>>If the relevant files are accessible via a shell account or the web server
>>is poorly configured this is really rather easy. Of course, *proving* that
>>it had been there for some time would be another matter entirely.
>
>But the whole point is that proof is not required -- increasingly, in
>the UK, mere accusation (of just about anything) is quite sufficient.
Belief in Karma, for example?
--
Colin Rosenthal
Astrophysics Institute
University of Oslo
Jacqui
>I wonder in what frame of mind Stephen King wrote 'Misery' :-)
And HE makes much more effort to avoid his fans in the first place. You
realise your big mistake was being nice and approachable (if sarcastic).
Try cultivating the Hunter S Thompson approach - get a big gun and make all
your interviewers drink 4 quarts of whisky first.
Jac who's pretty sure no-one would *dare* accuse Gonzo of plagiarism, even
if he published As I Lay Dying.
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>The point is that no matter what people suggests or speculates, that
>in itself has no literary value. It is your handling of ideas that
>makes a book, not the ideas in themselves. Your language, your style,
>your way of telling a story is what makes a book your work. Many of
>the ideas are frequent guests in other authors' works too, but they
>doesn't handle them the way you do, right?
I would even venture further and say that one of the *strengths* of the DW
books is the way Pterry takes up themes and interprets them. Just as my
personal opinion is that Goethe's best book is Faust (IMHO the only readable
one!) it's one of the attractions of the diskworld for me. We all 'know' how
Macbeth, or the Phantom of the Opera, or any of the other stories went, right?
Wrong. In putting different perspectives on witches and watchmen and literary
works he challenges out perceptions and causes the reader to question his
beliefs- which is an extremely good, and extraordinarily clever thing to do.
Not to mention being hellishly difficult.
>Oh, my. Now I've managed to say that you haven't had an original idea
>in your whole life...
What *is* an original idea? I don't think there is any one decent book on the
market that does NOT draw upon other people's ideas. There are few thoughts
that haven't been thought - the trick is to view a subject in a different
light, and put a different spin onto a topic. If you manage to do that, you are
'original' - but that doesn't mean your work appears out of a void. As an
academic, I can't see anything wrong with that concept.
>The inspirations you have been influenced by are increasingly
>speculated upon in the [A] posts. If someone accused you of stealing
>an idea or a character, they would find it has already been suggested
>that you got this from a Mongolian sitcom that ran two and a half
>episode in May 1978, or from a book of nursery rhymes only published
>in Swedish, in the village of Getbyn, printed in 13 issues. Well, you
>know what I mean, don't you?
Does the term 'LP cover' ring any bells? <EG>
What remains is the fact that because humans share certain behavioural traits
and a lot of them are familiar with their and other's cultural heritage common
themes will appear. Whether a reference is to a particular spot of history, or
a book, or the common perceptions of that even does not, IMHO, matter. I've
scrapped passages in my PhD upon reading someone else's opinion on the same
matter, because they wrote more fluently - but I *swear* that my version was on
paper before I ever read those books! Sometimes ideas are ripe, and more than
one person comes up with them.
Catja
aka PerditaX
The Gonzo Lager
>And you may claim that such an insubstantial thing matters
>very little, but tell me this: does the whole Craig Charles 'cocaine n'
>rape' trial not leave a little tiny bad taste in the mouth when you
>watch Red Dwarf nowadays
Not for 'mericans, though, since RD is not a really big thing with the
status quo. I surmise the closest we can come to it is the OJ Simpson
farce^H^H^H^H^Htrial. Although, I'll admit there's a big difference
between alledgedly doing blow & raping someone and slashing your ex-wife
and some waiter to death but the sheer saturation is enough that I no
longer enjoy those Naked Gun movies.
>When the *possibility* of any such
>deviation from a previously respected position raises its ugly head,
>then the damage is done.
Perfect example: Fatty Arbuckle. An innocent man blamed for the death
of some gutterslime drug hag. Even though he was eventually cleared,
his career was practically over.
>Like I said - I don't think that this is what is worrying the man. And,
>sadly, I have to say that technical solutions like those you have
>postulated just bear little weight in the face of a hypothetical
>downward slide in reputation.
Although I thought it was cute when some wag piped up that Terry could
simply print out ever single byte from The Pit and have it notarized.
It's that "Never Say Die/Never Think Things Out" attitude that has made
me come to really enjoy the Pratchett newsgroups as of late.
> Unfortunately, as has been stated many
>times over the last few days on both afp and abp, I suspect Terry has
>taken the right course of action.
I do too. It's a shame that we've lost so many people on AFP over the
last year or few due to stupidity and squabbles. But it stings when the
man whose name appears in the title of the group stops reading. It's
complete idiocy that merely because he writes good books that there
comes an extra charge to the price he already pays.
>Sorry for the overly long sentences - I tend to do that when ranting...
You'd be surprised at who writes long sentences. Try Faulkner sometime.
:)
The Gonz'
The Gonzo Lager
>How about we tie them down and make them watch friends for days at a
>time.
violated a cardinal law of the group would not be tortured by endless
viewings of "Friends".
The Gonz'
Richard Eney
Jonathan Ellis <jona...@franz-liszt.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Richard Eney wrote in message <79dn1i$8hf$1...@saltmine.radix.net>...
>><spoiler space inserted>
>>
>>some spoiler space kept but actually, I've removed all the
>>speculative "analysis"
Erm.. apology (in its classic sense as well as the modern) accepted as
such but I've nitpicked a bit below.
Spoilers for _Jingo_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
and
a
bit
more
[Jonathan Ellis, aka JE]
>>> I have a suspicion that this is *exactly* what is beginning to happen
>>>in Jingo, and Lord Vetinari's real purpose in stepping down is to test
>>>Vimes
<snip what I perceived as speculation>
[Tamar]
But, you see, there you said "beginning to happen" - and that is still the
beginnings of a speculation about what Vetinari _might_ do in the future,
based on your interpretation of his motives. Whether or not you guessed
right, I still see your original post as an extrapolation into a future
possible plot rather than only a comment on the action of Jingo itself.
Although the original speculation was made by someone else, your
response did seem to me to support it and extend it.
I agree that Jingo is another of Terry's fine books (I won't be so silly
as to try to decide which ones are best, since my opinion on that
can change hourly).
[JE] > Sorry. My post was not intended in any way to be to do with the future
>of the characters, but it became an analysis of a book that *has already
>been written* [1] - and a justification for some of the actions of the
>characters in that book, i.e. possible reasons as to *why* Vetinari stepped
>down: certain people have said that Vetinari's stepping down from his job
>and going to Klatch was only one of a number of out-of-character things in
>Jingo - my point is that it is entirely *in* character if his reasoning is
>to leave Vimes to take charge, which he himself hints at in his "blank"
>letter to Vimes: Pterry's own writing, not mine.
[Tamar] I saw Vetinari's 'blank' letter to Vimes as merely a hint that
Vimes could regain some clout even under military rule by using his
current rank and the official duties of that rank - playing the 'nobility'
game, in fact. It was indeed a hint as to a way to do something in a
Vetinarian way, by using Rust's own 'noble-military' system against him.
As I read it, that did not in any way imply that Vimes was to be left in
charge of the city, nor that Vetinari was stepping down (the leaving was
done in deep secrecy).
I saw Vetinari's 'stepping down' as his standard way of dealing with
malcontents too powerful to put in the scorpion pit; give them enough rope
and let them trip on it and hang themselves.
[JE] >And how Vimes coped with
>the situation, and can thus have been said to have passed a test of sorts
>(indeed, in Vetinari's own words again - see below)
[Tamar] I'm sorry, I fail to see where Vetinari uses the word "test" with
respect to Vimes's actions. Possibly I misremember, or have misread your
post. I see Vetinari making commenting that _somebody_ is up a minaret,
but whether it is Vimes himself or Cadram, I'm not entirely sure; I
suspect both. A donkey in a minaret is at an impasse, unable to move
either way. To me, that comment is simply saying "I see you have created
a situation that is apparently insoluble in a peaceful way without further
skilful input." It's not exactly a compliment.
<snip>
[JE] > [...] as I am
>entirely dealing with events that *had already happened* in Pterry's
>writing, I find it a little difficult to see how this could impinge on any
>*future* plots written by Pterry - any more than, say, people posting long
>posts about exactly how the time lines fit together in The Last Continent
>and debating about whether The Lady has played a role in the events of that
>book...
[Tamar] In that discussion, IIRC, we have been using direct quotations
from IT and TLC to support our positions on actions happening in the
books. We are not speculating as to future behavior by any of the
characters. Even if we are entirely wrong about the machinations we think
we see implied behind the written scenes, we are not speculating about the
_future_. Terry has already established that RW is one of The Lady's
playing pieces; we're just considering the possibility that TLC is the
end-game.
I take your point that it is a fine line indeed between contemplating a
character's motivation in one book and whether that motivation, if
genuine, might have further implications. I would not, I hope, speculate
on the ng about what The Lady's further activities might be.
>or the current debate, [...] on the nature of werewolves
[Tamar] Some time ago, well before leaving afp, Terry did specify that
Disc werewolves are not precisely the same as the more usual Hollywood
kind. I think that thread has long since gone [I] and has been discussing
purely Hollywood and some Earth-folkloric forms.
<snip>
[JE] >... it's when people start coming up
>with "future" plans, rather than talking about what has already happened,
>that the problem surely begins.
Agreed 100%.
[JE] > And I don't think I ever wrote or meant any of "what may happen
>next", only speculation that "this is a possible reason for the events
>that have already happened." As a discussion of a book that already
>exists, I think this is entirely relevant to ABP
I understand that you didn't intend to speculate that way.
<snip>
[JE] > my contention is that they haven't [changed] (given
>the thread that I was contributing to, which began with someone else
>speculating that Vimes would be left in charge when Vetinari was out of
>town in a future book - my point being that he _had already done_ this,
>and in a much more subtle way than the previous poster realised.)
I agree to disagree on that point, since I feel that Vimes was not left
in charge, more 'charged up and left with a fuse burning'.
Pax
=Tamar
Brian Yeoh
I don't suppose you might have a pointer to it somewhere where I might
look it up?
Maybe I'm not searching lspace.org thoroughly enough.
"They lied to you. The Devil is not the Prince of Matter; the Devil is
the arrogance of the spirit, faith without smile, truth that is never
seized by doubt. The Devil is grim because he knows where he is going,
and, in moving, he always returns whence he came."
-- Umberto Eco, "The Name of the Rose"
Ross Smith
>
> As an aside, I was interested to see, in a RD newsgroup around the time
> of Craig's arrest, a number of fans who automatically assumed that he
> was guilty; some took the view that the accusation *itself* was
> sufficient proof of guilt.
And for another example, I suspect you've stopped telling your little
anecdote about meeting Arthur C. Clarke in the toilet... :-(
--
Ross Smith ....................................... Auckland, New Zealand
<mailto:r-s...@ihug.co.nz> ........ <http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~r-smith/>
"I keep my ear very close to the ground, and in consequence I
listen to a lot of dog crap." -- Alexei Sayle
ajs...@mlecmn.net
> problem can be 'organized' away.
Besides, organization is a sign of a sick mind!
You can tell I'm a very healthy person by the state of my desk --- "I
know I left a stack of very important papers here somewhere"
Janice
CJ Sonnack
> If anyone on this newsgroup tried to take Pterry to court, I think most of
> us here would cheerfully stone them to death. (Metaphorically Speaking)
Metaphorically?? Not!!
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch...@Sonnack.com>_____________________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ __________________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|____________________________________________________|_______________________|
I'm not 43! I'm 18 with 25 years experience!!
Medusa
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> writes
>>anecdote about meeting Arthur C. Clarke in the toilet... :-(
>>
What anecdote? (she asks, innocently...)
--
Medusa ICQ# 30023749, afpsister to Sam
From Wales, where men are men and sheep are nervous...
My URL is concealed to protect the innocent
Change taffspam8926583989 to euryale to reply
Denise Connell
> (snip)
> As an aside, I was interested to see, in a RD newsgroup around the time
> of Craig's arrest, a number of fans who automatically assumed that he
> was guilty; some took the view that the accusation *itself* was
> sufficient proof of guilt.
>
I heard him speak in a radio interview some months ago on this very
topic. [1] If I remember correctly, he wrote the book, in part, because
he was dealing with his own creepy feelings about a certain kind of fan
he encounters. He describes this as the kind of person who thinks that
they could have been him (and therefore rightly deserved both his fame
and his money) if only *they* had the time to write. He got the feeling
that this type resented him even as they were fawning on him and asking
for his autograph. Their anger, he said, was always right on the surface
and he felt that they were unstable and ready to turn on him, like
wolves (no offense, Angua) if he wasn't as grateful to them as they felt
he should be, seeing as he was the one getting to live their lives and
all.
Sad and Scary. I hope that Terry's continuing rise in popularity
doesn't put him in the way of this kind of person. I like to think that
he has a different kind of fan base.
[1] "Fresh Air" program, hosted by Terri Grose
Denise
http://www.snapdragongifts.com
All I want is a warm bed, a kind word and unlimited power
Denise Connell
>
> (snip)
> But the whole point is that proof is not required -- increasingly, in
> the UK, mere accusation (of just about anything) is quite sufficient.
and I for one would much prefer that Terry spend his time writing,
partying and playing Tomb Raider then watch him waste his time in law
courts.
--
Denise
http://www.snapdragongifts.com
"7.5 Million years and all you got was 42? Oh...you were using Windows."
The Gonzo Lager
Re: Pterry meets CArthur C.
>I don't suppose you might have a pointer to it somewhere where I might
>look it up?
>What anecdote? (she asks, innocently...)
OKay. Tis very simple, very easy.
Get thee to an FTP, erm, site. Specifically, FTP.LSPACE.ORG.
While scouring the SOUND/WAV directory, download CONVENTION.WAV.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. HTH HAND.
The Gonz'
The Gonzo Lager
>And HE makes much more effort to avoid his fans in the first place. You
>realise your big mistake was being nice and approachable (if sarcastic).
Keep in mind, the man is a fan at heart. So he has our concerns. It's
no mistake that he was that way. And we do appreciate the
approachability.
>Try cultivating the Hunter S Thompson approach - get a big gun and make all
>your interviewers drink 4 quarts of whisky first.
While he's at it, why not allow his writing to degenerate so that you
realize that what he's basically doing is trying to capture past
glories.
Okay, I haven't read "Rum Diary" or the one about the letters but I've
noticed that a certain Mr. Duke had run out of gas by "Better Than Sex".
I think HST lost a lot of steam when Nixon died.
I only pray that, whatever Pterry does, he doesn't disappear like Thomas
Pynchon or J.D. Salinger.
>Jac who's pretty sure no-one would *dare* accuse Gonzo of plagiarism, even
>if he published As I Lay Dying.
Even though this isn't directed at me, I dig reading a statement like
that.
The Gonz'
Mary Sophia Novak
> I only pray that, whatever Pterry does, he doesn't disappear like Thomas
> Pynchon or J.D. Salinger.
Were either of them ever "apparent"?
Mary Sophia Novak
msn...@mail.internetcds.com
in...@fdhoekstra.nl
>
> Not long ago, Brian Yeoh wrote:
> Re: Pterry meets CArthur C.
> >I don't suppose you might have a pointer to it somewhere where I might
> >look it up?
> Meanwhile, Medusa wrote:
> >What anecdote? (she asks, innocently...)
>
> OKay. Tis very simple, very easy.
>
> Get thee to an FTP, erm, site. Specifically, FTP.LSPACE.ORG.
>
> While scouring the SOUND/WAV directory, download CONVENTION.WAV.
And for those of us who don't have sound cards? Please?
(note redirection to a.f.p., this is hardly [R] anymore)
Richard
lam...@my-dejanews.com
b...@iac.net wrote:
> Not long ago, Brian Yeoh wrote:
> Re: Pterry meets CArthur C.
> >I don't suppose you might have a pointer to it somewhere where I might
> >look it up?
> Meanwhile, Medusa wrote:
> >What anecdote? (she asks, innocently...)
>
> OKay. Tis very simple, very easy.
>
> Get thee to an FTP, erm, site. Specifically, FTP.LSPACE.ORG.
>
> While scouring the SOUND/WAV directory, download CONVENTION.WAV.
>
PUB/PRATCHETT/SOUNDS/WAV is where I found it.
DougL
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
The Gonzo Lager
>PUB/PRATCHETT/SOUNDS/WAV is where I found it.
I believe this is what's called, "Six of one, half dozen of the other".
Thanks for playing...
The Gonz'
Paul Herzberg
>Mary Sophia Novak wrote:
>>b...@iac.net wrote:
>>> I only pray that, whatever Pterry does, he doesn't disappear like Thomas
>>> Pynchon or J.D. Salinger.
>>Were either of them ever "apparent"?
>Not really. Pynchon has always been a 'slow' writer.
Well, his collection of early writings is called Slow Learner...
>I seem to recall
>him releasing a novel recently, though (i.e. more recent than Vineland).
That would be Mason & Dixon.
Cheers
Paul Herzberg
Medusa
<b...@iac.not> writes
>Get thee to an FTP, erm, site. Specifically, FTP.LSPACE.ORG.
For those of us even now having problems connecting, any hints as to
what I should enter for user and password?
Phoenix
that Medusa wrote:
> >Get thee to an FTP, erm, site. Specifically, FTP.LSPACE.ORG.
>
> For those of us even now having problems connecting, any hints as to
> what I should enter for user and password?
You could try using 'anonymous' as the user name and your e-mail as the
password...
Phoenix
--
Afpfiance to jumping Rosy http://users.telekabel.nl/eagle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFP Code 1.1 AC-NL d(+) s:-- a- U+ R+++ F++ h- P2= OSD-:@ C++ M pp----
L+ c+ B-(+) Cn PT+ Pu63- 5+ X-- MT? e+>++ r z+ end
Karen
<ea...@telekabel.nl> writes
>'T was on Thu, 11 Feb 1999 18:06:47 +0000,
>that Medusa wrote:
>> >Get thee to an FTP, erm, site. Specifically, FTP.LSPACE.ORG.
>>
>> For those of us even now having problems connecting, any hints as to
>> what I should enter for user and password?
>
>You could try using 'anonymous' as the user name and your e-mail as the
>password...
>
ftp://ftp.lspace.org/pub/pratchett/sounds/wav/
in the same way you would use any url which will take you as anonymous
with euryale.demon.co.uk as the password.
You say you had problems connecting? Guessing that you would be
connecting to the co.uk mirror site (as a uk demon user) you may have
fallen foul of the maximum connections which I think is 10 atm - but of
course ICBW:)
ttfn,
Karen
--
New to afp/abp? check http://www.lspace.org
Comments, suggestions, entries to FAQ's covering Tag's, Acronyms and
Daftpabank to: afp...@goodgulf.demon.co.uk
M Phillips
Terry Pratchett wrote in message ...
>And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts >something on a web
>page somewhere, can they do it in such a way that it >could be claimed to
>have been there for some time?
The website file listing (which clever, hacker-type people can look at, I
believe) will include a date created and last date modified record, so there
is info that will help. UNFORTUNATELY, electronic files are still very
difficult to get read into a court as evidence, so you need a good lawyer.
Martin
Andrea
> Terry Pratchett wrote:
> > (snip)
> > I wonder in what frame of mind Stephen King wrote 'Misery' :-)
Denise Connell wrote:
> I heard him speak in a radio interview some months ago on this very
> topic. [1] If I remember correctly, he wrote the book, in part,
because
> he was dealing with his own creepy feelings about a certain kind of
fan
> he encounters. He describes this as the kind of person who thinks
that
> they could have been him (and therefore rightly deserved both his
fame
> and his money) if only *they* had the time to write. He got the
feeling
> that this type resented him even as they were fawning on him and
asking
> for his autograph. Their anger, he said, was always right on the
surface
> and he felt that they were unstable and ready to turn on him,
Does this happen in all walks of life?
I have students like this, who think that they could, if they hadn't
been busy else where, be now teaching the class in my place. They
make a point of trying to take over and it is quite difficult to keep
on treating them politely. In fact they make my blood boil
<ears begin to steam>
Andrea
--
Now reading Eric (for the umptieth time - what fun) and Della is
reading Guards Guards (which seemed a good place to start as someone
else has our copy of TCoM)
(remove nac.mac.feegle to reply) ICQ#10861653
CJ Sonnack
> Terry Pratchett wrote in message ...
>> And how are things dated? If someone quietly puts
>> something on a web page somewhere, can they do it
>> in such a way that it could be claimed to have been
>> there for some time?
You bet. Some file systems store various "time stamps" (created, last
modified, last accessed, etc.), some carry only one (either created or
last modified). Either way, that information is just bits on a disk,
and it can be modified twenty-seven ways from Sunday.
I could //easily// TODAY create a text file that //appeared// to have
been written ten years ago. I could even fake up some log entries to
make it appear to have been downloaded many thousands of times.
It's all just bits on a disk, and if the COMPUTER can read'm and
modify'm, //I// can read'm and modify'm. Guarenteed.
IF YOU WANT TO SEE AN EXAMPLE, BROWSE:
http://www.Sonnack.com/Special/abp/
For a little demo I whipped up. Note the dates on the two files...
> The website file listing (which clever, hacker-type people can look at,
> I believe)...
Not if you put elementary protections in place, but if you don't, sure.
(I didn't in the URL above so you can all see the raw file listing.)
> ... will include a date created and last date modified record, so there
> is info that will help.
Won't help in the slightest.
> UNFORTUNATELY, electronic files are still very difficult to get read
> into a court as evidence,...
Rightfully so, because they are so easily faked. We have gotten to the
point where even photographs no longer mean anything: they are too easy
to fake now, too. (Check out Michael Crichton's RISING SUN for a good
(and realistic) story about such a thing.)
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch...@Sonnack.com>_____________________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ __________________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|____________________________________________________|_______________________|
The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting
than the question of whether a submarine can swim.
CJ Sonnack
> <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
[Indeed!]
> ...it seems to me that the difference between most of the speculative
> threads that have run on abp and the schmuck-of-the-mill [...] threads
> is that [in] the abp discussions [...it's] generally pretty clear [...]
> that the poster is speaking from a close examination of the past Discworld
> books, and that said poster believes that clues to future Discworld
> developments can be found there.
>
> In other words, it's emphatically clear that the person believes that
> *Terry already thought of what the poster thinks s/he sees*, and therefore
> Terry could not in future be accused of plagiarizing...
From my brief lurking time, I would agree. (Also based on experience in
other USENET venues.) And it is, I think, one of the delights of getting
to know almost any artist: you begin to perceive the mind behind the work.
In the storytelling arts, we come to know the common threads that make up
the warp and woof of the fabric. It's a wonderous thing to begin to see.
And the mark of a truly good artist is that their vision is complete and
(for lack of a word) pure. It doesn't matter if Mr. Pratchett did work out
all about the Elves early on if his vision is so consistant and unified
that when he DOES get around to it, it fits right in with "what has gone
before."
> And the Discworld is riddled with such things...
It certainly is! It's a wonderfully complete, consistant universe.
[FANISH BLATHER]
He's one of the few authors I buy any title I come across because I trust
them to always 'gimme da goods!' I can't name many I //always// buy, not
even bothering to read any blurb. I trust Mr. Pratchett completely and he
has never let me down.
And while I'm in blather mode: Let me just say publically that one thing I
cherish about TP's books is how--somehow--the final paragraph always has a
physical reaction with me...a kind of "DAMN that was GOOD" sort of chill
goes through me. I call it my "art detector". I get that same chill from
the classic films, paintings, plays and what have you.
[/FANISH BLATHER]
> I would argue, and *have* argued, that practically everything that has
> evolved in the Vimes-Vetinari connection is hindsight-visibly rooted
> in their final exchange in G!G!.
I would agree. Those characters (and all the other major players) are so
well drawn, that they almost HAVE to act as they do. It's their nature.
> [Is] it possible that we can delineate the distinction between discussing
> a future that one believes is visible in past works, versus pitching out
> ideas blindfolded in the hopes that this is the freakish but theoretically
> possible universe in which one of them turns out to be a home run?
Well, you seem to feel the distinction is "emphatically clear," but maybe
the line is fuzzier than one might suppose? I'm too new to the group to
presume to involve myself in abp management, so I'll leave off here.
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch...@Sonnack.com>_____________________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ __________________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|____________________________________________________|_______________________|
UNIX is a very user-friendly operating system ...
... it's just picky about who it's friends with.
Anthony W. Youngman
<Ch...@Sonnack.com> writes
>M Phillips <mph...@clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> UNFORTUNATELY, electronic files are still very difficult to get read
>> into a court as evidence,...
>
>Rightfully so, because they are so easily faked. We have gotten to the
>point where even photographs no longer mean anything: they are too easy
>to fake now, too. (Check out Michael Crichton's RISING SUN for a good
>(and realistic) story about such a thing.)
>
sure...". So if I took backups every day, and swore that I had done so,
and I was sure I took that backup on that day, then it would be
accepted.
I believe at least one American law firm allocates sequential serials to
documents. Each document is hashed, and its hash added to the previous
hashes. That is then published once a week or so in a legal journal. So
if there is any argument over whether a document is genuine, they can
recreate the sequence to get the hash, and say "yes this is the document
we had 6 months ago" or "no this document has been tampered with".
Sorry - getting increasingly off topic :-(
--
Anthony W. Youngman
wol at thewolery d demon d co d uk | The L-Space Web-http://www.lspace.org/
Ask Christopher Robin where it is. | The Ultimate Terry Pratchett fan site!
If replying by e-mail please mail wol.
Anything else may get missed amongst the spam.
John Leith
<gidj...@hem2.passagen.se> wrote:
>Terry Pratchett <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:MdVmJKAG...@unseen.demon.co.uk...
>>
>>It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
>
>Hey! You plagiarized that line from my fiancee!
>
>Ok, that wasn't very funny, but it was intended to be, ok? And she
>has, in fact, said something very close to that, which impressed me,
>since she's only five.
This may sound like a personal question, but how have you managed to
be engaged to a five year old?
John Leith BF
--
nos...@birdy.dircon.co.uk - That is really my e-mail address.
AFP Code 1.1a AC$ d+ s:+ a UP++ R+ F++ h+ P5+ OS--: C++++ M- pp--- L+ c
B+ Cn PT++ Pu40- 5++ !X MT+ eV+>+++ r++++ y+++
Gidjabolgo
news:36e16983....@news.dircon.co.uk...
>On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 10:41:57 +0100, "Gidjabolgo"
><gidj...@hem2.passagen.se> wrote:
>
>>>It doesn't have to be logical. I can do what I like.
>>
>>Hey! You plagiarized that line from my fiancee!
>>
>>Ok, that wasn't very funny, but it was intended to be, ok? And she
>>has, in fact, said something very close to that, which impressed me,
>>since she's only five.
>
>This may sound like a personal question, but how have you managed to
>be engaged to a five year old?
I have the right to remain silent...
It's the result of a twisted mind.
No, honest guv! My five-year-old daughter came up with the phrase first,
and since the my fiancee has been using it a lot, so I kind of got my
thought processes confused when I was writing, what with ringing phones,
running people and intercom hails for someone who has forgot to tell
they're home sick...
Gidjabolgo, pondering the correlation between bare-assed and embarassed
--
Home at http://hem2.passagen.se/gidjabol/
Mail to gidj...@hem2.passagen.se
A Non-Humourous Sig (tm)