In support of Ordover
Writebrother
It seems to me you guys are turning your back on a Golden Opportunity here by
jumping on Ordover's back.
Like him or hate him, he's an -editor- for gosh sakes, and he -does- have
inside info on how Big Time publishing works. He's also written at least one
and maybe two (I can't remember) episodes of DS9, so he knows about that, too,
and he's had a bunch of short-stories published.
I admit he's a bit abrasive, but he seems to respond to serious questions
(inlcuding mine) quite well, at least he does on AOL and on his Trek Q&A on the
trekbooks site. Even if you're not up for anything but fan fiction, what he has
to say could be helpful and informative or at least interesting, even if it's
not what you'd like to hear.
That's all from me.
<<<activating cloak now, going into warp>>>
"Two wrongs don't make a right, but two Wrights make an airplane."
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
writeb...@aol.comcheese (Writebrother) wrote:
> <<decloaking with shields on maximum....>>
Greetings, Writebrother. <smile>
I'm not sure that you actually need your shields on - I don't think that
you will get flamed for politely expressing a divergent opinion.
<reassuring smile>
I think it likely that many people here, probably most, are utterly
uninterested in *ever* pursuing a professional writing career. And John
Ordover says the *same* thing (which is only helpful to those few) over
and over and over and over and over and over and.... You get the idea.
Also, many people have expressed the opinion that the information given
is given far over to the _absolute, no room for doubt_ side of the
spectrum (AKA, that is the *ONLY* way to Rome), and in a somewhat
condescending/otherwise unfriendly manner -- And to most people
*anywhere*, that is likely to put your message at a disadvantage.
There is also a wide range of opinions on what is actually likely to
help someone get published, many of which have been expressed here --
and of which many do not agree with Mr. Ordover's interpretations. Many
of us are left in the quandry of do we believe the advice of other
writing professionals, who are giving us message A; or do we believe
someone who exhibits tendencies that cast doubt upon his messages, who
is giving us message Z.
I myself had seen Mr. Ordover on the CIS SFRT/SFMEDIA forums for many
years, where he didn't act like this. (Or not _NEARLY_ this bad.) But
he *IS* acting like this _*HERE*_. And it may be just a teeny bit
unfair to expect us to judge someone based on his behavior in other
places where most of us have never been, as opposed to the behavior he
is exhibiting in *OUR* playground.
Thank you for listening, and allowing me to express a divergent opinion
to yours. <warm smile>
Sincerely,
Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Journeytoxtc
>inside info on how Big Time publishing works.
And it *is* a business--no matter those who may cry that writing comes from the
soul, etc.
>He's also written at least one
>and maybe two (I can't remember) episodes of DS9, so he knows about that,
>too,
>and he's had a bunch of short-stories published.
John, have you written any novels? I enjoyed your short story in the first
Strange New Worlds volume.
>I admit he's a bit abrasive
Sometimes, that seems to be what it takes. Although, one usually gathers more
flies with honey...but who wants flies? ;)
XTC
"Everything is a journey; be prepared to paddle upstream."
Smiley
>It seems to me you guys are turning your back on a Golden Opportunity here by
>jumping on Ordover's back.
>
I hang out over at one of the Star Trek Fanfic newsgroups from time to time and
I've seen him there.
What episode of DS9 did he write?
Smiley
~~~~~~~~~~
Smiley :)
See my XF fanfic at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/7147/newintention.txt
........and we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love
Him and who have been called according to His purpose.
Romans 8:28
Kim
Oh for God's sake!!!!!!!
*~*~*~*~*~*
Kim
Journ...@aol.com
http://journeytox.simplenet.com <------ Note New URL
"Did I look adorable?" Mitch Pileggi, Season 4 Gag Reels :-)
"Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." Rudyard Kipling
Dasha K
S-O-C-K-P-U-P-P-E-T
I knew you could. A cookie for you.
Dasha K.
I wouldn't kick him outta bed for eatin' crackers...
Gwen
>
>S-O-C-K-P-U-P-P-E-T
>
>I knew you could. A cookie for you.
Gee, in this case I thought it was spelled a bit differently.
D-U-M-B-A-S-S
Guess no cookie for me :-(
GrammarSchoolSpellingChamp!Gwen
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend...inside of a dog it's too
dark to read."
Groucho Marx
GeoRed
This is cheap.
Heidi
::::::::with head in hands, rocking slowly::::::::::
"It just doesn't matter, it just doesn't matter, it just doesn't matter."
<Mulder: He's not just lean.......he's cuisine.>
Dasha K
>>journe...@aol.com.nospam (Journeytoxtc)
>
>This is cheap
What can you say, cheap things come from little minds who like to stoop to
lowdown stuff.
Phile4U
Copyright 1998 Time Inc.
Entertainment Weekly
December 4, 1998
SECTION: BONUS SECTION/E.W. INTERNET #5; Pg. [Bonus]13
LENGTH: 1600 words
HEADLINE: Out Of Character;
ONLINE FAN FICTION LETS DEVOTEES OF MOVIES AND TV SHOWS BOLDLY GO WHERE
HOLLYWOOD FEARS TO TREAD
BYLINE: Elissa Klotz, Additional reporting by Zack Stentz
BODY:
"I don't know why in the world you think this is hot, Mulder," Walter
Skinner laughed mockingly. "This is not hot, this is pathetic." He wrapped his
armstighter around Fox Mulder, pulling him closer, and lightly nuzzled the back
of
his neck. --from "Harder Than It Looks," J. Bast
No, that little scenario wasn't on the Fox network last Sunday. It's on the
Web--and welcome to the world of "fan fiction." Hovering online, just out of
sight of the mainstream, stories written by die-hard aficionados of TV shows,
movies, even musicians, have grown into an ongoing online wonderland, one in
which T.J. Hooker has coffee with Captain Kirk, Agents Mulder and Scully
investigate strange happenings in Sunnydale, and Buffy and the gang solve a
mystery with Scooby-Doo.
Is it illegal? Yes--but most TV networks ignore the fictional happenings of
their characters as long as the writers credit the proper sources and don't ask
for money. For instance, while the studio may own the copyright on Buffy and
her pals--and your story about her running for President is technically an
infringement--in reality, the rule is hardly ever enforced. Is fan fiction
immoral? Well...sometimes; the sub-subculture known as "slash" specializes in
graphic sexual encounters (usually gay, often written--as is most of fanfic--by
women) between characters that are officially "just friends."
The majority of fan fiction is far less steamy, though. Most of the stories
written about the musical group Hanson, for example, fall into the genre
informally known as "Mary Sue," in which the author, a teenybopper, happens to
meet the boys and starts a Disney-like innocent romance. Even stories at The
Princess Diana Memorial Fiction Library (www.mmjp.or.jp/amlang.atc/fiction)
have a romantic feel to them.
In a world in which entertainment conglomerates often treat audiences as
afterthoughts, fan fiction is about regaining control. "People love to fill in
the blanks," says Babylon 5 fan-fiction writer Pam Buck, "or if a show goes in
a direction they don't approve of, they'll write stories about what they wish
would happen." In some cases, fanfic keeps the soundstage lit well after the
network has pulled the plug. How else do you explain healthy sites for moribund
television shows like Quantum Leap (members.xoom.com/gcalvarez/ql.html) and
Highlander (www.seventh-dimension.simplenet.com)? And some groups, like the
folks at the Forever Knight Fan Fiction page (www.fkfanfic.com), keep writing
stories in hopes that they'll convince the network to resurrect the show.
How popular has fan fiction become? There are fanfic sites devoted to such
hit shows as ER (www.willamette.edu/ jhadden/er.html) and The Nanny
(www.geocities.com/televisioncity/studio/8064), and ones that continue the
plots of movies like Titanic (countingdown.com/c2t/absolution) and Star Wars
(www.fanfix.com). There are even some Jane Austen sequels out there
(www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Boulevard/5436/ fanfiction.html). But the royal
family of the medium is Star Trek: The Definitive Guide to Star Trek Fan
Fiction on the Web (www.erols.com/imppub/fanfic.htm) lists more than 100
fan-fiction websites based on Gene Roddenberry's original series and its
endless permutations. It's not surprising that frustration over Trek's 1969
cancellation was the seed from which all fanfic ultimately grew: Whereas
writers first explored bizarre plot twists in original stories printed in
fanzines, the rise of the Internet allowed fans to post their efforts on
bulletin boards and to a devoted Usenet group (alt.startrek.creative).
As the Web widens, fan fiction is slowly leaking into the mainstream--and
into mainstream television itself. Last season, a fan-fiction-like comic book
was used as a plot device in an X-Files episode, and ongoing Homicide and
Pretender "webisodes" on NBC's official site (nbc.com) are an intriguing
corporate response to the alternate-narrative concept.
As sad as it is to report, they're also better written than the majority of
fan fiction. Passion is the motivating factor in this medium, not grammar,
spelling, or scintillating banter. Here's Dawson Leery entering a jewelry store
in a typical Dawson's Creek fan tale: "Looking around everything costed a
bundle of money, which he didn't have, looking through the glass casing he
spotted something that stood out a thin necklace with a heart hanging off it."
At least the author didn't break the three most important rules of fan fiction:
spell-check, spell-check, and spell-check.
Most fanfic authors write for one reason: feedback. But there are those who,
dreaming of going legit, submit their work to publishers or to their favorite
television shows. Their efforts aren't well received. "We get tons of terrible
stuff," says John Ordover, editor of Pocket Books' lucrative Star Trek
novelization series. "Fan writing is not the farm team for the legit novels,
and should be abandoned at once by anyone who wants to be a pro writer of any
kind."
Ordover may be missing the point, though: As with so much about the Net,
fanfic is about community. Jacque Whitworth, a student at Ball State
University, describes the people who write the stories for her Tommy Lee Jones
Fan Fiction website
(www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Studio/5841/fanfic.html) as "the most creative,
hardworking, intelligent, and friendly bunch of people I've ever had the
pleasure of working with." Over at The X-Men-obsessed Subreality Cafe
(shifting-sands.la.ca.us/ darqstar/scafe/subrc.htm), members use a chat room
for 24-hour support in times of personal crises. Site creator Kelly Newcomb
testifies to the notion that "for some, fanficdom can become almost a surrogate
family." Now, why can't someone in Hollywood make a TV series about that?
***************************************
Copyright 1999 Scottish Daily Record & Sunday Mail Ltd.
Sunday Mail
July 4, 1999, Sunday
SECTION: Page 11
LENGTH: 90 words
HEADLINE: MARRIAGE, JIM, BUT KNOT AS WE KNOW IT BODY:
IT'S not logical, captain... space hero Mr Spock of TV's Star Trek has
finally tied the knot... in a book.
But the pointy-eared Vulcan, played by Leonard Nimoy in four TV series and
six films, doesn't consummate the marriage for an astonishing 14 years.
His blushing bride in a new Trekkie novel called Vulcan's Heart is
Commander Saavik, and it's the first marriage for Spock, 99, and his
63-year-old bride.
Last night, Pocket Books executive John Ordover said: "The eventual sex
scene is handled rather tastefully."
********************
Copyright 1999 The Kansas City Star Co.
THE KANSAS CITY STAR
January 21, 1999 Thursday METROPOLITAN EDITION
SECTION: ZONE/SOUTHLAND; Pg. 3; NEIGHBORS
LENGTH: 791 words
HEADLINE: Amateur writer boldly goes into science fiction
'Star Trek' book includes story by Dayton Ward
BYLINE: TERRI BAUMGARDNER, Special to The Star
Facing his destiny, Capt. James T. Kirk of the USS Enterprise lay
there defeated by the unbeatable foe: predator time.
And in those moments between life and death, Kirk experienced a
flashback in which he questioned the meaning of his life and his
unwavering devotion to duty as a Star Trek officer.
This plot didn't come from the mind of "Star Trek" creator Gene
Roddenberry. It was conceived by Dayton Ward, who lives in the
Highland Estates neighborhood of south Kansas City.
That story, "Reflections," was published last year in an
anthology, "Star Trek, Strange New Worlds. " A second anthology will be out
this spring.
A soldier's dedication to duty - the theme of "Reflections" -
is something Ward knows well. The 31-year-old author was a Marine for 11
years.
"I understand that mentality," said Ward, who lived in Lee's
Summit until 1997. "You can't be self-centered. You have to think of
what has to be done, of your comrades, of the mission."
He was a computer programmer in the military. Today, he employs those
skills at Sprint Corp His wife, Michi, is a payroll
accountant for Lee's Summit Hospital.
One day, Ward tapped into an online chat room for "Star Trek" fans.
"Professional writers are there on the message boards," he
said. "The guy who publishes 'Star Trek' started hanging out online.
That's how I heard about the contest."
John Ordover, an executive editor for New York-based Pocket
Books, opened the door for amateur writers and Star Trek fans such as Ward.
Would-be writers submitted their science-fiction tales, and the winning
short stories were published in the anthology last July.
Writers sent in 3,000 entries. Ward's short story was one of 18
to be published.
For the second book in the series, Ordover received 4,000
entries. Ward's second "Star Trek" story made the cut for the book, which
is expected to be published in May.
Who knows? Ward may enter the third amateur writers contest,
which will be announced early February via the Internet.
"I think he will be able to go on and tell his short stories in
other science fiction magazines that publish original stories,"
Ordover said
****************************
Copyright 1997 The Providence Journal Company
The Providence Journal-Bulletin
August 10, 1997, Sunday, ALL EDITIONS
SECTION: ARTS WEEK, Pg. 1E
LENGTH: 1177 words
HEADLINE: AT LARGE For my people, a 'Star Trek' breakthrough
BYLINE: Alan Rosenberg
In this age of diversity, maybe it was inevitable. But at long last, there's
someone in the Star Trek universe who's - well, like me.
That is, Jewish.
Because in the 30-plus years of Trekdom - from James T. Kirk's original
Enterprise to Jean-Luc Picard's sleek "next generation" model; from Ben Sisko's
struggling deep-space station to Kathryn Janeway's wandering Voyager - there
have been blacks, Asians, Native Americans. There have been Russians, Irishmen,
Frenchmen.
There even have been Klingons, Romulans, Betazoids and all manner of other
outer-space denizens.
But until now, never a Jew. Despite Star Trek's claim to showing a future
where all will work together in harmony, never a hint that this future might
include my people, too.
And now along comes Capt. David Rabin, the charming, daring commander of a
Federation outpost on the embattled border world Obsidian, where he must fight
saboteurs while trying to make the desert bloom.
Rabin and the classic Trek character Spock are the stars of an excellent new
Star Trek novel, Vulcan's Forge (Pocket Books, hardcover, $ 23). The book
chronicles Spock's youthful decision to defy his father and enter Starfleet,
and his grownup choice to leave Starfleet and become an ambassador. Rabin plays
a major part in both.
The captain not only has an affinity for desert worlds such as Obsidian and
Vulcan, he's an Israeli - and if you look hard for the hints, he's also Jewish.
Now, I don't think the fact that it took three decades for Rabin to show up
means that Trek creator Gene Roddenberry, or Harve Bennett or Rick Berman who
followed him in overseeing the Trek universe, had anything against the Jews. In
fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were Jewish themselves.
I think it speaks more to Roddenberry's deep distrust of organized religion,
of gods of any sort. After all, there aren't any Catholics or Protestants or
Hindus on the Trek landscape, either. By the time of Star Trek, Roddenberry
thought, man would have outgrown all that.
Subtle religious influences did come through. Spock's famous split-fingered
hand signal, for instance, was part of an ancient Jewish priestly benediction.
That was Jewish actor Leonard Nimoy's contribution to his character.
But what Roddenberry had in mind were stories that urged people to rely on
their own abilities. Those who set themselves up as gods were riding for a
fall; so were folks who relied on gods (or computers) to make decisions they
should have been making themselves.
Not bad messages. But they didn't leave room for anyone who might feel a
sense of religious faith - might even believe in God. God was a concept only
for fakes and weaklings; meditation, as practiced for instance by Spock's
Vulcans, was the only acceptable form of spirituality.
Then Roddenberry died, and things began to change.
Religion enters in
In the first post-Roddenberry TV series, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, the
people of the planet Bajor are a spiritual bunch, and they believe the
station's human commander, Captain Sisko, to be the emissary of the celestial
prophets. So it was established that aliens of the future, at least, might be
religious. (And if the stories about Bajoran religion emphasize the conniving
of the planet's spiritual leader, Kai Winn, more than the faith itself, well,
that's just good storytelling.)
The second post-Roddenberry show, Star Trek: Voyager, introduced Chakotay, a
Native American whose spirit guides led him on journeys of self-discovery.
(This apparently was sufficiently offbeat that it struck the producers as
non-threatening.) Other members of the crew, including Captain Janeway, were
interested in Chakotay's ways, even eager to learn them. But if they had any
religious traditions of their own, they never mentioned them.
And now, finally, Rabin.
I should make it clear here that Star Trek novels do not constitute official
Trek history. Though the same conglomerate owns Paramount, which makes the
movies and TV shows, and Pocket Books, which publishes the stories, only what
appears on film is canonical; what has shown up over the years in more than 200
sanctioned novels merely fills in the gaps. Some of it is eventually adopted by
the TV and movie producers; most simply vanishes.
Nonetheless, Rabin is a breakthrough.
He's portrayed subtly. In fact, though there are plenty of references to
Israel and "my people," the book never specifically says he's Jewish.
The only use of that word is not in reference to Rabin, but to his long-ago
divorce from the "nice Jewish girl" he'd married. He also mentions, while
fussing over a sick officer, that he doesn't want to sound like a stereotype -
the Jewish mother, we can guess.
But there is one clear reference to a religious heritage for Rabin. It's the
custom on Obsidian to decorate buildings with intricate clan patterns, and
Rabin has covered his headquarters' walls with human symbols, including the
Hebrew signs "Shalom" and "L'chaim," the symbols that mean "Peace" and "To
Life." Asked whether the scrawls are Hebrew graffiti, Rabin replies succinctly,
"Deuteronomy."
It's about time
Curious about how all this came to be, I called the book's authors, New
Yorkers Josepha Sherman and Susan Shwartz.
"We both decided that it was about time there were some Jewish characters in
Star Trek," said Sherman, a fantasy writer and folklorist whose previous books
include two collections of Jewish folktales. "And you'll notice that there's
not only Jewish characters; there are Arab and Irani characters, too" - a pair
of ensigns under Rabin's command. "We wanted to show that everybody would be
included."
"Why not have (Spock) have a Jewish friend?" asked Shwartz, who writes about
finance for Wall Street firms when she isn't writing fantasy and science
fiction. "Who would come to Vulcan? People who know deserts. That means an
Israeli. . . . Basically, it takes an Israeli to deal with a Vulcan!"
It sounds so . . . logical. But I had to ask - why the emphasis on
"Israeli," rather than Jewish?
"We didn't want to hit the reader over the head," Sherman explained. "You
can't lecture the reader and still tell a good story."
"Star Trek has always been pretty secular," said Shwartz. "And it just
seemed more in keeping with Star Trek itself, to deal with the ethnic identity
and the Jewish identity and the political identity without necessarily going
into the religion. . . . He's got that, he just doesn't make a big point of
it."
The conspiracy-seeking side of my reporter's nature wondered if Trek's
powers-that-be had asked them to tone things down. But it turned out that their
editor John Ordover not only is Jewish himself, but actually was the one who
suggested they create a Jewish character.
"He wanted to see, as he put it so gently," said Sherman with mischief in
her
voice, " 'JEWS IN SPAAAACE!' "
May they live long and prosper.
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
das...@aol.com (Dasha K) wrote:
> Hi kids, do you know how to spell sockpuppet?
>
> S-O-C-K-P-U-P-P-E-T
No, No, Dasha, that couldn't be it!! After all, if John Ordover was
hiding himself under other names just to praise himself when nobody else
was going to, and to ask himself questions, what would ever happen if
someone tracked this down with a sniffer and his bosses found out,
especially if he was doing it on corporate time? Or what about other
publishing houses in New York? Why, after Pocket Books took the hit
for hiring someone like that, and his name was a laughing stock
throughout the publishing industry, what would happen? Why, he would
be in such dire straits that it would be unbelievable! No, no I just
*can't* believe that JourneytoXTC and Writebrother and ORDOVER should be
checked out by someone with these skills -- Someone who is an Executive
Editor for a line of tie-in novels would *NEVER* be stupid enough to do
something like _THAT_.
Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus
P.S. I wanna cookie. <G>
Wendy Stevens
> >
> >It seems to me you guys are turning your back on a Golden Opportunity here by
> >jumping on Ordover's back.
> >
>
> I hang out over at one of the Star Trek Fanfic newsgroups from time to time and
> I've seen him there.
> What episode of DS9 did he write?
>
'Starship Down' and 'It's Only a Paper Moon', I believe....
Emily
Journeytoxtc
Directed at me for my screen name, I suspect. And yet, the...sockpup-- er,
person who posted the tacky Ordover/Bridges parody gets praised for doing
essentially the same thing.
You all are praising each other, swapping and spewing beer over insults to
Ordover, continuing the cheap, dumbass, lowdown stuff.
XTC
EPurSeMouve
Wendy Stevens wrote:
> Smiley wrote:
> > What episode of DS9 did he write?
> >
>
> 'Starship Down' and 'It's Only a Paper Moon', I believe....
To be accurate (I was curious and looked this up already), he cowrote "Starship
Down" with David Mack, and there appears to have been an uncredited rewrite by René
Echevarria. For "It's Only a Paper Moon," he received co-story credit with David
Mack once more - the teleplay was written by Ronald Moore.
For those who did not watch DS9: Echevarria and Moore were two of the bigwigs of the
series, somewhat similar to Frank Spotnitz and Vince Gilligan on XF. In regards to
the episodes, Tim Lynch, one of the most highly respected Trek reviewers online,
gave "Starship Down" a rating of 6.5 and "It's Only a Paper Moon" a rating of 9.
Both numbers are out of ten.
Just an FYI for the curious. I looked this all up at http://www.psiphi.org/DS9.
EPur
Kim
There is NOTHING yours about that screenname except the "TC."
Kipler
Ordover, continuing the cheap, dumbass, lowdown stuff. >>
Actually, we are NOT all doing that. Despite the fact that Mr. Ordover was
downright snide to me - implying that my lack of interest in getting published
must be "sour grapes" - I don't believe I've said one dumbass thing to him.
If Mr. Ordover really wants people to hear his message, then he needs to speak
it in a manner that allows people to hear it. At present, he's not doing that.
You feel that we're missing a golden opporturnity to learn from someone who's a
professional editor. I feel that Mr. Ordover is missing a golden opportunity
to learn about the tone that he uses when he speaks (or types) to people.
While I have no advice to offer anyone on the ng about how to get published, I
can offer pretty solid advice on teaching. I have spent the past 14 years*
learning to communicate a message to an audience so that my tone doesn't put a
wall between me and the people I'm speaking to. Any disdain or condescension
that shows up in my voice will distance me from my students - and will make
them defensive, rather than receptive to my words.
In cyberspace, the need to edit for tone is perhaps even greater than in real
life. No facial expressions, no vocal cues are available - no smirking, no
smiling, no teasing. There are only the words themselves. When an author's
tone puts people on the defensive, then he himself gets in the way of his own
message, and it's time to look for a way around that problem.
In short, if Mr. Ordover really does come into the ngs with positive intentions
- to help aspiring authors achieve publication - he is far less effective in
his efforts than he might be, largely because his tone puts people on the
defensive. Meanwhile, other folks with virtually the same message are
welcomed, heard, given beer and cybercookies. So I must ask: What do the
effective newsgroup communicators know that Mr. Ordover does not?
*Resume and references available upon request to those who believe that I'm
making my teaching credentials up.
--Kipler
Journeytoxtc
And there is nothing in "MasterOrdover" that the sockpuppet "owns" save for the
"Master."
<shrug>
I'm not trying to pass myself off as you--though the sockpuppet signed "J.
Ordover" to his/her/its post; seems s/he is trying to pass a tacky piece of
fan fiction off on Ordover. Of course we know Ordover is too smart to spend
his time writing fanfic when he could be writing/editing professional works.
XTC = "Journey to Ecstasy"
XTC
row row row your boat, and remove .nospam for email
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
journe...@aol.com.nospam (Journeytoxtc) wrote:
> <<Sockpuppet; dumbass; cheap; little minds stopping to lowdown
stuff.>>
>
Journey,
Since AOL only permits 10 characters in its screen names, it seems
likely that "journeytoxtc" with 12 characters is a faked-name. And
since a regular poster here has the AOL registration of "JourneytoX", it
is also likely that the fake name you have chosen could be interpreted
as a slam.
> And yet,
> the...sockpup-- er,
> person who posted the tacky Ordover/Bridges parody gets praised for
> doing
> essentially the same thing.
I suspect highly that many people on this group would enjoy finding out
with exactitude the precise person who posted that... If only to shake
their hand. <shrug>
It is my belief that if anyone has praised the person/persons who posted
that story for doing so under a non-legitimate name (I remember *no one*
that has done that), that the reasons they might have *enjoyed* that
story enough to do so might be found in my previous message, the one
to which you replied. If you wish to learn, in a calm fashion, those
reasons, I point you towards that post.
I don't think anyone on this group "has it in" for Mr. Ordover. Tired
of what seems to equate to a deluge -- That one I could believe.
<shrug> And when people get tired of something, they tend to blow off
steam in one way or another -- Like proving an accusation of not being
able to effectively write incorrect.
If you, or Mr. Ordover, wishes to learn to get along with this group, I
do not think you will find it difficult. I sincerely do hope that you
are not another name for John Ordover -- I have sincere hopes that he
would never stoop to something that "cheap, dumbass, lowdown".
Sincerely,
Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus
journeytoXTC
2) He said their (people who want to be professionally published) time would
be better spent writing PRO fic as opposed to fanfic, because the latter really
won't help them get published. A pro publisher isn't going to care how many
fans you have online, or how many zines you've been published in, or how many
hits your website has. Ordover works in the business, he knows how it works.
3) Ordover never said that people who *don't* want to be pro published should
stop writing fanfic. If he did, I would appreciate someone pointing out the
post to me, because I haven't seen it.
4) Yes, Ordover does have an abrasive manner, but so do other professional
editors (not all of them, I'm sure, but publishing is a business and they
generally don't have time to coddle). The publishing world isn't all bubbles
and butterfly wings.
5) Please tell me in rational terms what you disagree with in any of this.
XTC
Dasha K
I think we mostly disagree with you writing under a name that is meant to mock
a long-time poster to ATXC. Come on, we know who you are, why don't you post
under your regular name and quit with the cute shenanigans? I mean, sigh, how
tired...
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
> this.
Respectfully, Journey -- We just hashed over this silly mess *THREE OR
LESS DAYS AGO* in the mega-thread "Article on Print Erotica". Since
you seem to have read everything that Mr. Ordover wrote there, please go
back and (re?)read all the _responses_ to what he wrote. I know you
would, as a responsible, thinking, polite person *never* want to put an
entire newsgroup to extra trouble to save yourself a few hours reading.
If after that point you still need clarifications on the responses,
please quote messages, and *THEN* ask for clarification. Thank you.
Also, please note in the message in _this_ thread that I asked you to
read, that I pointed out that not everyone agrees with Mr. Ordover's
advice on how to get professionally published, and some of the reasons
*why* we do not agree. Since Mr. Ordover has not yet seen fit to reply
to many of the messages pointing out those reasons in other threads (I
wonder why?), I am hampered as to giving you his response.
GeoRed
journe...@aol.com.nospam (Journeytoxtc) writes:
><<Sockpuppet; dumbass; cheap; little minds stopping to lowdown stuff.>>
>
>Directed at me for my screen name, I suspect. And yet, the...sockpup-- er,
>person who posted the tacky Ordover/Bridges parody gets praised for doing
>essentially the same thing.
>
>You all are praising each other, swapping and spewing beer over insults to
>Ordover, continuing the cheap, dumbass, lowdown stuff.
Thing is, the parody was very obviously that.....a parody. There was no
mistaking that that was *not* John Ordover who wrote it. By fashioning your
screen name so closely to that of someone else on the newsgroup.....someone
that has her own opinions and is a regular poster here......you seem to be
intentionally attempting to make people think that you *are* that person. I
almost missed it myself, the resemblence is so close. I may not have realized
it if Kim herself hadn't responded to your post. That is very trollish
behavior.
Katrina
>>5) Please tell me in rational terms what you disagree with in any of this.
>
>I think we mostly disagree with you writing under a name that is meant to
>mock
>a long-time poster to ATXC.
I'd like to add the following:
I like Kim. A *lot*. She speaks her mind, stands up for what she believes in,
and is very confident about her ability to do both. What's more, she does so
under her own name. (Other than the "Bridges" spoof, but if anyone honestly
thinks that was Mr. Ordover, they are, in my Grandma's words, "touched in the
head.)
I honestly *don't* know who this XTC person is, as I try to ignore the cliques
and clubs and dodge ball teams around here. But if XTC is a regular, and
he/she doesn't have the guts to speak his/her mind about Kim under his/her own
name, then take it to email.
Katrina
^..^
journeytoXTC
doing?
Is their behavior better because they were parodying someone whom the majority
here plainly dislike?
>There was no
>mistaking that that was *not* John Ordover who wrote it.
I never signed "Kim" or "JourneyToX" to any of my posts. As I stated, I am not
her, nor am I trying to be. Master...@aol.com signed "J. Ordover," clearly
an impersonation.
Do long-time posters have license to do things that newbies cannot?
Master...@aol.com seems to have no prior history here, either, yet was
welcomed with open arms.
XTC
(not Kim)
Kim
>(Other than the "Bridges" spoof, but if anyone honestly
>thinks that was Mr. Ordover, they are, in my Grandma's words, "touched in
>the
>head.)
That wasn't, in fact, me. The poem was mine, the spoof wasn't.
Now think about this: do you honestly think I'd make Skinner have merely a
cocktail wiener sized penis, even in spoof?
There you go then! <g>
Of course, I know all about how the spoof came about, and it's funny as hell.
Of course, I have my suspicions as to how this phony XTC came about, and it's
not funny, it's sad.
I'd rather laugh than cry about any of this, because I don't think the opinion
of Ordover, or others, merit my tears.
Isak Dinesen said the cure to anything is salt water: sweat, tears or the sea.
I'm not giving up any tears for anyone around here, unless they're happy tears.
I get a little seasick on the ocean.
So that leave sweat. I do have something I could be working on, don't I,
Katrina?
::::looking around for the sharp implements and listening for the little
goats:::::
Hugs to you, Katrina, for the many kind things you said.
journeytoXTC
>in,
>and is very confident about her ability to do both. What's more, she does so
>thinks that was Mr. Ordover, they are, in my Grandma's words, "touched in the
>head.)
So--Mast...@aol.com was Kim?
> But if XTC is a regular, and
>he/she doesn't have the guts to speak his/her mind about Kim under his/her
>own
>name, then take it to email.
You're all desperate to kill the messenger, whoever they may be, and burn the
message before trying to understand it.
If Master...@aol.com was Kim, why didn't *she* have the guts to post it
under her own name?
XTC
(and if any of you thought I was Kim--*agreeing* in a positive Ordover thread,
were you also "touched in the head"?)
Katrina
>So--Mast...@aol.com was Kim?
I'm only guessing. It was obviously a parody, and given the posts she traded
with Ordover re: BOMC (I always read that as "Book of the Month Club"), I
assumed. Plus, it was well written, and if there's one thing Kim can do, it's
write well <g>.
>You're all desperate to kill the messenger, whoever they may be, and burn the
>message before trying to understand it.
>
I quite understand the message. But now you're taking knocks at Kim (refer to
Deja for past diatribes about "appropriating" screen names, I'll not recount
those discussions here), and I don't see how it furthers your point.
>If Master...@aol.com was Kim, why didn't *she* have the guts to post it
>under her own name?
>
I took it to be part of the parody.
>(and if any of you thought I was Kim--*agreeing* in a positive Ordover
>thread,
>were you also "touched in the head"?)
More to the point, anyone who thought you were Kim-- *agreeing* in a positive
Ordover thread was willingly led to think that by your intentional choice of
screen names.
Katrina
^..^
Katrina
>That wasn't, in fact, me. The poem was mine, the spoof wasn't.
My honest-to-God mistake. Bygones.
>Now think about this: do you honestly think I'd make Skinner have merely a
>cocktail wiener sized penis, even in spoof?
>
*Excellent* point.
>So that leave sweat. I do have something I could be working on, don't I,
>Katrina?
*nodnod*
<straightens up inbox and dusts hard drive in anticipation of email from Kim --
with *attachments*!>
>::::looking around for the sharp implements and listening for the little
>goats:::::
<heh heh>
Katrina
^..^
Kim
< a brilliantly wicked analysis of the continuing devolution of John Ordover by
his own two hands>
>
>
> Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus
>
>
>P.S. I wanna cookie. <G>
Have the whole pan of brownies, babe.
As my hubby said, "Those books suck. The Ordover guy's going to be asking if
you want fries with that soon."
It's all about food, ya know.
Kim
Then create your own distinct identity. Or use your regular one.
Your selection of this name is anything but a coincidence or a tribute. It has
already created confusion and I strongly suspect it was intended to hurt or
mock.
If you have such contempt for me, you'd think you'd want to get a million miles
away from my name. I'm sure "IHateJTX" is available from AOL for your use.
GeoRed
>Date: Mon, 11 October 1999 08:31 PM EDT
>Message-id: <19991011203100...@ng-ci1.aol.com>
Writing hilarious fanfic in the form of parody. This is a fanfiction
newsgroup, after all.
>Is their behavior better because they were parodying someone whom the
>majority
>here plainly dislike?
If you dislike what they are supposedly doing, then why are you doing it
yourself?
>>There was no
>>mistaking that that was *not* John Ordover who wrote it.
>
>I never signed "Kim" or "JourneyToX" to any of my posts.
You didn't have to.....your name was close enough that anyone not looking
closely wouldn't have caught it.
As I stated, I am
>not
>her, nor am I trying to be. Master...@aol.com signed "J. Ordover,"
>clearly
>an impersonation.
There you go. *Clearly*. Obviously. Parody. Which of these words do you not
understand? And if you aren't trying to emulate Kim, why did you take a name
so close to hers? You are clearly upset with MasterOrdover.....why are you
doing the same exact thing except for making it very less obvious? You were
attempting to decieve but got busted. MasterOrdover was very obviously writing
a parody that NO ONE mistook as being John. Do you see the difference?
>Do long-time posters have license to do things that newbies cannot?
Of course not....but parodies are fanfic. Fanfic is welcome here. Using
someone elses name in an attempt to deceive people isn't.
>Master...@aol.com seems to have no prior history here, either, yet was
>welcomed with open arms.
He/she wrote a very funny piece of fanfic that was clearly a parody. All you
are doing is masquerading as someone else in support of JO. I don't think you
are doing him any favors. If Kim and Dasha hadn't caught it right away, you may
have gotten away with it for a while....especially with other newbies. I
shudder to think what else you may have tried to post in her guise. Another
question: lots of people disagreed with John, yet you chose Kim to impersonate.
Why is that? Past grievance perhaps? Just curious.
Potcallin
>under your regular name and quit with the cute shenanigans? I mean, sigh,
>how tired...
Actually, you may not know. Sockpuppet,
yes: troll, no ... not THIS time anyway.
She does have a point about differential
treatment towards her and MasterOrdover.
My guess: she's cyberpunkyar
Michaela
>5) Please tell me in rational terms what you disagree with in any of this.
I, for one, already did. Mr. Ordover thinks (or appears to, to me, from what
he's posted) that any writing activity not directly related to working with a
potential publisher/editor is a waste of one's professional writing time and
any dappled and darling dreams of being published.
*I* happen to believe that this is akin to saying that anyone hoping to become
a professional web designer should no longer visit any web site not
specifically related to graphic design and HTML coding because it's a waste of
time and won't get you anywhere. I believe that to be a published writer, one
must explore all aspects of writing, and not just the parts that might make you
money someday. As with any craft in which one hopes to grow, you must
experience as much of it as possible.
In other words, I think Mr. Ordover's all or nothing approach to publishing is
unrealistic and not necessarily reflective of the entire publishing industry.
Having heard from many publishing professionals who, in fact, have given me the
opposite advice, this would appear to further validate my personal opinion.
And, yes, I personally have found these professionals to be less condescending
in their communication.
Is that rationale enough?
Michaela
*** * *** * *** * *** * *** * *** * ***
Oh, Alcohol, I still drink to your health.
*** * *** * *** * *** * *** * *** * ***
(Address is a spam block -- kill the muse to reply.)
journeytoXTC
>someone elses name in an attempt to deceive people isn't.
This was *never* an attempt to deceive. I wasn't trying to get away with
anything--I *was* trying to put Ordover's message in simple, clear terms--which
all of you are still determined to ignore.
If you must, my screen name is a parody. Since you all like parody so well...
>lots of people disagreed with John, yet you chose Kim to impersonate.
> Why is that? Past grievance perhaps? Just curious.
I don't know Kim from a hole in the wall; she was *exceedingly* vocal and told
Ordover to go to hell. That would be my past grievance with her. She was rude
to a person who came in here to defend his name and clarify his point.
I wondered how she would like it. My guess is not much, but then she won't
think about how Ordover feels about being mistreated. He wasn't welcome
here--he isn't a regular, so he doesn't matter. This is what I'm getting from
all of this.
journeytoXTC
>Since AOL only permits 10 characters in its screen names, it seems
>likely that "journeytoxtc" with 12 characters is a faked-name.
New AOL policy is 16 letters. Isn't it cool? :)
XTC
journeytoXTC
Sure, thank you.
XTC
journeytoXTC
>Respectfully, Journey -- We just hashed over this silly mess *THREE OR
>LESS DAYS AGO* in the mega-thread "Article on Print Erotica".
You make part of my point for me. :) If this was hashed over *three or less
days ago,* why are people still slamming Ordover and not letting this go? If
you all made your point so effectively, why not move on? Why would someone
spend time writing a parody of the man? Why would someone spend time writing a
filk? The playground still looks occupied to me, even though this was hashed
over *three or less days ago*.
(Now someone is gonna point a finger and say I'm just stirring it up and making
it continue--this was still stirring long before I arrived.)
Kim has said she isn't Master...@aol.com. Then who is? Why hasn't this
person come forward? They apparently have the support of the entire
newsgroup--save me. Come out, come out wherever you are and accept the roses
that are falling at your feet.
XTC
(stating for the record that I'm not Ordover, WriteBrother, or MasterOrdover.
I'm just not *that* clever.)
Scullycat2
the cute shenanigans?
Ooooo, Ooooo ::waves frantically::!!!
I don't know who JTXTC really is! PLEEZE tell me! I love this sort of thing!
And if there's a club, can I join? I'll bring all the cookies, brownies, etc.
that you can eat!
Cathi K.
http://scullycat2.tsx.org
Cat's X-Files Fanfic Factory
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PSYCHIC RAIN - The Best Band You've Never Heard
Go to http://www.psychicrain.com
for sounds from their new CD "Spun Out", release date 10/12
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
journe...@aol.com.nospam (journeytoXTC) wrote:
> > Using
> >someone elses name in an attempt to deceive people isn't.
>
> This was *never* an attempt to deceive. I wasn't trying to get away
with
> anything--I *was* trying to put Ordover's message in simple, clear
terms--which
> all of you are still determined to ignore.
I think you just might be missing the difference between ignoring a
message, *_>AND DISAGREEING WITH THAT SELFSAME MESSAGE<_*. Of which
difference it seems you just might be ignoring. <BEG>
This isn't true? Then I apologize -- But go back and respond to the
messages I have left you in this thread, please, so I would have some
actual justification in apologizing for thinking you are ignoring what
people are trying to say to *YOU*.
> I wondered how she would like it. My guess is not much, but then she
> won't
> think about how Ordover feels about being mistreated. He wasn't
> welcome
> here--he isn't a regular, so he doesn't matter. This is what I'm
> getting from
> all of this.
<laughs heartily> Hon, I've never posted here in this newsgroup in my
*LIFE* before five days ago. Don't believe me? -- Go to Deja and check
messages for my name, then do a posting history. And although I have
no particular proof that I've never posted here under another name, I
heartily invite you to go back to Deja and read *EVERY* message I've
ever posted here, and then all the responses. See if *anybody* here
has treated me like they knew me - or with _ANYTHING_ but the utmost
respect -- With the possible exception of John Ordover.
I am anything *BUT* a regular -- I only wandered in to ask about the
titles of a couple of fanfic stories I fondly remembered. But I take
care to be _polite_, _clear_, and to _LEARN THE NEWSGROUP BEFORE I SHOOT
OFF MY MOUTH_ -- So I have with little or no exceptions throughout a
11-YEAR career on Usenet, GEnie, CIS, AOL, various BBS's, and a hearty
career IRC'ing been _UNIVERSALLY_ welcomed. In my long experience,
it's not a hard thing to learn. Except for those who _>*WON'T TRY*<_.
So, please, excuse me if I find your theory of "he isn't a regular, so
he doesn't matter" _HEARTILY_ amusing.
If you prefer to command respect, think of it like a commercial survey
to find out the preferences of your target audience - Try to find out
_what_ commands respect first -- Before whining that no one does.
Or get used to people thinking you're a cheeseburger.
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
journe...@aol.com.nospam (journeytoXTC) wrote:
> Hey, Nonny Nonny!
>
> >Respectfully, Journey -- We just hashed over this silly mess *THREE
> OR
> >LESS DAYS AGO* in the mega-thread "Article on Print Erotica".
>
> You make part of my point for me. :) If this was hashed over *three
> or less
> days ago,* why are people still slamming Ordover and not letting this
> go? If
> you all made your point so effectively, why not move on? Why would
> someone
> spend time writing a parody of the man? Why would someone spend time
> writing a
> filk? The playground still looks occupied to me, even though this was
> hashed
> over *three or less days ago*.
Respectfully, As with our Mr. Ordover, I am concluding again that you
may be missing some points.
"Three or less days ago" is meant to be a short time -- Someone's
memories, and their newsreaders, may be conclusively presumed with
someone of competence to stretch back that far. Therefore, it is a
point of netiquette that if many people made many points in a timeframe
that their newsreaders should still have those messages current, it is
considered not-terribly polite -- And forgive me, from the opinions of
most persons I have known in my 'netting course, not terribly bright --
to ask for a reiteration of points that have been expressed within a
newsgroup within, say, the past week or ten days. And the more people
involved in a discussion (not to mention the shorter the time-frame),
the more the not-terribly-polite factor rises.
Likewise, if someone has produced some form of stress with a single
person, or a group of people's lives (like not listening, like ignoring
points, trolling, impersonating people -- and I *DO* hope you are bright
enough to see the difference between a parody in a newsgroup that
is _there_ for that purpose, and deliberately choosing a false name
almost exactly that of a regular poster -- etc.), the shorter the time
frame, the more likely it is that people are still blowing off steam. I
reiterate (and if you find my reiterations tedious, I propose that you
could always *READ AND NOT IGNORE THEM THE FIRST TIME*) that the story,
poem, etc., were the newsgroup's method of blowing off some steam on the
subject of John Ordover. I ask, please, that you spare me the
reiteration of *WHY* we might not have fallen at the feet in adoration
of John Ordover, and please (as I have asked you before... starting to
see a pattern, anyone?) read the second message in this thread -- One
you probably *should* have read, as you replied to that message...
> Kim has said she isn't Master...@aol.com. Then who is? Why
> hasn't this
> person come forward? They apparently have the support of the entire
> newsgroup--save me. Come out, come out wherever you are and accept
> the roses
> that are falling at your feet.
Because, sir, they have no responsibility to. Period.
Sincerely, and with equally sincere hopes that she is not feeding a
troll -- Especially if that Troll's name rhymes with "Con -- And Over",
Hey-Nonny-nonny Maus
Kim
Don't I remember that the last time that Ordover passed through these parts,
that there was some CyberPunky person who showed up after him, like the man
with the shovel and bucket following the elephants in the parade?
Anybody else recall some insane rantings from that person about 'stopping
fanfic forever' and some real big support of Ordover?
Maybe this is Ordover's own little stalkerfan come to revisit us.
Let's not rule that out.
I think the choice of my name and the comments reveal something less random,
more motivated by some personal animosity, but I could be wrong.
Actually, who cares? What an ass.
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
Very cool. How nice for you. <Warm smile>
Did you have any thoughts on the *REST* of the message?
Sincerely,
Hey-Nonny-Nonny-Maus
Kim
>told
>Ordover to go to hell. That would be my past grievance with her.
No, that would be Ordover's grievance with me, unless you're somehow
compensated or motivated to do his dirty work.
journeytoXTC
>Or get used to people thinking you're a cheeseburger.
You've blown my cover.
XTC
journeytoXTC
>>told
>>Ordover to go to hell. That would be my past grievance with her.
>
>No, that would be Ordover's grievance with me, unless you're somehow
>compensated or motivated to do his dirty work.
I'm not doing anyone's dirty work.
Ordover didn't need rescuing. I posted because I thought his point could be
clarified by someone who didn't carry the stigma his name apparently does
around here.
I was wrong to think it would help.
People have said he has no right bringing his opinions in here, as they don't
apply (he's Trek, this is X-Files), etc. He came in because he saw his name
somewhere and wanted to clarify something that someone said he'd said. (Oh
what a tangled web.)
You attacked him, as did others.
A filk was written. A parody was written--using his real name no less.
I saw that as wrong and hateful. I spoke up.
XTC
the cheeseburger stands alone
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
<grins at his admission that people usually think he's a
cheeseburger...>
;)
Hey-Nonny-nonny Maus
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
Journey,
I am honestly sorry that you feel that way about this subject, and about
us. <shrug> Perhaps you and this group just aren't made for each
other.
I feel very much like you ignored just about *everything* that was said
to you that did not fit your pre-conceived notions, and ignored logic in
favor of emotional arguments. You probably feel the same way about us.
Perhaps you might be happier finding a different community, especially
if you feel we will never change.
Sincerely,
Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus
journeytoXTC
>poem, etc., were the newsgroup's method of blowing off some steam on the
>subject of John Ordover.
I see. And what if he blows back? He's not just a subject--he's a real
person. I'm sure you can check Deja and get his posting history as well.
>Because, sir, they have no responsibility to. Period.
And yet people claim I have a responsibility (or should have the "guts") to
speak up under my "real name." Can you explain that, Nonny Nonny?
XTC
(not Ordover, not cyberwhoever, not Kim, just plain old XTC, the cheeseburger)
journeytoXTC
>Did you have any thoughts on the *REST* of the message?
Well, sure.
>>I suspect highly that many people on this group would enjoy finding out
with exactitude the precise person who posted that... If only to shake
their hand. <shrug>>>
I thought this was wordy--and I do confess, I have forgotten what this refers
to. "who posted that" refers to what? Sorry, it's rather late.
<<It is my belief that if anyone has praised the person/persons who posted that
story for doing so under a non-legitimate name (I remember *no one* that has
done that), that the reasons they might have *enjoyed* that story enough to do
so might be found in my previous message, the one to which you replied. If
you wish to learn, in a calm fashion, those
reasons, I point you towards that post.>>
Again, I thought this was wordy. Did I say that someone praised
Master...@aol.com for posting under a non-legit name? They praised the
content, which was hateful, in my opinion. (The content was hateful; the
praise only seemed to fan the flames.)
I don't need to question why they enjoyed it; they enjoyed it because it was a
smack to Ordover, who presented a view that no one found kosher. The author
attacked Ordover, "got the upper hand", and most everyone cheered. Another
ogre ousted from the kingdom.
<<I don't think anyone on this group "has it in" for Mr. Ordover. >>
<tired smile> Okay. I think otherwise.
<< Tired
of what seems to equate to a deluge -- That one I could believe.>>
If they are tired of it, why do they continue to fan the flames? (Don't accuse
me of doing that here, for you asked for my response to the rest of the post.)
>><shrug> And when people get tired of something, they tend to blow off
steam in one way or another -- Like proving an accusation of not being
able to effectively write incorrect.>>
"not being able to effectively write incorrect." I've lost my decoder ring,
Nonny. Can you help me out here?
<<If you, or Mr. Ordover, wishes to learn to get along with this group, I
do not think you will find it difficult. I sincerely do hope that you
are not another name for John Ordover -- I have sincere hopes that he
would never stoop to something that "cheap, dumbass, lowdown".>>
I am not another name for John Ordover.
XTC
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
journe...@aol.com.nospam (journeytoXTC) wrote:
> >that the story,
> >poem, etc., were the newsgroup's method of blowing off some steam on
> >the
> >subject of John Ordover.
>
> I see. And what if he blows back? He's not just a subject--he's a
> real
> person. I'm sure you can check Deja and get his posting history as
well.
<shrugs> All right. I hope he does write a parody about us, and post
it here -- That is the newsgroup's purpose. Or he is free to go to
another newsgroup, and perform an action that is suited to the
environment there. Or he is free to perform many real-world actions,
including seeing a lawyer, if he so wishes. Or to suffer in silence.
Or many other ways he might blow off steam -- including trying to figure
out what he might have done WRONG about his approach, and fix it -- A
blowing off of steam I heartily recommend.
I am concluding, sir (madam?), that you are a troll -- And that the main
problem in my approach may very well be trying to present logical
arguments to someone who, like that fabled whore, may be brought to
culture, but not made to think.
> >Because, sir, they have no responsibility to. Period.
>
> And yet people claim I have a responsibility (or should have the
> "guts") to
> speak up under my "real name." Can you explain that, Nonny Nonny?
<giggles at her perceived chances of logical arguments making it though,
but gamely pushes ahead anyway>
If someone bothers to learn accepted Usenet "netiquette" before starting
to post, they learn that the accepted rules for nomenclature and
self-presentation are that while a "handle", or screen/posting name, is
perfectly acceptable -- and, indeed, most people use one --
*UN*acceptable things include: Someone who posts under a first
name/handle in a newsgroup, then posts under another without notifying
publically in that newsgroup as to the change (a "sockpuppet", as I
believe is the term you are fond of -- since you've been using it); or
someone that deliberately uses a handle very similar to that of an
established poster (not specifically named, but generally falls under
the category of "troll").
You have been accused of the second -- And have admitted to it. Most
people, Usenet-wide, find that unacceptable. I think if you change
your Usenet name to something a bit more unique, that it would fit
exactimundo on what you have been requested to do.
> (not Ordover, not cyberwhoever, not Kim, just plain old XTC, the
cheeseburger)
As long as you're happy. <shrugs> Some people enjoy pain... Heck,
some people enjoy _Henson_. <shudders> ;) ;)
I have not found you to listen to most of the logical responses you have
asked for; nor have I found you responding in a logical fashion.
John J. Ordover
Okay, to defuse a few things.
1) I appeciate the support of the creator of this thread, Writebro.
2) However, I don't think it's a good idea to use a screen name that
can lead to your posts being confused with someone else on the board.
It's not the same thing as chosing a name to be funny and post a
parody. I'm sure we -all- know there are LOTS of other ways available
to mock people you disagree with....:)
3) If I've been abrasive, I apologize, but I gotta say it's very hard
to be constantly told that I look down on fan fic writers, that I
think they are wasting their time, etc. etc. when in fact I have not
and do not say or believe that. If you enjoy writing fan fiction
then enjoy! I don't know how to say it more clearly than that.
4) There seems to be a notion here that fan fiction is the wave of the
future, that it's a higher moral calling than regular publishing, that
fan fiction writers are "true" writers writing "from the heart"
without "walls between you and your audience." That might or might
not be true but is not relevent if your concern is how to get paid
for your writing now or as quickly as possible. And If that's not
your concern, then why are you reading my posts, since that's all I
talk about? :)
5) If you want to turn pro, the path I outlined is what I sincerely
consider the fastest and easiest: practice what you intend to sell.
Understand that even editors in the media-tie-in market are looking
for those with professional credits. If you want to go into the
-business- of being a writer -for a living-, you have to work the
publishing system as it stands, and I'm happy to answer questions
about how it works.
That's all for now.
John
Executive Editor
The Star Trek Novels
Pocket Books
www.startrekbooks.com
Michaela
>>Is that rationale enough?
>
>Sure, thank you.
You're welcome.
Michaela <--- mommy brought me up to be polite <g>
mabtng
>
> "Three or less days ago" is meant to be a short time -- Someone's
> memories, and their newsreaders, may be conclusively presumed with
> someone of competence to stretch back that far. Therefore, it is a
> point of netiquette that if many people made many points in a timeframe
> that their newsreaders should still have those messages current, it is
> considered not-terribly polite -- And forgive me, from the opinions of
> most persons I have known in my 'netting course, not terribly bright --
> to ask for a reiteration of points that have been expressed within a
> newsgroup within, say, the past week or ten days. And the more people
> involved in a discussion (not to mention the shorter the time-frame),
> the more the not-terribly-polite factor rises.
>
> Likewise, if someone has produced some form of stress with a single
> person, or a group of people's lives (like not listening, like ignoring
> points, trolling, impersonating people -- and I *DO* hope you are bright
> enough to see the difference between a parody in a newsgroup that
> is _there_ for that purpose, and deliberately choosing a false name
> almost exactly that of a regular poster -- etc.), the shorter the time
> frame, the more likely it is that people are still blowing off steam. I
> reiterate (and if you find my reiterations tedious, I propose that you
> could always *READ AND NOT IGNORE THEM THE FIRST TIME*) that the story,
> poem, etc., were the newsgroup's method of blowing off some steam on the
> subject of John Ordover. I ask, please, that you spare me the
> reiteration of *WHY* we might not have fallen at the feet in adoration
> of John Ordover, and please (as I have asked you before... starting to
> see a pattern, anyone?) read the second message in this thread -- One
> you probably *should* have read, as you replied to that message...
>
(I'm re-posting this message I wrote on the "Bridges Of Ordover County"
thread...since it appears only one other person read it there...;))
Netiquette?
Ok. I've gotta ask this.
The writing in this (Ordover County) thread has been clever. No doubt.
But why is it okay
to parody/snark at someone else (using their real name, btw) in this
instance where it has never been accepted as proper netiquette in the past
on atxc? In fact, I remember a very heated thread just a short time ago
where someone else was the victim of a "fiction" post. That piece of
"writing" was rightfully called on the carpet.
So. Why is it different this time? This post is not to attack anyone
personally. But why is there a double standard here? Why is it "blowing
off steam" in this case, but not in the other?
The writing was clever. I just wish it hadn't been directed at poking
fun/jabbing at one individual.
You may not agree with what JO has to say and that's fine. But he *is* a
real person and has just as much right to be here as anyone else.
mab (<--- Who is by no means a troll)
Kim
>I am not another name for John Ordover.
>
>
>XTC
No, you're just a name-mimicking troll.
It's time for you to go away now.
ORDOVER
It's not for you to say who can be here and who can't. This is a public
newsgroup, not a private forum.
There are plenty of private places for groups to hang out, and places where
people can play topic cop. This isn't one of them.
John Ordover
Executive Editor
Star Trek Fiction
Pocket Books
For more Trek Book Info:
www.startrekbooks.com
Binah
Dasha wrote:
> > we know who you are, why don't you post under your regular name and
> > quit with the cute shenanigans?
>
> Ooooo, Ooooo ::waves frantically::!!!
> I don't know who JTXTC really is! PLEEZE tell me! I love this sort
> of thing! And if there's a club, can I join? I'll bring all the
> cookies, brownies, etc. that you can eat!
Educated guessing can be fun, too.
Personally, I'm guessing it's one or both of the gruesome twosome
having fun with the nasty sockpuppet hijinx.
As for the friendly or clearly parody sockpuppets, it's pretty clear
who they are too. No doubt they'll take you up on the cookie offer. ;-)
As I am not an author, the Ordover discussion doesn't enflame me.
However, I can see that JO comes off as offensive. For an editor,
you'd think tone would be important...ah well.
It's a shame when your potential students can't receive the message
because it looks and feels like the teacher is insulting the student.
It also doesn't help when the quality of the average ST paperback is
awful. I used to read them like they were going out of style, but ever
since STTNG novels started to appear, I've been less than impressed.
One early STTNG book broke me of my ST novel habit. It was some 'Alice
in Wonderland' theme piece of sh*t that I couldn't even finish. I may
have read one DS9 book (ho-hum, forgettable), and I've never picked up
a Voyager book.
Yet before then, I had already become weary of the restrictions that
the producers put on the books. It's frustrating to read book after
book and never see any character development. Though, that's not to
say I haven't read an awful SW book.
The hardback ones tend to be decent (Imzadi, Sarek, etc.) often because
we get character development--even if it is retroactively.
My favorites ST paperbacks are the older ones. Diane Duane and A.C.
Crispin were stand-outs. The short story books from the 70's are
fascinating in their boldness. I particularly liked a story
called "The Procrustian Petard" (even though it's terribly sexist). I
think it's in the same anthology as "Mindsifter", as someone mentioned.
If I were aspiring to be a profic author, I wouldn't try to be a genre
author. I would think that would be too limiting. If I wanted to
write about Kirk and Spock OR Mulder and Scully, I'd rather keep it in
the fanfic realm where I could do with them as I pleased.
I understand that Ordover is saying to be a pro that you should give up
fanfic completely and write your own universe. Sure, it makes sense in
a harsh way. However I question the supposed 'goal' of being a pro ST
or XF author. Why give up fanfic to write it professionally later
under severe shackles? That doesn't seem worth it, unless you're just
doing it for the paycheck then. Which may explain why those books tend
to be unsatisfying.
--
Binah
XFW #1013 ggg
SMUTster#1013
========================================================================
Brain:"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
Pinky:"I think so Brain, but where are we going to find chaps our size?"
journeytoXTC
>believe is the term you are fond of -- since you've been using it)
Only after someone else used it--I admit, I lost who that was in all this fuss.
>You have been accused of the second -- And have admitted to it.
No, I stated that someone (GeoRed?) accused me of trollish behavior. I did not
admit to it.
>some people enjoy _Henson_.
As in Jim Henson and the muppets? What's not to like?
XTC
journeytoXTC
>to parody/snark at someone else (using their real name, btw) in this
>instance where it has never been accepted as proper netiquette in the past
>on atxc?
Thank you; I, myself, have wondered the same thing, and am still looking for
someone to give an answer. I feel I may never find one.
XTC
journeytoXTC
>us. <shrug> Perhaps you and this group just aren't made for each
>other.
And I am honestly sorry that you don't get what I am saying: that it was
hateful to parody someone (who came in to only clarify a point someone muddied)
using their real name.
>I feel very much like you ignored just about *everything* that was said
>to you that did not fit your pre-conceived notions, and ignored logic in
>favor of emotional arguments.
> You probably feel the same way about us.
Ooops--lookie there, we agreed. I'm sure that was unintentional.
XTC
journeytoXTC
>cheeseburger...>
A hunk of meat covered in cheese; what's not to like?
XTC
journeytoXTC
this specific post.)
>All right. I hope he does write a parody about us, and post
>it here -- That is the newsgroup's purpose.
And I thought it was for fan fiction. According to you, it's for posting
parodies, in which people blow off steam at others--not fictional others, mind
you, but real people?
XTC
Kim
>Ordover didn't need rescuing. I posted because I thought his point could
>be
>clarified by someone who didn't carry the stigma his name apparently does
>around here.
>I was wrong to think it would help.
Speaking of names with stigma......
Nobody can take you seriously until you quit using something so close to my
name. It's a cheap stunt.
I'll say this one more time.
I have no use for John Ordover. Why don't you search Deja News for every post
I've ever written to him and see how many questions I've posed him, and then go
into the thread and see how they were answered? He has offered very little,
mostly answers built on his assumptions and always delivered with his
arrogance.
I don't actually disagree with some of what Ordover says. As I said elsewhere,
all he says is mere common sense. Publishing industry, target market, original
works, etc. - fine, sure, heard it before, great. So having heard it before,
and heard it better, what use do I have for him?
The quality of books he creates do not impress me.
The quality and most of all, the delivery, of his advice does not impress me.
The quality of his professionalism and his personal demeanor does impress me -
in the most negative way possible.
The quality of his defenders, those made out of knitted foot apparel, makes me
laugh.
Go away, Gold Toe.
Kim
I have much more respect, and affection, for cheeseburgers. They have more
integrity. You don't see a cheeseburger going around pretending it's a hot dog,
do you?
Nope, in the scheme of things a cheeseburger is a good thing and a sockpuppet
is just smelly footwear in the wrong place.
Kim
>
>It's not for you to say who can be here and who can't.
And yet, you yourself dissaproved of the screenname of the person I just told
to go away!
Whatever, John. I'm just not amused by this anymore.
ORDOVER
>>
>>It's not for you to say who can be here and who can't.
>
>And yet, you yourself dissaproved of the screenname of the person I just told
>to go away!
>
>Whatever, John. I'm just not amused by this anymore.
Yes, I disapprove of using a screen name intended to cause confusion. That's a
long way from telling people to go away, as if you had some right to do so.
You don't. All you have is the right complain, and nicely request a change in
screen name.
If you're not amused, stop reading the posts.
Smiley
Fronteir thing hes been doing lately....) and (occasonaly) Michael Jan
Freidman.
They can keep all the others.
Smiley
~~~~~~~~~~
Smiley :)
See my XF fanfic at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/7147/newintention.txt
........and we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love
Him and who have been called according to His purpose.
Romans 8:28
Dianne Heins
>
> I feel very much like you ignored just about *everything* that was said
> to you that did not fit your pre-conceived notions, and ignored logic in
> favor of emotional arguments. You probably feel the same way about us.
> if you feel we will never change.
This is ripe. I don't know how the heck journeytoxtc is in RL--
whether someone's alias/sockpuppet or not... but assuming for the
moment s/he is not--you all have come out, guns blazing, attacking
more the person than the ideas (can you spell "flame"?) and then come
out with this sort of trite, hypocritical twaddle?
Now you know why I tend to just lurk.
Dianne
Starliee
This has been a most fascinating thread. My views on fanfic: Do I think it's
some form of higher moral calling? Heh heh heh..no. It's fun. I enjoy it. I
enjoy writing about characters in situations that would *never* happen on the
televised series, and getting responses. I love *reading* good fanfiction. -
Corpse, Oklahoma, etc.
You ever read Corpse and Oklahoma, Mr. Ordover?
So maybe you say "But the greater majority of fanfic is just badly written..."
The majority of books in existence suck too :)
So the genre's are even :) Both have gems, both have stories that should have
long ago been tossed away. My problem: I expect bad fiction in a fanfic group.
A person doesn't write great fiction the first few times around. I DON'T
expect it in published fiction; come on, the thing goes through editors, and
more editors.
Which is why I refuse to read any Star Wars and Star Trek books. they all suck
now. My personal opinion, of course :)
And as far as this trolling thing is concerned..Eh? What? I must have missing
something, because I don't see it...I see people being a bit sensitive on what
it just a newsgroup, but hey..people have their reasons, right?
The screen name thing...No one knows a person's intentions about a screen name
unless they tell the 'public', so it's a bit unfair to accuse them off the bat.
I've seen lots of s/n's that look alike for no other reason than coincidence.
I don't know about you, but I noticed the difference right off. The Sig gives
it away, too :)
ria.
x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~
These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.
Gwen
were heinous)...:
> If you enjoy writing fan fiction
>then enjoy! I don't know how to say it more clearly than that.
Gee, thanks, Mr. Ordover! I'm so glad that you came in here to this fanfiction
writing newsgroup and filled us in on the fact that if we enjoy fanfiction, we
should keep doing it. Because, you see, I was wondering if I should...
Gwen, who supposes if she wanted to get published she'd seek out advice from a
community that is focused on publishing
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend...inside of a dog it's too
dark to read."
Groucho Marx
Kim
>The screen name thing...No one knows a person's intentions about a screen
>name
>unless they tell the 'public', so it's a bit unfair to accuse them off the
>bat.
> I've seen lots of s/n's that look alike for no other reason than coincidence.
Now that's funny. This is about as spontaneous and coincidental as the Normandy
Invasion.
How about a hot, fresh plate of Reality Bites?
A name almost identical to mine shows up for the first time about 24 hours ago
in a debate in which I am engaged, taking the opposite position to mine.
Coincidence?
Maybe it's a coincidence that OJ Simpson's blood turned up at the crime scene
where Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman died.
<rolling eyes>
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
mab...@mindspring.com (mabtng) wrote:
> Netiquette?
>
> Ok. I've gotta ask this.
>
> The writing in this (Ordover County) thread has been clever. No
> doubt.
> But why is it okay
> to parody/snark at someone else (using their real name, btw) in this
> instance where it has never been accepted as proper netiquette in the
> past
> on atxc? In fact, I remember a very heated thread just a short time
> ago
> where someone else was the victim of a "fiction" post. That piece of
> "writing" was rightfully called on the carpet.
>
> So. Why is it different this time? This post is not to attack anyone
> personally. But why is there a double standard here? Why is
> it "blowing
> off steam" in this case, but not in the other?
>
> The writing was clever. I just wish it hadn't been directed at poking
> fun/jabbing at one individual.
>
> You may not agree with what JO has to say and that's fine. But he
> *is* a
> real person and has just as much right to be here as anyone else.
>
> mab (<--- Who is by no means a troll)
<said soberly> I believe you, MAB.
I (sincerely) do apologize -- I was not on the newsgroup when the story
of which you speak went down, so I do not know any of the details about
the story or the incident. Would you, or someone else, please fill in
the missing details; or provide some information so that I may go
looking for them? This is a serious, and *NOT* a sarcastic or
facetious request -- I would feel more comfortable discussing my views
on the current parody if I knew more about what I was contrasting it
with.
I feel comfortable only with these aspects: I am not the person who
wrote "The Bridges of Ordover County", nor do I know who wrote it. I
made my best guess, and as it turned out I guessed wrong. To my eyes,
the only aspect about the post that made it libelous and/or a personal
attack was the listing of the author as "J. Ordover" with an address
that could be construed as belonging to Mr. Ordover. I saw, and see,
the rest of the story as mere parody - And if I had written it, I would
have posted it, sans any identifying elements with the name "Ordover"
on it. Which, although other people may not agree with me, would
include leaving the title "Ordover County" and the
identification "Master of all he Surveys" -- For I see those aspects,
again, as mere parody.
I am not sure I honestly believe that almost anyone would believe that
John Ordover was "J. Ordover". Whereas I think it likely
that "Journeytoxtc" could easily be confused with "Journeytox", leading
to much confusion and hurt to and from those involved in the
confusion. I also believe that it was admitted to as a
deliberate "let's see how she likes it" measure -- Which again leads me
to believe that it is likely hurtful in intent.
Boy, I sure rambled on awhile for someone who was going to cut it
short. <self-deprecating laugh, but a honest smile> Please forgive
me, and feel free to respond back -- Including and especially if you
disagree with me. Thanks for listening.
Peace find you, and thank you,
Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
journe...@aol.com.nospam (journeytoXTC) wrote:
> >>I suspect highly that many people on this group would enjoy finding
out
> with exactitude the precise person who posted that... If only to shake
> their hand. <shrug>>>
>
> I thought this was wordy
I am sorry that you do not care for my writing style. <sad look>
> --and I do confess, I have forgotten what this refers
> to. "who posted that" refers to what? Sorry, it's rather late.
I apologize -- I had thought that the quoted message above it should
have been enough. <g> Perhaps you might wish to find the original
message where you made the request, to refresh yourself?
> <<It is my belief that if anyone has praised the person/persons who
> posted that
> story for doing so under a non-legitimate name (I remember *no one*
> that has
> done that), that the reasons they might have *enjoyed* that story
> enough to do
> so might be found in my previous message, the one to which you
> replied. If
> you wish to learn, in a calm fashion, those
> reasons, I point you towards that post.>>
>
> Again, I thought this was wordy.
I again apologize for my writing style not being to your taste.
> Did I say that someone praised
> Master...@aol.com for posting under a non-legit name?
Yes.
> They praised the
> content, which was hateful, in my opinion. (The content was
> hateful; the
> praise only seemed to fan the flames.)
I do not feel the content was hateful. I am sorry that you feel that
way.
> I don't need to question why they enjoyed it; they enjoyed it
> because it was a
> smack to Ordover, who presented a view that no one found kosher. The
> author
> attacked Ordover, "got the upper hand", and most everyone cheered.
> Another
> ogre ousted from the kingdom.
<shrugs, and wishes that you had read the messages responding to Mr.
Ordover before commenting on them>
> <<I don't think anyone on this group "has it in" for Mr. Ordover. >>
>
> <tired smile> Okay. I think otherwise.
Fair enough. Agree to disagree?
> << Tired
> of what seems to equate to a deluge -- That one I could believe.>>
>
> If they are tired of it, why do they continue to fan the flames?
> (Don't accuse
> me of doing that here, for you asked for my response to the rest of
> the post.)
I am -- literally, no joke -- unsure how my request that you form a
response to my message is/was fanning flames.
> >><shrug> And when people get tired of something, they tend to blow
off
> steam in one way or another -- Like proving an accusation of not being
> able to effectively write incorrect.>>
>
> "not being able to effectively write incorrect." I've lost my
> decoder ring,
> Nonny. Can you help me out here?
John Ordover, in one of his recent posts, directly said that writing
fanfic - what we do here - did not lead to being able to write
effectively. If someone thinks of what they want to write, and the
audience for which it is meant, and a piece is written which is
effective in both those aims, it is an effectively written piece. I
believe that this has now been proven to occur, with little-or-no pre-
writing or post-writing time to add any polish.
> <<If you, or Mr. Ordover, wishes to learn to get along with this
> group, I
> do not think you will find it difficult. I sincerely do hope that
> you
> are not another name for John Ordover -- I have sincere hopes that he
> would never stoop to something that "cheap, dumbass, lowdown".>>
>
> I am not another name for John Ordover.
I am quite literally relieved if that be so.
Kim
>> I am not another name for John Ordover.
Then NonnyMaus said:
>I am quite literally relieved if that be so.
The screenname does not, as of this afternoon sometime, exist. I learned this
when I wrote The Meat Sandwich or Hosiery a note and AOL said "no such
screenname".
Therefore:
(1) It's been deleted by its creator.
(2) It's been deleted by AOL.
or
(3) It was faked and not from AOL.
That's over. Thank God.
I'm forgetting it as I type. Let's all do that.
Starliee
>ago
>in a debate in which I am engaged, taking the opposite position to mine.
Ah, so you are all seeing and all knowing. Amazing. But I digress :)
I think you're just being overly suspicious and defensive, but that's just an
opinion.
>Maybe it's a coincidence that OJ Simpson's blood turned up at the crime scene
>where Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman died.
....This is the internet. Connects millions of people, right? Some people are
BOUND to have s/n that are close together. For all you know, XTC has been
wandering around for a long while; and you DON'T know. Your analogy is a bit
flawed :)
And don't you think it's a bit egotistical to assume that someone who shows up
with a nick similar to yours and automatically assume they are trying to be
nefarious?
By the way, I must say you carry sarcasm very well :) I could say you are being
just as abrasive as a certain other person people have been talking about
lately.
I by no means meant to offend you; and I apologize if I have. I'm just trying
to see both sides.
ria.
x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x~x
Kim
>Ah, so you are all seeing and all knowing. Amazing. But I digress :)
>I think you're just being overly suspicious and defensive, but that's just
>an
>opinion.
>And don't you think it's a bit egotistical to assume that someone who shows
>up
>with a nick similar to yours and automatically assume they are trying to
>be
>nefarious?
<snip>
>For all you know, XTC has been
>wandering around for a long while; and you DON'T know. Your analogy is a
>bit
>flawed :)
I recommend Deja news for your edification. It shows no history of this XTC
person before 24 hours ago.
Power search: author: journe...@aol.com.nospam
AOL now reports this screenname does not exist.
I'm sorry, but this adds up to something far more than a coincidence, by any
standard of logic. At a certain point, in bending over to be fair and avoid
accusation, you just break your back.
I by no means think I am important in any scheme of things. I was only
important enough for a coward to want to mimic or mock for their own
gratification and in the defense of Ordover. I'm hardly flattered. Not even
Ordover thought this was cool.
It's over. Let's talk about something else.
journeytoXTC
Yes. :)
Last night, I said:
> I've lost my
>> decoder ring,
>> Nonny. Can you help me out here?
Nonny replied, and I was just reading her initial post incorrectly. Sorry
about that, Nonny, I understand what you meant now. It was phrased a bit
awkwardly--at least when I read it in the middle of the night. :)
XTC
journeytoXTC
>person before 24 hours ago.
Deja doesn't log "x-no-archive: yes" posts, do they?
XTC
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
Greetings, Dianne,
I apologize -- but I do not feel as if I have attacked Journeytoxtc.
Would you be willing to give me, or point me towards, examples of what
items are causing you to think that? This is a serious request - Not a
case of trying to play stupid, as I am not being facetious, nor lying,
about my feelings.
The post to Journey that you quoted was meant in an utterly serious
fashion -- I phrased it in a formal tone to try very hard to cut down on
mis-understandings. If two people, or groups, or whatever, are just not
happy with each other, and they cannot see eye-to-eye, sometimes it's
just time to call it quits.
I apologize if I'm being even more dense than usual. <g>
Peace find you,
Starliee
>AOL now reports this screenname does not exist.
ah well. It could be many reasons, but at this point I would have to agree with
you. It probably was more than just coincidence.
Kim
No they don't.
So you would have me believe you've been wandering around the net with this
name for ever so long and happily no-archiving yourself, until 24 hours ago,
when you stopped no-archiving?
There's a few problems with this argument.
(1) AOL said your screenname didn't exist yesterday. Today it does. Yesterday
you hae nospam in your SN. Today you do not. Could be some glitch. Could be
hocus pocus. Who knows?
(2) Evidently since it's at least now a real AOL screenname, screennames longer
than 10 characters have only been allowed by AOL for perhaps 2 months.
(3) You yourself said that your name could be regarded as a parody. Parody
finds its best audience in those who understand the person/book/TV show/etc.
that is being parodied. So here's your parody audience - this forum. Where have
you been all this time?
So I still add this up, egotistically I suppose, to anything but a coincidence.
I'll conclude thusly:
JourneyToX has been my email address and identity within the X-Files community
for over a year now. It's my website address, my eBay ID, and the name I put on
my fic.
I would like to ask you, respectfully and sincerely, to cease using
JourneyToXTC within this community to avoid confusion of identity and bad
feelings toward myself and yourself.
I can never step inside your skull and know your motivations for doing this,
but I think they're fairly clear. All I can do is beg you to stop this.
If you have anything you want to say, any criticism of me, any scorn or rage
or abuse you want to throw at me, any mockery, anything - I invite you to do
it. I'll read it. I'll take it. Hell, maybe I deserve it. But it would be
approrpriate for you to use a name other than the one that is too close, not
coincidentally, to mine.
ORDOVER
posts carry more weight - if you changed your screen name.
2) You guys say -I'm- abrasive?:) Seems I'm par for the course around here.:)
journeytoXTC
name; it's no skin off my nose.
XTC
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
ord...@aol.com (ORDOVER) wrote:
> 2) You guys say -I'm- abrasive?:) Seems I'm par for the course
> around here.:)
Well, no, actually it was people defending you saying
that... ;) :) :) :) :) <g>
What did you find abrasive?
Peace,
The Mousy-Nonny Person <G>
ORDOVER
"Notkim" ?:)
The Great King Flubble [of Zeta Reticulli] In The Sky
"Do Borg Dream of Electric Sheep?" ah, irrelevant...
da...@uforesearch.fsnet.co.uk
BEGIN MURDEROUS INTENT BLOCK
http://come.to/excaliburnebula
Gwen <gwe...@aol.com> wrote in message news:19991012173919...@ng-fn1.aol.com...
> John Ordover wrote (amongst other points that I snipped, though I admit not all
> were heinous)...:
>
> > If you enjoy writing fan fiction
> >then enjoy! I don't know how to say it more clearly than that.
>
> Gee, thanks, Mr. Ordover! I'm so glad that you came in here to this fanfiction
> writing newsgroup and filled us in on the fact that if we enjoy fanfiction, we
> should keep doing it. Because, you see, I was wondering if I should...
>
> Gwen, who supposes if she wanted to get published she'd seek out advice from a
> community that is focused on publishing
and if you want one for original fiction go to alt.fiction.orig... i'l let you guess the rest
Dianne Heins
> In article <MPG.126d36f6db2dabf9989735@news>,
> dhe...@pcisys.net wrote:
> > heynonnyn...@my-deja.com wrote...
> > >
> > > I feel very much like you ignored just about *everything* that was
> > > said
> > > to you that did not fit your pre-conceived notions, and ignored
> > > logic in
> > > favor of emotional arguments. You probably feel the same way about
> > > us.
> > > Perhaps you might be happier finding a different community,
> > > especially
> > > if you feel we will never change.
> >
> > This is ripe. I don't know how the heck journeytoxtc is in RL--
> > whether someone's alias/sockpuppet or not... but assuming for the
> > moment s/he is not--you all have come out, guns blazing, attacking
> > more the person than the ideas (can you spell "flame"?) and then come
> > out with this sort of trite, hypocritical twaddle?
>
> Greetings, Dianne,
>
> I apologize -- but I do not feel as if I have attacked Journeytoxtc.
> Would you be willing to give me, or point me towards, examples of what
> items are causing you to think that? This is a serious request - Not a
> case of trying to play stupid, as I am not being facetious, nor lying,
> about my feelings.
I wouldn't assume you were be... unfortunately, there's something
buggy about the news server here at work combined with my preferred
news reader that seems to make everything disappear once I close the
program (it doesn't do that at home, of course, and the techies don't
know *why* it happens here)... anyway, that means that I don't even
have the headers of anything I've read that caused me to react! So
I'll have to go to dejanews and I just don't have time right now--I'll
tag this message and try to look into it later when things get boring
again :) I don't want you to think I'm just being nasty--it was an
overall feeling I got after reading through several threads, so it'll
take some time to come up with some examples.
> The post to Journey that you quoted was meant in an utterly serious
> fashion -- I phrased it in a formal tone to try very hard to cut down on
> mis-understandings. If two people, or groups, or whatever, are just not
> happy with each other, and they cannot see eye-to-eye, sometimes it's
> just time to call it quits.
Understood. I suspect that such formality after a bunch of much
more... informal and personal flame-style posts came across to *me* as
being, well, snotty. I suspect it was the cumulative affect. And
yeah, if someone just doesn't fit into an NG, s/he probably doesn't
belong there; however, it's not unusual for someone to say something
of this sort snarkily--you know, the, "don't let the door hit you in
the butt on the way out," or, "if you can't stand the heat," type of
remark. Such comments are *usually* not made for any known positive
reason <g>, you know? And that's how it sounded to me. And I may
very well have misread it--some of the NGs I frequent get into some
major flame wars periodically and I probably am filtering through
those experiences...
> I apologize if I'm being even more dense than usual. <g>
Or me. It's very hard to say something nicely in a flame-filled
thread and have it come across right--since the readers are already
riled up due to the general contents of the thread.
Dianne
SweetConfetti42
>How about the name
>"Notkim" ?:)
Imagine my surprise to find it taken already! I guess a lot of people aren't
Kim.
SweetConfetti
the artist formerly known as XTC
www.saynotosocks.org
Kim
>Ordover suggested:
>>How about the name
>>"Notkim" ?:)
>
>
>Imagine my surprise to find it taken already! I guess a lot of people aren't
>Kim.
>
And that is probably for the best, dont you think? <g>
>SweetConfetti
>the artist formerly known as XTC
>www.saynotosocks.org
Tee hee!
SweetConfetti42
Now stop, or the next thing you know, I'll be giving you cookies and beer.
heynonnyn...@my-deja.com
dhe...@pcisys.net wrote:
<snip>
> So
> I'll have to go to dejanews and I just don't have time right now--
> I'll
> tag this message and try to look into it later when things get boring
> again :)
Fair enough -- Thank you. <warm smile>
> > I apologize if I'm being even more dense than usual. <g>
>
> Or me. It's very hard to say something nicely in a flame-filled
> thread and have it come across right--since the readers are already
> riled up due to the general contents of the thread.
Agreed, unfortunately. :(
Thank you again.
Hey-Nonny-Nonny Maus