Does the correct usage of the word 'flame' encompass both a public
diatribe and a private criticism, or does it just have the narrower meaning
of the former, public, use.
To rephrase the question: is it possible to flame by mail, or does
by definition, a flame require a posting. (Admittedly a private critique
can be just as sizzling as a public one, but is it correct to call it a flame.)
Please respond by mail.
--
Craig Werner
!philabs!aecom!werner
(1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517)
"The proper delivery of medical care is to do as much Nothing as possible"
--
"It's the thought, if any, that counts!" Dick Grantges hound!rfg
ANY ABUSIVE CORRESPONDENCE WHICH APPEARS ON EITHER THE UNIX
SYSTEM, OR IN A PERSON'S PERSONAL MAIL.
And flame my grammar all you like; I write for a LIVING. I can
"relax" on the net if I wish to......
I suspect that this use originated because a person who was arguing was
getting hot and bothered. Later, the transitive version of the term
came into use, because a flamer could be directing his flames (like a
flame thrower), so you could "flame at" someone.
--
Barry Margolin
ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics
UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
I'd like to point out that we also awarded (at least we did 10 years ago)
the "Asbestos Cork Award" to the most deserving flaming a**hole...
I concur with the hot-and-bothered (rather than insulting/attacking)
origin.
--
Eric Black "Garbage In, Gospel Out"
UUCP: {sun,pyramid,hplabs,amdcad}!chronon!eric