From rvotaw at i-55.com  Fri Aug  1 01:52:54 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:52:54 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Take My Hogwarts Class Quizzes
References: <bgca7c+d960@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007c01c357cf$a1279b00$74a0cdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

Wiley o'Ravenclaw wrote:

> I just got done teaching seven weeks of summer school.  Course
> Title:  Hogwarts.  It was a heckuva lot of fun, but after tomorrow's
> Tri-Wizard Tournament, I'm going to be glad to take a break.

Oh that sounds like fun!  Do tell, where do I need to move to in order to
teach in a place where they let you do such a thing?

I took all the quizzes, found myself rather stupid.  Well, I did fine in the
basics, SS, CoS, PoA, and People.  I missed 1 question in Goblet of Fire
(forgot what color Durmstang's robes were!), missed 6 in places--that one
was hard.  I missed 2 in OOP, but one wasn't my fault.  The fountain had all
four listed, unless it was a trick question :)  The other I misclicked and
didn't check--shame.  Missed 3 in spells, and 3 in classes.  Need to study
up on those I guess!  It was quite fun. :)

Richelle





From insanus_scottus at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 02:58:21 2003
From: insanus_scottus at yahoo.co.uk (Scott)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:58:21 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names 
In-Reply-To: <20030731182917.94822.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bgcl0d+n1nj@eGroups.com>

 Melanie Black wrote:
" 'Oh no - I like Arwen too, and galadrial could have been worse 
(the main problem was the girl in question didn't suit the name) but 
Celeborn? I mean come on - that's an invitation to pick on the poor 
boy to all his potential schoolmates :)'
"My reply: Celeborn is awful.  As with Galadrial....but I still kind 
of like the name..lol...maybe for a pet or something.."

--They aren't bad names, but I'd name my cat after a LOTR character 
before any child that happens to come along. Imagine being Bilbo...I 
mean seriously. But I do like Meradoic 'cause Merry is nice, and so 
is Pippin...what about Aragorn? That's not so bad. 

I don't think I'd want to be named *Harry*...

I'm not altogether sure why me parents named me Scott, although I 
suspect it might have something to do with their love of Scotland 
(is that really obvious?). Incidentally our family *is* Scottish, 
but I don't think that was the reason, per se.

It's odd because I've always been the only Scott I've known, though 
I have met several others in passing it's not a common name at least 
in this area.

Are there any other Scott's on this list I wonder? I'm sure there 
*are*, but I can't think of any.

Scott
Who remembers when this girl in his 1st or 2nd grade class (can't 
remember which) changed her name to Leslie Leslie. After that 
everyone wanted to change their names too...I for some reason, 
perhaps I was possessed, decided I wanted to be "Obie Denby" for 
years...luckily my parents had *some* sense.






From gabolamx at yahoo.com.mx  Fri Aug  1 03:22:02 2003
From: gabolamx at yahoo.com.mx (Gabriela)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 03:22:02 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names for Unborn Babies
In-Reply-To: <3F290897.000005.68641@monica>
Message-ID: <bgcmcq+g6vs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  (snip)
> 
> I knew a girl at uni who was called Galadriel and her brother was 
celeborn -
> really you have to wonder if some parents even like their kids :)
> 
> K

Hi there (I've been de-lurking a lot lately). I agree with some 
people here that Galadriel is not that bad, Celeborn...well, no 
comments on that one. Talking about people naming their offspring as 
movie/book characters, I met this woman who named her sons after Star 
Wars characters, one of her sons is Anakin and the other is Kenobi. 
Some of you might think it's not that bad, well, just add an hispanic 
surname to those names (I'm from Mexico)like Anakin Rodriguez or 
something. How about that?

Gabriela
who used to hate her name and now LOVES it  :)




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Aug  1 09:16:07 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 19:16:07 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Popular and Unpopular Names for Unborn Babies
In-Reply-To: <3F295B26.000001.74735@monica>
Message-ID: <3F2ABC77.16030.5DFE2@localhost>

On 31 Jul 2003 at 19:08, Kathryn Cawte wrote:
 
> Oh no - I like Arwen too, and galadrial could have been worse (the main
> problem was the girl in question didn't suit the name) but Celeborn? I mean
> come on - that's an invitation to pick on the poor boy to all his potential
> schoolmates :)

Reminds me of a quote from the great Terry Pratchett (in collaboration 
with the almost-as-great Neil Gaiman in Good Omens):

"Pepper's first names were Pippin Galadriel Moonchild. She had been 
given them in a naming ceremony in a muddy valley field that contained 
three sick sheep and a number of leaky polythene teepees. There are only 
two ways a child can go with a name like Pippin Galadriel Moonchild, and 
Pepper had chosen the other one..."

  


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 11:44:36 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 04:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Take My Hogwarts Class Quizzes
In-Reply-To: <1059732001.1032.91284.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030801114436.37777.qmail@web11007.mail.yahoo.com>

>    From: "losangelis" <butsiriuslyfolks at charter.net>
> 
> I just thought I'd offer up eight quizzes I created on the internet 
> that my students (4th-7th grade) took for house points, as well as 
> OWLs and NEWTs.  Feel free to take them (I think for most on this 
> list, they're pretty easy, but it was a good time for the kids).

My results and comments:


Sample Quiz - 17 out of 20 (85%)

But I'm confused about some answers:

<< In the "Midnight Duel", a Gryffindor student takes on Crabbe and
Goyle single-handedly in a duel. Who was that student? >> 
Are we talking about chapter "Midnight Duel" in Book 1? If I recall
correctly, Malfoy and Crabbe (Goyle was not supposed to be there) never
showed up for the duel.

<< How many robes did Harry need to buy for his fourth year at Hogwarts
(Goblet of Fire)? >>
Is that mentioned somewhere? I only remember the bit about dress robes
being necessary, no comments about normal robes.

<< How many robes did Harry have to buy in his first year at Hogwarts?
- Answer = 4 >>
I'm pretty sure the letter said 3 work robes, a hat and a cloak. 


Quiz 1 - 20/20 (100%)

Easy one. One answer became a bit non-canonical after OotP though: 
<< What transports students from the Hogwarts Express to the castle
after their first year? - Answer = horseless carriages >>
Now we know that there are horses there ^__^


Quiz 2 - 20/20 (100%)

Got lucky. I tend to mix Crabbe and Goyle up, so I didn't quite
remember which of them got bitten by Scabbers, but I got it right in
the end. Probably wouldn't have remembered how many owls were needed to
carry a broomstick if I hadn't checked about a week ago because of a
fic I'm writing. 

One question got me curious: << What is unusual about the white
chessman that Harry, Ron, and Hermione find in the large chess board on
the way to the Sorcerer's Stone? - Answer = They have no faces >>
Most chess sets I've seen don't have faces... Is that really unusual?


Quiz 3 - 20/20 (100%)

The easiest one so far. Lots of mispellings though. And gosh, I had
completely forgot that Justin was supposed to have curly hair. (Lucky
me that wasn't in the question, I'd have flunked it for sure.)


I need a break. I'll take the other ones later.


Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From s_ings at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 12:07:03 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 08:07:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <20030731191504.82671.qmail@web14201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030801120703.56181.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt at yahoo.com> wrote: > 
> 
> When I was born, my mother wanted an uncommon name
> for
> me, and named me Tyler. As a kid, I was the only
> Tyler
> I knew, and it used to annoy me that I could never
> find personalized little toys, etc. with my name on
> them. Now, Tyler seems quite popular as a boy's
> name.
> After spending most of my life as the only Tyler, I
> still am startled when I'm out in public and hear
> someone calling their kid by that name.
> 
I know that feels. While Sheryll isn't a particularly
uncommon name, spelling it this way is unusual. I only
knew one other Cheryl growing up and I didn't meet her
until high school. And I could never find any of those
little personalised items, either. 

My sister had the same problem, though there's
actually a story behind her name. There are nearly 5
years between us and by the time my sister came along
my parents already had names picked out. My sister was
going to be called Sandra Lee. Fair enough. However,
in those days you couldn't leave the hospital until
you had named you baby. About the time my mother was
finding out she was pregnant, her sister had a baby
girl. Didn't know what to call her, so named her
Sandra Lee. My parents were told that they were having
a boy, so weren't too worried about that name being
taken, and decided to call a boy Shawn. They had a
girl. My mother suggested calling my sister Shawn.
Nope, says Dad, that's a boy's name. So my mother took
the d and the a out of Sandra, stuck it on the end of
Shawn and said "Not a boy's name anymore". So my
sister ended up being Shawnda Lynn. You might not
think that's so bad. However, she was a teenager about
the time that Honda was big on a campaign that
advertised 'get your hands on a Honda'. Not much of a
stretch from Honda to Shawnda. Fortunately my sister
has a good sense of humour (and likely still has the
Honda mirror I gave her). :-D

I have about 25 cousins on both sides of our family
and I don't think any of us have used names for our
children that are already in the family. Makes for
some interesting names. My cousins have named their
children things like Talina, Chyna, Avery (a
delightful little girl) and Nolan. My sister's
children are Austin, Makayla and Kailan and my
daughter is named Nyssa. I cheated and gave her two
middle names - Elizabeth (after my aunt) and Shawnda. 

Nyssa hated her name growing up because no one could
pronounce it and people were forever asking her if her
name was Vanessa or Melissa. By the time she was three
her standard response to "What's your name?" was
"Nyssa, N-Y-S-S-A, Nyssa". It's pronounced Nissa and
even through high school she had teachers that
insisted on calling her Neesa. I never thought it
would cause that much trouble. *sigh*

Sheryll, thinking her husband's siblings had it easy
with names like Susan, Andrew, Mike, Larry, Frank, etc.

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From h_potter_uk at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 13:23:15 2003
From: h_potter_uk at yahoo.co.uk (Jenny)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 13:23:15 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <bgc11g+hc51@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgdpk3+afct@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer Piersol" 
<jenP_97 at y...> wrote:
> Well... Jennifer was the #1 girls' name in the '70s (thanks, 
Cindy)...
> and boy, don't I know the effects of that.  I lived in a small town 
of
> 14,000 (now about 21,000 ten years later) in high school, and once 
had
> an algebra class with 2 other Jennifers.  We ended up being Jen, 
Jenny
> and Jennifer (I was Jennifer).  
> 

Here's another Jennifer checking in on the action ;)

I know exactly what you mean.  One year on my skating team, there 
were four of us - a coach named Jen, myself (captain Jenny), and two 
teammates - one named Jennifer and the other a Jenna.  That's not 
nearly as bad as one year (the year of the K's).  We had Kelly, 
Christy, Christina, Kristin, Carolynn, Carrie, and a coach named 
Kate.  Whew!  Talk about confusing.

Speaking of pre-natal names as well, there was a professor at my 
college who wanted to name his kid Frodo or Bilbo because the due 
date was on their birthday.  His wife put a stop to that and they 
ended up calling the child Booger until he was born.  

As for myself, I was known as Ralph and, 11 years before me, my 
brother was Scooter.  In the end, my parents decided to go the 
alliteration route with James and Jenny.  Needless to say, I get 
called Jamie once and a while.  And a few Jenny-Lynn's because people 
don't realize it's my first _and_ last name.  And as for the Jennifer 
craze in the 70's, I got hit with the wake in the 80's (actually, my 
mom was naming me after a cousin of her's, but little did she know 
I'd end up with the same name as Jenny Lind, the Swedish opera 
singer!)  I've met a lot of Jennifer's who have their middle name 
Lynn, but, for me, that's my last name (my middle name is Noel).

>-Jen, who wishes JKR read these boards and would use that name in her
> books... ;)

Hear, hear, Jen!  I'm for that one too!  :)

Yours in Gryffindor,
Jenny




From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 14:10:26 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 07:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Take My Hogwarts Class Quizzes
In-Reply-To: <1059732001.1032.91284.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030801141026.19745.qmail@web11003.mail.yahoo.com>

>    From: "losangelis" <butsiriuslyfolks at charter.net>
> Subject: Take My Hogwarts Class Quizzes
> 
> potterville.net


Results and comments, part II:


Quiz 4 - 19/20 (95%)

Morgan, you idiot, mixing up the Quidditch games. Drat. 

And does anyone know if waddiwasi actually means something?


Quiz 5 - 25/25 (100%)

Now that's more like it. Although I was lucky about the colour of the
Beauxbatton uniform... 


Quiz 6 - 20/20 (100%)

Lucky again. I had no idea pansy was the name of a flower. (English not
my first language.)


Quiz 7 - 19/20 (95%)

So I didn't know the name of the train station at Hogwarts... *sigh*


Quiz 8 - 19/20 (95%)

Sorry for being an insufferable know-it-all, but there's no right
answer for that question: 
<<What is NOT in the fountain at the Ministry of Magic?   
A   : a wizard 
B   : a house elf 
C   : a goblin 
D   : a centaur >>
All of them, plus a witch, were present in the fountain.


OWLs - 10/10 (100%)

YAY! *feeling smug* Take that, Hermione!


NEWTs - 7/10 (70%)

Admittedly, I couldn't remember (still can't, to be honest) any student
being transformed into a badger in CoS. 
Admittedly, I probably fell asleep in the middle of History of Magic,
and that's why I didn't know the century of the Goblin Rebellions.

But, about the Astronomy question... isn't Canis Major the name of the
constellation? Sirius, known as the Dog Star, would be the main star of
that constellation. Therefore, Canis Major and Sirius are not the same
thing. I want that point back, teacher!

And... I've got this one right, but still... If even JKR admits she has
no idea what is Arithmancy, then... I don't know. I don't quite see the
point of including a math question in a HP quiz. 


Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 14:12:14 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 14:12:14 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names & Theme Songs
In-Reply-To: <bgbg04+7o2i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgdsfu+mekb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...> 
wrote:
I think each of us should have a *theme song!*  You 
> know, a link to a song that reflects who you are.
> 
> OK, here goes.  Henceforth (until I change my mind, anyway), my 
> theme song is "Rapper's Delight" by the _Sugar Hill Gang_.  This is 
> because it is old school and retro and rather frivolous -- like 
> me!  :-)
> 
> http://www.bus.miami.edu/~ldouglas/house/shill/rd.html
> (click "audio clip")
> 
> Sin D.C.

Hi Cindy

Have you ever heard the version the little old lady did in "The 
Wedding Singer"?

June




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  1 14:21:10 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (Terry James)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 09:21:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Popular and Unpopular Names
Message-ID: <BAY8-F87GMsQz2KjYih00015e8b@hotmail.com>




>From: Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at yahoo.com>

My sister's
>children are Austin, Makayla and Kailan and my
>daughter is named Nyssa. I cheated and gave her two
>middle names - Elizabeth (after my aunt) and Shawnda.
>
>Sheryll, thinking her husband's siblings had it easy
>with names like Susan, Andrew, Mike, Larry, Frank, etc.
>

I always liked the name Nyssa from Dr. Who.  It's a really pretty name.  My 
friend's name is Rhesa, pronounced REE-sa.  Nobody can get it right on the 
first try.  It's from a list of names in the Bible.  I always told her she 
was lucky--the next name in the verse is Zerubabel.

I almost named my first child Michaela.  It was a choice between that and 
Jordyn.  But while we were
actually on the way to the hospital, we decided for Jordyn because my 
husband has a brother named Michael, a step-brother (married to my husband's 
sister--it's a Southern thing, don't ask questions) named Michael, and a 
niece named Micah.

It turned out good that we went with Jordyn, because five weeks later 
another one of his step-brothers had a baby and they named theirs Makayla.  
We had no idea that's what they were intending.

My brother's name is Landon.  Twenty-four years ago no one at all had that 
as a first name, and he went through his entire childhood having to spell 
it, being called Brandon, never having any little personalized toys.  Now 
half the boys between 15 and 5 are called Landon.  I thought about naming my 
second daughter Landyn, to go with Jordyn, but Landon objected.  I still 
think Landyn is a pretty name, if anybody's pregnant.... :)

Terry LJ

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Fri Aug  1 14:38:03 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 14:38:03 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names & Theme Songs
In-Reply-To: <bgdsfu+mekb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgdu0b+qdog@eGroups.com>

June wrote:

> Have you ever heard the version the little old lady did in "The 
> Wedding Singer"?

No, I missed that movie.  Is it pretty good?

I haven't seen very many Adam Sandler films, although I liked him on 
SNL.  I saw "Happy Gilmore" and thought it was a total scream, 
though.

Cindy -- who can't figure out why so many former SNL stars fade away 
when they leave the show




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 17:27:19 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 17:27:19 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names & Theme Songs
In-Reply-To: <bgdu0b+qdog@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bge7tn+lrbb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." 
<cindysphynx at c...> wrote:
> June wrote:
> 
> > Have you ever heard the version the little old lady did in "The 
> > Wedding Singer"?
> 
> No, I missed that movie.  Is it pretty good?

I'd recommend it - sweet romantic comedy set in the 1980's with a 
lot of fun 80's music.  The little old lady is Sandler's singing 
pupil and learns the following songs to sing to her husband at their 
wedding anniversary:

Till there was you

and Rappers Delight. 

See it if you can - I almost died laughing at this - she does 
Rappers Delight pretty good!

One of Sandler's best IMHO.


June




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 17:57:12 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 17:57:12 -0000
Subject: Interesting Web Poll
Message-ID: <bge9lo+5gc7@eGroups.com>

I notice people have posted a few internet poll links.  Here is the 
ultimate.  Ever read the Divine Comedy by Dante?  Ever wondered 
where you'd end up? Hell, purgatory or heaven.

Wonder no more....

www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv

FYI - I'll be seeing you in limbo.

PS - not a religious maniac - I just love Dante.

June

"The mind is its own place, and in itself
Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven."





From boggles at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 23:23:10 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 18:23:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Popular and Unpopular Names for Unborn
 Babies
In-Reply-To: <bgb0m1+rmpe@eGroups.com>
References: <bgb0m1+rmpe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f00bb50a63c1698@[192.168.1.100]>

At 12:05 PM +0000 7/31/03, Amy Z wrote:
>
>So, let the stories be unleashed.  What did you call your kids while
>they were in utero?  What did your parents call you?  (Makes note to
>ask parents.)

All fetuses on my father's side of the family, including myself and 
my three siblings, were/are called "BJ" in utero.  The theory is that 
this stands for "Billy Joe" for a male and "Bobbi Jo" for a female, 
but I suspect it was merely convenience - a number of members of the 
family ended up with the initials BJB before the tradition was 
instated.

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From boggles at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 23:33:41 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 18:33:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <20030731213150.80611.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030731213150.80611.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f01bb50a8ebb7ab@[192.168.1.100]>

At 2:31 PM -0700 7/31/03, Petra Pan wrote:
>
><HA!>  Yeah, I was wondering when a
>"Jennifer" is going to weigh in on this. 
>I once knew so many Jennifers that the
>next one to transfer into my school was
>going to have to be an "Iffer."

Yes - I actually was called "Niff" by a friend of mine in college, 
who meant someone else by "Jen".

Then there was eighth grade science class - four Jennifers and a 
Jeannie all in the same class.  The teacher solved this by calling us 
all by last name.

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug  2 00:28:52 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 00:28:52 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names for Unborn Babies
In-Reply-To: <bgb0m1+rmpe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgf0k4+sqdm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z" <lupinesque at y...> 
wrote:

> So, let the stories be unleashed.  What did you call your kids 
while 
> they were in utero?  What did your parents call you?  (Makes note 
to 
> ask parents.)

According to my parents, I was Jill until I was born.  Then, 
apparently, they saw me and decided to name me Joy.  I guess they 
were happy.  I am happy, too, because I hate the name Jill and I like 
the name Joy, even though the other kids always made fun of my name.  
But the other kids make fun of your name no matter what, so I think I 
got a pretty good deal out of it, even though people are constantly 
telling me that a grumpy, curmudgeonly person like myself should not 
be named Joy.

--JMC




From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 00:41:46 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 00:41:46 -0000
Subject: In utero names and what's up with the J's?
Message-ID: <bgf1ca+2ol1@eGroups.com>

My brother-in-law was also called "Cletus the Fetus". Hmmm...

We called my first daughter Missy before she was born, sure she was 
a girl, but she is now Melissa to all but a couple of friends.

She in turn called her unborn sister Benina (without knowing she was 
a sister), although we have no idea why. She even told a grocery 
store clerk that was her baby sister's name. I saw no need to 
correct her ;o).

My second daughter decided to call my third daughter after a street 
near us... Dudley! Poor thing... We haven't told her yet, but since 
she listens to the books carefully as we read to her sister, it's 
sure to come out some day.

A moms' group I belong to had a Jen and two Jenny's among its 
members, and now Jen is on the steering team with Jena, Jeana, 
Jeralyn and Jeannette! 

Beth (Who's been Elizabeth, Liz, Betje, Becky or, to the drum major 
who couldn't remember, Jill!)




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Sat Aug  2 01:21:09 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 01:21:09 -0000
Subject: Harry / Hermione Picture and Newsweek
In-Reply-To: <bga7cu+4e2l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgf3m5+hmo2@eGroups.com>

Anne wrote:

> I am one of the lucky ones . . .
> 
> Found Newsweek at the supermarket; it's the August 4th issue, with a 
> little blurb at the top of the front cover about 'the new Harry 
> Potter movie'.  It is easy to miss, as none of the HP cast is on the 
> front cover.

No kidding!!

Ok I did my weekly shopping for groceries and just *had* to see if
they finally changed the Newsweek for this week.  I live in Denton,
Texas so they can be kind of slow about updating the magazines.  
Anyway, I see the pics of Sadam's sons and a *tiny* little header in
the upper right corner saying "One the New 'Harry Potter' Set".

Eeeeeee!

So I snatched it up fast and skipped the the counter.  And I am so
excited that cool picture of Harry and Hermione clinging together in
fear like *siblings*  ::big grin:: is perfect for cutting out and
framing.  Teehee.  

Ok, HP fandom squealing is over.  But I am *very* happy with even this
short article.  Even if Sirius is not sexy enough in that other
picture.  Lets hope his sexiness is in the walk and not the look.  


Melody




From editor at texas.net  Sat Aug  2 02:39:31 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 21:39:31 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Nicknames for kids
References: <BAY8-F99VzpJxV0HvBg0001c88a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <006701c358a0$f1dfe620$4704a6d8@texas.net>

> Not really in utero, but still...

Me either. I always went by "Mandy" as a child, and when granola bars came
out, I suppose "Mandolabar" was inevitable, and my brothers shortened it,
and call me "Bar" to this day.

My daughter Catherine (which *does* get misspelled a lot) goes by the Polish
diminutive of Kasia, and for some totally unremembered reason, I have always
called her Kasia the Boo. Kasia Boo. Or just Boo. Probably from my brother
visiting when she was a baby; he calls babies "boobooheads." Hey, he calls
*me* Bar. I'm *related* to these people.

Of course, I named my son Tomasz. It's genetic.

~Amanda






From shufan90 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 03:47:54 2003
From: shufan90 at yahoo.com (shufan)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 20:47:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <p05200f01bb50a8ebb7ab@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <20030802034754.45829.qmail@web80309.mail.yahoo.com>

Another Jennifer speaking and having experience the "which jennifer?" in school my daugther are named Cordelia and Cassandra.  The college students I work with think I am a huge Buffy fan, but in my husband picked the names after I purchased at least 3 baby name books and begged him to pick something that was different.
 
I have also been called Niff, Jenn, but never a Jenny.
 
jennifer




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sat Aug  2 03:52:13 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 22:52:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Nicknames for kids
References: <BAY8-F99VzpJxV0HvBg0001c88a@hotmail.com> <006701c358a0$f1dfe620$4704a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00d901c358a9$758b0bf0$aea0cdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

Amanda wrote:

> My daughter Catherine (which *does* get misspelled a lot) goes by the Polish
> diminutive of Kasia, and for some totally unremembered reason, I have always
> called her Kasia the Boo. Kasia Boo. Or just Boo. Probably from my brother
> visiting when she was a baby; he calls babies "boobooheads." Hey, he calls
> *me* Bar. I'm *related* to these people.

Well, I don't have any in utero nicknames to share, but I have to jump in with some of my students nicknames last year.  I had two girls with completely different names who liked to be called Lucy.  Neither of them had names remotely resembling Lucy.  Neither of whom I called Lucy.  Kids from other classes called them that.  So when one of them was in trouble all the student knew to tell the office was "Lucy did it."  And when they buzzed my room and asked for Lucy, I had to ask which one.  The only help they could give was another nickname--Macaroni.  Who on earth would call a child Macaroni?  Even as a nickname?  Of course there was also a Jun-Jun (short for Junior).  Nicknames make for a great deal of confusion at school!

Richelle 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 07:07:12 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 07:07:12 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
Message-ID: <bgfnv0+6siu@eGroups.com>

Is there anyone here who is from London or is familiar with London,
who might want to speculate on possible REAL London neighborhoods what
could be potential locations for #12 Grimmauld Place?

Neighborhood that at one time were nice well kept middle class
neighborhood, that have not endured the test of time very well, and
are now run down. 

It would have to be on the East side, which makes sense because I'm
lead to believe that the East End is a working class low rent
district. Am I correct in assuming that the 'East End' is an very old
London neighborhood? Remember they flew east, and told Harry if he got
separated he should continue to fly east, and the re-enforcements
would join him.

One odd fact that makes it almost impossible for Grimmauld Place to be
a real neighborhood is how long it took to fly there doesn't seem
consistent with it being a 20 minute walk to King's Cross Station,
which unless I'm mistaken is roughly in the Charring Cross Road
neighborhood. Flying time seems to imply a far east neighborhood, but
a 20 minute walk seems to imply a central London neighborhood.

I know it all fiction, but I'm curious.

bboy_mn




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 08:23:12 2003
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 08:23:12 -0000
Subject: How's this for a Harry? -Pictures
Message-ID: <bgfsdg+3dji@eGroups.com>

I've finally gotten my pictures from the June 20th-21st book release 
party at Borders Books here in Redmond, WA.  The boy in the pictures 
is my ten-year-old son, William.  He makes a very good Harry 
Potter!  LOL  He had a blast, but was very tired when it was all 
over.  You can cut and past the links into your browser window if 
they aren't clickable.   

Here's "Harry" with Hagrid:
http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/William_as_Harry1.jpg

Gilderoy Lockhart managed to get into this picture:
http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/William_as_Harry2.jpg

"Harry" salutes with wand in hand:
http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/William_as_Harry3.jpg

"Rictusempra!":
http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/William_as_Harry4.jpg

"Harry" runs into Hermione Granger and Lucious Malfoy(?!):
http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/William_as_Harry5.jpg

This is one tuckered out ten-year-old:
http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/William_as_Harry6.jpg

I hope everyone who looks enjoys the pictures! 

Diana









From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Aug  2 11:38:49 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 11:38:49 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bgfnv0+6siu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgg7s9+4l0m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> Is there anyone here who is from London or is familiar with London,
> who might want to speculate on possible REAL London neighborhoods 
what
> could be potential locations for #12 Grimmauld Place?
> 
> Neighborhood that at one time were nice well kept middle class
> neighborhood, that have not endured the test of time very well, and
> are now run down. 
> 
> It would have to be on the East side, which makes sense because I'm
> lead to believe that the East End is a working class low rent
> district. Am I correct in assuming that the 'East End' is an very 
old
> London neighborhood? Remember they flew east, and told Harry if he 
got
> separated he should continue to fly east, and the re-enforcements
> would join him.
> 
> One odd fact that makes it almost impossible for Grimmauld Place 
to be
> a real neighborhood is how long it took to fly there doesn't seem
> consistent with it being a 20 minute walk to King's Cross Station,
> which unless I'm mistaken is roughly in the Charring Cross Road
> neighborhood. Flying time seems to imply a far east neighborhood, 
but
> a 20 minute walk seems to imply a central London neighborhood.
> 
> I know it all fiction, but I'm curious.
> 
> bboy_mn

Hackney suggests itself to me.  Crumbling old houses as I recall 
(left London in early nineties - so if Hackney has now been 
yuppified apologies all round).

It used to be very popular with squatters (people who settle 
unpaying in empty houses) at one time.  The houses are quite 
victorian and attractive in their way and could of course be done up.

It is also in the north eastern part of London and about 20 mins 
from Kings Cross!

June




From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Sun Aug  3 12:18:07 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 22:18:07 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Interesting Web Poll
References: <bge9lo+5gc7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c359b9$4d0e7200$65984cca@Monteith>

Hi



> I notice people have posted a few internet poll links.  Here is the 
> ultimate.  Ever read the Divine Comedy by Dante?  Ever wondered 
> where you'd end up? Hell, purgatory or heaven.
> 
> Wonder no more....
> 
> www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
> 
> FYI - I'll be seeing you in limbo.
> 

Well this was fun. I'm off to the seventh level of Hell!

The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Low
Level 5 | High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Moderate
Level 7 | High
Level 8- the Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low

Luv
Nox



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug  2 13:32:38 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 13:32:38 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bgg7s9+4l0m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bggehm+knn9@eGroups.com>


> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> 
wrote:
> > Is there anyone here who is from London or is familiar with 
> > London, who might want to speculate on possible REAL London 
> > neighborhoods whatcould be potential locations for #12 Grimmauld 
> > Place?
> > Neighborhood that at one time were nice well kept middle class
> > neighborhood, that have not endured the test of time very well, 
> > and are now run down. 
> > 
> > It would have to be on the East side, which makes sense because 
> > I'm lead to believe that the East End is a working class low rent
> > district. Am I correct in assuming that the 'East End' is an 
> > very old London neighborhood?

Almost. The 'East End' is a generic term for anything East of the 
City of London. It encompasses several neighbourhoods. 

Because the prevailing winds in London are West to East, any smelly 
trades used to be placed in the East part, so that the smells would 
be blown *away* from the city.

This meant that the aristocracy, who didn't have to work, sited 
their houses in the 'west end' of the city, near the City of 
Westminster and the Court. People who ran businesses were usually 
either in the City of London itself, or in the 'east end'. 

Modern London has now swallowed up the City of Westminster, the City 
of London, the East End, the West End, and the entire County of 
Middlesex [grin].


 Remember they flew east, and told Harry if he 
> 
> > got separated he should continue to fly east, and the re-
> > enforcements would join him.
> > 
> > One odd fact that makes it almost impossible for Grimmauld Place 
> 
> > to be a real neighborhood is how long it took to fly there 
> >  doesn't seem consistent with it being a 20 minute walk to 
King's Cross Station,
> > which unless I'm mistaken is roughly in the Charring Cross Road
> > neighborhood. 

Roughly, but it would take about 20 minutes to walk from Charing 
Cross Road to Kings Cross. Kings Cross Station is on the Euston 
Road, and has a neighbourhood around it (called 'Kings Cross'. I 
think it's the station that's named after the neighbourhood.)

12 Grimmauld Place could also be in the Kings Cross neighbourhood, 
which has definitely seen better times. It's currently one of the 
most notorious red light/drug dealing districts in London, with the 
local residents fighting a bitter battle to try and get the 
authorities to clean the place up. If 12 Grimmauld place *is* in 
King's Cross, I can understand why the kids were only allowed out of 
the house with an adult ;-)

> Flying time seems to imply a far east neighborhood, but
> > a 20 minute walk seems to imply a central London neighborhood.
> > 
> > I know it all fiction, but I'm curious.

The discrepancy could be due to Moody's paranoia. He could have been 
following a very wandering path over London - but if Harry got 
separated, he would have to fly straight for the reserves to find 
him.

Another reason for the discrepancy might be that Harry would see the 
lights of London as he approached from the WEST (Surrey) - but 
there's an awful lot of London. I can tell you how long it takes to 
get from East London to West London on the tube (Metro), because I 
do it regularly; 1 hour and 20 minutes. Just crossing the Central 
Zone (Zone 1 on the tube system) takes at least half an hour. 

Equally, when I'm driving home from Eastern England, I expect to 
see 'city' streets at least half an hour before I get home. Harry 
could easily have been flying for some time over city streets just 
to get into the centre of town.

>> 
> June wrote:
> Hackney suggests itself to me.  Crumbling old houses as I recall 
> (left London in early nineties - so if Hackney has now been 
> yuppified apologies all round).
> 
> It used to be very popular with squatters (people who settle 
> unpaying in empty houses) at one time.  The houses are quite 
> victorian and attractive in their way and could of course be done 
up.
> 
> It is also in the north eastern part of London and about 20 mins 
> from Kings Cross!

Yes, Hackney is a possibility, but so is Spitalfields, just East of 
the City of London. That has a large number of old 
Georgian/Victorian houses (around Spitalfields market), which also 
fell into decay when cheap travel meant the rich no longer had to 
live near their place of work. It's currently full of artists, who 
discovered that large amounts of space for studios could be had 
relatively cheap. It's also full of squatters as there are quite a 
few empty houses left.

Islington is now mostly very yuppiefied, but still has some run down 
large houses left; Clerkenwell also has some run down areas.

But personally, I would go for Kings Cross itself, or the 
neighbouring district of Pentonville, which is North London rather 
than the East End. It's famously run down, is a large enough area 
that a 20 minute walk to the station is feasible, and has a park 
called 'Joseph Grimaldi Park', which may have suggested the pun. :-)

Pip!Squeak





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sat Aug  2 14:09:28 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 09:09:28 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] How's this for a Harry? -Pictures
References: <bgfsdg+3dji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00c801c358ff$c253ea50$2b9fcdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

Diana wrote:

> I've finally gotten my pictures from the June 20th-21st book release 
> party at Borders Books here in Redmond, WA.  The boy in the pictures 
> is my ten-year-old son, William.  He makes a very good Harry 
> Potter!  LOL  He had a blast, but was very tired when it was all 
> over.  You can cut and past the links into your browser window if 
> they aren't clickable.   

William was an adorable Harry!  I must say, he had the Daniel Radcliffe wand salute expression down perfect.  I can hear him now--"You wish." :)

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 14:43:29 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 14:43:29 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bggehm+knn9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bggimh+5agv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...>
wrote:
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> But personally, I would go for Kings Cross itself, or the 
> neighbouring district of Pentonville, which is North London rather 
> than the East End. It's famously run down, is a large enough area 
> that a 20 minute walk to the station is feasible, and has a park 
> called 'Joseph Grimaldi Park', which may have suggested the pun. :-)
> 
> Pip!Squeak

Joseph Grimaldi Park!!!! Oooooo... that's just too close to be a
coincidence.

Thanks to the people who posted, it gave me a wonderful insight into
London, and many of those neighborhoods sound just perfect.

As I think about it, it may be possible that the flight took so long
because Moody flew them around the far East End to avoid the city,
then brought them into the Kings Cross area on a more North East to
South West route. That is, coming into the Kings Cross neighborhood,
or near by neighborhood, from the North East.

Cool! I wasn't sure anyone would or could respond to my question.

Thanks.

Steve/bboy_mn





From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sat Aug  2 17:35:34 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy St John)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 10:35:34 -0700
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names & Theme Songs
Message-ID: <410-22003862173534269@earthlink.net>

Sin DC (aka Rapper's Delight) wrote:

> Lastly, I think I have a solution to the sudden proliferation 
> of "Cindys" and "Wendys."  Oh, sure, we could start using last 
> initials and such to differentiate those with the same name, but how 
> boring is that?  I think each of us should have a *theme song!*  You 
> know, a link to a song that reflects who you are.
>
> OK, here goes.  Henceforth (until I change my mind, anyway), my 
> theme song is "Rapper's Delight" by the _Sugar Hill Gang_.  This is 
> because it is old school and retro and rather frivolous -- like 
> me!  :-)


This is a fantastic idea. 

If I were going to choose a *real* theme song (as in a serious one that
reflects my attitude towards life la, la la, blah, blah, blah) it would be
"I Hope You Dance" by Leanne Womak. And there is even a small chance
someone here has heard me sing it, as I karaoke'd it on Saturday night at
Nimbus. It's a lovely uplifting song with a heartwarming message.

How boring is THAT? <G> So, my official HP4GU theme song (until *I* change
my mind) will be, "Yo ho, yo ho, A Pirate's Life for Me." Don't ask me why.
There is nothing particularly piratical about me. But I do rather like the
image of myself dressed in revealing wenchy clothing, with a big feathered
hat sitting on my brow at a jaunty angle, sailing around the Caribbean with
Captain Jack Sparrow at my side. (Yes, having a MAJOR crush on Captain Jack
right now. Who would have thought some men look SO sexy in eyeliner?
Orlando WHO???). 

So, until further notice, I'll be singing "Yo Ho" when posting around here. 

And while I'm at it, I suppose I'll add a couple of other comments about
this thread (as I was the one who started it in a round-about way. I don't
think I've ever done anything to inspire as much conversation before in my
whole life). When I was pregnant, I referred to the little person as "Sweet
Baby." (How twee, I know). I thought Sweet Baby was going to be a girl, and
would therefore end up being named Bridget Annika, so imagine my surprise
when Sweet Baby emerged complete with penis! <G> Fortunately, I'd prepared
for this eventuality, and had actually chosen a boy's name, too - Connor,
after Connor MacLeod from the "Highlander" movie. I didn't think it was
going to be a popular name, but turns out there are now all sorts off
little kindergarten-aged Connors (or Conners or Conors) running around out
there. I even know one who's a girl.  If I'd known it would be so popular,
I would have probably picked something else (Tristan and Nigel have always
been favourite names of mine, and neither is likely to become popular
anytime soon). Probably lucky for Connor that I didn't go with one of the
other names. <G>

For myself, I detested Wendy for the longest time. I hated being named
after that little simp in "Peter Pan," although if my parents had had any
*vision* whatsoever, they could have called me Wendy Darling (instead of
Wendy Ann), and I'd have liked that. So, I changed the spelling of my name
to Wynnde, and went by this for years. Finally, though, I got so sick of
spelling it out constantly, and having to explain it to just about every
single person I ever came into contact with (including store clerks who
read the name on my credit cards and such). So, I went back to Wendy and am
very happy to have done it. I'm happy with the name now, having forsaken it
and now reclaimed it. 

Oh - and one more tiny thing. Yesterday was my birthday, so Happy Birthday
to Me! (Is that cheeky of me?). If I'd come one day earlier, I'd have been
able to share a birthday with Harry and JKR. Oh well. You can't have
everything in life! <G> 

Cheers!
Wendy





From andie at knownet.net  Sat Aug  2 18:19:31 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 18:19:31 -0000
Subject: Sirius' Famous Lines
Message-ID: <bggvbj+scfj@eGroups.com>

In my opinion, another trajedy surrounding Sirius' death will be the loss of his 
wonderful lines from the series.  You've got to admit, he's had some great 
ones!  Therefore, in his memory, I thought it would be great to list our all time 
favorites...

Here are a few of mine:
1.  "You are truly your father's son, Harry." PoA
2.  "If you made a better rat that a human, it's not much to boast about, Peter." 
PoA
3.  (I can't remember this one exactly, and it's a long one, but... )  When they 
can't find Kreacher... "He's probably in the attic crying over my mum's old 
bloomers."  OoP [Again, sorry for mutiliating that line!]

Anyone have any other favorites they'd like to add??? :)

grindieloe




From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sat Aug  2 18:46:19 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 18:46:19 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bggimh+5agv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgh0tr+c0pd@eGroups.com>

bboy asked about possible locations of Grimmauld Place, and has 
received some great answers, but there is one thing I wanted to add. 
(I've snipped all the other discussion)

Steve, you might check with Lexicon Steve. He discussed the location 
of Grimmauld Place in his & Penny's Nimbus talk on the geography of 
Harry Potter. I did a quick search at the Lexicon just now, and 
couldn't find the information, so he may not have it up yet. But 
IIRC, he concluded that it was mostly likely located abou 20 minutes-
walk east (and a bit south) of King's Cross Station. I don't 
remember what all went into that conclusion, though, so I'd suggest 
you go straight to him to find out his reasoning.

:-)
Wendy




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Sat Aug  2 19:35:13 2003
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 19:35:13 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <20030801120703.56181.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bgh3ph+10hg6@eGroups.com>

<<<long discussion on names>>>

I have a book called "The Amazing Fact-a-day Fun Book". One of the 
amazing facts goes something like (I paraphrase): "Until 1972, 
parents in France had to choose a name for their children from a book 
authorized by the state!" 

Right. So, in Hungary, in 2003, parents STILL have to choose a name 
for their child from a booklet authorized not by the state, but by 
the national language comittee sorta-thing. Reading about people 
inventing names fot their kids, I'm always amazed. There are about 
1600 girl's names and 1200 boy's names in the booklet. 

If you want something different, you can appeal to the comittee, but 
there are certain basic principles that cannot be crossed. One of 
them is that you have to spell names phonetically. No "Jennifer"s, 
however much we want them, it'll have to be "Dzsennifer", which is 
phonetic Hungarian for the same thing. Doesn't it look awful that 
way? And a lot of people still choose it! :-)

It makes the spelling thing much easier. But it still leaves the 
surname. Especially for "foreign" names like mine (McLean) it's an 
endless spelling game. But hey.

Lotsa love from Aliz (Alice in English)




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Aug  2 20:43:02 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 20:43:02 -0000
Subject: Where is 12 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bggehm+knn9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgh7om+n6kj@eGroups.com>

Did anyone notice that the subject line said 21 Grimmauld Place, 
leading me to wonder if someone had a numerological theory on 
something else being hidden on that block.

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:

> Roughly, but it would take about 20 minutes to walk from Charing 
> Cross Road to Kings Cross. Kings Cross Station is on the Euston 
> Road, 

Where is Euston Station, which JKR admitted is actually the one 
that has the barrier she envisioned the wizards crossing to get to 
Platform 9 and 3/4? 

> and has a neighbourhood around it (called 'Kings Cross'. I 
> think it's the station that's named after the neighbourhood.)

I seem to recall two years ago someone educating us stupid Americans 
that King's Cross and Charing Cross (chere reine cross) are both 
named after crosses some Plantagenet king (I forgot which one) put up 
in memory of his late wife.
 
> 12 Grimmauld Place could also be in the Kings Cross neighbourhood, 
> which has definitely seen better times. It's currently one of the 
> most notorious red light/drug dealing districts in London, with the 
> local residents fighting a bitter battle to try and get the 
> authorities to clean the place up. If 12 Grimmauld place *is* in 
> King's Cross, I can understand why the kids were only allowed out
>  of the house with an adult ;-)

How does that affect users of the train station?

> But personally, I would go for Kings Cross itself, (snip) has a 
> park  called 'Joseph Grimaldi Park', which may have suggested the 
> pun. :-)

Any idea after whom 'Joseph Grimaldi Park' is named? 




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Aug  2 20:53:40 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 21:53:40 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Where is 12 Grimmauld Place?
References: <bgh7om+n6kj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2C24D4.000003.72537@monica>

 
Catlady wrote
 
Did anyone notice that the subject line said 21 Grimmauld Place, 
leading me to wonder if someone had a numerological theory on 
something else being hidden on that block.
 

Me -

Actually we don't really have 'blocks' in the sense Americans do, and 21
would likely be on the other side of the road anyway :)

Then she said -
--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
 
> Roughly, but it would take about 20 minutes to walk from Charing 
> Cross Road to Kings Cross. Kings Cross Station is on the Euston 
> Road, 
 
Where is Euston Station, which JKR admitted is actually the one 
that has the barrier she envisioned the wizards crossing to get to 
Platform 9 and 3/4? 
 
Me -

Slightly further along the Euston Road, to the west I think, about ten
minutes walk from what I remember.

Then she added -

I seem to recall two years ago someone educating us stupid Americans 
that King's Cross and Charing Cross (chere reine cross) are both 
named after crosses some Plantagenet king (I forgot which one) put up 
in memory of his late wife.

Me -

*claps delightedly* See, Americans *can* be taught ;) Very good - you're
referring to the Eleanor Crosses, erected by one of the Henrys (one of the
early ones).
 
Having been told by Bluesqueak that -

> 12 Grimmauld Place could also be in the Kings Cross neighbourhood, 
> which has definitely seen better times. It's currently one of the 
> most notorious red light/drug dealing districts in London, with the 
> local residents fighting a bitter battle to try and get the 
> authorities to clean the place up. If 12 Grimmauld place *is* in 
> King's Cross, I can understand why the kids were only allowed out
> of the house with an adult ;-)
 
She pondered -

How does that affect users of the train station?
 
Me -

It doesn't. When getting off a train you immediately catch the Underground
(attached to the station), a bus (from right out front, away from the main
road), or a taxi, ditto. 


She also wondered -
Any idea after whom 'Joseph Grimaldi Park' is named? 
 
Me -

Joseph Grimaldi perchance? Sorry, couldn't resist. He was a clown.
http://www.clown-ministry.com/History/Joseph-Grimaldi.html

K



From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 22:09:35 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 15:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names & Theme Songs
In-Reply-To: <410-22003862173534269@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20030802220935.40748.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com>

Wendy St John <hebrideanblack at earthlink.net>:
> For myself, I detested Wendy for the
> longest time. I hated being named
> after that little simp in "Peter Pan,"
> although if my parents had had any
> *vision* whatsoever, they could have
> called me Wendy Darling (instead of
> Wendy Ann), and I'd have liked that. 

Ah but here is your chance to be known as 
"Wendy Darling," if you so choose!  But 
then, I would said that, wouldn't I, 
considering my handle...which I chose 
partly because it's about as close to 
'unique' as I was going to get on a list 
this big without going with 'abstract.'

Of course, with that theme song of yours, 
you COULD be Hook... <g>

> Oh - and one more tiny thing. Yesterday
> was my birthday, so Happy Birthday to Me!

And many happy returns!

Petra, of the Lost Girls
a
n  ;)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Aug  2 23:15:50 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 23:15:50 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bggimh+5agv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bghgn6+ddn8@eGroups.com>

Steve wrote:

> As I think about it, it may be possible that the flight took so 
long
> because Moody flew them around the far East End to avoid the city,
> then brought them into the Kings Cross area on a more North East to
> South West route. That is, coming into the Kings Cross 
neighborhood,
> or near by neighborhood, from the North East.

Am I being thick here?  I don't understand why flight time comes 
into it.  They were flying from Little Whinging, in Surrey, which is 
much further away.

David




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 23:19:15 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 19:19:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Birthday Wishes!
Message-ID: <20030802231915.10243.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com>

*drags her exhausted body into the party room and
surveys the mess from the last party*

Geez, don't you guys ever clean up after yourselves?
I'm a Birthday Elf, not a House Elf. *sigh* :-D

I'm a bad Birthday Elf, at that, having missed a
birthday yesterday. Sincere apologies to Wendy.

Yesterday's birthday honouree was Wendy and today's is
Amber. Birthday owls can be sent care of this list and
Wendy's belated wishes can be sent directly to:
hebrideanblack at earthlink.net

I hope both of you had magical days, filled with fun
and friends.

Happy Birthday, Wendy!
Happy Birthday, Amber!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 02:00:38 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 02:00:38 -0000
Subject: Where is 12 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <3F2C24D4.000003.72537@monica>
Message-ID: <bghqc6+s173@eGroups.com>

 
> Having been told by Bluesqueak that -
> 
> > 12 Grimmauld Place could also be in the Kings Cross  
> > neighbourhood, which has definitely seen better times. It's 
> > currently one of the most notorious red light/drug dealing      
> > districts in London, with the 
> > local residents fighting a bitter battle to try and get the 
> > authorities to clean the place up. If 12 Grimmauld place *is* in 
> > King's Cross, I can understand why the kids were only allowed out
> > of the house with an adult ;-)
>  
Catlady pondered -
> 
> How does that affect users of the train station?
>  
> Me -(Kathryn) wrote:
> 
> It doesn't. When getting off a train you immediately catch the 
> Underground(attached to the station), a bus (from right out front, 
> away from the main road), or a taxi, ditto. 
> 
Yup, getting into and out of the train station is reasonably safe. 
Inside is also OK, as it's quite heavily patrolled by the British 
Transport Police.

It's probably one of the small British bits that American readers 
miss, though. In PS/SS the Dursley's leave Harry on his own in 
King's Cross Station, with no money to get back to Surrey. 

Unless you want a child to start an exciting career in the sex 
industry, King's Cross Station is the last place in Britain a 
responsible parent/guardian would leave an eleven year old on their 
own. An eleven year old might not realise that they *must* go 
straight to a policeman or railway employee if they miss the train.  
And not go with that nice man who's just asked if you want any 
help ...

Pip!Squeak






From glcherry at bellsouth.net  Sun Aug  3 03:19:12 2003
From: glcherry at bellsouth.net (stardancerofas)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 03:19:12 -0000
Subject: Fanfic Recommendation / Popular Unpopular names
Message-ID: <bghuvg+e717@eGroups.com>

Tired of a kind, gentle, humble, Remus Lupin? Then have I got a story
for you. The Lone Maurauder (yeah, I know that's not spellled just
right, but hey everyone makes mistakes). This story, does have some
fairly, shall we say, foul language (The "F" word is used several
times), but I really just didn't pay attention to that.

Lupin, devastated by Sirius' lose, is out for a little Marauder
retribution. He even manages to tell Dumbledore to "shut up". I love
this story.

http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1448756

Like I said, tired of Remus being calm? Read this! And no, I'm not the
author. :)
Lorrie

Whos' real name is Natalie (named for Natalie Wood), Lorraine (named
for Lorraine Day). I was almost a Georgiana Leslie. I'd have killed my
parents by now for that one :)




From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 03:19:57 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 03:19:57 -0000
Subject: Where is 12 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bghqc6+s173@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bghv0t+s41q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
>  
> 
> It's probably one of the small British bits that American readers 
> miss, though. In PS/SS the Dursley's leave Harry on his own in 
> King's Cross Station, with no money to get back to Surrey. 
> 

Which brings up my latest question: According to the maps I've been 
able to find online (which you'd think would be an easy thing, but 
they're all geared to tourism), Surrey is near London. However, one 
reviewer wrote "(t)hey sense the pain of his miserable return visits 
to London". So was this just another of this guy's "flints", like 
referring to Transformation class, or is Surrey considered part of 
London like various US suburbs are being swallowed up by big cities? 
It looked like a county, not a city. 

Beth, who needs to find a better map....




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 03:59:22 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 03:59:22 -0000
Subject: Where is 12 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bghv0t+s41q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgi1aq+jrvg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Beth" <jillily3g at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
> wrote:
> >  
> > 
> > It's probably one of the small British bits that American readers 
> > miss, though. In PS/SS the Dursley's leave Harry on his own in 
> > King's Cross Station, with no money to get back to Surrey. 
> > 
> 
> Which brings up my latest question: According to the maps I've been 
> able to find online, Surrey is near London. 
> 
> Beth, who needs to find a better map....

bboy_mn:

Good European Maps-

http://www.multimaps.com/

Includes satilite photos of Britain and Europe which are really cool.


http://www.maps24.com/

Java maps, that show amoung other things, one way streets in London,
and they allow you to make distance measurements.

Both maps work best with MS Internet Explorer, but can still be used
with Netscape/Mozilla.

Surrey is mostly south and slightly east of central London. The
closest point to central London in Surrey is 10 miles (Epson, Croydon)
, the farthest point is about 40 miles (Haslemere). Distance to a the
large centerally located city of Guildford is about 28 miles. 

Therefore, a relatively short trip to London and typical of most suburbs.

Hope that helps.

bboy_mn






From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 04:15:52 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 04:15:52 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bghgn6+ddn8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgi29o+sgi3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> Steve wrote:
> 
> > As I think about it, it may be possible that the flight took so 
> > long because Moody flew them around the far East End to avoid the 
> > city, then brought them into the Kings Cross area on a more North 
> > East to South West route. That is, coming into the Kings Cross 
> > neighborhood, or near by neighborhood, from the North East.

> 
> Am I being thick here?  I don't understand why flight time comes 
> into it.  They were flying from Little Whinging, in Surrey, which is 
> much further away.
> 
> David

bboy_mn:

Straight in to London via broom assuming a 60mph flight speed, is
about a 15 to 30 minute flight, depending on the actual location from
Little Whinging (which doesn't exist).

I get the impression of a much longer, probably over an hour, flight.

---OoP Am HB pg 37---
(Narration of Harry's thoughts)
He wondered how long they ad been flying; it felt like an hour at least.
---end quote---

I would guess that they flew another 10 to 20 minutes more after Harry
had the above quoted thought. Estimated an hour and 20 minutes, that's
a lot of flying time to travel 20 to 30 miles. 

So, I am trying to account for that time. True Moody's detours added
some time, but I doubt that it tripled the amount of flying time. 

Kings Cross station is north of the central City of London near
Regent's Park. So I speculate that they did not fly directly over the
heart of London. Instead the skirted the center of the city by flying
farther east and approached King's Cross area from the north east.

I'm not saying it's true, I'm just speculating on the possibilities.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 12:34:34 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 12:34:34 -0000
Subject: 12 Grimmauld Place Map - King Cross, 1 Mile
In-Reply-To: <bgfnv0+6siu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgivgq+i2mf@eGroups.com>

Just out of curiousity I scanned a map of London's King's Cross
neighborhood, and drew a circle with a 1 mile radius centered on
King's Cross Station. One mile is approximately a 20 minute walk.

If you would like to look at it.

http://www.homestead.com/bluemoonmarket/files/12grim.jpg

WARNING: this file is 600,000 bytes. 

I don't recommend downloading it unless you have high speed access. It
will still work with a modem, but it will take a while. Best view at
800x600 or better resolution.

It's nice to see the neighborhoods we've been talking about, and get
some landmark references.

Map is from a paper map of London by Collins. This covers the city in
detail including Docklands and Greenwich. (us$9.95)

Another good paper map for fan fic writers is Zagat Survey. It shows
detailed maps of each significant neighborhood, and the main city map
shows restaurants, and identifies them by price, quality, and cooking
style. Great if you need Harry and Ron to meet at a restaurant
somewhere, or if you need to reference landmarks as they walk down the
street.

Good on-line maps-

http://www.multimaps.com/
includes aerial photo maps

http://www.map24.com/
Java interactive map, allows distance measurements and shows one way
streets.

Just thought I would pass that along.

bboy_mn








From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Sun Aug  3 14:59:25 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 14:59:25 -0000
Subject: Bowling for Columbine
Message-ID: <bgj80d+po0n@eGroups.com>



Seen it yesterday. Moving to Canada soon. :-)

No. Seriously. Are you KIDDING me? Some things there would have 
looked like a joke taken way too far on Monty Python. (Know what I 
mean?)

Sorry for being like this. I suppose I'm still in shock. 


Naama, who thought Israelis were nuts ...






From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug  3 15:02:13 2003
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 3 Aug 2003 15:02:13 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1059922933.19.32612.m10@yahoogroups.com>


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, August 3, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

Hi everyone! 

Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7
pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight
Saving/Summer Time.*  Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours,
but can last as long as people want it to last.

Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 
For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33

Hope to see you there! 

 





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 15:07:48 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 16:07:48 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Bowling for Columbine
References: <bgj80d+po0n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2D2544.000001.58987@monica>


 
Seen it yesterday. Moving to Canada soon. :-)
 
No. Seriously. Are you KIDDING me? Some things there would have 
looked like a joke taken way too far on Monty Python. (Know what I 
mean?)
 
Sorry for being like this. I suppose I'm still in shock. 
 
 
Naama, who thought Israelis were nuts ...
 
 
 
lol. I saw it last week and had a similar reaction. Loved the bank that
gives out guns when you open an account - they have a whole vault full. And
michael Moore's comments after he got his "So my first question is do you
really think it's safe to be handing out guns in a bank?"

I've been considering studying in America - seriously considering going to
Canada instead!

Charlton Heston scared me - 'from my cold dead hands'?! Who does the guy
think he's kidding?

What really amazed me was the serious, respected news programs who were
tying up the emergency services by calling 911 to get statements during the
Columbine High thing. Sometimes journalists totally disgust me.

 K



From editor at texas.net  Sun Aug  3 15:40:08 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:40:08 -0500
Subject: Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <bgj80d+po0n@eGroups.com> <3F2D2544.000001.58987@monica>
Message-ID: <002c01c359d5$856b1740$ea04a6d8@texas.net>

I haven't been following this, nor seen what seems to be something in
*excessively* bad taste, but even so..

> Charlton Heston scared me - 'from my cold dead hands'?! Who does the guy
think he's kidding?

I figured he has really strong views on his right to own guns. So do I. I
don't think I'd open fire, but I'd certainly be in a lawyer's office and
courtroom if anyone tried to empty our gun cabinet. Bad enough they ask you
in children's medical exams: do you have any guns in the house? To which I
have steadfastly refused to make answer, yea or nay; I inform them that I do
not consider that their business.

We hunt. Our children will, when they're old enough. They at least will know
their way around a gun well enough to know what the hell a gun is capable
of. Enough to treat them with a healthy respect, which children who only see
them on TV, who have never seen that guns make things *really die,* do not.

~Amanda




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 16:36:25 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 17:36:25 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <002c01c359d5$856b1740$ea04a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3F2D3A09.000001.12063@monica>

 
 
~Amanda

I haven't been following this, nor seen what seems to be something in
*excessively* bad taste, but even so..
 

 
 Me -

Isn't that pretty much like declaring Harry Potter to be evil without having
read it? How can you possibly form a reasonable opinion on it if you haven't
seen it? This is an honest question - what are you basing that opinion on? I
m not trying to be rude (having read this and realised that's how it might
come across) just honestly curious.

It is about the high incidence of death in America caused by gunshot wounds
and tries to understand why that is. That seems to me to be a subject that
deserves some kind of attention. Especially since it isn't purely due to the
number of guns floating around in America (although why there is even any
debate about banning some of them I do not understand, hunting rifles, fine
I understand that, even simple handguns, although I would never want one in
*my* house, but some of the high powered weaponry people ar allowed to own
is just ridiculous). canada his a high gun ownership level (logical in a
country that big and open) and so does Switzerland but they don't have
anywhere near the murder rate.

K
 
 



From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug  3 16:43:28 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 16:43:28 -0000
Subject: Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgj80d+po0n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgje3g+ul62@eGroups.com>

That's a great movie! I enjoyed it immensely ... including discussing 
it with my friends afterwards and pointing out certain logic flaws. 
Amanda, I thought the only part in particularly bad taste was when he 
left the photo at Charlton Heston's house.

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" <naama_gat at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> Seen it yesterday. Moving to Canada soon. :-)

After I saw the movie, I raised a question in HPfGU Chat: Michael 
Moore interviewed two people in a bar in Toronto who both insisted 
that Canadians don't lock their front doors, not even after persons 
undesired had entered their homes and stolen stuff, and he checked it 
out by trying the front doors of a street of houses and did indeed 
find them all unlocked. I was *freaked out* at that idea. 

So I asked in chat, Canadians present, do you lock the front doors of 
your houses? And the consensus was that all, whether USAn, Canadian, 
or British, do lock their front doors, at least *after* having been 
burgled. 

> No. Seriously. Are you KIDDING me? Some things there would have 
> looked like a joke taken way too far on Monty Python. (Know what I 
> mean?)

USAmerica is a *big* country. You can find plenty of loonies if you 
look for them. What's important is how the loonies illustrate ideas 
common among people considered normal.
> 
> Sorry for being like this. I suppose I'm still in shock. 
> Naama, who thought Israelis were nuts ...

I've always thought that the reason that many Israelis are nuts is 
because the nuttiest are transplants from USA (and infect the others). 




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug  3 16:52:45 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 16:52:45 -0000
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <3F2D3A09.000001.12063@monica>
Message-ID: <bgjekt+puar@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:

> It is about the high incidence of death in America caused by
> gunshot wounds and tries to understand why that is.(snip) canada
> has a high gun ownership level (logical in a country that big and 
> open) and so does Switzerland but they don't have anywhere near the 
> murder rate.

According to a delightful book called ALBION'S SEED by David Hackett 
Fischer, it is because of USAmerican cultural traits inherited from 
the early British settlers of various US regions. People from the 
England-Scotland Border area and Northern Ireland colonized much of 
the South, where their ethnic label is "Scots-Irish" or "hillbilly", 
AND people from that region colonized much of the West, bringing 
their culture with them. Fischer's account of the Borderer culture 
matches neatly with the account in unpublished essays by a native of 
that area (since moved to London to be a physicist) named Patrick 
Brady, who referred to his ancestral culture as "Reavers". 




From editor at texas.net  Sun Aug  3 18:22:30 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:22:30 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <002c01c359d5$856b1740$ea04a6d8@texas.net> <3F2D3A09.000001.12063@monica>
Message-ID: <000601c359ec$34a3a680$7c05a6d8@texas.net>

Amanda :
>
> I haven't been following this, nor seen what seems to be something in
> *excessively* bad taste, but even so..

>
> Isn't that pretty much like declaring Harry Potter to be evil without
having
> read it? How can you possibly form a reasonable opinion on it if you
haven't
> seen it? This is an honest question - what are you basing that opinion on?

I never said it was a reasonable opinion. My comment was a prequel to a
response to what seemed a corollary anyway, just to let people know I was
not up on the topic. My transitory, ephemeral, not terribly relevant to my
post comment was based on the fact that "Bowling for Columbine" sounds like
a Saturday Night Live skit done in rather poor taste. Just on the face of
it.

> It is about the high incidence of death in America caused by gunshot
wounds
> and tries to understand why that is. That seems to me to be a subject that
> deserves some kind of attention. Especially since it isn't purely due to
the
> number of guns floating around in America (although why there is even any
> debate about banning some of them I do not understand, hunting rifles,
fine
> I understand that, even simple handguns, although I would never want one
in
> *my* house, but some of the high powered weaponry people ar allowed to own
> is just ridiculous). canada his a high gun ownership level (logical in a
> country that big and open) and so does Switzerland but they don't have
> anywhere near the murder rate.

There is some serious inquiry called Bowling for Columbine? Really? Just
when you think life can't get any weirder.

~Amanda






From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sun Aug  3 18:33:00 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 11:33:00 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <bgj80d+po0n@eGroups.com> <3F2D2544.000001.58987@monica> <002c01c359d5$856b1740$ea04a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00c401c359ed$abb51b40$e43c1c40@aoldsl.net>

Amanda wrote:

<They at least will know
their way around a gun well enough to know what the hell a gun is capable
of. Enough to treat them with a healthy respect, which children who only
see
them on TV, who have never seen that guns make things *really die,*>

I hate to disappoint you love but my best friend was shot in the face in
her home by her cousin.  Both were active hunters and had taken gun safety
courses through out their lives.  Both were raised around guns and new to
respect them.

The reason she was shot is still murky but from what we know, he was moving
the gun (brining it to or from his father) and it went off.  None of them
were prepared for it, he wasn't aiming for her, nor was he playing with.
The police officially labeled it a freak accident.

Add this to the emergency room case I came across while waiting with a
friend of the guy who shot himself in the leg as he was loading his riffle
and ended up shooting his wife in the thigh.

Guns aren't safe, no matter how well you train and treat them with respect.

Saitaina
Born and raised with a gun in her hand but still believes in gun control.
****

He pops into my trailer and drops this bomb on me and now
I have to try and concentrate on blood lust and orc slaughtering when
all I can think about is making out with the blonde elf.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first into a
tree because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still be having a
better day than I am today."




From editor at texas.net  Sun Aug  3 18:41:50 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:41:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <bgj80d+po0n@eGroups.com> <3F2D2544.000001.58987@monica> <002c01c359d5$856b1740$ea04a6d8@texas.net> <00c401c359ed$abb51b40$e43c1c40@aoldsl.net>
Message-ID: <001501c359ee$e79cb040$7c05a6d8@texas.net>

Sait:

> Guns aren't safe, no matter how well you train and treat them with
respect.

I never said they were safe. The only reason they exist is to kill things.

Freak accidents can happen with anything. I just think that if my children
are aware of the potential, they will be better prepared than if they've
only seen guns on TV and in the toy aisle. Just as I think that if they
learn what alcohol tastes like, and what a small amount feels like, while
under my roof, they'll be better prepared when or if someone slips them
something or presses them to drink.

~Amanda






From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 18:54:48 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 19:54:48 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <000601c359ec$34a3a680$7c05a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3F2D5A78.000001.71437@monica>

~Amanda
 
There is some serious inquiry called Bowling for Columbine? Really? Just
when you think life can't get any weirder.
 
Me -

While Michael Moore has a kind of humorous approach to his film making it is
a documentary not a comedy show. He uses humour (such as my comment about
him opening the bank account and then when he had his hands on the gun
asking the bank manager if he thought it was maybe a little dangerous to be
handing out guns in a bank) but he does not make jokes. The title comes from
the fact that various media types have sought to blame the massacre at
Columbine High on Marilyn Manson music, on Hollywood blockbusters, on video
games, and even on the fact that the kids involved liked wearing black
clothing (as in people have blamed it on each of those thing not them all
lumped together), without ever really investigating their motives. All these
things were just convenient handles to hang blame on. The last activity the
kids took part in before they went home, loaded up on guns and started
shooting at their schoolmates was bowling class - so it makes just as much
sense to blame it on bowling.

Incidentally he spoke with some of the survivors of the event and got them
to go with him and get KMart to ban all non-hunting ammunition from their
stores since the bullets (including the ones still in the young people he
was with) came from KMart. So he even managed to have some actual concrete
results from his film - unfortunately they didn't include getting Charlton
Heston to admit that turning up with an NRA convention just down the road
from somewhere that has experienced a school shooting only days or weeks
later was even slightly tactless let alone get an apology out of him.

Incidentally the film was shown at Cannes at the request of the judges (even
though they don't normally do documentaries) and won the oscar for best
documentary (or factual film or whatever it's called) so no it is not in
anyway a comedy.

K
 
 
 



From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug  3 19:39:40 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 19:39:40 -0000
Subject: Does anyone know the URL
Message-ID: <bgjods+pb3n@eGroups.com>

for the very funny court decision of the probate of the property in 
Minneapolis of the late Sirius Black?




From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Aug  3 20:08:50 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 20:08:50 -0000
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <3F2D5A78.000001.71437@monica>
Message-ID: <bgjq4i+kjon@eGroups.com>

Bowling for Columbine is, IMO, an excellent film.  As Kathyrn 
mentioned, it won this year's Academy Award for Best Documentary.  It 
has also won a lot of other awards, including one from a group of 
Documentary Filmmakers voted it "the best documentary of all times." 

Kathyrn has explained the odd name, which is in keeping with Michael 
Moore's particular sense of humor.  It's really a very moving and 
thoughtful movie, which I would recommend that everyone -- no matter 
what your feelings about gun control -- should see.

**25 point trivia bonus** 
What song does Moore use during the final credits?

**100 point trivia bonus**
Who's singing it?

I think that Saitania has a very good point about how guns are not 
safe.  Whenever there are guns, there will be accidents.  Does that 
mean that they should be outlawed altogether?  I don't know -- I go 
back and forth on that issue.  You can't outlaw everything dangerous -
- if you could we'd have to outlaw automobiles, which are the most 
dangerous machines even invented, in terms of the numbers of people 
killed by them.  

I certainly believe that there is absolutely no reason why anyone who 
doesn't have a professional reason should be allowed to own anything 
other than a hunting rifle.  And I, personally, feel that hunting is 
somewhat barbaric, but I'm sure I do things that others consider 
barbaric (e.g., eating meat), so go ahead and shoot the little 
bunnies, Amanda. :-D

And I agree, Amanda, that teaching your kids respect for guns is a 
good thing, and I trust you, personally, because I know that you are 
smart and sensible, to keep the loaded rifles away from the 
toddlers.  But the reason why the doctor asks you if you have guns is 
because it *is* one the biggest threats to child safety in the U.S.  
Thousands of kids are killed in gun accidents every year.  These are 
not just freak accidents, which as you pointed out can happen 
anywhere, anytime, but mostly they are caused by morons who leave 
loaded guns or ammunition lying around where their uneducated kids 
can get their hands on them.  That doctor doesn't know that you are 
not one of those morons, and I'm glad he asks.

--Joywitch




From miss_teriously at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 20:33:49 2003
From: miss_teriously at yahoo.com (Marjon G.)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Slytherin poster and where to find it
Message-ID: <20030803203349.9323.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com>

Does anybody knows a online store where I can find
this poster? Can you please give me that adres? If you
know some other way how I can get my hands on this
poster, you're welcome to tell me. :)

Please help!

Miss Tery

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From miss_teriously at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 20:39:41 2003
From: miss_teriously at yahoo.com (Miss Tery)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 20:39:41 -0000
Subject: Slytherin poster and where to find it
In-Reply-To: <20030803203349.9323.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bgjrud+nn7d@eGroups.com>

Does anybody knows a online store where I can find this poster? Can 
you please give me that adres? If you know some other way how I can 
get my hands on this poster, you're welcome to tell me. :)
 
Please help!

Miss Tery

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ok I see my attachment has been removed, but this is the poster I 
mean: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/2002/10/DracoPoster.jpg
(So the poster with all my favourite Slytherins on it)




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug  3 21:08:00 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 21:08:00 -0000
Subject: Does anyone know the URL
In-Reply-To: <bgjods+pb3n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgjtjg+n24p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> for the very funny court decision of the probate of the property in 
> Minneapolis of the late Sirius Black?

I found it: http://www.livejournal.com/users/ajhalluk/48963.html




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 21:13:34 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 22:13:34 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Bowling for Columbine trivia and locked doors
References: <bgjq4i+kjon@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2D7AFE.000001.60597@monica>

 
--Joywitch
 
**25 point trivia bonus** 
What song does Moore use during the final credits?
 
**100 point trivia bonus**
Who's singing it?
 

Me -

I admit I only watched it a week ago and I have no idea of the answer. "I
don't Like Mondays" is coming to mind but I think that was this week's West
Wing actually.

Did anyone else who saw it think that Marilyn Manson came off as being a lot
more thoughtful and intelligent than many of the pro-gun nuts (and I'm not
implying all people who support gun ownership are nuts, I'm commenting on
the sanity of particular individuals in the film)?

And on the subject of locking doors (which came up earlier in this thread) I
don't know anyone who has a front door you can open without a key anyway.
Every place I've lived has had a Yale lock (which was designed purely to
annoy forgetful people like me who don't always remember to pick their keys
up) which means if the door is shut it's locked if you're on the wrong side
of it.

K



From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sun Aug  3 21:17:45 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 07:17:45 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <3F2D5A78.000001.71437@monica>
Message-ID: <3F2E0899.29175.1B3879@localhost>

On 3 Aug 2003 at 19:54, Kathryn Cawte wrote:

> Incidentally the film was shown at Cannes at the request of the judges (even
> though they don't normally do documentaries) and won the oscar for best
> documentary (or factual film or whatever it's called) so no it is not in
> anyway a comedy.

It's also not a documentary, nor is it particularly factual.

Discussing it in too much detail would go well into the discussion of 
current political issues. But anybody who is praising BFC should be 
aware of the issues mentioned in:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110003233

That link is from 'The Wall Street Journal', a fairly reputable news 
organ. After reading it, I would also suggest people check out:

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

which is a more detailed analysis of Moore's misrepresentations, but 
from a less reliable source. It's accurate as far as I can tell (and 
I've checked it out - it should be noted that one of the problems was 
removed from later editions of the film), but it has a definite 
political axe to grind.

My objection to Mike Moore and this movie is not politically motivated - 
it's motivated by believing anything that calls itself a documentary 
shouldn't deliberately misrepresent the truth. I get every bit as 
steamed up about the NRA's deliberate lies about the level of crime in 
Australia (which is an area I know a great deal about, and which is what 
got me involved in the gun control debate - I do not like American 
political lobby groups lying about my country - especially not when 
their lies present it as worse than it is).

I think BFC is a reasonably good film - in the same way that 'Triumph of 
the Will' was a great film. It's a wonderfully made piece of propaganda. 
But a documentary? Nope.

The fact that I agree with many of the political goals of that 
propaganda doesn't make me like it any more.



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From butsiriuslyfolks at charter.net  Sun Aug  3 21:45:34 2003
From: butsiriuslyfolks at charter.net (losangelis)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 21:45:34 -0000
Subject: Take My Hogwarts Class Quizzes - Morgan
In-Reply-To: <20030801141026.19745.qmail@web11003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bgjvpu+pbsk@eGroups.com>

Thanks, Morgan, for all the points on the quizzes.  No one else 
questioned me on them, so I will clean them up in places that I need 
to.  :-)

Wiley




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug  3 21:47:36 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 21:47:36 -0000
Subject: Bowling for Cold dead hands (was : Amanda)
In-Reply-To: <3F2E0899.29175.1B3879@localhost>
Message-ID: <bgjvto+qsdn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> 
wrote:
> 
> Discussing it in too much detail would go well into the discussion 
> of current political issues. But anybody who is praising BFC should
> be aware of the issues mentioned in:
> 
> http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110003233
> 
> That link is from 'The Wall Street Journal', a fairly reputable
> news organ.

Even tho' it is well-known that the editorial and opinion pages of 
the Wall Street Journal are full of raving lunacy (as when they 
declared Singapore had been found to be the free-est developed 
country), I checked out the link you gave, and promptly found one 
statement that I am SURE is false, and others that I suspect to be:

<< Mr. Moore makes the preposterous claim that a Michigan program by 
which welfare recipients were required to work was responsible for an 
incident in which a six-year-old Flint boy shot a girl to death at 
school. Mr. Moore doesn't mention that the boy's mother had sent him 
to live in a crack house where her brother and a friend kept both 
drugs and guns--a frequently lethal combination. >>

Mr. Moore DID mention that the mother and her child moved in with 
this relative (alleged relative, according to follow-up news stories 
on the actual killing) because she couldn't afford to rent a place of 
her own (housing is expensive). His theory, backed up by sound bites 
from a police chief, was that children would not be committing crimes 
if their mothers were home keeping an eye on them rather than away at 
jobs. If momma walked sonny to school in the morning (instead of 
being on a three hour bus ride to work), she would have noticed he 
had helped himself to uncle's gun and take it away from him. That 
claim may be wrong, but is not preposterous.




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 21:53:25 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 22:53:25 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <3F2E0899.29175.1B3879@localhost>
Message-ID: <3F2D8455.000005.60597@monica>

 

 
Dreadnought wrote -
It's also not a documentary, nor is it particularly factual.
 
Discussing it in too much detail would go well into the discussion of 
current political issues. But anybody who is praising BFC should be 
aware of the issues mentioned in:
 
http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110003233
 
That link is from 'The Wall Street Journal', a fairly reputable news 
organ. After reading it, I would also suggest people check out:
 
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
 
which is a more detailed analysis of Moore's misrepresentations, but 
from a less reliable source. It's accurate as far as I can tell (and 
I've checked it out - it should be noted that one of the problems was 
removed from later editions of the film), but it has a definite 
political axe to grind.
 
Me -

Actually having just gone and read the Wall Street Journal article I would
have to say that it isn't exactly enamored with facts itself. I'm not going
to go into details here, as I'm sure most people would be bored but I'd be
happy to carry this on offlist with anyone interested. I noticed several
statements in it that make me wonder if they watched the film. I also notice
that they gave the researchers for BFC 24 hours (possibly less) to respond
and went to press without securing a response so it is also one sided and it
does seem to be basing a lot of its opinions on the opinions of the guy
responsible for the second site you linked to. Again I make no judgements on
his reliability but I'm not keen on its over-reliance on that one source.

The article talks about anti-Americanism (a very common you're with us or
against us attitude that the US media seems to be adopting) which may be
true in regards to the French in general, but I doubt it was a motivating
force for the judges at Cannes (I could be wrong there, I don't know much
about them). I think the WSJ's whole attitude though smacks of the same
false sense of patriotism that seems to pervade American media these days -
if your criticise America (and obviously are an American) you are
unpatriotic, if you criticise the government or the President you are
unpatriotic. I note that Michael Moore's last book was due to be published
the day after the WTC disaster and was pulled, not because of comments which
might be hurtful to victims and their families since he offered to re-edit
it to remove any, but because he refused to remove his criticisms of the
Bush government - it was eventually released due to pressure from readers.

Yes Michael Moore has political views - he is what you Americans would call
an extreme liberal and what we Europeans would call slightly left of centre.
He campaigned whoever the third presidential candidate was in 2000 (Ralph
Nader I think) and is pro-gun control. However I would disagree with the
view that that negates the value of the film. All news articles or
documentaries or films produced due to one person are biased in some way,
whether it is deliberate or not, if we as intelligent adults cannot
understand that and ensure we know what kind of bias we might expect when
watching/reading them then that is a failing on our fault.

K


 



From kaisenji at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 22:33:54 2003
From: kaisenji at yahoo.com (Kaisenji)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 22:33:54 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <bg8tj1+cke2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgk2ki+pnju@eGroups.com>

I use to despise my name as it rhymned with some rather unpleasant
body parts.  
For kids (since I'm not doing the marriage thing) I've chosen Rhiannon
and for the boy Talisen (name of the Welsh bard).  About as un-normal
as they get *g*
Kai



--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> > Cindy C. -- who never liked her name
> 
> I never liked mine either.  And here we had a chance to call 
> ourselves anything we wanted and we picked the extremely subtle 
> handles of Cindy C. and Amy Z.  D'oh!
> 
> Amy, wondering if it's too late to get everyone to call her Renata




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Aug  3 22:57:47 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 22:57:47 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <bgk2ki+pnju@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgk41b+n82q@eGroups.com>


 Amy-
> I never liked mine either.  And here we had a chance to call 
ourselves anything we wanted and we picked the extremely subtle 
handles of Cindy C. and Amy Z.  D'oh!>

Well, I went one better, and stuck my surname initial onto the end of 
my first name. Pointfully.
I just wish my parents had given it some thought. KirstIN INnes is a 
name guaranteed to get you teased. I was called "Ninninninnis" for 
?years?. And my terribly sensitive mother didn?t call me "Catriona" 
because she thought I?d be called "Catty".
Boyfy and I aren?t thinking about kiddies for a good few years yet, 
but we?re arguing about names anyway. As we can?t agree on a single 
name, I occasionally wonder if he?s really the appropriate father for 
little Cora and Orla?
Completely OT bit- I?m stuck in a small Peruvian city with no money 
and nothing to do, while my friends are trekking through the Amazon 
jungle. I developed an allergic reaction to all but the unsuitable 
anti-malarials. Bring me some sunshine, people....
Kirstini (doh!) 





From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 00:18:39 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:18:39 -0000
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgjq4i+kjon@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgk8ov+2e05@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at a...> wrote:
 But the reason why the doctor asks you if you have guns is 
> because it *is* one the biggest threats to child safety in the 
U.S.  Thousands of kids are killed in gun accidents every year.  
These are not just freak accidents, which as you pointed out can 
happen anywhere, anytime, but mostly they are caused by morons who 
leave loaded guns or ammunition lying around where their uneducated 
kids can get their hands on them.  That doctor doesn't know that you 
are not one of those morons, and I'm glad he asks.
> 
> --Joywitch

But then shouldn't he also ask if her children always wear their 
seatbelts (properly fitted by a professional, of course), their 
helmets when riding their bikes, whether they're always supervised 
when around more than an inch of water and all the other common, 
potentially lethal hazards to children? It seems to be a statement, 
more than a concern. 

Beth




From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Aug  4 00:31:19 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 20:31:19 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgk8ov+2e05@eGroups.com>
References: <bgk8ov+2e05@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1059957083.6781BFE@s5.dngr.org>


On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 8:18PM -0500, Beth wrote:
> Real-To:  "Beth" <jillily3g at yahoo.com>
>
> But then shouldn't he also ask if her children always wear their
> seatbelts (properly fitted by a professional, of course), their
> helmets when riding their bikes, whether they're always supervised
> when around more than an inch of water and all the other common,
> potentially lethal hazards to children? It seems to be a statement,
> more than a concern.
>

Actually, our pediatrician does, age appropriately, of course. She 
doesn't ask parents of 2 month olds about helmets, and once a parent 
says that a child can swim it becomes less of an issue at tubtime and 
more of an issue in backyards or where one can get to said yard.

My doctor even asks if we strap ourinfant into his stroller when we go 
out for a walk and never walk even a foot from the changing table.

Yeah, they're all 'private' things, but they're all safety reminders 
too.

Heidi



From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Mon Aug  4 00:40:32 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 20:40:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Does anyone know the URL
Message-ID: <d3.209bab03.2c5f0580@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 03/08/2003 23:08:57 Paris, Madrid (heure d'?t?), 
catlady at wicca.net a ?crit :

> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
> Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> >for the very funny court decision of the probate of the property in 
> >Minneapolis of the late Sirius Black?
> 
> I found it: http://www.livejournal.com/users/ajhalluk/48963.html
> 
> 

Gosh... been away from the list too long...

So. This Melanie is sister to puppies. Who is Melanie? And why is this being 
reffered to as canon? Do I need a Time Turner here?



Cristina (who thinks this is is really turning out a little bit more 
complicated than Friends - where I've been lately, doing a Quark book with all the 
scripts I could find... which didn't prevent me from dreaming I'd met JKR, and 
only managed to start crying like an idiot in front of her...)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 00:50:31 2003
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden_faile)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:50:31 -0000
Subject: Gnome Toss Game/Quidditch Game
Message-ID: <bgkakn+eop2@eGroups.com>


HELP!!! Does anyone out there happen to have the instructions for 
either one of these games? They seemed to have been missplaced and 
now we would like to play these games. I will greatly appreciate it 
if someone does take the time to anwer. E-mail me privately if 
necessary.

Laila




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Aug  4 00:52:12 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:52:12 -0000
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <3F2D8455.000005.60597@monica>
Message-ID: <bgkans+1pd3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...>
wrote:

> Me -
> 
> Actually having just gone and read the Wall Street Journal article I
would
> have to say that it isn't exactly enamored with facts itself. I'm
not going
> to go into details here, as I'm sure most people would be bored but
I'd be
> happy to carry this on offlist with anyone interested. I noticed several
> statements in it that make me wonder if they watched the film. I
also notice
> that they gave the researchers for BFC 24 hours (possibly less) to
respond
> and went to press without securing a response so it is also one
sided and it
> does seem to be basing a lot of its opinions on the opinions of the guy
> responsible for the second site you linked to. Again I make no
judgements on
> his reliability but I'm not keen on its over-reliance on that one
source.

I see absolutely no sign that the Wall Street Journal chose to rely on
only one source. Indeed, I have seen dozens of articles about the
misrepresentations that Mike Moore made in his film - and I have
checked out those misrepresentations for myself. I had to. It's part
of my job.

I work for a large, Australian, public safety organisation. Our brief
is to critically examine any issue that relates to the public safety
of the Australian people, and to make use of any resources that would
help promote public safety within Australia. Since the Port Arthur
massacre of 1996, gun safety and issues of gun control have been one
of our major preoccupations (prior to September 11, 2001, it was
clearly our major occupation). We got a copy of Bowling for Columbine
as soon as it became available and watched it in the hope that it
might be useful to us in promoting public awareness of issues of
violence. Immediately we watched it, we could see obvious, basic
errors, which made us concerned about its veracity. While those basic
errors were not automatically self destructive to the films purpose,
they certainly indicated extremely poor attention to basic and simply
checked facts. So we decided to check out the film.

I didn't do most of the checking myself - I was working in other
areas, most of the time (technically speaking I'm supposed to be a
data analyst - but we move around a lot to avoid anyone becoming
hyperfocused on particular limited issues) - but some of it, I did. We
checked dozens of articles criticising the film, and hundreds praising
it. The fact is, while I think BFC is an excellent film, I do not
believe any film that makes such basic factual errors as that one
does, and which deliberately splices together unrelated statements
from different speeches to make it look like they were part of the
same speech (and I know this is true because I have seen the raw
footage of the speeches that Moore spliced) can call itself a documentary.

Basic factual errors - the most glaring to me was the fact the Mr
Moore claimed that there had been 65 gun homicides in Australia in a
given year. That claim is false - there is no single year (and no
single one year period) in Australian history when the number of gun
homicides was 65. That was glaring to me because I have to know those
figures. There was a year where it was 64 - and that was the lowest
number on record. Furthermore we checked every single published source
we could to try and find out where Mr Moore might have got a figure of
65 from - and we couldn't find one. Mr Moore also failed to respond to
requests from us - and others - to cite his sources. This was not the
only basic piece of factual information he got wrong by any means -
it's just the one I know off the top of my head, without needing to
check records.

In one sense, it doesn't matter if the number is 64 or 65 or 165 - but
if a person doesn't even take the trouble to check a basic number
readily available on the web, I think it casts considerable doubt on
the value of any dopcumentary he produces. If you can't even get basic
facts right, it's very hard to take your arguments seriously.
 
> The article talks about anti-Americanism (a very common you're with
us or
> against us attitude that the US media seems to be adopting) which may be
> true in regards to the French in general, but I doubt it was a
motivating
> force for the judges at Cannes (I could be wrong there, I don't know
much
> about them). 

You might want to check out the other films Cannes has awarded prizes
to over the years. Cannes is an incredibly politically motivated film
festival with very clear agendas. That doesn't mean films that win
there do not have real artistic merit - they do - but your chances of
winning are much, much higher if you present certain political viewpoints.

> Yes Michael Moore has political views - he is what you Americans
would call
> an extreme liberal and what we Europeans would call slightly left of
centre.
> He campaigned whoever the third presidential candidate was in 2000
(Ralph
> Nader I think) and is pro-gun control. However I would disagree with the
> view that that negates the value of the film. All news articles or
> documentaries or films produced due to one person are biased in some
way,
> whether it is deliberate or not, if we as intelligent adults cannot
> understand that and ensure we know what kind of bias we might expect
when
> watching/reading them then that is a failing on our fault.

First of all, I object to being referred to as part of a 'You
Americans'. I am not an American, I have never been to the United
States. I am an Australian.

Secondly, I share Mr Moore's views on gun control, and the level of
violence in the United States.

Thirdly, I do not believe that Bowling for Columbine is a film whose
value has been negated. Quite the contrary.

I agree fully that intelligent adults should be able to sort out
biases for themselves. And that is why I gave the links I did -
because there seem to be a lot of people out there who assume that
Bowling for Columbine is factual and accurate in all areas. It isn't
and I think people need to know that. If after reading the criticisms,
you still think the film has value, that's fine - and I would agree
with you. 

But I personally think it would have been a better film if Mr Moore
had stuck to the facts, without embellishment. He could have still
made his point extremely successfully, and it would be a lot harder
for people to dismiss his work.

Shaun Hately (my sig is missing in action)




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 00:52:47 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:52:47 -0000
Subject: Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <00c401c359ed$abb51b40$e43c1c40@aoldsl.net>
Message-ID: <bgkaov+uh1c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Saitaina" <saitaina at w...> wrote:
>
> ,,,edited,,,
> 
> Guns aren't safe, no matter how well you train and treat them with
respect.
> 
> Saitaina
> Born and raised with a gun in her hand but still believes in gun
control.
> ****


bboy_mn:

You are absolutely right; GUNS AREN'T SAFE.

And neither are cars, trucks, airplanes, bathtubs, showers, streets,
highways, gravel roads, farm machinery, kitchen knives, baseball bats,
lakes, rivers, swimming pools, bicycles, skateboards, Big Macs, french
fries, premium ice cream, football, baseball, basketball, soccer,
hockey, stairways, ... shall I go on? People die and/or are injured as
a result of everything on this list and more.

Yes, guns aren't safe, that's the whole point. That's why you learn to
handle them properly, and more importantly that's why you rigorously
and religiously maintain proper safery procedures. Sadly, most gun
accidents are not caused by faulty guns, but by faulty operators (more
like operator error).

That's also why you learn to drive a car properly, yet we still have
car accident. In car accidents, a far greater number of accidents are
the fault of the vehicle; malfunctioning car. Although, it's the
drives ultimate responsibility to make sure the car is properly
maintained. Even then though, many vehicle error/faulty equipment
accidents are caused by faulty design. That is, the fault of the
manufacturer rather than the driver. 

You rarely see a gun accident caused by faulty design. Guns don't just
accidently go off. The incidence of that, is EXTREMELY EXTREMELY RARE.
The Safety mechanism has to be off, the firing mechanism has to be
cocked, and the firing mechanism has to be release (the trigger has to
be pulled). 

Those three event simply do NOT spontaneously occur. Oh yes, I forgot
to mention the most important part, the gun has to be loaded. It must
have amunnition in it, and that should never occur unless you are in a
situation that actually requires that it be loaded; in the wood, on
the rifle range, in defense of your life, etc....

When you have a gun that is loaded, with the safety off, the hammer
pulled back, and you pull the trigger; that is not an accident, that
is gross negligence, and a far far cry from proper gun handling and
proper safety procedures. 

I'm really really truly sorry that your friends got hurt, but those
were not spontaneous discharges of guns. They were, without a doubt,
human error. 

Ultimately HUMANS are the most dangerous thing on the face of the earth.

If you accept life, that is, if you choose to live, then you accept
the risk of death. If you don't accept the potential risk of death
inherent in life, then while you may go for a long time not dying, you
will never really live. 

Sorry for the rant. I know that guns are like religion. They are a
subject that can never be resolved. But it has been my experience that
even around people who claim they are knowledgable and experienced in
handling guns, by my standards, they fall far short.

Just a thought, and again with apologise if I have inflamed the situation.

bboy_mn






From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Aug  4 00:55:59 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:55:59 -0000
Subject: Dream, Melanie, Puppies (was Does anyone know the URL
In-Reply-To: <d3.209bab03.2c5f0580@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bgkauv+qb0n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, bettedavisgreen at a... wrote:

> So. This Melanie is sister to puppies. Who is Melanie? And why is
> this being reffered to as canon? Do I need a Time Turner here?

Melanie and the puppies and the haunted movie theater and all that 
are from some fanfic that I haven't read, and I don't recall that 
the thing I posted the URL of said that they were canon ... but 
memory is the first thing to go, right? 
 
> 
> Cristina (who thinks this is is really turning out a little bit
> more complicated than Friends - where I've been lately, doing a 
> Quark book with all the scripts I could find... 

Friends? Quark? Quark is a character on Star Trek, yes?

> which didn't prevent me from dreaming I'd met JKR, and 
> only managed to start crying like an idiot in front of her...)

My real reason for replying: *I* had a dream like that, one night 
during Nimbus 2003 ... 




From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Mon Aug  4 01:05:21 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 21:05:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Dream, Melanie, Puppies (was Does anyone know the URL
Message-ID: <71.3377950e.2c5f0b51@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 04/08/2003 02:57:33 Paris, Madrid (heure d'?t?), 
catlady at wicca.net a ?crit :

> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, bettedavisgreen at a... wrote:
> 
> >So. This Melanie is sister to puppies. Who is Melanie? And why is
> >this being reffered to as canon? Do I need a Time Turner here?
> 
> Melanie and the puppies and the haunted movie theater and all that 
> are from some fanfic that I haven't read, and I don't recall that 
> the thing I posted the URL of said that they were canon ... but 
> memory is the first thing to go, right? 
> 

Sorry.  On the link they talk of canon.

> >
> >Cristina (who thinks this is is really turning out a little bit
> >more complicated than Friends - where I've been lately, doing a 
> >Quark book with all the scripts I could find... 
> 
> Friends? Quark? Quark is a character on Star Trek, yes?
> 

F.R.I.E.N.D.S. You know, "I'll be there for you" slightly mental...  but I 
find it fun

And Quark XPRess is a software for making magazines and stuff. Sorry for not 
making that clear... Simply that when you get a file that is around 1300 pages 
big, and WinWord will colapse everytime you try to open it, let alone try to 
convert it to PDF, this Quarky baby is quite handy.

> >which didn't prevent me from dreaming I'd met JKR, and 
> >only managed to start crying like an idiot in front of her...)
> 
> My real reason for replying: *I* had a dream like that, one night 
> during Nimbus 2003 ... 
> 
 
Oh! did you also end up asking her to sign the paper tissue she held out for 
you?

Cristina 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Aug  4 01:09:01 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 01:09:01 -0000
Subject: Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgkaov+uh1c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgkbnd+tpol@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:

> Those three event simply do NOT spontaneously occur. Oh yes, I 
> forgot to mention the most important part, the gun has to be
> loaded. It must have amunnition in it, and that should never occur 
> unless you are in a situation that actually requires that it be 
> loaded; in the wood, on the rifle range, in defense of your life, 
> etc....

I hope very much that I don't irritate the gun-lovers, but it has 
often occured to me that the advised safety practise of keeping the 
unloaded gun locked in one drawer and the ammunition locked in a 
different drawer kind of interferes with the idea of keeping a gun at 
home for self-defense from people who break into the home during 
the night. If a person is sleeping peaceably in their own bed and 
suddenly awoken by the sound of a burglar or rapist climbing into 
their bedroom window, or worse yet by feeling the rapist grab them, 
they don't have time to unlock two drawers and load the gun. 

Same for carrying a gun for protection against muggers who might 
attack a lone person waiting at a bus stop late at night ... a person 
who has just had the bad guy's gun stuck in their face doesn't have 
time to take the gun out of their briefcase and the ammunition out of 
their pocket and load the gun.

I once read an account in which most of the guns found by the airport 
screeners at DFW back in the 1980s were hand-bag guns carried by 
ladies who had completely forgotten that they were there. It occured 
to me that a gun is not useful for protection if the person carrying 
it doesn't even remember that it's there, or even if she remembers, 
its buried somewhere in all the clutter that weighs down at least MY 
purse.




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Aug  4 01:11:54 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 01:11:54 -0000
Subject: Dream, Melanie, Puppies (was Does anyone know the URL
In-Reply-To: <71.3377950e.2c5f0b51@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bgkbsq+ncsg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, bettedavisgreen at a... wrote:
> Dans un e-mail dat? du 04/08/2003 02:57:33 Paris, Madrid (heure 
d'?t?), 
> catlady at w... a ?crit :
> 
> > --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, bettedavisgreen at a... 
wrote:
> > >which didn't prevent me from dreaming I'd met JKR, and 
> > >only managed to start crying like an idiot in front of her...)
> > 
> > My real reason for replying: *I* had a dream like that, one night 
> > during Nimbus 2003 ... 
> > 
>  
> Oh! did you also end up asking her to sign the paper tissue she
> held out for you?

No. She patted me comfortingly and I woke up. 




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 01:43:57 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 01:43:57 -0000
Subject: Gun Safety ( was:Cold dead hands/Columbine)
In-Reply-To: <bgkbnd+tpol@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgkdot+i8om@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
> > Those three event simply do NOT spontaneously occur. Oh yes, I 
> > forgot to mention the most important part, the gun has to be
> > loaded. It must have amunnition in it, and that should never occur 
> > unless you are in a situation that actually requires that it be 
> > loaded; in the wood, on the rifle range, in defense of your life, 
> > etc....

> Catlady:
> 
> I hope very much that I don't irritate the gun-lovers, but it has 
> often occured to me that the advised safety practise of keeping the 
> unloaded gun locked in one drawer and the ammunition locked in a 
> different drawer kind of interferes with the idea of keeping a gun at 
> home for self-defense from people who break into the home during 
> the night. 
> ...edited...


bboy_mn:
In the loaded or unloaded debate, you have to weigh each situation. If
I lived alone in a house that was rarely visited by children or teens,
and on the occassion they were they, they were never unsupervised, nor
would they have any occassion to be in my private space, I might
consider keeping a loaded gun.

On the other hand if you are a parent with kids living in the house,
and you don't lock these things up separately, the risk of accident
becomes far greater than the risk of home intrusion. 

Everything in life is a judgement call. Even whether you choose to
access the gun is a judgement call. Make the wrong judgement and you
are in essence handing your gun to your attacker.

Personally, I am more an advocate of keeping a gun locked in the same
drawer as the ammo, but not loaded. It takes less than 10 seconds
(nore like 5) to load an automatic or a revolver with a speed clip. It
takes probably less that 20 seconds to manually load a revolver. 

The absolute greatest risk of injuries to kids is if a kid other than
your own comes into the house and finds the gun, or perhaps as an
error in judgement, your kid shows the neighbor kid the gun. Then a
struggle breaks out over who get to hold the gun, etc.... Next thing
you know, someone is hurt.

That very think happen in Minneapolis a few years back. A kid showed
his best, his very best nearly a brother, friend his fathers gun. The
best friend wanted to hold it, which the kid hadn't counted on; kids
can be so impulsive. They kid tried to keep the gun away for his
friend and in  the struggle the gun went off.

What went wrong?
1.) the gun should have never been loaded.
2.) the drawer should have been locked.
3.) the kid should have been taught that, in that situation, rather
than stuggle, he should immediately have gone for adult help. Also, a
very loud, "I'M GOING TO TELL!" as he ran out the door would have gone
a long ways toward getting his friend to put down the gun. Better to
get in trouble for playing with dad's gun than to have a best friend dead.

The main trouble is there are too many people out there with
Rambo/cowboys TV/movie attitudes toward guns. No one has wacked them
on the head with a two-by-four and pointed out the difference between
fiction and reality. In fiction, the dead men get to go home to their
families at the end of the day.

Sorry, guess I'm still ranting.

For the record, I love to shoot, but really have never been very big
on hunting. When ever I think of hunting, I picture myself out in the
middle of the woods with a dead deer, and I ask myself, what on earth
do I need with a dead deer? Although, I do support hunting because we
have take so much of the wild life habitat for ourselves that what is
left won't sustain the potential size of a herd left unchecked. So, we
either let the game animals go from near extinction to excess beyond
the habitat capability and back to near extinctin again, or try to
manage the a functional level. Besides it's mostly hunters who pay for
the preservation and expansion of wildlife habitat.

In addition, if anyone would like to start arguing the Constitutional
issues related to guns, I'm primed and ready for that. Sadly, very few
people understand the Bill of Right in even the most basic and
fundimental way.

bboy_mn





From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 03:55:56 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 03:55:56 -0000
Subject: GUHHH
Message-ID: <bgklgc+6tnu@eGroups.com>

More Potter-burning, this time in western Michigan:

http://tinyurl.com/ixnq

It's always people who haven't read the HP books who seem most 
anxious (word chosen deliberately) to burn them.

Anne U
(on an unrelated note, wondering how long it's taking for new fics to 
go up on FA these days...)





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Aug  4 04:29:26 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 23:29:26 -0500
Subject: Question about HP books in Canada
Message-ID: <00cc01c35a40$fdbaa420$309dcdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

I know that Canada has the British versions of the HP books, but does anyone know if they sell the adult editions in Canada or just the regular versions?  I'm going to Canada next month and I'd like to be able to pick them up then, as it will be easier to carry them home from Canada than the UK next year!

Thanks!

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 05:10:05 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 05:10:05 -0000
Subject: GUHHH
In-Reply-To: <bgklgc+6tnu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgkprd+72an@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <anneu53714 at y...> 
wrote:
> More Potter-burning, this time in western Michigan:
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/ixnq
> 
And here's the follow up:
http://tinyurl.com/ixr8
( http://www.wwmt.com/engine.pl?
station=wwmt&id=2871&template=breakout_local.html )

I grew up in western Michigan--I'm not surprised. While people like 
my parents wouldn't be involved in book burning, they would probably 
say they could understand why those people would feel so strongly. 

BTW, for an alternative western Michigan viewpoint, check out 
Lexicon Steve's page: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/hp-faq.html#Christian
:o)

Beth




From subrosax at earthlink.net  Mon Aug  4 05:39:30 2003
From: subrosax at earthlink.net (subrosax99)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 05:39:30 -0000
Subject: Where is 21 Grimmauld Place?
In-Reply-To: <bgfnv0+6siu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgkrii+dj6b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> Is there anyone here who is from London or is familiar with London,
> who might want to speculate on possible REAL London neighborhoods 
what
> could be potential locations for #12 Grimmauld Place?
> 
> Neighborhood that at one time were nice well kept middle class
> neighborhood, that have not endured the test of time very well, and
> are now run down. 
> 
> It would have to be on the East side, which makes sense because I'm
> lead to believe that the East End is a working class low rent
> district. Am I correct in assuming that the 'East End' is an very 
old
> London neighborhood? 

It's been a few years since I lived in London, but I think there are 
quite a few neighborhoods that would qualify. My own neighborhood of 
Shepherds Bush was bad enough, though I suspect it has been 
gentrified to some extent since. In any case, it never seemed bad 
enough to house a joint like #12. I'd personally eliminate the West 
End from the running.
It could be somewhere in the East End, maybe someplace like Hackney 
or Stepney Green. Though for sheer crumminess, my vote goes to dear 
South London! You can't beat Clapham, Brixton or Stockwell! Made my 
own scuzzy neighborhood look like Shangri-La. I certainly admired the 
pluckiness of the residents though. I'll echo the sentiments I saw 
written on a banner on my first visit to the south of London; I'M 
BACKING BRIXTON!!!

Allyson




From severussnape at shaw.ca  Mon Aug  4 05:54:28 2003
From: severussnape at shaw.ca (Dan Feeney)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 05:54:28 -0000
Subject: Canadian editions, Moore, Jarmusch
Message-ID: <bgksek+ufo9@eGroups.com>

Canadian editions come with the two flavours of cover. I only get the 
regular edition, not the adult one...

Moore's film was great. It was no less "factually correct" 
or "objective" than anything I've seen on FOX or CNN. What standard 
are people comparing it to? What control? None exists. Corporate 
media has set a "standard" of apparent apolitical that is - 
vehemently pro-corporate, vehemently judgemental about anyone who is 
different, and sets up a fictional "normal" person who is a fictive 
work of Hollywood. No one lives like a sit-com, yet every sitcom, 
whether it's about the 60s or gay couples or black dentists and 
lawyers, sets up the "normal" American, and then, in the news, this 
fictional "normal" is the standard by which weirdness is projected. 
Its very very culturally deadening. Cauron is no more political than 
Columbus - he just happens to be overt about it, probably because he 
is more conscious of BEING political, where a director like Columbus 
is ignorant of his political role - he certainly seems to be. It is 
Cauron's choice - some on the movie list and this one have voiced 
complaints about Cauron's politics. That's great. voice all you want. 
But don't EVER expect that people with high profiles should "shut 
up," any more than we average joes and jills should "shut up." Fudge 
is not entirely conscious of the role he is playing and has played in 
the return of the DE. That is not the sterling example that should be 
held up in terms of anything at all.

It is just incredibly silly to think there are so many gun-related 
murders in the USA because of "hillbilly feuds".

Moore can be accused of Anti-Americanism only if Americanism is 
defined as narrowly as the standard sit-com defines it, or as You 
Know Who defines it.

With Bowling for Columbine, perhaps a good movie to see would be Jim 
Jarmusch's film, Dead Man. It is also not without humour, and guns 
play a central role.

As Rowling's series progresses, I don't think the importance of these 
kinds of discussions will lessen at all. At the end, in fact, they 
may be integral to any discussion of Harry Potter. That is why I have 
decided to enter this discussion.

dan




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 05:55:08 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 05:55:08 -0000
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgjq4i+kjon@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgksfs+7h5g@eGroups.com>

Joywitch wrote: 
> And I agree, Amanda, that teaching your kids respect for guns is a 
> good thing, and I trust you, personally, because I know that you 
are 
> smart and sensible, to keep the loaded rifles away from the 
> toddlers.  But the reason why the doctor asks you if you have guns 
is 
> because it *is* one the biggest threats to child safety in the 
U.S.  
> Thousands of kids are killed in gun accidents every year.  These 
are 
> not just freak accidents, which as you pointed out can happen 
> anywhere, anytime, but mostly they are caused by morons who leave 
> loaded guns or ammunition lying around where their uneducated kids 
> can get their hands on them.

You know, I have to wonder about the actual numbers on that, because 
that certainly doesn't jibe with my impressions that I get from the 
news (and I don't think this subject would tend to be underreported).

Thousands of kids *murdered* every year I can believe, but I hear of 
very few killed in gun *accidents*.  And the impression I have is 
that, of the murders, most are committed in some way other than with 
a gun, except, of course, for things like drive-by shootings.  
Speaking of which, how many of the children killed by guns are 
actually teenagers involved in something illegal (gangs, drugs or 
what have you)?  This is a separate category which would need a 
different approach than gun safety in the home.

And, anyway, what's a doctor doing when a child tells him there is a 
gun in his home?

Annemehr





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Aug  4 06:53:24 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 16:53:24 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Canadian editions, Moore, Jarmusch
In-Reply-To: <bgksek+ufo9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2E8F84.8307.5643DD@localhost>

On 4 Aug 2003 at 5:54, Dan Feeney wrote:

> Canadian editions come with the two flavours of cover. I only get the 
> regular edition, not the adult one...
> 
> Moore's film was great. It was no less "factually correct" 
> or "objective" than anything I've seen on FOX or CNN. What standard 
> are people comparing it to?

A standard of 'truth'. I can understand Mr Moore presenting his opinions 
in any way he feels comfortable with. But when he presents hard data 
that is easy to gather, easy to check, and easy to verify, then he 
should get the data correct. He doesn't. 

One clear example, Mike Moore claims that the number of gun homicides in 
the US in a year was 11,127.

There is *no* year in US history when the number of gun homicides was 
11,127.

Would it have harmed the 'documentary' for Mike Moore to have used 
accurate figures - for example 8,719 for 2001? 8,661 for 2000? 8,480 for 
1999?

These figures are *easily* obtainable, totally free of charge, in about 
a 10 minute search of the Internet.  

If Michael Moore has an interest in the truth, why not use the real 
figures? It's not like they are incredibly different from those he does 
use.

You think the film is great? As a film, maybe. From a documentary 
however, I expect basic factual accuracy.

He gets the gun homicide figures for the US wrong. He gets the gun 
homicide figures for Australia wrong. He gets the gun homicide figures 
for Germany wrong.

And none of those numbers are hard to find out.

In the case of the US and Australia, his numbers aren't that far off. If 
the case of Germany, they are.

I find it very hard to have respect for a documentary film maker who 
makes such elementary mistakes - even when I agree with his message.

> Moore can be accused of Anti-Americanism only if Americanism is 
> defined as narrowly as the standard sit-com defines it, or as You 
> Know Who defines it.

Do I think Moore is anti-American? Not particularly. But I wouldn't care 
if he was. That would be his right.

What concerns me is his level of respect for the truth. And I don't 
think it's that high. And when you consider his speech at the Oscars 
where he railed against the US government for its fictions - well, I 
think he should get the plank out of his own eye first.  

If he wants to criticise others for being less than truthful, it'd be 
smart to put his own house in order.

If these inaccuracies had been necessary to make his point, I could 
understand them - but they weren't. They are simply clumsy.

And, personally, I don't think clumsy films deserved to win major film 
awards.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Aug  4 06:58:15 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 06:58:15 -0000
Subject: Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgkaov+uh1c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgl067+10agn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Saitaina" <saitaina at w...> 
wrote:
> >
> > ,,,edited,,,
> > 
> > Guns aren't safe, no matter how well you train and treat them with
> respect.
> > 

> 
> You are absolutely right; GUNS AREN'T SAFE.
> 
> And neither are cars, trucks, airplanes, bathtubs, showers, streets,
> highways, gravel roads, farm machinery, kitchen knives, baseball 
bats,
> lakes, rivers, swimming pools, bicycles, skateboards, Big Macs, 
french
> fries, premium ice cream, football, baseball, basketball, soccer,
> hockey, stairways, ... shall I go on? People die and/or are injured 
as
> a result of everything on this list and more.
> 

True, of course. The difference is, that all these other things have 
functions that are positive in our lives. Guns don't. As Amanda so 
succinctly said, their only function is to kill things. So, while 
banning cars, for instance, would have a very negative impact on most 
people's lives, exactly what kind of negative impact would banning 
guns have? (I don't include hunting rifles here.) 


> Yes, guns aren't safe, that's the whole point. That's why you learn 
to
> handle them properly, and more importantly that's why you rigorously
> and religiously maintain proper safery procedures. Sadly, most gun
> accidents are not caused by faulty guns, but by faulty operators 
(more like operator error).
> 
> That's also why you learn to drive a car properly, yet we still have
> car accident. In car accidents, a far greater number of accidents 
are the fault of the vehicle; malfunctioning car. Although, it's the
> drives ultimate responsibility to make sure the car is properly
> maintained. Even then though, many vehicle error/faulty equipment
> accidents are caused by faulty design. That is, the fault of the
> manufacturer rather than the driver. 
> 

And you don't think that *people* may come with faulty design hard-
wired in them? Such as tendencies to forgetfulness, to lack of 
attention, to the contempt bred by familiarity? I can tell you that 
in Israel gun accidents happen all the time in the army. And believe 
me, I served in the army, that safety precautions are *hammered* into 
you. Aim a gun - unloaded!- at a friend, and you're liable to go to 
prison. You do not - ever! - go about with a loaded gun. After the 
gun was loaded and unloaded, you - always! - take a trial shot, 
aiming the gun away, at a 45 degrees angle, to make sure a bullet 
hasn't remained inside. And still soldiers and security personnel 
keep shooting each other accidentally. Just a few days ago, a soldier 
accidentally shot his *father* dead. He was a fighter in a high class 
combat unit. He would have a hundred times more experience with guns 
(in addition to actually having seen people hurt by them) than 90% of 
American gun owners. And he shot his father by mistake. At the 
funeral, he was too shocked to say the kaddish, the prayer the son 
traditionally says over his father's grave. 

I have to say, that as seen from the outside, the most absurd thing 
about American gun culture, is that most of the guns people have are 
completely unnecessary. Most people interviewed on the film said that 
they needed and wanted guns for protection (so did Charlton Heston, 
by the way). But that means that the only reason why most people own 
guns is because they know that a lot of other people have guns. So 
they have to "protect their families." Nice, isn't it? An arms race  
between each and every citizen. 
I think that was the point of Moore's film, to show the fear that 
people in America have of each other, and the danger of a limitless 
access to guns in such a state of mass paranoia.


Naama




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 07:48:36 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 07:48:36 -0000
Subject: GUHHH - book burning
In-Reply-To: <bgklgc+6tnu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgl34k+661s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <anneu53714 at y...> wrote:
> More Potter-burning, this time in western Michigan:
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/ixnq
> 
> It's always people who haven't read the HP books who seem most 
> anxious (word chosen deliberately) to burn them.
> 
> Anne U



bboy_mn:

This is so pathetic. I certainly don't deny people their beliefs, but
too many people don't have beliefs, they put their faith in others
(not god or the bible, but self-serving misguided humans), and believe
what ever they are told they are suppose to believe.

Here is the last line of that article-
"The Jesus Non-Denominational Church says it will burn Harry Potter
books and other items at noon Sunday. Church leaders say, in this
written statement, they are "taking a stand against witchcraft." 

So, what next? ...witch burning?

By the way, only 50 people showed up.

What they seem to forget, and why I can't give any credibility to
these people, is that to burn the books, they had to buy the books,
and if they truly believe the book promote witchcraft then their
purchases supported witchcraft which they claim they are against. And
by promoting their 'book burning' they are in essence promoting the
book itself (free advertising), rather than suppressing it. Please,
help me find the logic in that.

It is clear that these things are never about books, they are about
publicity and notoriety. These events are about people who like to see
their name in the paper. That and a touch of mob mentality.

The only people I could ever possibly support in taking a stand
against HP books are parents who have done their research, and quietly
on their own, made what they feel is the best decision for their kids.
Pretty hard to argue with that approach.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn







From severussnape at shaw.ca  Mon Aug  4 08:13:21 2003
From: severussnape at shaw.ca (Dan Feeney)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 08:13:21 -0000
Subject: Canadian editions, Moore, Jarmusch
In-Reply-To: <3F2E8F84.8307.5643DD@localhost>
Message-ID: <bgl4j1+kohb@eGroups.com>

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm

Shaun, add up the handguns and other guns. This is from the US bureau 
of justice.

Seems you didn't do what you said was so easy to do. According to 
these official US stats, Moore's figures are way more accurate than 
yours.

dan




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 08:34:28 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 08:34:28 -0000
Subject: Guns: No Redeeming Social Value, eh?
In-Reply-To: <bgl067+10agn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgl5qk+nn2a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" <naama_gat at h...>
wrote:

> 
> The difference is, that all these other things have functions that 
> are positive in our lives. Guns don't. As Amanda so 
> succinctly said, their only function is to kill things. 
>
> ...edited... 
> 
> Naama


bboy_mn:

No other function than killing, eh?

So, you aren't aware that there are gun sports that are part of the
Olympics? 

You aren't aware that a majority of non-military ammo fired is fired a
pieces of paper, tin cans, tree stumps, and other not living targets? 

You aren't aware of the extent to which competative shooting takes
place in every part of the United States? (every part of the modern
world for that matter)

You aren't aware of the pre-teen, and teen shooting competitions that
take place all the time?

You aren't aware of the life long postive relationships built between
fathers and sons who engage in outdoor activities together; including
gun sports? 

You aren't aware that a majority of hunters rarely have the
opportunity to shoot their guns in the field? (Hunting, like fishing,
is mostly a social event.)

You aren't aware of people who collect guns for their historical
significants? 

You aren't aware of people who admire guns because, while the are
reletively simple, they are at the same time, sophisticated pieces of
engineering? 

So... 

No other function than killing, eh? 

No redeeming or positive social value, eh?

Just something to think about?

bboy_mn






From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Aug  4 08:59:22 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 18:59:22 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Canadian editions, Moore, Jarmusch
In-Reply-To: <bgl4j1+kohb@eGroups.com>
References: <3F2E8F84.8307.5643DD@localhost>
Message-ID: <3F2EAD0A.5955.C99947@localhost>

On 4 Aug 2003 at 8:13, Dan Feeney wrote:

> http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm
> 
> Shaun, add up the handguns and other guns. This is from the US bureau 
> of justice.
> 
> Seems you didn't do what you said was so easy to do. According to 
> these official US stats, Moore's figures are way more accurate than 
> yours.

Dan, please point out to us which year on that chart shows 11,127 gun 
homicides?

That is the number that Mike Moore claims. That is a number that cannot 
be substantiated.

Mr Moore is the person who chose to give a precise number. Mr Moore is 
the person who has refused to give his source.

I am well aware of the US BoJ figures - I consider the FBI figures to be 
more accurate as the method used to gather those numbers is more 
academically rigorous - BoJ figures are always rough. Uniform Crime 
Reports figures are more rigorously checked for accuracy. That doesn't 
mean they are always precisely right - but they are better figures. 
IMHO.

The difference can be substantial - one example:

1999 - according to the UCR:

There were 8480 total gun murders in the US.

The BoJ page states:

There were 10117 total gun murders in the US.

When Michael Moore was asked for his source information, he has told 
people to check the UCR. So, frankly, I don't think it's unreasonable to 
assume that is his source.

Now - if he had simply used only the BoJ figures, that would not be a 
major problem. Different figures yield slightly different results. But 
it is a simple fact that he doesn't even use accurate figures from the 
BoJ.

There is no year where his figure of 11,127 gun homicides in the US is 
true. At least not that I can see.

Using accurate figures would not have been hard.

Now - if it was just the US, I might be prepared to cut him some slack. 
The numbers are large enough that some variation is reasonable.

But he doesn't get the figures for Germany or Australia right either - 
and those numbers are quite small and *not* easily confused.

He claimed 65 gun homicides in Australia in a single year. The closest 
matches was 64 in 1993 and 67 in 1995.

The man is not accurate. And he should be.

If he had said 'Around 11,000' cases, or 'Around 10,0000' cases or 
something similar to that, there wouldn't be an issue.

But he chose to use the number 11,127.

And that number cannot be substantiated.

If for Australia, he'd said 'Around 60', there wouldn't be an issue.

But he chose to use the number 65.

And that number cannot be substantiated.

His accuracy is questionable when there is no need for it to be.

And for a documentary maker who chooses to publically attack governments 
for presenting inaccurate information, while receiving an award for a 
film in which he does just that is, IMHO. Unacceptable.

Fact is, I could even accept that Mr Moore simply made a mistake - there 
is one scene in the original Bowling for Columbine that was removed from 
later releases because of problems with its factual accuracy. That's a 
responsible position.

But even after Mr Moore's errors have been exposed on other issues, he 
has consistently failed to correct them. If he came out now and simply 
said "I got the numbers wrong - here's the real ones", I'd be happy - 
and his arguments wouldn't be weakened at all because the differences 
aren't profound.

Inaccuracy in the media is hardly unusual.

But Mike Moore has deliberately chosen to attack others for their 
inaccuracies.

You reap what you sow.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Aug  4 09:16:39 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 09:16:39 -0000
Subject: Guns: No Redeeming Social Value, eh?
In-Reply-To: <bgl5qk+nn2a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgl89n+crdk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" 
<naama_gat at h...>
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > The difference is, that all these other things have functions 
that 
> > are positive in our lives. Guns don't. As Amanda so 
> > succinctly said, their only function is to kill things. 
> >
> > ...edited... 
> > 
> 


> 
> No other function than killing, eh?
> 
> So, you aren't aware that there are gun sports that are part of the
> Olympics? 
> 
> You aren't aware that a majority of non-military ammo fired is 
>fired a pieces of paper, tin cans, tree stumps, and other not living 
>targets? 
> 
> You aren't aware of the extent to which competative shooting takes
> place in every part of the United States? (every part of the modern
> world for that matter)
> 
> You aren't aware of the pre-teen, and teen shooting competitions 
>that take place all the time?
> 
> You aren't aware of the life long postive relationships built 
>between fathers and sons who engage in outdoor activities together; 
>including gun sports? 
> 
> You aren't aware that a majority of hunters rarely have the
> opportunity to shoot their guns in the field? (Hunting, like 
fishing, is mostly a social event.)
> 
> You aren't aware of people who collect guns for their historical
> significants? 
> 
> You aren't aware of people who admire guns because, while the are
> reletively simple, they are at the same time, sophisticated pieces 
>of engineering? 
> 


Well, it was Amanda (a gun owner) who said that about guns only 
purpose being killing. As to the sports activities you enumerate: a) 
I specifically excluded hunting rifles in my post and b) how does 
what you say explain or justify the fact that so many other types of 
guns and rifles are legal in the USA? Do fathers and sons bond over 
Oozies? Or are Oozie ranges also included in the Olympics? 

As for the admiration of guns as works of engineering. Well, I have 
little to say about that. I'm not at all technically minded. But, I 
suppose that nuclear bombs might be extremely fascinating pieces of 
engineering for people who understand their mechanism. The gas 
chambers used in the death camps were probably also quite efficient, 
smooth working mechanisms. Does that add a positive value to them?


Naama




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Mon Aug  4 10:01:12 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:01:12 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] GUHHH
In-Reply-To: <bgklgc+6tnu@eGroups.com>
References: <bgklgc+6tnu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200308041201.12818.silmariel@telefonica.net>

Anne U:

> It's always people who haven't read the HP books who seem most
> anxious (word chosen deliberately) to burn them.

There willl always be idiots seeing 'evil' when there is not. As ridiculous as 
it may sound, 'Sailor Moon' started a debate in Italia, because some parents 
'saw' the series was going to turn their daughters into lesbians.

> (on an unrelated note, wondering how long it's taking for new fics to
> go up on FA these days...)

Don't know about FA, but I looked AFF yesterday and it has growed from 45 to 
85 pages on HP.

silmariel



From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 11:41:19 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:41:19 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
References: <bgkans+1pd3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2E465F.000001.47187@monica>

 
Shaun -
 
Basic factual errors - the most glaring to me was the fact the Mr
Moore claimed that there had been 65 gun homicides in Australia in a
given year. That claim is false - there is no single year (and no
single one year period) in Australian history when the number of gun
homicides was 65. That was glaring to me because I have to know those
figures. There was a year where it was 64 - and that was the lowest
number on record. Furthermore we checked every single published source
we could to try and find out where Mr Moore might have got a figure of
65 from - and we couldn't find one. Mr Moore also failed to respond to
requests from us - and others - to cite his sources. This was not the
only basic piece of factual information he got wrong by any means -
it's just the one I know off the top of my head, without needing to
check records.
 
Me -

Well I certainly wouldn't argue with you about the accuracy of the numbers
re Australia but I think (I don't have a copy of the film so I'm doing this
from memory) he was talking about gun deaths not just homicides. I note that
the second article you linked claimed that his figures for America covered
*all* gun deaths and complained that he wasn't comparing like with like, but
then he complained that his European figures were too high and didn't match
just homicide deaths so I do wonder if that was because he was including all
deaths there too. It wouldn't change the UK figure much since adding in
self-defense and police shootings would be unlikely to move the number up by
more than one or two in any given year, but in Germany the number he gave
was too high (apparently) and that could well explain it. Since he was going
by death certificates in the US I haven't checked this because I wouldn't
have the first idea how to get those statistics even for my own country let
alone the rest of Europe.


 Shaun -
 
You might want to check out the other films Cannes has awarded prizes
to over the years. Cannes is an incredibly politically motivated film
festival with very clear agendas. That doesn't mean films that win
there do not have real artistic merit - they do - but your chances of
winning are much, much higher if you present certain political viewpoints.
 
Me -

Like I say I was guessing, but it didn't win a prize. We're not talking
about a simple voting issue, the judges made the unusual decision to ask it
to be shown when they don't usually show documentaries
.
Shaun -
 
First of all, I object to being referred to as part of a 'You
Americans'. I am not an American, I have never been to the United
States. I am an Australian.
 
Me -

This wasn't directed at you specifically, I realised you were Australian.
The majority of the people responding to this thread seemed to be American,
I was talking to them, specifically the ones who might not know his work. I
m sorry if it upset you but it wasn't directed at you.

 K 



From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 11:51:41 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:51:41 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Canadian editions, Moore, Jarmusch
References: <3F2E8F84.8307.5643DD@localhost>
Message-ID: <3F2E48CD.000003.47187@monica>

Shaun -
One clear example, Mike Moore claims that the number of gun homicides in 
the US in a year was 11,127.
 
There is *no* year in US history when the number of gun homicides was 
11,127.
 
Me -

But that figure is (apparently) accurate (according to the guy who was
knocking the film that you sent a link to) for total gun *deaths*. I
honestly don't remember him saying the figure was specifically homicides -
of he did then the scripwriting was inaccurate.

K



From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 12:18:39 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:18:39 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Gun Safety ( was:Cold dead hands/Columbine)
References: <bgkdot+i8om@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2E4F1F.000005.47187@monica>

 bboy_mn

 
In addition, if anyone would like to start arguing the Constitutional
issues related to guns, I'm primed and ready for that. Sadly, very few
people understand the Bill of Right in even the most basic and
fundimental way.
 

 Me -

Well I was taught that there is doubt about exactly what the writers meant
when they said 'right to bear arms' anyway, but I don't know if that's right
 However I think it should be pointed out that when it was written the US
was still a frontier country with no police force or real standing army (I
could be wrong on that last point). Guns were needed for hunting for food,
protection from wild animals and protection from/apprehending bandits/Native
Americans/anyone else that was considered a threat. You couldn't dial 911
for help you had to do it yourself. The standard method of apprehending
dangerous people was for the sheriff to round up local citizens to do it.
Guns were inaccurate (not sure about hunting rifles but other guns certainly
were) and unreliable, unlike today. You had to be fairly close to your
target to be sure of hitting it and you couldn't carry fully loaded because
they had a tendency to go off if you did, I understand that it was common to
have the weapon mostly loaded and set to an empty chamber. And the term
drive-by shooting could only be applied to a man on a horse.

What may have been reasonable when it was written is not reasonable now. The
Constitution is ammended all the time - what makes this particular part of
it any more sacred than the rest. When it said all men are created equal it
didn't include anyone who wasn't white. It also really did mean men. There
is already some element of gun control I believe - not all makes of gun are
legal to own. While I have no problem with hunting rifles I do have a
problem with owning other forms of gun. I don't know what we in the UK
decided on gun control but I know they were debating only allowing handguns
for shooting to be kept at registered shooting ranges in approved locked
metal cabinets. I see no reason for owning an automatic or semi-automatic
weapon. I do not believe in keeping handguns in the home for defense -
statistics show (and I'm being terribly sloppy and not looking them up but I
know I saw them on a Discovery Channel show about crime) that if you have a
gun in your home the chances of you or a family member or friend being shot
with it (either accidentally, by being mistaken for an intruder or
deliberately) are far higher than the chances of shooting an intruder. If
America must hang on to its guns then I think control should be tightened to
the point where it needs to be shown that anyone who has a gun has had a
serious amount of training in how to use it, how to keep it safely etc.
Accidents will still of course happen.

The NRA says that guns don't kill people, people kill people, that's true
but unfortunately you can't ban people (which would be the safest option) so
the most you can do is take their guns away from them. It won't stop all gun
crime, of course it won't, criminals will still get hold of guns illegally
but if by owning a gun you are committing a crime it does make it easier to
control. You don't have to wait until someone has been shot to arrest them,
simply by catching them with a gun you can arrest them.

K



From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Aug  4 12:54:36 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:54:36 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] GUHHH
In-Reply-To: <200308041201.12818.silmariel@telefonica.net>
References: <bgklgc+6tnu@eGroups.com> <200308041201.12818.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <1060001720.1CF48485@s5.dngr.org>

AnneU wrote:
>>  (on an unrelated note, wondering how long it's taking for new fics to
>>  go up on FA these days...)

New fics by authors who are already on the site and who submit fics with 
good grammar + their review thread... Maybe 2-3 days
New fics by authors who have never submitted before... 4-5 days at most

Fics where we have  a question and send an email to the author who 
doesn't reply... Indefinite.

Heidi for  fictionalley



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 12:56:31 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 12:56:31 -0000
Subject: Moore
In-Reply-To: <3F2EAD0A.5955.C99947@localhost>
Message-ID: <bgll5v+3jvs@eGroups.com>

<Snip>
> Shaun writes:
> Dan, please point out to us which year on that chart shows 11,127 
> gun homicides?
> 
> That is the number that Mike Moore claims. That is a number that 
> cannot be substantiated.
> 
> Mr Moore is the person who chose to give a precise number. Mr 
> Moore is the person who has refused to give his source.
> 
> I am well aware of the US BoJ figures - I consider the FBI figures 
> to be more accurate as the method used to gather those numbers is 
> more academically rigorous - BoJ figures are always rough. Uniform 
> Crime Reports figures are more rigorously checked for accuracy. 
> That doesn't mean they are always precisely right - but they are  
> better figures. IMHO.
> 
> The difference can be substantial - one example:
> 
> 1999 - according to the UCR:
> 
> There were 8480 total gun murders in the US.
> 
> The BoJ page states:
> 
> There were 10117 total gun murders in the US.
> 
> When Michael Moore was asked for his source information, he has 
> told people to check the UCR. So, frankly, I don't think it's 
> unreasonable to assume that is his source.
> 
> Now - if he had simply used only the BoJ figures, that would not 
> be a major problem. Different figures yield slightly different 
> results. But it is a simple fact that he doesn't even use accurate 
> figures from the BoJ.
> 
> There is no year where his figure of 11,127 gun homicides in the 
> US is true. At least not that I can see.
> 
> Using accurate figures would not have been hard.
> 
> Now - if it was just the US, I might be prepared to cut him some 
> slack. The numbers are large enough that some variation is 
> reasonable.
> But he doesn't get the figures for Germany or Australia right 
> either - and those numbers are quite small and *not* easily 
> confused.
> He claimed 65 gun homicides in Australia in a single year. The 
> closest matches was 64 in 1993 and 67 in 1995.
> 
> The man is not accurate. And he should be.
>

Shaun, I am really *not* getting your argument here. When you said 
in an earlier post that Mr Moore was inaccurate about the number of 
gun homicides in Australia, I was imagining that you meant he'd said 
165, when the real figure was 65, or some similar huge discrepancy. 
The variation of uh, 1, or maybe, uh, 2 (which works out as an error 
of from + or - 1.56% to + or - 3% ) would be reasonably acceptable 
accuracy for me.

> If he had said 'Around 11,000' cases, or 'Around 10,0000' cases or 
> something similar to that, there wouldn't be an issue.
> 
> But he chose to use the number 11,127.
> 
> And that number cannot be substantiated.

And as you have argued above, the figures from two institutions 
(which I assume are both official U.S. institutions - I wouldn't 
know, being a Brit) vary by 1637 deaths. [Which I hope means that 
the deaths of 1637 people turned out to be imaginary, but I rather 
doubt it. I suspect their families are still grieving, but have been 
told it was 'accident', rather than homicide.]

So, official figures vary by around + or - 16%. Mr Moore's figures 
vary from the U.S. BoJ figures by again, about 1%. (Assuming it was 
1998 he was working from)

What you mean is that you can't find the data table he used. Or find 
the official he got the figures from. The figures he quotes are 
within the acceptable variation of the statistics; which do vary 
according to how crimes are reported, whether a death is later re-
classified as accidental rather than homicide, and so on.

For Australia, have you considered that he may have asked someone at 
the Australian embassy, who told him 'it averages 65'? Which is 
reasonable from the figures you quote. And would justify Mr Moore 
refusing to reveal a source. 

Or would you prefer to say that you can't find the table he used? 
That 'his figures are inaccurate'? Because to say 'his figures are 
inaccurate' when you're actually talking about a variation of 1 to 
3% is a bit of a statistical trick. It implies a large variation; 
you are actually talking about a small one. It implies there is such 
a thing as a definite, final figure, when in fact the figures could 
easily vary by one or two depending on the way they were collected.

> 
> If for Australia, he'd said 'Around 60', there wouldn't be an 
issue.
> 
> But he chose to use the number 65.
> 
> And that number cannot be substantiated.
> 
> His accuracy is questionable when there is no need for it to be.
> 
> And for a documentary maker who chooses to publically attack 
> governments for presenting inaccurate information, while receiving 
> an award for a film in which he does just that is, IMHO.          
> Unacceptable.

When he's attacking a government whose figures between departments 
vary by 16%, he could have a point. :-)

[I make no claims for the accuracy of British government statistics, 
btw. There's currently a major discussion going on over the 
discovery that the supposed 'huge rise in street crime' was actually 
a huge rise in insurance fraud. People were claiming that they'd 
been mugged and had their mobile stolen because they wanted a new 
mobile ;-) Strangely, these 'street crime' figures stayed in the 
stats even when the 'muggings' turned into fraud investigations.]

> 
> Fact is, I could even accept that Mr Moore simply made a mistake - 
> there is one scene in the original Bowling for Columbine that was  
> removed from later releases because of problems with its factual 
> accuracy. That's a responsible position.
> 
> But even after Mr Moore's errors have been exposed on other  
> issues, he has consistently failed to correct them. If he came out 
> now and simply said "I got the numbers wrong - here's the real 
> ones", I'd be happy - and his arguments wouldn't be weakened at 
> all because the differences aren't profound.

Oh, yes they would, Shaun. You're doing exactly what you say 
wouldn't happen. 'His figures are inaccurate!' you cry. 'Look; he 
said 65 people were killed in Australia in one year! And you know 
what? It WASN'T 65!'

No, it was 64. Gee whiz. That would be an acceptable variation in a 
lot of scientific experiments.

But the headlines would be "Mike Moore admits figures were false!"  
And how many people would read beyond the headlines?

> 
> Inaccuracy in the media is hardly unusual.
> 
> But Mike Moore has deliberately chosen to attack others for their 
> inaccuracies.
> 
> You reap what you sow.

But you seem to be missing the point. Variation of 1 to 2% or no 
variation, there were approximately 10,000 to 11,000 deaths in the 
U.S. by gun homicide. In Australia there were approximately 65. The 
population of the U.S. is 250 million. The population of Australia 
is 17 million (rounded up to nearest million, figures taken from 
Collins World Atlas).

So if Australia had the same gun homicide rate as Australia, there 
should be 680 gun deaths each year. If the U.S. had the same gun 
homicide rate as Australia, they should have 956 deaths per year.

That is the point I think Mr Moore is trying to make. The point is 
not arguing about whether his figures are accurate to within 0.0%, 
or whether the table he took his figures from is accurate in itself. 

The point is that the variation between cultures is huge. The point 
is that the question should be asked whether the gun is so important 
to the U.S. sense of self that they decide they must live and die 
with that homicide rate. 

It's not my question - my culture has other questions to ask itself. 
And the U.S. would be well within its rights and constitution to 
decide 'yes, guns are that important to us'. 

But quibbling about the difference between 65 and 64 (or 67) does 
not actually help to answer the question. The important difference 
is the one that says ten times more people (per head of population) 
die from gun crime in the U.S. than in Australia. The variations in 
figures that you are arguing about don't actually change that at all.

Pip!Squeak






From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 13:03:14 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:03:14 -0000
Subject: Moore
In-Reply-To: <bgll5v+3jvs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgllii+ogpr@eGroups.com>

> So if Australia had the same gun homicide rate as Australia, there 
> should be 680 gun deaths each year. 

Oops, mistyped. I meant that if Australia had the same gun homicide 
rate as *the U.S*, there should be 680 gun deaths each year. 

Not 65. Or 64. Or 67. 

680.

Pip!Squeak




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 13:19:12 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:19:12 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Moore
References: <bgllii+ogpr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2E5D50.000001.43191@monica>

 
 
Pip!Squeak
Oops, mistyped. I meant that if Australia had the same gun homicide 
rate as *the U.S*, there should be 680 gun deaths each year. 
 
Not 65. Or 64. Or 67. 
 
680.

 
  Me -

Yes that was my major problem with his figures actually. While flat numbers
of gun deaths are great I would rather he'd given rates per head. I thought
it would have been more helpful.

K



From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Mon Aug  4 13:20:22 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 09:20:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Dream, Melanie, Puppies (was Does anyone know the URL
Message-ID: <1cb.ebde2f5.2c5fb796@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 04/08/2003 03:12:43 Paris, Madrid (heure d'?t?), 
catlady at wicca.net a ?crit :

> >>>which didn't prevent me from dreaming I'd met JKR, and 
> >>>only managed to start crying like an idiot in front of her...)
> >>
> >>My real reason for replying: *I* had a dream like that, one night 
> >>during Nimbus 2003 ... 
> >>
> > 
> >Oh! did you also end up asking her to sign the paper tissue she
> >held out for you?
> 
> No. She patted me comfortingly and I woke up. 
> 

Oh... Lucky you :)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Aug  4 13:59:49 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 23:59:49 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Moore
In-Reply-To: <bgll5v+3jvs@eGroups.com>
References: <3F2EAD0A.5955.C99947@localhost>
Message-ID: <3F2EF375.2811.1DCB6DA@localhost>

On 4 Aug 2003 at 12:56, bluesqueak wrote:

> Shaun, I am really *not* getting your argument here. When you said 
> in an earlier post that Mr Moore was inaccurate about the number of 
> gun homicides in Australia, I was imagining that you meant he'd said 
> 165, when the real figure was 65, or some similar huge discrepancy. 
> The variation of uh, 1, or maybe, uh, 2 (which works out as an error 
> of from + or - 1.56% to + or - 3% ) would be reasonably acceptable 
> accuracy for me.

Two issues here - the first is that he is *not* aiming for reasonable 
accuracy. If he was just trying to be approximately accurate, he 
wouldn't be using number 11,127. He'd be using numbers like 11,000 or 
10,000. He's the one who has chosen to be precise. And he's inaccurate.

Secondly the figure of 64 gun deaths in Australia was for 1993. Bowling 
for Columbine's research is c1999. The figure for 1999 was 50. For 1998 
was 57, for 1997 79, for 1996 104, for 1995 67.

Basically he'd have to have gone back from 1999 to 1995 to even get a 
single year figure that could reasonably be rounded to 65. 
 
> > If he had said 'Around 11,000' cases, or 'Around 10,0000' cases or 
> > something similar to that, there wouldn't be an issue.
> > 
> > But he chose to use the number 11,127.
> > 
> > And that number cannot be substantiated.
> 
> And as you have argued above, the figures from two institutions 
> (which I assume are both official U.S. institutions - I wouldn't 
> know, being a Brit) vary by 1637 deaths. [Which I hope means that 
> the deaths of 1637 people turned out to be imaginary, but I rather 
> doubt it. I suspect their families are still grieving, but have been 
> told it was 'accident', rather than homicide.]

The reasons for the difference in figures is not exactly straightforward 
- but it has a lot to do with certain assumptions made about whether 
certain things are crimes or not. The BoJ figures are interested in 
trends - not in absolute numbers - and provided the measure used is 
consistent from year to year, the trends can be studied. The UCR figures 
are concerned with specific accuracy about the crimes committed.
 
> So, official figures vary by around + or - 16%. Mr Moore's figures 
> vary from the U.S. BoJ figures by again, about 1%. (Assuming it was 
> 1998 he was working from)
> 
> What you mean is that you can't find the data table he used. Or find 
> the official he got the figures from. The figures he quotes are 
> within the acceptable variation of the statistics; which do vary 
> according to how crimes are reported, whether a death is later re-
> classified as accidental rather than homicide, and so on.

No, what we mean is that NOBODY has been able to find the particular 
data file, Michael Moore used. Not just us - nobody out of quite a few 
people looking. And when Mike Moore has been asked for his source he has 
given only a vague reference to the UCR - which does not back his 
numbers at all.

So what we have are figures from a source nobody except Michael Moore 
seems to know about, and which he will not disclose. If this only *one* 
piece of data, that might not be a major issue - but he's made the same 
mistake with at least three different countries. That does not inspire 
confidence in his ability, or his desire to be factually accurate.
 
> For Australia, have you considered that he may have asked someone at 
> the Australian embassy, who told him 'it averages 65'? Which is 
> reasonable from the figures you quote. And would justify Mr Moore 
> refusing to reveal a source. 

If Mike Moore gathered his data by asking somebody at the Australian 
embassy for a figure, then that simply illustrates how careless he is 
with facts. That would not be a standard of research worthy of calling 
his final product a documentary.

It's certainly not good enough when contacting either the Australian 
Institute of Criminology, or the Australian Bureau of Statistics would 
have given him a fully accurate answer within 5 minutes.
 
> Or would you prefer to say that you can't find the table he used? 
> That 'his figures are inaccurate'? Because to say 'his figures are 
> inaccurate' when you're actually talking about a variation of 1 to 
> 3% is a bit of a statistical trick. It implies a large variation; 
> you are actually talking about a small one. It implies there is such 
> a thing as a definite, final figure, when in fact the figures could 
> easily vary by one or two depending on the way they were collected.

Mr Moore is the person who chose to use a figure of 11,127. Not 
approximately 11,000 - but a precise number. There is no data set as yet 
identified - by me, or a lot of other people - that supports that 
precise number. And Michael Moore refuses to say where he got it from 
except a vague reference to the UCR which has totally different numbers.

A 1 to 3% difference may not seem like a lot to you - but frankly, I 
expect a documentary worthy of being proclaimed the best documentary 
film in the world for a given year to be better than 97-99% accurate on 
basic census-type data.

> > And for a documentary maker who chooses to publically attack 
> > governments for presenting inaccurate information, while receiving 
> > an award for a film in which he does just that is, IMHO.          
> > Unacceptable.
> 
> When he's attacking a government whose figures between departments 
> vary by 16%, he could have a point. :-)

Does he have a point? Probably - but it's not one that is enhanced by 
sloppy use of basic statistics.

> Oh, yes they would, Shaun. You're doing exactly what you say 
> wouldn't happen. 'His figures are inaccurate!' you cry. 'Look; he 
> said 65 people were killed in Australia in one year! And you know 
> what? It WASN'T 65!'
> 
> No, it was 64. Gee whiz. That would be an acceptable variation in a 
> lot of scientific experiments.

No, it was 50 - or 57 - or 59 - or 104. To arrive at a number close to 
65, Mike Moore had to *ignore* the four years of more recent data easily 
available to him before he would get close to that number. Including 
ignoring the year of the Port Arthur Massacre - the worst case of murder 
by a single gunman in world history. 35 people killed in one afternoon 
(that incident is the single reason why the number for 1996 is so much 
higher than normal). He'd have to ignore those types of numbers before 
he'd even get close to a 65.
 
> But the headlines would be "Mike Moore admits figures were false!"  
> And how many people would read beyond the headlines?

So we should let him get away with fuzzy figures, just so he can avoid 
bad headlines? 

I don't know, I just have the crazy idea that we should expect 
documentary films to meet a basic standard of factual accuracy. If I 
used figures as sloppily as he does in my first year university course, 
I'd fail the assignment.

> But you seem to be missing the point. Variation of 1 to 2% or no 
> variation, there were approximately 10,000 to 11,000 deaths in the 
> U.S. by gun homicide. In Australia there were approximately 65. The 
> population of the U.S. is 250 million. The population of Australia 
> is 17 million (rounded up to nearest million, figures taken from 
> Collins World Atlas).

No, I think you're missing my point.

I happen to agree with Mike Moore basic contentions. I routinely argue 
in favour of gun control using Australia as a counterexample to America, 
using population comparisons etc. If you wanted, I could probably mail 
you a dozen posts I've made on the subject to a particular list.

I don't disagree with Michael Moore's contentions at all. I'm *not* 
missing his point. I just don't think that his point is enhanced by 
basic errors of fact.

I just disagree with the idea that Bowling for Columbine was a 
particularly good documentary film. I expect a documentary to get basic, 
easily verifiable, facts correct. Not just nearly correct - but correct 
and accurate. And I expect the maker of such a film to be prepared to 
cite his sources when people identify potential discrepancies.

I expect a documentary film to accurately quote people - not to splice 
in unrelated statements from different speeches made at different 
locations months apart in a manner that leads the viewer to believe they 
are seeing a single speech.

I expect a documentary film to accurately depict real life events - not 
to modify what really happened in order to create a more exciting story.

I agree with what Michael Moore is trying to do. I just disagree with 
his methods. He's careless with the truth - and that is putting the best 
spin on what he does that I can. 

> So if Australia had the same gun homicide rate as Australia, there 
> should be 680 gun deaths each year. If the U.S. had the same gun 
> homicide rate as Australia, they should have 956 deaths per year.
> 
> That is the point I think Mr Moore is trying to make. The point is 
> not arguing about whether his figures are accurate to within 0.0%, 
> or whether the table he took his figures from is accurate in itself. 

My point is that if Mr Moore wishes people to take his views seriously, 
he shouldn't be making basic mistakes that make it incredibly easy for 
his critics to attack his fundamental position.

I stand up and say the US has 48 states - are you likely to listen to 
anything else I have to say about America? If you can't get basic facts 
right, people will not listen to you.
 
> The point is that the variation between cultures is huge. The point 
> is that the question should be asked whether the gun is so important 
> to the U.S. sense of self that they decide they must live and die 
> with that homicide rate. 

Yes, and I agree that that is a question that is worth asking. My point 
is, however, that I'd rather that the question be asked in a context of 
reasonable accuracy - not an acceptance of inaccuracy.
 
> It's not my question - my culture has other questions to ask itself. 
> And the U.S. would be well within its rights and constitution to 
> decide 'yes, guns are that important to us'. 
> 
> But quibbling about the difference between 65 and 64 (or 67) does 
> not actually help to answer the question. The important difference 
> is the one that says ten times more people (per head of population) 
> die from gun crime in the U.S. than in Australia. The variations in 
> figures that you are arguing about don't actually change that at all.

Which I have said several times:

"Would it have harmed the 'documentary' for Mike Moore to have used
accurate figures"

"If these inaccuracies had been necessary to make his point, I could
understand them - but they weren't. They are simply clumsy."

"Thirdly, I do not believe that Bowling for Columbine is a film whose
value has been negated. Quite the contrary."

"But I personally think it would have been a better film if Mr Moore had
stuck to the facts, without embellishment. He could have still made his
point extremely successfully, and it would be a lot harder for people to
dismiss his work."

I have no doubt whatsoever about the basic value of 'Bowling for 
Columbine' as a film. I just have this whacky idea that a documentary 
film - especially ones that wins an Oscar - should actually be factually 
accurate.

If BFC hadn't won an Oscar, I wouldn't be worried about it at all - but 
I am *frankly* stunned at how low the standards must be if work that is 
this shoddy is acclaimed as the world's best for a given year. And I 
think it says a lot more about politics than respect for basic truth 
that that happened. 

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Aug  4 14:08:56 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 00:08:56 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Canadian editions, Moore, Jarmusch
In-Reply-To: <3F2E48CD.000003.47187@monica>
Message-ID: <3F2EF598.8641.1E5116B@localhost>

On 4 Aug 2003 at 12:51, Kathryn Cawte wrote:

> But that figure is (apparently) accurate (according to the guy who was
> knocking the film that you sent a link to) for total gun *deaths*. I
> honestly don't remember him saying the figure was specifically homicides -
> of he did then the scripwriting was inaccurate.

No, it's not accurate for total gun deaths.

And the film definitely says gun homicide anyway - whether that's an 
inaccuracy in scripting, or in the numbers used, it's inaccurate, and I 
expect better of a documentary film.

Back to the first point. What the site says is:

"After an email tip, I finally found a way to compute 11,127. Ignore the 
FBI, use Nat'l Center for Health Statistics figures. These are based on 
doctors' death certificates rather than police investigation, and give 
figures about 2,000 higher than FBI.

Then -- to their gun homicide figures, add the figure for legally-
justified homicides: self-defense and police use against criminals. 
Presto, you have exactly Moore's 11,127. I can see no other way for him 
to get it."

If that is what Michael Moore did (and I don't know if it is - all I 
know is somebody claims it yields the same number), there's two issues 
there.

The first is that it isn't a number for total gun deaths - it explicitly 
excludes accidents and suicides, for example.

But if it's a figure for *gun homicides* then for fairness of 
comparison, Mike Moore should have used figures from the other countries 
that included justifiable homicides as well as murders. He didn't. 
Comparing 'like with like' is a basic standard of accuracy.

If he added in the way described, we have a situation where he either 
chose to unfairly inflate US figures in comparison to other countries, 
or at the very least, he was totally careless about ensuring the figures 
used were compatible. Either way, I expect better from a documentary.

I mean - I really wonder. Am I unique in expecting documents that claim 
to be factual, to actually make reasonable efforts to be factual?

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 14:26:02 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 14:26:02 -0000
Subject: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bgksfs+7h5g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bglqdq+2msm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> And, anyway, what's a doctor doing when a child tells him there is 
> a gun in his home?

I actually asked my doctor this.  We'd never dream of having a gun 
in the house (my husband's a black belt anyway, if anyone was ever 
stupid enough to try to break into our house), but I was also 
curious about this and asked our doctor about it the last time my 
kids had a check-up.  He said he just tells parents who do own guns 
about basic gun safety and keeping them away from the kids, he 
recommends they teach their kids about gun safety, and makes note of 
it on the chart for statistical purposes.  He also has little 
brochures people can take away.  (I think they're actually printed 
by the NRA.)  He's a good guy, not the least bit preachy.  He 
revealed to me that he doesn't think that it's a good idea to have 
guns in the house ever, as he could tell I was on the same page, but 
I doubt he would reveal this bias to anyone who said they had a gun 
in the house.  And when you have a kid whose mom or dad is a cop, 
they're definitely going to have one or more guns around.  That's 
part of the parent's job, and he said he totally understands that.  
I don't think most doctors are judging people and certainly 
not "reporting" people who have guns.  They're just interested in 
making sure safety precautions are being followed for the sake of 
the kids.

I've even had one or two parents whose kids are friends with mine 
ask me whether we had guns in the house before allowing their kids 
to come over.  I said, no, we don't have a gun, and I assume you 
don't either or you wouldn't be asking.  They confirmed this.  As a 
parent, if you only know your kids' friends and don't necessarily 
know the parents well, you can't necessarily take for granted that 
the folks in the house are observing precautions concerning gun 
safety.  And when I forbade my kids to continue going to a friend's 
house it wasn't because the parents had purchased a gun--it was 
because they'd brought home a pit bull from a shelter.  Now, a pit 
bull raised from a puppy is one thing, but one from a shelter could 
have had a very unpredictable early life.  Loads of people around 
here train them for fighting, and more than one person who OWNS a 
pit bull has been savagely attacked by their own animal, thinking 
that they could control the beast.  (They were obviously wrong.)  On 
the balance, I'd be more inclined to allow my child to go into a 
house with a properly maintained and locked-up firearm than with a 
pit bull.

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Mon Aug  4 15:17:25 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 17:17:25 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Amanda --->Cold dead hands (or a lawyer), was Bowling for Columbine
In-Reply-To: <bglqdq+2msm@eGroups.com>
References: <bglqdq+2msm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200308041717.25496.silmariel@telefonica.net>

>On the balance, I'd be more inclined to allow my child to go into a
> house with a properly maintained and locked-up firearm than with a
> pit bull.
>
> --Barb


Firearms possesion is strictly controled here, in Spain. My father had two 
riffles for hunting (wildboars), but they came with the hunting license and 
were sold after he gave up the 'hobby'. Arms are restricted, in my 
experience, to a few cases:

Hunting & Sports. These are legal, but (I must stress this) they must be 
maintained into a safe case, enforced by law, and you can only take them out 
to their specific place of use (be it hunt or sport). You can't have them 
with you in the street.

Policeman, army forces men. This does not include private security services.

Old men who survived the civil war (1936-39) and you won't convince them they 
can live without a gun. This is illegal, but isn't a problem, so they are not 
prosecuted.

You know, I've had a little over the limit teenage years, but any of the 
people I've interacted with would admit they had a gun, even if they admitted 
things as selling drugs (the hard ones).

We consider firearms as dangerous, but I have to sadly add that, only last 
year dangerous animals were controlled legally (involving registering, 
asurances, etc), and it was only after there were a few attacks and a dead 
children about 3 years old.

So, even if I live in a country where arms possesion is forbidden, I prefer 
the well-maintained and secured firearm (I have a friend whose father is a 
policeman and I don't have any problem going to his house: he's got 8 kids) 
than the pit-bull, thanks.

silmariel





From marley2580 at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 16:55:25 2003
From: marley2580 at blueyonder.co.uk (marl2580)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 16:55:25 -0000
Subject: locking doors
Message-ID: <bgm35t+r28j@eGroups.com>

As an aside comment to the whole Moor debate (a topic about 
which I am very opinionated, living as I do within an hour's drive 
from Dunblane, but don't wish to inflame the topic even more) I 
don't lock my doors very often. I found it really funny how Moor 
was really surprised that no one locked their doors, yet all the 
houses he tried were occupied at the time. I know of no one who 
locks their door when they are actually in their house (except 
perhaps last thing at night) and I live in a city. The only time I ever 
lock my doors is last thing at night and when I go out for any 
length of time. I don't even have a yale lock so anyone could just 
walk in, but the point is that they don't. Do people in America 
actually lock their doors when they're still in their house?

Marley




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 18:07:56 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 18:07:56 -0000
Subject: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <3F2E4F1F.000005.47187@monica>
Message-ID: <bgm7ds+8hkm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...>
wrote:
>  bboy_mn
> 
>  
> In addition, if anyone would like to start arguing the 
> Constitutional issues related to guns, I'm primed and ready for 
> that. Sadly, very few people understand the Bill of Right in even 
> the most basic and fundimental way.
>  
> 
>  Me -
> 
> Well I was taught that there is doubt about exactly what the writers
> meant when they said 'right to bear arms' anyway, but I don't know 
> if that's right.

bboy_mn:
Well, people today have doubts about the right to keep and bear arms,
but the founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they
wrote the Bill of Rights, and those reasons are just as valid if not
more valid today than they were back then. I think there is a greater
likelihood today for what they were guarding against to occur.

> ... was written the US was still a frontier country with no police 
> force or real standing army .
> 

It has nothing to do with the frontier, nothing to do with the police
in the sense that you are implying, and only a limited amount to do
with a standing army, but probably not in the way you might think.

> Guns were needed for hunting for food,

Nothing to do with hunting food.

> protection from wild animals and protection from/apprehending 
> bandits/Native Americans/anyone else that was considered a threat. 
>

Nothing to do with wild animals, bandits, indians, but something to do
with a very specific 'other' threat.

>
> ...edited...
>

> 
> What may have been reasonable when it was written is not reasonable
> now. 

As I said before, it is more relevant and reasonable now than it was then.

> The Constitution is ammended all the time - what makes this 
> particular part of it any more sacred than the rest. 

But you must realize that there is a significant difference between
the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


> There is already some element of gun control I believe - not all 
> makes of gun are legal to own. 

The primary limitation on guns is on fully automatic machine guns, the
favorite of the time being the Thompson Sub-Machine Gun which in one
form has a 300 round magazine. These guns were outlawed in the 30's in
an effort to bring bootlegging gangs undercontrol.


> While I have no problem with hunting rifles ...
>
> ...edited..
> 
> K


Again the Bill of Rights has nothing to do with hunting, that's one of
the greatest misconception in existance. You can't imagine how much I
cringe when I hear talking heads (news reporters) say something to the
effect that you don't need a military rifle to hunt deer. Once again,
again, the right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with hunting;
never has, never will.

Now let's skip the point to point comments and get right to the heart
of that matter.

I'm guessing most of what I said above makes no logical sense, so I
think it's time for a history lesson.

The Bill of Rights was added about 15 years after the Constitution was
first signed (Dec 15, 1791). So what happened in that 15 years that
made them think that they needed more?

The American Continental Congress did an excellent job of outlining a
government that was new, modern, and unprecidented in the history of
the world. A Elected Democratic Republic with a build in system of
checks and balances. Each branch of government had some authority to
override or control the other branches, but because the other branches
have their own ability to override and control, we had a built-in
guarantee (of sorts) that no branch can get out of control and
unfairly dominate the government, and there by dominate the people.

That sounds like a pretty good deal. How much more could you ask for
in a government? (more on that later)

What are the branches of government as defined by the Constitution of
the United States? Come on now, every citizen of the US should know
this without even having to pause and think. 

Perhaps a better question will help us out. How many branches of
government are there? Don't bother, I'll save you the time, and tell
you that there are FOUR. 

So, what are the four branches of government? I'll save you some time
again, and give you three of them; congressional, judicial, and
executive (Congress, Supreme Court, Office of the President). I gave
you those because they are the easy ones.

The fourth branch is the branch that is defined by the Bill of Rights.
Our founding fathers realized that they forgot to empower the most
important branch of government; they forgot the most critical and
crucial check and balance of all. They forgot to give the people the
ultimate power to control ALL branches of government under any and all
circumstances. 

Now we are to the heart of the matter. To assure that the US
government could never ever under any circumstances have more power
than the people themselves, the founders created the Bill of Rights.
To assure that if the branches of government consciously or
unconsciously conspired to gain the ultimate power to oppress their
own people, the people would have a master list of items to weigh the
governments actions against. Violation of this master list would be
the people's sign that the government was being corrupted by it's own
power. Think Fudge and Umbridge, especially Umbridge, weigh Umbridge's
actions against the master list in the Bill of Rights.

The Master list, also known as the Bill of Rights, is the master list
of all the ways all governments from the beginning of time until this
very day and on into the near infinite foreseeable future have used to
oppress and control their own citizens.

Do you think the people living in Iraq under Susdam Hussian had the
right to keep and bear arms, the right to freedom of the press, free
assembly, protection against self-incrimination, the right to a fair
and speedy trial, the protection against unreasonable search and
seizures, the right to a free press, a jury trial, etc...? Of course,
they didn't because these are the very things that every oppressive
dictator STOPS as soon as he gains control because it is the only way
he can maintain control. Dictators do not do well against a free,
empowered and powerful people. Do think the Cambodians living under
Pol Pot had any of these rights? ...Iatola Komani in Iran? ...Idi Amin
Dada in Ugandan? ...Hitler in Germany? ...Afghanistan. No, they had
none of these rights.

The day you give up any one of the items on this master list is the
day you give up your ability to insure your own continued liberty.

Why am I allowed to have a gun? Because as long as I do, I have power
over my government, as long as I do, my government needs to be afraid
of me. When we lose the power to control our own government, we lose
everything. Of course, those who so willingly trade away their freedom
for a false sense of security, will tell you that the government is on
our side, so why do we need to protect ourselves from them? Oddly, the
Germans felt the same way about Hitler when he first came to power; he
was on their side until he killed a few million of them and plunged
them into a bloody world war. Pol Pot promised to take Cambodia into
an new era of enlightenment then proceeded to kill half the
population. The list of murderous dictators who abolished the Master
List of Freedoms and **Inalienable** Rights is endless, and it
stretches forward and backwards through time; many have been and many
more will be. To quote a great statesman and soldier; "CONSTANT
VIGILANCE".

The day I give up my gun, is the day I give up my liberty, and the day
I give up my gun, is the day you pry it from my cold dead hands.
Better to die for Liberty than to live in tyranny.

Those who trade their freedom for security, ultimately, will have 
neither. (quote: Ben Franklin, Theodore Roosevelt, and many more great
men)

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms-
"II. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall NOT
be infringed."

The Bill of Rights-
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto/bill_of_rights.html

More of my thought on this subject-
http://www.homestead.com/asian_lovr/files/issues/guns.html
Warning: This page is 'G' rate, but, unless you are of a liberal mind
that doesn't mind content of a more extreme rating, I suggest you do
not stray from this page. (But you would see a picture of me it you
did, also 'G' rated.)

I could go on and on, and trust me, as long as this post is, it is
nothing compared to the 'on and on' I could go. 

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

bboy_mn







From terryljames at hotmail.com  Mon Aug  4 18:14:27 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (Terry James)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:14:27 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] locking doors
Message-ID: <BAY8-F123kpKaKKgbLN00029d89@hotmail.com>


>From: "marl2580" <marley2580 at blueyonder.co.uk>
Do people in America
>actually lock their doors when they're still in their house?
>
>Marley
>

I can't answer for other parts of the US, but my city has the highest murder 
rate per capita in my state, so I definitely lock my doors at all times.  
After all, I don't care if someone gets in while I'm not there--my property 
can be replaced.  What I'm worried about is while me and my children are 
home.

We've also just had a serial killer who walked in on his victims through 
unlocked doors, so my thinking here was reinforced.

It's a sad thing, but necessary.

I have gotten in a bit of trouble though when my dh would be working outside 
and I'd forget that he was out there and lock him out!  He thinks it's a 
sign of repressed hostility or something.  Ummm....of course not.  :)

Terry LJ

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 18:36:49 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 19:36:49 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Guns & the Bill of Rights
References: <bgm7ds+8hkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2EA7C1.000001.41057@monica>

 

> 
> Me -
> 
> Well I was taught that there is doubt about exactly what the writers
> meant when they said 'right to bear arms' anyway, but I don't know 
> if that's right.
 
bboy_mn:
Well, people today have doubts about the right to keep and bear arms,
but the founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they
wrote the Bill of Rights, and those reasons are just as valid if not
more valid today than they were back then. I think there is a greater
likelihood today for what they were guarding against to occur.
<snip>
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms-
"II. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall NOT
be infringed."
   <snip>
Me -

And this is why I said there is debate over what they meant. 'a well and
regulated militia' is not what America has today, what it has is individuals
who out of fear or violence or criminal intent own guns. People do not by
and large own guns to protect themselves from the government, they own them
to protect themselves from 'them'. Them being the shadowy fear of someone
out to cause violence and destruction. I was taught that several
constitutional scholars have suggested that this clause means the right to
bear arms as part of a militia (ie to serve in an army) not the right for
everyone to own guns. My point though was not that it was written to promote
hunting,my point was that when it was written guns were a necessary part of
life, they are not now. Times change and rules have to change with them, no
one should rigidly stick to something written 200 years ago just because it
s seen as unalterable. When the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were
written no one could have envisaged the technology that we have now, just as
no one could have envisaged the society that we have now. As I said before
why is one part of it deemed more sacred than others. It *is* the Bill of
Rights that says 'All men are created equal' isn't it? Because when that was
written, like I said before, it meant all white men. We have adapted it to
mean that which is acceptable by today's society, why not do this for guns?
Besides as you yourself admitted, assuming it does mean what people take it
to mean, ownership of weapons for all, that right already has been infringed
 So it's not a case of sticking to the right to bear arms it is merely a
question of where the line should be drawn.

bboy_mn said

Do you think the people living in Iraq under Saddam Hussian had the
right to keep and bear arms,  
<snipped various other examples>

Actually large numbers of people in Iraq had guns, same for most of the rest
of your examples. I understand your point but I think it's wrong because
there really is no need for individuals to own guns. If George Bush (for
example) decided to suspend democracy and appoint himself lord high poobah
then one of two things would happen. (oversmplified I know) 1)The majority
of the armed forces would support him in which case there is not much that
most private individuals could do or 2) they wouldn't and they'd shoot him
themselves. Dictators don't rule by holding all the weapons, they rule by
fear. They rule by making sure that people know that if they just keep their
heads down and their mouths shut they will survive and if they don't they'll
never be seen again. And while standing up to be counted might be the moral
thing to do most people won't because their priorities are protecting
themselves and their families.

And as for ownership of weapons being the only way to safeguard your freedom
.... Ghandi didn't seem to need guns, Martin Luthor King (not *as*clear cut
since there were civil rights groups who promoted violent means) didn't use
guns. Michael Moore did try making this arguement in his documentary but the
idiot he was talking to hadn't actually heard of ghandi so the point fell
somewhat flat.

K
PS I think I may have spellt Ghandi wrong but at least I did so consistently.



From silmariel at telefonica.net  Mon Aug  4 21:17:45 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:17:45 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <3F2EA7C1.000001.41057@monica>
References: <bgm7ds+8hkm@eGroups.com> <3F2EA7C1.000001.41057@monica>
Message-ID: <200308042317.45378.silmariel@telefonica.net>

Kathryn Cawte:
> And as for ownership of weapons being the only way to safeguard your
> freedom...

Thank you for your PoV, Kathy. Steve is making me think that I, a citizen of 
the EEC, am not free because I don't own a gun for self-defense (and I don't 
have the right to have one, I must say). On the other hand, they can't kill 
me legally to later find I was innocent, that after all, the 'jury' just 
choose wrong. That should make my slavery happier.

Btw, just seen Terminator 3 and noticed without Cameron the movie's women are 
stupid, all of a sudden. 

silmariel




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 23:44:56 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 23:44:56 -0000
Subject: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <3F2EA7C1.000001.41057@monica>
Message-ID: <bgmr5o+ta9t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" 
<kcawte at b...> wrote:
>  
> 
> > 
> > Me -
> > 
> > Well I was taught that there is doubt about exactly what the 
writers
> > meant when they said 'right to bear arms' anyway, but I don't 
know 
> > if that's right.
>  
> bboy_mn:

> <snip>
> The Right to Keep and Bear Arms-
> "II. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a
> free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall 
NOT
> be infringed."
>    <snip>
> Me -
> 
> And this is why I said there is debate over what they meant. 'a 
well and
> regulated militia' is not what America has today, what it has is 
individuals
> who out of fear or violence or criminal intent own guns. People do 
not by
> and large own guns to protect themselves from the government, they 
own them
> to protect themselves from 'them'. Them being the shadowy fear of 
someone
> out to cause violence and destruction. I was taught that several
> constitutional scholars have suggested that this clause means the 
right to
> bear arms as part of a militia (ie to serve in an army) not the 
right for
> everyone to own guns. My point though was not that it was written 
to promote
> hunting,my point was that when it was written guns were a 
necessary part of
> life, they are not now. Times change and rules have to change with 
them, no
> one should rigidly stick to something written 200 years ago just 
because it
> s seen as unalterable. 
> 
> bboy_mn said
> 
> Do you think the people living in Iraq under Saddam Hussian had the
> right to keep and bear arms,  
> <snipped various other examples>
> 
> Actually large numbers of people in Iraq had guns, same for most 
of the rest
> of your examples. I understand your point but I think it's wrong 
because
> there really is no need for individuals to own guns.

 
Actually, recent scholarship has shown that the right to bear arms 
was indeed perceived by the framers as an individul right, and not 
one subsumed under a gvernmental organization.

As to changing conditions mandation abolition of this right, I would 
say that once given up, such individual rights are diffucult to 
ressurrect.  Conditions my change further, and suddenly, as wee ahve 
seen with 9/11.

Haggridd




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Aug  5 00:45:42 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 01:45:42 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: US Episcopalian Church question
Message-ID: <3F2EFE36.000003.94197@monica>

The BBC have been covering the delayed confirmation of the gay bishop by the
 Episcopal church all day. About an hour ago they explained that it's
membership is actually less than 1% of the population of the US and as such
it legally qualifies as a sect. And yet ABC news which is being shown now
just described it as one of the US's biggest churches. Now I realise that
these two things aren't necessarilly contradictory but they certainly sound
like someone is wrong. Can someone explain whether they're both right?

K
*confused*



From subrosax at earthlink.net  Tue Aug  5 01:28:13 2003
From: subrosax at earthlink.net (subrosax99)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:28:13 -0000
Subject: locking doors
In-Reply-To: <bgm35t+r28j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgn17d+s2e6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "marl2580" <marley2580 at b...> 
wrote:
> As an aside comment to the whole Moor debate (a topic about 
> which I am very opinionated, living as I do within an hour's drive 
> from Dunblane, but don't wish to inflame the topic even more) I 
> don't lock my doors very often. I found it really funny how Moor 
> was really surprised that no one locked their doors, yet all the 
> houses he tried were occupied at the time. I know of no one who 
> locks their door when they are actually in their house (except 
> perhaps last thing at night) and I live in a city. The only time I 
ever 
> lock my doors is last thing at night and when I go out for any 
> length of time. I don't even have a yale lock so anyone could just 
> walk in, but the point is that they don't. Do people in America 
> actually lock their doors when they're still in their house?
> 
> Marley

In Los Angeles, people definately lock their doors when they are in 
the house. I can't think of anyone who doesn't lock their doors at 
night, at the very least. I tend not to do it during the daytime, but 
I probably should.
On the other hand, I have these relatives that live in a tiny little 
town in Iowa, and they never lock their doors. I found this extremely 
shocking, but I guess they don't have any crime in town.

Allyson




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 02:34:15 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 02:34:15 -0000
Subject: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <200308042317.45378.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bgn537+6kfh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> wrote:
> Kathryn Cawte:
> > And as for ownership of weapons being the only way to safeguard your
> > freedom...
> 
> ... Steve is making me think that I, a citizen of the EEC, am not
> free because I don't own a gun for self-defense (and I don't 
> have the right to have one, I must say). 

bboy_mn:

I think I may have stirred up the cauldron enough, but since you post
is short and very direct, I will makes a couple of hopefully not  too
inflamitory comments.

You say you are free (I'm not doubting that), and as long as your
government remain benevolent, you are OK. But if the tide turns
against you, what measure of assurrance do you have (Bill of Rights),
what resources are at your disposal to bring a straying government
under control?

Let's look at the case of Delores Umbridge and Cornelius Fudge. The
first decree was simple, the government gets to appoint a teacher. And
the logic is that they need to have this interference in the system to
save the system itself. 

Then in the interest of law and order, Umbridge gains the right to
monitor and sack teachers. Now she has gained power to oppress and
threaten the rest of the staff, but seemingly for the greater good. To
assure that her power will go unchallenged, she is not above torturing
students. But that is not enough power for her, she has to be the High
Inquisitor. A role which she got by bullying and intimidating a
supposedly free press into spreading propaganda and lies to discredit
anyone who stood in her way. 

Later, it's not just the corruption of the free press, but the actual
banning of the press. Then the next step is to ban the free flow of
ideas and open dialog by any means. Then she bans groups, teams, and
clubs. All for the greater good, of course, all with best interests of
the wizard world at heart, and not only that, since no one read deeper
into what was happening and prevented it, Fudge and Umbridge did so
with the support of the people. 

All the while that she tries to get things under her control for the
good of and with the support of the government and the people, oddly,
things get worse. Which gives her the perfect excuse to become more
oppressive. Then, you lose the right to privacy, your mail is being
searched, then you are subjected to the unwarrented search and seizure
of your property. Due process of law is by passed. 

When that only makes things worse again, Umbridge has no choice but to
insure her absolute authority by creating her own personal SS/Gestapo,
an elite army that operates outside the bounds of standard law and
order. And then... and then... and then... the system with the full
support of the government and the people cascades into a dictatorship,
with the oppression of all rights and of the people. And let's not
forget how Fudge tried to totally corrupt the judicial system in order
to get Harry expelled not only from Hogwarts, but from the wizard world.

This corruption of government always come with the support of the
people. People who most willingly trade away their freedoms for
security. But, sadly, the more freedom the trade away, the less secure
they become, until the have finally destroy the very thing they
thought they were preserving.

This is not just the stuff of story books and fairytales. This is
happening right now today in our modern enlightened world. 

Our assumed enemies are not our greatest enemies, we are our own
greatest enemy, we as complacent univolved citizen are the greatest
threat to freedom. This type of corruption is insidious, it creeps in
and takes over otherwise stable and funcitional governments, and
usually does so with the support of the people. That is, until the
people realize that they have destroy the very thing they took for
granted.

Let me point out an example from recent history, that so very clearly
supports the right to keep and bear arms. In the Serbia/Croatia
conflict, in it's infinite wizdom, the USA bullied the rest of the
world into enforcing a ban on the sale of arms to Croatia, which in
turn allowed the heavily armed Serbian to slaughter countless Croatian
men, women, and children while the world stood by and watched. 

The Croatian's begged the world, not to give them, but to sell them
arms so they could defend themselves. They were more than willing to
fight their own battles, but the world, primarily at the insistence of
the US, wouldn't do it because they thought to would only inflame the
war. 

So Croatians were helpless, they had little choice but to watch their
friends and family being murdered while the world sat by sipping tea
and debating how, when, and if they should help. True there were a few
small bands of militia that were able to form and resist the Serbs.
But, with the rest of the world actively suppressing them, they were
hardly enough to be effective. 

People can say the reasons to keep and bear arm don't apply to our
modern world, but modern history continually proves them wrong.


> On the other hand, they can't kill me legally to later find I was 
> innocent, that after all, the 'jury' just choose wrong. That should 
> make my slavery happier.
> 
> edited...
> 
> silmariel


I assume this is a reference to the death penalty, and you will get no
argument from me there. By the way, the state I live in doesn't have
the death penalty. 

I view the death penalty as another means by which the government can
become corrupt. It's very easy, to charge and convict your opponents
of captial crime (re: Fudge's corrupt court), and very neatly let the
system dispose of them. This happens all the time in our modern world.

Just out of curiousity, how many violations of your own charter of
rights did Umbridge commit? Quite a few I imagine. 

Sorry, once again I rambled on far longer than I intended too.

Steve/bboy_mn 






From catlady at wicca.net  Tue Aug  5 04:02:35 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 04:02:35 -0000
Subject: our current (political = banned) controversy
Message-ID: <bgna8r+m42k@eGroups.com>

Naama wrote:

<< So, while banning cars, for instance, would have a very negative 
impact on most people's lives, exactly what kind of negative impact 
would banning guns have? (I don't include hunting rifles here.) >>

It is possible that banning cars, other than ambulances, and transit 
to and from airports and train stations, would have a POSITIVE effect 
on people's lives. It definitely would reduce air pollution, drunk 
driving, and auto accidents, especially the ones where cars come up 
on the sidewalk to kill people. Since no one would have a private 
car, there would be great public support for mass transit, so the 
mass transit would be pretty much adequate. And the inconveniences of 
mass transit might lead to people walking more, for short distance 
errands, which would be delight the public health propagandists.

<< I have to say, that as seen from the outside, the most absurd 
thing about American gun culture, is that most of the guns people 
have are completely unnecessary. Most people interviewed on the film 
said that they needed and wanted guns for protection (so did Charlton 
Heston, by the way). But that means that the only reason why most 
people own guns is because they know that a lot of other people have 
guns. So they have to "protect their families." Nice, isn't it? An 
arms race between each and every citizen. >>

Well, they aren't going to tell a complete stranger that they like to 
own a hundgun in case they might ever want to commit suicide someday, 
perhaps when terminally ill and in desperate pain?

<< I think that was the point of Moore's film, to show the fear that 
people in America have of each other, and the danger of a limitless 
access to guns in such a state of mass paranoia. >>

Meaning, either reduce the guns or reduce the paranoia? Moore seemed 
to credit the paranoia to the pathetic excuse for news on local TV 
stations ("if it bleeds, it leads" -- preferably a crime, else a 
fatal traffic accident. Then a remote from a reporter on-site in a 
dark shopping mall in front of a closed shop in which something 
happened earlier in the day. Then the water-skiing budgerigar (except 
we say "parakeet"). Most people don't watch any TV news (and more 
people get news from TV than any other source), but are scared 
anyway.

Kathryn wrote:

<< I do not believe in keeping handguns in the home for defense -
statistics show (and I'm being terribly sloppy and not looking them
up but I know I saw them on a Discovery Channel show about crime) 
that if you have a gun in your home the chances of you or a family 
member or friend being shot with it (either accidentally, by being 
mistaken for an intruder or deliberately) are far higher than the 
chances of shooting an intruder. >>

I know I don't remember the statistics, but my recollection is that 
something like 43 out of 47 deaths associated with a firearm in the 
home were deliberate suicides. I understand that parents don't want 
their teen-agers to commit suicide (altho' there was a woman whose 
husband and then later her son committed suicide with the household 
gun right in front of her, and she went on TV to beg parents to lock 
the guns away from the teen-agers as well as from the children, and 
she got tons of hate mail from people who called her a Communist 
criminal-hugger who wants to take all their guns away), but I believe 
very strongly that every person belongs to THEMSELVES, no one is the 
property of the government or some religion or their parents, and 
therefore even teen-agers have a moral right to commit suicide, and 
parents should prevent this by being less nasty to their teens rather 
than by locking up the guns. (It should be obvious from this that I 
am child-free :) .) 

And I think it was found that more deaths were cases of one family 
member murdering another in a fit of rage than of one family member 
shooting another due to carelessness with firearms.  

Marley wrote:

<< I found it really funny how Moore was really surprised that no one 
locked their doors, yet all the houses he tried were occupied at the 
time. I know of no one who locks their door when they are actually in 
their house (except perhaps last thing at night) >>

I was really surprised at your comment, perhaps indicating that we 
live in different universes after all. Other people have already 
replied about locking their doors when at home, but I wanted to add 
that I was surprised that none of those people who found Moore 
messing with their doorknobs either punched him out or answered the 
door with gun in hand.




From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 04:17:18 2003
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (Jennifer Piersol)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 04:17:18 -0000
Subject: Fishing for sympathy...
Message-ID: <bgnb4e+4h1q@eGroups.com>

Hey all.  August 4th is going down in history as Jen's Least Favorite
Day of the Year, and I was just hoping I could have some good thoughts
sent my way.

Today is the 20th anniversary of my mom's death from breast cancer.

I also found out today that my beautiful black cat Gilbert, who is
only about 6 1/2 years old and the most pleasant, loving, and vocal
cat I've ever known, has a particularly nasty form of cancer, and his
prognosis doesn't look too good.

So even though one of my friends from elementary school turns 28 today
(guess how I always remembered her birthday), August 4th will be
heretofore (sp?) called "Cancer Day" in my little internal calendar,
and I'm feeling spectacularly depressed.

I did have a somewhat brighter moment when Allie noticed I was sad and
gave me 2 or 3 really squishy lovey-hugs... and then I got sad again
when thinking that my mom must have been really heartbroken to leave
us before seeing my sister and I grow up and have our own babies...

Sorry to bring a damper on everything, but I was just feeling horrible
and wanted some company.

-Jen, wallowing.




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Tue Aug  5 04:37:45 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:37:45 -0700
Subject: Downloader Trojan virus?
Message-ID: <124143250.20030804213745@earthlink.net>

Hi,

I'm hoping somebody here has experience with this virus and
can help.

I've visited fanfiction.net twice over the last week, and
each time my Anti Virus program (Norton) alerted me to a
virus (Downloader Trojan) in my Temporary Internet files.
The program wasn't able to repair, quarantine or delete the
virus, even though I'm up to date on the definitions, and
this virus is listed.

Has anyone else experienced this and knows how to prevent
this from happening?

The file containing the virus was called "The ultimate
browser enhancer" both times.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                          mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our pet rabbits: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/




From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Tue Aug  5 05:26:25 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 01:26:25 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Downloader Trojan virus?
Message-ID: <19e.187100a2.2c609a01@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 05/08/2003 06:38:44 Paris, Madrid (heure d'?t?), 
siskiou at earthlink.net a ?crit :

> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm hoping somebody here has experience with this virus and
> can help.
> 
> I've visited fanfiction.net twice over the last week, and
> each time my Anti Virus program (Norton) alerted me to a
> virus (Downloader Trojan) in my Temporary Internet files.
> The program wasn't able to repair, quarantine or delete the
> virus, even though I'm up to date on the definitions, and
> this virus is listed.
> 
> Has anyone else experienced this and knows how to prevent
> this from happening?
> 
> The file containing the virus was called "The ultimate
> browser enhancer" both times.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Susanne              mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net
> 
> Visit our pet rabbits: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou

Okay, I went to Symantec' website, and found out there are a couple Trojans 
like this, you'll have to check the extension. Then you try and do a search, ie 
for Downloader Trojan Aphe, and check the removal instructions. Always amazed 
me how you have to do so many things to remove a virus that's in their list - 
I thought we payed them to actually do the entire job... If you can't find 
the extension, then you will spend a nice moment with your registry and search 
box trying to locate offending files.

Whatever you do, don't contact Symantec's support. You'll get an answer in 
two months. Reason why I let them go. 

Mc Afee tells you to simply look for this

The SYSMAN32.EXE file is downloaded to %SysDir% as SYSMAN32.EXE, and a 
Registry key is added to launch it at subsequent system startup. For 
example:HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
"SystemManager" = C:\WINNT\System32\sysman32.exe    
    
            
Indications?of?Infection        
    
Existence of the file SYSMAN32.EXE in %SysDir% coupled with the Registry hook 
detailed above. 
    
    
If you find them, simply erase them.    



Also, you might want to try this > 
> 
> http://www.simplysup.com/tremover/details.html
> 
    
but I'm not sure they cover it... found it in a discussion on this trojan 
though. 


Hope it helps.

Disclaimer: interfering with your registry might make your computer fly out 
the window (even if it's a Mac)

cheers!

Cristina
    








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Aug  5 05:47:17 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 15:47:17 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] US Episcopalian Church question
In-Reply-To: <3F2EFE36.000003.94197@monica>
Message-ID: <3F2FD185.11452.260688@localhost>

On 5 Aug 2003 at 1:45, Kathryn Cawte wrote:

> The BBC have been covering the delayed confirmation of the gay bishop by the
>  Episcopal church all day. About an hour ago they explained that it's
> membership is actually less than 1% of the population of the US and as such
> it legally qualifies as a sect. And yet ABC news which is being shown now
> just described it as one of the US's biggest churches. Now I realise that
> these two things aren't necessarilly contradictory but they certainly sound
> like someone is wrong. Can someone explain whether they're both right?

Hi Kathryn,

The numbers I am going on here are from 1990 - I simply have these to 
hand. In 1990, there were approximately 2.45 million Episcopalians in 
the United States. US population in 1990 was around 250,000,000 - so 
just under 1% of Americans were Episcopalian. The ratio is probably 
similar today, but I can't immediately check that. So that sounds about 
right.

Now - the next part - does that make them one of the biggest Churches in 
the US? Yes, it does. What you need to realise is that many of the major 
brances of Christianity actually consist of a number of different 
Churches. For example, in the figures I am looking at here, Baptists are 
actually 14 separate Churches.

The list I am looking at contains about 150 different 'Churches' - all 
or nearly all the 'major' religious groupings of the US in 1990. Of 
these groups, only 10 are larger than the Episcopalians (National 
Baptist Convention of America, National Baptist Convention USA, Southern 
Baptist Convention, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, 
United Methodist Church, Moslems (they're not divided in this list), 
Presbyterian Church, Roman Catholics.

So coming in at number 11 out of 150 probably means it's reasonable to 
refer to the Episcopalians as one of America's biggest churches.

Basically, it comes down to how you count things. For example, the 
largest single Baptist group in the list is the Southern Baptist 
Convention with nearly 15 million people.  But if you group together all 
the Baptist groups, it's over 26 million. No single Pentecostal Church 
has more members than the Episcopalians - but there are more 
Pentecostals than there are Episcopalians. Same applies to Jews - there 
are more Jews than there are Episcopalians, but they are divided into 
three separate groups.

It comes down to how you apply the numbers.

Now, the above are from 1990 - so will have changed a bit. But the 
relative sizes won't have changed that much. And it should also be noted 
that not all groups count their numbers in the same way - the Roman 
Catholic Church considers a person a member from the moment of baptism, 
unless they choose to leave the faith. Many of the Protestant churches 
only count adult members in their numbers - so you can't really get a 
fair comparison.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Tue Aug  5 09:58:37 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:58:37 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <bgn537+6kfh@eGroups.com>
References: <bgn537+6kfh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200308051158.37429.silmariel@telefonica.net>


Steve/bboy_mn:
> Just out of curiousity, how many violations of your own charter of
> rights did Umbridge commit? Quite a few I imagine.

Bet she did, I loved her, but I'm not a the one to talk here because I liked 
Harry being tortured. It doesn't happen to me when they are real persons 
(gladly), but I'm a sadistic so I enyojed a lot with Harry detentions.

>You say you are free (I'm not doubting that), and as long as your
government remain benevolent, you are OK. But if the tide turns
against you, what measure of assurrance do you have (Bill of Rights),
what resources are at your disposal to bring a straying government
under control?

If your government decides to go wild, you have little chances of getting well 
with ot without firearms, and obiously the Bill of Rights does not apply, it 
is the first thing you are going to dispose of, and of course if the gov goes 
wrong, grab an arm, why not. But let's try for this not to happen, works 
better to educate your population into Civil Rights and democracy so they 
react when they're rights are menaced, not when you can't do anything (wich 
was Spain Civil War, btw, so we remember).


> Sorry, once again I rambled on far longer than I intended too.

Steve, dear, you know we'll ever reach a consensus here. Face we live in 
different countrys, US and UE, that are world appart in the civil arms 
subject.

So keep being happy living in the US and be glad for me being happy living in 
the UE.

I don't want you angry, as you make fun and pointing posts.

Cheers from the other reality,

silmariel





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Tue Aug  5 10:17:34 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:17:34 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Downloader Trojan virus?
In-Reply-To: <19e.187100a2.2c609a01@aol.com>
References: <19e.187100a2.2c609a01@aol.com>
Message-ID: <200308051217.34010.silmariel@telefonica.net>


> >
> > The file containing the virus was called "The ultimate
> > browser enhancer" both times.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Susanne              mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net
>
> Disclaimer: interfering with your registry might make your computer fly out
> the window (even if it's a Mac)
>
> Cristina

She's not joking. Make a security copy first. Now. Of all your important data, 
including emails, system files and configuration data. I usually get paid for 
giving this advices, please be conservative with your actions, you could 
regret it later. 

silmariel



From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Aug  5 11:46:56 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:46:56 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Guns & the Bill of Rights
References: <bgn537+6kfh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F2F9930.000003.94435@monica>

 
 
bboy_mn:
 
You say you are free (I'm not doubting that), and as long as your
government remain benevolent, you are OK. But if the tide turns
against you, what measure of assurrance do you have (Bill of Rights),
what resources are at your disposal to bring a straying government
under control?
   <snip>
This corruption of government always come with the support of the
people. People who most willingly trade away their freedoms for
security. But, sadly, the more freedom the trade away, the less secure
they become, until the have finally destroy the very thing they
thought they were preserving.
  <snip>
Let me point out an example from recent history, that so very clearly
supports the right to keep and bear arms. In the Serbia/Croatia
conflict, in it's infinite wizdom, the USA bullied the rest of the
world into enforcing a ban on the sale of arms to Croatia, which in
turn allowed the heavily armed Serbian to slaughter countless Croatian
men, women, and children while the world stood by and watched.
 
The Croatian's begged the world, not to give them, but to sell them
arms so they could defend themselves. They were more than willing to
fight their own battles, but the world, primarily at the insistence of
the US, wouldn't do it because they thought to would only inflame the
war.
   <snip>
 
Just out of curiousity, how many violations of your own charter of
rights did Umbridge commit? Quite a few I imagine.
 
 
Me -
 
Croatia is a bad example because you are talking about a civil war not a
government trying to enslave its own people. As you yourself point out the
corruption of government always comes with the support of the people so it
really doesn't matter whether those people are armed or not. I repeat that
if a government has the support of its own military then it doesn't matter
how well armed its people are - the military is always going to have the
better weaponry and training..
 
It's difficult to compare the situation in the WW to the situation in a
European democracy since as far as we can see the WW isn't particularly
democratic. But I can safely say she didn't commit any violations of our
charter of rights in the UK - because we don't have one. The closest thing
we have is the Magna Carta which was written in 1215. We also don't have any
kind of written constitution.
 
Our safeguards come in the form of a free and very independent press who
have regular opportunities to quiz our leader (how many press conferences
has Shrub given in his presidency? And I mean actual press conferences not
just statements to the press - I'll give you a clue, it's less than 10), a
judiciary that isn't elected (thank goodness, justice and popularity are
after all not always compatible) and is having its last tie to the executive
severed and a strong parliament. We also have history on our side - the last
time a ruler tried to indefinitely suspend Parliament and set up a
dictatorship we executed him.
 
K

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pentzouli at hotmail.com  Tue Aug  5 12:46:15 2003
From: pentzouli at hotmail.com (holly_phoenix_11)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 12:46:15 -0000
Subject: HELLO!
Message-ID: <bgo8un+bgtb@eGroups.com>

Hello grown-ups-fans of Harry Potter!
Following this group's posting guidelines, I just dropped by to 
introduce myself and let you know that I'd really like to join you in 
discussing our favourite book character. I am 27 years old and a 
female (names are not obligatory, are they?). As English is my second 
language, I have managed to order and read three times already (!) 
the fifth book, so while we all wait impatiently for the following, I 
hope I will find among you some friendly faces :-) and chat about the 
books, as well as about the movies.

So, I will soon see you all in this very interesting group.

Cheers!
holly_phoenix_11




From pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net  Mon Aug  4 12:49:14 2003
From: pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:49:14 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] HELLO!
References: <bgo8un+bgtb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01dd01c35a86$d27b9da0$535fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: holly_phoenix_11 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:46 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] HELLO!


  Hello grown-ups-fans of Harry Potter!
  Following this group's posting guidelines, I just dropped by to 
  introduce myself and let you know that I'd really like to join you in 
  discussing our favourite book character. I am 27 years old and a 
  female (names are not obligatory, are they?). As English is my second 
  language, I have managed to order and read three times already (!) 
  Names are not obligatory but it would be great to know where you are from !

  the fifth book, so while we all wait impatiently for the following, I 
  hope I will find among you some friendly faces :-) and chat about the 
  books, as well as about the movies.

  Oh, none of us bite !

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pentzouli at hotmail.com  Tue Aug  5 13:02:32 2003
From: pentzouli at hotmail.com (holly_phoenix_11)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 13:02:32 -0000
Subject: HELLO!
In-Reply-To: <01dd01c35a86$d27b9da0$535fc487@personal>
Message-ID: <bgo9t8+d1gk@eGroups.com>


>   Names are not obligatory but it would be great to know where you 
are from !

I am from Greece (it shares its north borders with Albania, you know 
the land where Voldemort used to hide, but do not be afraid, I never 
crossed its borders...)

I live in Thessaloniki, the second biggest city of Greece.

It would be great to get to know you all too! ;-D

cheers
holly_phoenix_11




From pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net  Mon Aug  4 13:11:26 2003
From: pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:11:26 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HELLO!
References: <bgo9t8+d1gk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01e201c35a89$ed45f470$535fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: holly_phoenix_11 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 2:02 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HELLO!



  >   Names are not obligatory but it would be great to know where you 
  are from !

  I am from Greece (it shares its north borders with Albania, you know 
  the land where Voldemort used to hide, but do not be afraid, I never 
  crossed its borders...)

  I live in Thessaloniki, the second biggest city of Greece.

  #splutters at coincidence ! #

  I'm Greek to, by ancestry, but was born in the UK. I've been to Thessaloniki too !
  But my family is in Athens . Small world......

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pentzouli at hotmail.com  Tue Aug  5 13:35:08 2003
From: pentzouli at hotmail.com (holly_phoenix_11)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 13:35:08 -0000
Subject: HELLO!
In-Reply-To: <01e201c35a89$ed45f470$535fc487@personal>
Message-ID: <bgobqc+cds1@eGroups.com>

> 
>   #splutters at coincidence ! #
> 
>   I'm Greek to, by ancestry, but was born in the UK. I've been to 
Thessaloniki too !
>   But my family is in Athens . Small world......
> 
>   Michelle

You know, you are the first Greek person in a foreign site I meet! 
Small world indeed... If we chat a bit, we might end up cousins or 
something, it happens a lot to me lately (I have a great big Greek 
family...) My relationship with the UK is quite big, as my mother is 
an English teacher and my brother went to University in Aberdeen... 
I've been there, but I would prefer London. Do you live in the UK 
permanently? Ever considered living here?







From tminton at deckerjones.com  Tue Aug  5 13:44:26 2003
From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:44:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fishing for sympathy...
Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE2486B8@djmail.deckerjones.com>

HUGS HUGS to you!!  Things will get better!!  Hang in there.  Go get
some Ben and Jerry's Ice cream, that always helps make the wallowing go
away!!
 
Tonya

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Jennifer Piersol [mailto:jenP_97 at yahoo.com] 
	Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:17 PM
	To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
	Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fishing for sympathy...
	
	
	Hey all.  August 4th is going down in history as Jen's Least
Favorite
	Day of the Year, and I was just hoping I could have some good
thoughts
	sent my way.
	
	Today is the 20th anniversary of my mom's death from breast
cancer.
	
	I also found out today that my beautiful black cat Gilbert, who
is
	only about 6 1/2 years old and the most pleasant, loving, and
vocal
	cat I've ever known, has a particularly nasty form of cancer,
and his
	prognosis doesn't look too good.
	
	So even though one of my friends from elementary school turns 28
today
	(guess how I always remembered her birthday), August 4th will be
	heretofore (sp?) called "Cancer Day" in my little internal
calendar,
	and I'm feeling spectacularly depressed.
	
	I did have a somewhat brighter moment when Allie noticed I was
sad and
	gave me 2 or 3 really squishy lovey-hugs... and then I got sad
again
	when thinking that my mom must have been really heartbroken to
leave
	us before seeing my sister and I grow up and have our own
babies...
	
	Sorry to bring a damper on everything, but I was just feeling
horrible
	and wanted some company.
	
	-Jen, wallowing.
	
	
	
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1707
544108:HM/A=1693352/R=0/SIG=11tralmvc/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mq
so=60178293&partid=3170658> 	
 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1693352/rand=578171651> 	

	________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
	
	Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's
Admin Files!
	http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
	
	Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary
material from posts to which you're replying!
	
	
	Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . 
	



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net  Tue Aug  5 14:21:53 2003
From: pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 15:21:53 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HELLO!
References: <bgobqc+cds1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01ea01c35b5c$ee815cc0$535fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: holly_phoenix_11 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 2:35 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HELLO!


  You know, you are the first Greek person in a foreign site I meet! 
  Small world indeed... If we chat a bit, we might end up cousins or 
  something, it happens a lot to me lately (I have a great big Greek 
  family...) My relationship with the UK is quite big, as my mother is 
  an English teacher and my brother went to University in Aberdeen... 
  I've been there, but I would prefer London. Do you live in the UK 
  permanently? Ever considered living here?


  I think, if I could get to grips with the language, I would most certainly come back. I love the life, the food. the people. It's kind of home. Maybe one day I will live there. 

  You could always offlist me if you want to know more about my family story. 

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From joym999 at aol.com  Tue Aug  5 14:54:38 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 14:54:38 -0000
Subject: Fifty Points to Jennifers Day
Message-ID: <bgogfe+nr7j@eGroups.com>

Given the content of several recent threads, I declare today, August 
5th, to be Fifty Points to Jennifers Day.  Everyone named Jennifer, 
your house gets fifty points, just because I, Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, 
based on the authority vested in me by no one in particular and 
certainly not the admin team, just feel like all the Jennifers in 
this world deserve some points today.

--JMC




From tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 15:03:22 2003
From: tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com (tomatogrower88)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 15:03:22 -0000
Subject: Fishing for sympathy...
In-Reply-To: <bgnb4e+4h1q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgogvq+1fel@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer Piersol" 
<jenP_97 at y...> wrote:
> Hey all.  August 4th is going down in history as Jen's Least 
Favorite
> Day of the Year, and I was just hoping I could have some good 
thoughts
> sent my way.
> 
> Today is the 20th anniversary of my mom's death from breast cancer.
> 
> I also found out today that my beautiful black cat Gilbert, who is
> only about 6 1/2 years old and the most pleasant, loving, and vocal
> cat I've ever known, has a particularly nasty form of cancer, and 
his
> prognosis doesn't look too good.
> 
> So even though one of my friends from elementary school turns 28 
today
> (guess how I always remembered her birthday), August 4th will be
> heretofore (sp?) called "Cancer Day" in my little internal calendar,
> and I'm feeling spectacularly depressed.
> 
> I did have a somewhat brighter moment when Allie noticed I was sad 
and
> gave me 2 or 3 really squishy lovey-hugs... and then I got sad again
> when thinking that my mom must have been really heartbroken to leave
> us before seeing my sister and I grow up and have our own babies...
> 
> Sorry to bring a damper on everything, but I was just feeling 
horrible
> and wanted some company.
> 
> -Jen, wallowing.


I feel so bad for you. That is alot to deal with in one day. Troubles 
seem to come at the same time of year. I hope things brighten up for 
you. Children do have a wonderful way of comforting you. A hug from a 
child is real love. 

Myrth




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 16:36:46 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 16:36:46 -0000
Subject: US Episcopalian Church question
In-Reply-To: <3F2EFE36.000003.94197@monica>
Message-ID: <bgomeu+q9ad@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" 
<kcawte at b...> wrote:
> The BBC have been covering the delayed confirmation of the gay 
> bishop by the Episcopal church all day. About an hour ago they 
> explained that it's membership is actually less than 1% of the 
> population of the US and as such it legally qualifies as a sect. 
> And yet ABC news which is being shown now just described it as one 
> of the US's biggest churches. Now I realise that these two things 
> aren't necessarilly contradictory but they certainly sound like 
> someone is wrong. Can someone explain whether they're both right?

Shaun already explained this in terms of numbers, but more to the 
point, even if the Episcopal Church had a membership one-twentieth 
of its current level, it would still warrant this kind of attention 
by the powers that be because the heads of most of the large 
coroporations in the US, as well as most politicians in the US 
(especially the US Congress) are on the books as members of either 
the Episcopal Church, PCUSA (Presbyterian Church USA) or ELCA 
(Evangelical Lutheran Church in America)--and all of these 
denominations are currently wrestling with issues of sexual 
orientation.  This has a lot more to do with who is in power in this 
country than mere membership numbers.

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Aug  5 16:46:55 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:46:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HELLO!
References: <bgo9t8+d1gk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002301c35b71$2e2ed8c0$4a9ecdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

holly_phoenix_11 wrote:

> I am from Greece (it shares its north borders with Albania, you know 
> the land where Voldemort used to hide, but do not be afraid, I never 
> crossed its borders...)

Ah, my friend got married in Greece.  To an Albanian. :)  Not Voldemort, don't worry.  They live in the US now.  Welcome to the group!

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Tue Aug  5 19:07:08 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 19:07:08 -0000
Subject: How to confuse with statistics WAS Re: US Episcopalian Church question
In-Reply-To: <3F2FD185.11452.260688@localhost>
Message-ID: <bgov8s+8amp@eGroups.com>


> Now, the above are from 1990 - so will have changed a bit. But the 
> relative sizes won't have changed that much. And it should also be 
noted 
> that not all groups count their numbers in the same way - the 
> Roman Catholic Church considers a person a member from the moment 
> of  baptism, unless they choose to leave the faith. Many of the  
> Protestant churches only count adult members in their numbers - so 
> you can't really get a fair comparison.

If they use the same method as the Anglican Church in England, then 
they count their membership as adults over 16 who are regular church 
attenders. The usual method is to ask adults who worship reasonably 
regularly if they want to go on the 'electoral roll' (people who can 
vote on church matters) and then use that one as the basis 
for 'total church membership'.

It gets very confusing, because there are several sets of 
statistics. We almost never count numbers baptized, because the 
Anglican Church is the 'default', Established, church in England. 
Probably a quarter of the population has been baptised Anglican 
(Over 10 million). Average Sunday attendence is 1 million in 
England, but average attendence per week is 1.2 million, and the 
total number of people who attend at least once a month is 1.7 
million. 

At Christmas, an extra million people decide to turn up [grin], and 
we could claim 2.7 million. And in times of crisis, the place is 
packed.

Really, it's 'please select your statistic'.  If you want to show 
that the church is dying, use Sunday attendance (falling). If you 
want to show that the church is growing, use weekly or monthly 
attendance, or total membership (rising). If you want to show a 
truly catastrophic fall, use Christmas week followed by the first 
Sunday in January [big, evil grin].

So the 1% of the U.S. population membership is probably correct, but 
may well not be the same figure as the percentage of the population 
who would say 'Episcopalian' if asked what Church they belonged to. 
Or even the same figure as the percentage of the U.S. population who 
attend an Episcopalian church.

Pip




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Tue Aug  5 20:52:44 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 20:52:44 -0000
Subject: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <3F2F9930.000003.94435@monica>
Message-ID: <bgp5es+r286@eGroups.com>

> Our safeguards come in the form of a free and very independent 
> press who have regular opportunities to quiz our leader (how many 
> press conferences has Shrub given in his presidency? And I mean 
> actual press conferences not just statements to the press - I'll 
give you a clue, it's less than 10), a
> judiciary that isn't elected (thank goodness, justice and 
> popularity are after all not always compatible) and is having its 
> last tie to the executive severed and a strong parliament. We also 
have history on our side - the last
> time a ruler tried to indefinitely suspend Parliament and set up a
> dictatorship we executed him.
>  
> K

And we have our greatest safeguard - the sheer bloody-mindedness of 
our people. 

Don't confuse a gun with freedom. We have a long, long tradition of 
telling the government to get stuffed [as Kathryn points out, dating 
back to 1649 when we explained to King Charles I that he ruled by 
our consent, not by divine right. And just to prove that you no 
longer have our consent, we will now proceed to chop your royal head 
off. ;-)]

And that tradition has continued on its merry way down to the 
1990's, when demonstations and riots (without a gun in sight) showed 
the then government that they *cannot* enforce an unpopular law. 
(The Poll Tax Riots). Or when the people of Tatton in Cheshire 
showed that no party machine could force them to re-elect a sitting 
MP they believed corrupt. (They elected a slightly bewildered 
reporter called Martin Bell, who was standing on an anti-corruption 
platform - the first Independent MP in Parliament for over 50 years)

Hitler could have been elected here, I think. But he would have 
elected himself into a civil war, because 'the government is always 
right' is just not in our tradition. 'Resist the government when 
it's wrong' *is* in our tradition. 

You said, Steve:
"But if the tide turns against you, what measure of assurance do you 
have (Bill of Rights), what resources are at your disposal to bring 
a straying government under control? "

Us. Just us. 

That's all it takes. Because a Bill of Rights is not worth the paper 
it is written on if the people who are supposed to govern by it 
don't believe in it. 'Bills of Rights' also depend on 'us'. The 
people. Deciding that they are not going to let 'the government' get 
away with it. Deciding that in the last resort they will *make* the 
government abide by its laws.

Who holds the guns and the tanks is important. But you are 
forgetting that guns can be obtained, and petrol bombs made, and 
things can go bang in the night if the people are determined. 

As Kathryn said, we have history on our side. History has taught us 
that we are our own constitution. The Bill of Rights is us.

Pip!Squeak




From meboriqua at aol.com  Tue Aug  5 21:07:42 2003
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 21:07:42 -0000
Subject: Fifty Points to Jennifers Day
In-Reply-To: <bgogfe+nr7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgp6au+bdr8@eGroups.com>

Joywitch M. Curmudgeon in a decidedly uncurmudgeonly mood wrote:

> Given the content of several recent threads, I declare today, August  
5th, to be Fifty Points to Jennifers Day.  Everyone named Jennifer,  
your house gets fifty points, just because I, Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, 
based on the authority vested in me by no one in particular and 
certainly not the admin team, just feel like all the Jennifers in this 
world deserve some points today.>

Awwwwwwww - that makes me feel very special.  I just want you to know 
that to me, every day is Joywitch M. Curmudgeon Day.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who usually only allows Mom and Dad to call 
her Jennifer but might make an allowance for Joywitch... Nah 
**************************************************************




From drusillamalfoy at gmx.net  Tue Aug  5 21:13:37 2003
From: drusillamalfoy at gmx.net (drumalfoy)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 21:13:37 -0000
Subject: Bookburnings of Harry Potter
Message-ID: <bgp6m1+4036@eGroups.com>

I hope this forum is the right place to post my question and I 
apologize if this posting is inapropriate, but I have been 
confronted with articles about Harry Potter book burnings. 
 
I live in Germany where I teach at a catholic grammar school, where 
Harry Potter is read in school and the films are shown with the 
consent of both the friars, who maintain the school and the 
teachers and the head-mistress. They all seem to enjoy Harry Potter 
as well.
 
I am now absolutely astonished to see what seems to be happening in 
the U.S.: 

I read that pastors burn the Harry Potter books, preach against them 
because they say that those books glorify witchcraft and therefore 
leads poor innocent children right into the arms of Satan and into 
the jaws of Hell. I also read that there are others who take a more 
positive view of the books and other books have been published 
guiding parents how to guide their children through Harry Potter and 
maintaining their Christian beliefs and values through it.
 
Now my question is: is this something you are confronted with, too? 
And to what extend? Or is this something the media pushes up and 
these things are only curiosities which do not usually happen?

I really am interested in views other countries take on Harry Potter. 
So, if you are a resident of the U.S. of A. I would really appreciate 
reading your experiences. If you are from any other country, I would 
be very much interested in reading how Harry Potter is dealt with in 
your country.

Thanks a lot.
Drusilla




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Aug  5 22:29:35 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 17:29:35 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Bookburnings of Harry Potter
References: <bgp6m1+4036@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002801c35ba1$0d29eea0$ac9ecdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

Drusilla wrote:

> Now my question is: is this something you are confronted with, too?
> And to what extend? Or is this something the media pushes up and
> these things are only curiosities which do not usually happen?

It does happen around the US, but it is generally not a very large crowd for
a HP book burning, and it really is as you say something the media overdoes.
I live in Louisiana, and someone in New Orleans tried to organize a book
burning on June 21st, but didn't get any interest.  Ha!  :)  I've get some
surprise when I say I love Harry Potter, particularly to people in church,
but I've never had any negative feelings about it.  The closest was when I
was writing something in a HP notepad and someone (a very, er, ditsy girl)
said, "Oh, shame on you."  I just looked at her and said "Have you read it?"
"No."  "Then don't knock it till you try it."  That shut her up.  I've won
several middle of the road sort of people over by throwing Christian
symbolisms in HP in their face until their mouths hang open.  I love the
response. :)

Now, back to book burnings.  There really are very few, and they are
drastically blown out of proportion by the media.  And most (not all, but
most) people are against them simply because a) there are worse things
available to the general public and b) people should be able to read what
they want, this is America after all. Which of course means people can also
burn what they want, unfortunately.

The Holocaust museum in Washington D.C. used pictures from a Harry Potter
book burning in New Mexico as part of a 10th anniversary exhibit for the
museum, equating it with the Nazi book burnings.

Richelle





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 23:26:24 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 23:26:24 -0000
Subject: HUMOR: You Might Live in Minnesota If...
Message-ID: <bgpef0+i3ue@eGroups.com>

Just to show you I do have a lighter side....
- - - - - - -

  
Jeff Foxworthy Moves North 

'You live in Minnesota if....'
  
If you consider it a sport to gather your food by drilling through l8
inches of ice and sitting there all day hoping that the food will swim
by, you might live in Minnesota.

If you're proud that your state makes the national news 96 nights each
year because International Falls is the coldest spot in the nation,
you might live in Minnesota.

If you have ever refused to buy something because it's "too spendy",
you might live in Minnesota.

If you think a basketball team consists of twelve white boys, you
might live in Minnesota.

If your local Dairy Queen is closed from November through March, you
might live in Minnesota.

If you instinctively walk like a penguin for five months out of the
year, you might live in Minnesota.

If someone in a store offers you assistance, and they don't work
there, you might live in Minnesota.

If your dad's suntan stops at a line curving around the middle of his
forehead, you might live in Minnesota.

If you have apologized to a telemarketer, you might live in Minnesota.

If you may not have actually eaten it, but you have heard of Lutefisk,
you might live in Minnesota.

You have worn shorts and a parka at the same time, you might live in
Minnesota.

If you have either a pet or a child named "Kirby", you might live in
Minnesota.

If your town has an equal number of bars and churches, you might live
in Minnesota.

If you have had a lengthy telephone conversation with someone who
dialed a wrong number, you might live in Minnesota.

If you know how to say Wayzata, Mahtomedi, Edina and Shakopee, you
might live in Minnesota.

If you grew up thinking rice was only for dessert, you might live in
Minnesota.

If you think that ketchup is a little too spicy, you might live in
Minnesota.

If every time you see moonlight on a lake, you think of a dancing
bear, and you sing gently, "From the land of sky-blue waters,...
Hamm's the beer refreshing", you might live in Minnesota.........

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Though you might like to know.

bboy_mn




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Aug  6 00:01:43 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 00:01:43 -0000
Subject: Value of guns
In-Reply-To: <bgl067+10agn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgpgh7+o52c@eGroups.com>

Naama wrote:

> But that means that the only reason why most people own 
> guns is because they know that a lot of other people have guns. So 
> they have to "protect their families." Nice, isn't it? An arms 
race  
> between each and every citizen. 

I could've sworn that the reason US citizens carry guns is for 
protection against the *British*, who, as is well known, would force 
them to drink tea if they did not maintain eternal armed vigilance.

The fact that the British, by and large, do not own or carry guns 
shows just what a corrupt and effete race we are, and a moral danger 
to the rest of the world.

David




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Aug  6 00:07:53 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 01:07:53 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Value of guns
References: <bgpgh7+o52c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F3046D9.000003.30755@monica>

David
The fact that the British, by and large, do not own or carry guns 
shows just what a corrupt and effete race we are, and a moral danger 
to the rest of the world.
 
Me -

Humph - it's these damn colonials that are the problem. We introduce them to
the wonders of British civilization and they rebel over stupid little
details like wanting the vote. Not to mention perfectly good shipments of
tea.

K
 



From vicky07035 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 00:19:37 2003
From: vicky07035 at yahoo.com (vicky07035)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 00:19:37 -0000
Subject: Bookburnings of Harry Potter
In-Reply-To: <bgp6m1+4036@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgphip+anb1@eGroups.com>

>From Vicky,
Friends of mine who are Potter fans. ( We have a book club at work 
and we are all reading OoP) Were talking about this topic and one of 
the girls pointed out her Minster reads the books and finds them 
wonderful and fun for all ages. He told her "It's nice to find a good 
book which tells a classic tale of good vs evil. Also how this young 
faces danger with ablity to over come it". If people are going to 
play this game of "Magic is the devils work" Then I think you should 
really read the book and not just the cover.  
 - In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "drumalfoy" 

<drusillamalfoy at g...> wrote:
> I hope this forum is the right place to post my question and I 
> apologize if this posting is inapropriate, but I have been 
> confronted with articles about Harry Potter book burnings. 
>  
> I live in Germany where I teach at a catholic grammar school, where 
> Harry Potter is read in school and the films are shown with the 
> consent of both the friars, who maintain the school and the 
> teachers and the head-mistress. They all seem to enjoy Harry Potter 
> as well.
>  
> I am now absolutely astonished to see what seems to be happening in 
> the U.S.: 
> 
> I read that pastors burn the Harry Potter books, preach against 
them 
> because they say that those books glorify witchcraft and therefore 
> leads poor innocent children right into the arms of Satan and into 
> the jaws of Hell. I also read that there are others who take a more 
> positive view of the books and other books have been published 
> guiding parents how to guide their children through Harry Potter 
and 
> maintaining their Christian beliefs and values through it.
>  
> Now my question is: is this something you are confronted with, too? 
> And to what extend? Or is this something the media pushes up and 
> these things are only curiosities which do not usually happen?
> 
> I really am interested in views other countries take on Harry 
Potter. 
> So, if you are a resident of the U.S. of A. I would really 
appreciate 
> reading your experiences. If you are from any other country, I 
would 
> be very much interested in reading how Harry Potter is dealt with 
in 
> your country.
> 
> Thanks a lot.
> Drusilla




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 00:32:21 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 00:32:21 -0000
Subject: Rights & Citizens (Carolina, Kathryn, bluesqueak)
Message-ID: <bgpial+iam1@eGroups.com>

Carolina said-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/17314

Kathryn said-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/17316

Bluesqueak said-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/17329


bboy_mn:

Excellent posts, all of you. I can only conclude that we are much more
in sync with each other's thoughts and feelings, than earlier post
might indicate.

RE: USA vs UK-

There is one big difference between the US and UK as related to this
recent series of posts. In it's history, UK has know more than it's
share of conflict and hard times. The US, on the otherhand, has had
things way too good for it's own good.

UK knows from experience that it must cling to what is good with every
fiber of it's being and every last drop of it's blood. It's amazing
how hard times will make you value and appreciate the good times so
much more. 

The US, on the other hand, has had very little internal conflict in it
history; revolutionary war, civil war, and the great depression of the
1930's. There is one small problem with that. The citizens sometimes
become more interested in preserving the 'good' they perceive in their
daily lives; good job, good house, good schools, etc, and they become
willing to sacrifice the greater good in an effort to preserve the
security of their personal lives. These are the people who will so
willingly trade freedom, for what they would eventually discover is a
false sense of security.

This same patter repeats itself in all countries where an incidious
evil creeps slowly in, erroding freedom with the popular support of
the people, all for a sense of security that, much to their amazement,
only deteriorates. 

Of course, like all wise but evil governments, they will quickly blame
this deterioration on an absurdly false but common enemy; the jews,
the Bolsheviks, the Communists, the Molsems, the decadent rich, the
lazy good for nothing poor, wellfair mothers, blacks, Asians, the good
old USA ...the list goes on and on. The point is no evil goverment
worth it's salt can function unless they come up with a good common
enemy to distract the citizens and help them forget that the evil
government is the real enemy.

We have a free press in the US, but that free press, in the interest
of preserving their own 'seucrity', fall into a pattern of doing
nothing but repeating the press releases that the government hands
out. When challenged on this issue, they say that they can't afford to
make waves because if the get the administration mad at them, they
will be banned and therefore lose access. 

Sadly, what they don't realize is that if they challenge the issue,
they could hardly be banned, because the press has a Constitutional
right to scrutinize the government. But it's so much easier to not
issue the challange and to stay safe and secure.

UK has 2,000 years of history, that's plenty of time for many many
challenges to the security of the people to occur. The US has 200
years of history, and we have not had to face those challenges yet. 

The biggest problem is, if the US citizens don't maintain constant
vigilance against the enemy within, and cling with every fiber of
their being and every drop of their blood to the freedoms at the
foundation of our country, I could very easily see this country
becoming corrupted. And when the largest standing army and larest
nuclear force in the world becomes corrupted, it's hardly what the
world could call an 'internal' problem.

CONSTANT VIGILANCE.

I defend the Bill of Rights to my death, even against my own
government, because the minute we let the government start chipping
away at our rights, we take the first step on the road to perdition.

Wonderful talking to you all and hearing your opinions.

Peace out.

Steve/bboy_mn







From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Aug  6 00:41:46 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 01:41:46 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Rights & Citizens (Carolina, Kathryn, bluesqueak)
References: <bgpial+iam1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F304ECA.000001.99259@monica>

Steve/bboy_mn
 
I defend the Bill of Rights to my death, even against my own
government, because the minute we let the government start chipping
away at our rights, we take the first step on the road to perdition.
 
Me -

then you're a little late getting round to acting aren't you? The US
government seems to have spent the last few year eroding the rights of
individual citizens in the name of security. And if that wasn't enough then
American citizens should look at the way their government has acted to other
countries (and don't think I'm trying to set myself up on the moral high
ground here because pretty much unless you start actually nuking other
countries you've got a heck of a way to go to catch up with most European
countries, but like you say America hasn't been around that long). If a
country doesn't resect the rights of other countries, how can you possibly
expect it to continue to resopect those of its own citizens?

K



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Aug  6 01:24:34 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 01:24:34 -0000
Subject: GUHHH - book burning
In-Reply-To: <bgl34k+661s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgplci+ncsj@eGroups.com>

Steve wrote:

> What they seem to forget, and why I can't give any credibility to
> these people, is that to burn the books, they had to buy the books,
> and if they truly believe the book promote witchcraft then their
> purchases supported witchcraft which they claim they are against. 
And
> by promoting their 'book burning' they are in essence promoting the
> book itself (free advertising), rather than suppressing it. Please,
> help me find the logic in that.
> 
> It is clear that these things are never about books, they are about
> publicity and notoriety. These events are about people who like to 
see
> their name in the paper. That and a touch of mob mentality.

OK, I obviously can't speak for the church in question, but this is 
how I think it works.

Book-burning is essentially symbolic.  It is not, AFAIK, intended to 
prevent anyone reading the books.  At one level, it's about telling 
the world 'we feel this strongly about this'.

However, I suspect, the main intent is spiritual.  The idea is that 
events in the world, particularly crucial spiritual events such as 
conversions, are influenced by spiritual beings who exist 
independently of humanity - that is, angels and demons.  Demons hold 
people in their grip through blindness, desire, and so forth, and 
this grip must be loosened before the church can make significant 
progress.

This is achieved by symbolic acts and declarations that apply the 
victory that Christ has already won on the cross to the demons that 
are influential in a particular situation.  I suspect burning Harry 
Potter books is seen as one of these acts.

Although the mechanisms by which this is supposed to happen are 
obscure (to say the least!), I think it is the general understanding 
of churches that practise this sort of thing that the acts are 
supposed to be Christocentric - that is, refer back in some way to 
Jesus, his sacrifice, humility, etc (think of the Eucharist as an 
example).  Failing that, a direct attack on an obvious abuse (think 
of Jesus and the Temple courts - this was essentially symbolic, as 
Jesus' action would not have resulted in a permanent reform).  That 
would imply that, even by the standards of this type of thinking, 
churches that burn the Harry Potter books are missing the mark.

David




From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 03:59:36 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 03:59:36 -0000
Subject: HUMOR: You Might Live in Minnesota If...
In-Reply-To: <bgpef0+i3ue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgpuf8+3ere@eGroups.com>

Aina hey, Steve. These look familiar. I've probably seen most of them 
before in "You might live in Wisconsin if..." except that down here, 
instead of "Wayzata, Mahtomedi, Edina and Shakopee", we know how to 
say Mendota, Monona, Waubesa and Kegonsa (the four lakes around 
Madison), as well as Oconomowoc, Butte des Morts, and Chequamegon :-)

Anne U
(whose favorite Peter & Lou Berryman song is "Oh Yah Hey, Up in 
Wisonsin", and who realizes that only to a Minnesotan would Wisconsin 
be "down there")







From kkersey at swbell.net  Wed Aug  6 04:19:41 2003
From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 04:19:41 -0000
Subject: Bookburnings of Harry Potter
In-Reply-To: <bgp6m1+4036@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgpvkt+pucc@eGroups.com>

I purchased my copy of OoP through our church's bookstore. :-) 

Of course one of the reasons our church put in the order was to be a
bit of a counterpoint to some of the anti-Potter preaching. Another
reason was so that we could have a really great OoP release party at
the civilized hour of 8am (Saturday morning).

The book burnings and some of the more outrageous anti-Potter
preaching get publicity, but more insidious is the ongoing campaigns -
widespread and often successful - by some groups to remove books from
public and school libraries. The American Library Association (ALA)
has excellent information on their web site - look for the materials
for Banned Book Week on their site. Rowling's books have topped out
the lists of challenged and banned books for several years, IIRC.

http://www.ala.org

I have this vague idea in my head about *why* some people may feel so
threatened by books (or ideas in books) that are not consistent with
their own religious views or political opinions; it has to do with the
perceived power of the written word, something that is treated
differently in more literal vs. more liberal religious traditions. 

It must be very scary to live in a world where you fear being
corrupted by what you read. OK, I admit that I feel just a tiny bit of
trepidation when turning to the Op Ed page of the Wall Street Journal.
(A wink in Sean's general direction here ;-)

And I do feel *some* sympathy. Last night I was reading to my three
year old from an anthology of 20th Century Children's lit, and I
picked "Bedtime for Frances". I'd read "A Birthday for Frances" (or
whatever the title was) before and thought it was delightful. We were
deep into the story when I ran across a referrence to spanking. I
tried to read over it with "you'll get in trouble" instead of "you'll
get a spanking" but it turns out the whole damn plot turns on that
threat. (Frances hears a moth banging against a window and that
reminds her of the threat of being spanked so she stays in bed instead
of getting up and bugging her parents, and so she finally goes to
sleep.) I really don't want to start a discussion about physical
punishment, but our family does not do it and the last thing I wanted
at bedtime was to explain to my child about spanking. My first
reaction was - how dare they put that story in this book! But now I am
thinking that it is not such a bad thing, as long as it doesn't become
a favorite. When my child can read the story as written, I'll be happy
to discuss spanking with him. Until then, he's going to hear my
version, never mind the plot holes. ;-)

Anyway, I've not had any encounters myself with folks who have let me
know that they think reading HP will corrupt them, but my mom did miss
out on a tutoring job when she asked the student, who was about 11 or
12, if he had read Harry Potter. "*We* Don't Read Books Like *That*."
was the answer, supplied by the parent. Poor Kid.

Karen, who notes that this week's sermon topic at her church is Buffy
the Vampire Slayer, spriritual lessons thereof. Hmmm. 


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "drumalfoy"
<drusillamalfoy at g...> wrote:
> I hope this forum is the right place to post my question and I 
> apologize if this posting is inapropriate, but I have been 
> confronted with articles about Harry Potter book burnings. 
> <snip snip>
>  
> Now my question is: is this something you are confronted with, too? 
> And to what extend? Or is this something the media pushes up and 
> these things are only curiosities which do not usually happen?
> 




From shufan90 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 04:28:33 2003
From: shufan90 at yahoo.com (shufan)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fifty Points to Jennifers Day
In-Reply-To: <bgogfe+nr7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030806042833.9223.qmail@web80303.mail.yahoo.com>

I would like to thank you for that boost, as I am having a very challenging week!
 
Jennifer

joywitch_m_curmudgeon <joym999 at aol.com> wrote:
Given the content of several recent threads, I declare today, August 
5th, to be Fifty Points to Jennifers Day.  Everyone named Jennifer, 
your house gets fifty points, just because I, Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, 
based on the authority vested in me by no one in particular and 
certainly not the admin team, just feel like all the Jennifers in 
this world deserve some points today.

--JMC


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From boggles at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  6 04:53:51 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:53:51 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Guns & the Bill of Rights
In-Reply-To: <bgm7ds+8hkm@eGroups.com>
References: <bgm7ds+8hkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f00bb5639b19931@[192.168.1.100]>

At 6:07 PM +0000 8/4/03, Steve wrote:
>
>  ...Afghanistan. No, they had
>none of these rights.

Er, actually, Afghanistan had (at least in the early '90s) a guns per 
capita ratio second only to the US itself.  Their right to keep and 
bear arms - at least for males - may not have been constitutionally 
protected, but neither was it infringed.  That's one of the reasons 
it was considered a good place to train jihad fighters.

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From boggles at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  6 04:57:13 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:57:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] locking doors
In-Reply-To: <bgm35t+r28j@eGroups.com>
References: <bgm35t+r28j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f01bb563ab0d4f6@[192.168.1.100]>

At 4:55 PM +0000 8/4/03, marl2580 wrote:
>Do people in America
>actually lock their doors when they're still in their house?

I certainly do.  After all, what's in the house when I'm there is far 
more worth protecting than what's there when no one's home.

Having said that, my parents live in a rural area, and they lock the 
front and side doors when they're home, but the back door is only 
locked at night or when they're out.  Then again, they also have 
large dogs on the property.

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 05:08:10 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 05:08:10 -0000
Subject: HUMOR: You Might Live in Minnesota If...
In-Reply-To: <bgpef0+i3ue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgq2fq+4hhe@eGroups.com>

What fun!

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> Just to show you I do have a lighter side....
> - - - - - - -
 
> If you may not have actually eaten it, but you have heard of 
Lutefisk,
> you might live in Minnesota.

LOTS of us have heard of Lutefisk!  Don't you remember having a big 
thread about it here a few months back?

 
> If your town has an equal number of bars and churches, you might 
live
> in Minnesota.

Sounds like much of SW Pennsylvania...

 
> If you know how to say Wayzata, Mahtomedi, Edina and Shakopee, you
> might live in Minnesota.

Nope.  But I can say Monongahela, North Versailles, and Carnegie 
(Hint to you all in New York & Jersey: it's CarNEGie, not CARnegie!)

> 
> If you grew up thinking rice was only for dessert, you might live 
in
> Minnesota.

Don't be silly.  Rice is for weddings.  Unless they make you use 
birdseed or bubbles.


> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> 
> Though you might like to know.
> 
> bboy_mn

You know what I think?  If Molly Weasley was from the USA, she'd 
speak like a Minnesotan.

Annemehr
I don't care what anybody says, I still love Mrs. Weasley...




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 06:11:20 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 06:11:20 -0000
Subject: locking doors
In-Reply-To: <bgm35t+r28j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgq668+rsaf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "marl2580" <marley2580 at b...> 
wrote:
> As an aside comment to the whole Moor debate (a topic about 
> which I am very opinionated, living as I do within an hour's drive 
> from Dunblane, but don't wish to inflame the topic even more) I 
> don't lock my doors very often. I found it really funny how Moor 
> was really surprised that no one locked their doors, yet all the 
> houses he tried were occupied at the time. I know of no one who 
> locks their door when they are actually in their house (except 
> perhaps last thing at night) and I live in a city. The only time I 
ever 
> lock my doors is last thing at night and when I go out for any 
> length of time. I don't even have a yale lock so anyone could just 
> walk in, but the point is that they don't. Do people in America 
> actually lock their doors when they're still in their house?
> 
> Marley

Hi all, this is my first post to the OT list:

I live in a town of less than 30,000 people in Connecticut.  I grew 
up here (Hopefully, I will be getting out soon but that's another 
story).  It's an incredibly safe place to live.  We don't have much 
in the way of crime.  Our police news consists mainly of traffic 
violations and underage drinking.  There has been one murder here in 
my lifetime and it was a family dispute.  
However, we do have a couple prisons across from an elementary school 
(that just cracks me up--I'm an idiot, I know).  
I lock the doors of my apartment and my car at all times, home or not 
home.  Most people here do the same thing.  They gotta keep their 
pretty stuff safe.  
I know of one person only who does NOT lock his doors.  And he NEVER 
locks them.  That's my uncle.  I don't even think he or anyone else 
in his family could locate a house key if you asked him to.  I know 
he's never given me keys when I dog sit.  It proved to be a problem 
one day when I locked myself out of the house with the dog barking 
madly inside.  
Anyway, my uncle is fearless.  He was a police officer in town for 
over 20 years.  He knows there's nothing that he needs to lock his 
house up for.  My uncle is very rare, though.  Even his wife locks 
herself in at night when she's alone.

Okay I wrote way too much, 
KathyK (wishing she was fearless)




From kkersey at swbell.net  Wed Aug  6 07:32:36 2003
From: kkersey at swbell.net (Karen Cleary)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 02:32:36 -0500
Subject: Bowling for statistics
Message-ID: <3F30AF14.1030408@swbell.net>

No rants about guns here, just a bit of info about a number:

By way of doing a google search on the term "11,127" and some associated 
keywords, such as firearms, I've located what I think may be the source 
of source of Michael Moore's disputed statistic:

"In 1999, a total of 28,874 firearm deaths occurred, according to such 
reports. Of this total, 11,127 were homicides or due to legal 
intervention; 16,599 were suicides; 824 were unintentional (accidental) 
shootings; and 324 were of unknown cause."

Why "legal intervention" deaths are included with homicides I can only 
speculate - perhaps the category could be loosely described as 
intentional shootings of another person as opposed to accidental 
shootings or intentional suicides. In any case, the report does not 
break down those numbers in further discussion. It does cite the 
National Center for Health Statistics publication  _Vital Statistics_ as 
the primary source for the data.

This brief  was written by William Kroase, Domestic Social Policy 
division of the Congressional Research Service. You know, those bleeding 
heart bambi-hugging pinko liberals bent on overthrowing the Constitution 
and confiscating all your hunting rifles. Uh, nope. Actually the CRS is 
a government agency, part of the Library of Congress, responsible for 
researching and briefing members of congress on legislative issues. 
Their web site goes on and on about their long history of providing 
objective, non-partisan, accurate, reliable information, etc. etc.: 
 http://www.loc.gov/crsinfo/whatscrs.html

The briefs are not made publicly available by the CRS but you can 
purchase them, or, better yet, find them posted on various elected 
representatives' web sites. I found the one I quoted above, order code 
IB10071 "Issue Brief for Congress: Gun Control Legislation for the 107th 
Congress", posted here:
 http://shelby.senate.gov/legislation/leg_pdf/gun1.pdf

Yeah, I know that that version of the report was updated after Michael 
Moore's movie was shown at Cannes, but the part I quoted was surely 
available in earlier versions of that report or in that report's 
predecessor. Lumping "legal interventions" together with homicides 
appears to be boilerplate from version to version. In any version, it is 
an eminently reputable source, and I wouldn't fault anyone for using its 
figures. Lies and damn lies not withstanding.

I'll confess that I still haven't seen the movie myself. But I love just 
about everything Michael Moore has done that I have seen, and I'd take 
his word, or come to think of it, just about anyone's, over that of John 
Fund (the WSJ editorialist Sean cited) any day of the week. OK, I think 
I'll leave it at that.

Oh wait, one more thing, Michael Moore has a web site:
http://michaelmoore.com

Karen




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Wed Aug  6 08:24:25 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:24:25 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Bowling for statistics
In-Reply-To: <3F30AF14.1030408@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <3F3147D9.14683.1CDFF5@localhost>

On 6 Aug 2003 at 2:32, Karen Cleary wrote:

> By way of doing a google search on the term "11,127" and some associated 
> keywords, such as firearms, I've located what I think may be the source 
> of source of Michael Moore's disputed statistic:
> Yeah, I know that that version of the report was updated after Michael 
> Moore's movie was shown at Cannes, but the part I quoted was surely 
> available in earlier versions of that report or in that report's 
> predecessor. Lumping "legal interventions" together with homicides 
> appears to be boilerplate from version to version. In any version, it is 
> an eminently reputable source, and I wouldn't fault anyone for using its 
> figures. Lies and damn lies not withstanding.

I'm going to see if I can check this out - my office should have 
available previous versions of the report, so I'll see if it appears in 
those. If it does, I'd be prepared to forgive Michael Moore on that 
point (although I would wonder why he's failed to answer continual 
requests asking him to cite the source - note that Vital Statistics is 
the source that somebody mentioned they thought Michael Moore might have 
used because the numbers matched and that was raised months ago) - but 
it would still leave his mistakes about German figures, and Australian 
figures. And it would still leave his editing together of unrelated 
speeches which leaves people with a false impression of what was really 
said. That's the thing I consider to the be the most disturbing thing in 
the film - it's just it's hard to say for certain if that was 
deliberately intended to mislead. Most people seeing the film come away 
with the impression they saw extracts from a particular speech - but it 
doesn't actually *say* they do.

> I'll confess that I still haven't seen the movie myself. But I love just 
> about everything Michael Moore has done that I have seen, and I'd take 
> his word, or come to think of it, just about anyone's, over that of John 
> Fund (the WSJ editorialist Sean cited) any day of the week. OK, I think 
> I'll leave it at that.

You should see it - if you like Moore's work, you will like this film. 
It's a nice piece of work. I just don't personally think it's worthy of 
an Oscar as a documentary.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 13:24:49 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 13:24:49 -0000
Subject: Latin question
Message-ID: <bgqvj1+f87l@eGroups.com>

I know PS has been translated into Latin with the title of "Harrius 
Potter et Philosophi Lapis". I would like to know how the translation 
of the titles of the other four books would be like. Anyone here who 
has studied Latin and could help me?


Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br




From trisha.masen at verizon.net  Wed Aug  6 13:28:53 2003
From: trisha.masen at verizon.net (Trisha Masen)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 9:28:53 -0400
Subject: HUMOR: You Might Live in Minnesota If...
Message-ID: <20030806132853.DHFX18222.out002.verizon.net@localhost>

> From: "annemehr" <annemehr at yahoo.com>
> 
> What fun!
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> > Just to show you I do have a lighter side....
> > - - - - - - -
> > If you may not have actually eaten it, but you have
> > heard of Lutefisk, you might live in Minnesota.
> 
> LOTS of us have heard of Lutefisk!  Don't you remember
> having a big thread about it here a few months back?

To which I (Trisha) add:
Anyone who has ever listened to Garrison Keillor has heard of Lutefisk :)
 
> > If your town has an equal number of bars and churches,
> > you might live in Minnesota.
> 
> Sounds like much of SW Pennsylvania...

And parts of SE PA.  Within a ten-block radius of my house in Philly, there are probably at least ten churches of some sort.  I think there are about 15 bars.
 
> > If you know how to say Wayzata, Mahtomedi, Edina and
> > Shakopee, you might live in Minnesota.
> 
> Nope.  But I can say Monongahela, North Versailles, and
> Carnegie (Hint to you all in New York & Jersey: it's CarNEGie,
> not CARnegie!)

I can say Schuylkill (SKOO-kill).
 
Thanks for the morning funnies :)

~Trisha




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Aug  6 15:52:54 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:52:54 -0500
Subject: Question for filkers
Message-ID: <00f301c35c32$d597a030$309fcdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

Has anyone done a Filk of the Matchbox 20 song "Unwell?"  I keep hearing it on the radio and it is screaming out for an OOP Filk, but I'm not creative enough to do one myself!  Has anyone done one for that song?  If not, somebody imaginative get on it, quick! :)

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Wed Aug  6 18:39:31 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:39:31 -0000
Subject: Fishing for sympathy...
In-Reply-To: <bgnb4e+4h1q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgri13+46d0@eGroups.com>

Jen, I hope your week is improving.  My own mother died almost 11 
years ago, so I can sympathize with your feelings there.  May you 
find peace of mind in your happy memories of her.  
I also hope that your cat is doing alright despite the 
diagnosis...cats are tough little critters!

Tracy 




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 20:49:02 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 20:49:02 -0000
Subject: Latin question
In-Reply-To: <bgqvj1+f87l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgrpju+hk4r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Morgan D." 
<morgan_d_yyh at y...> wrote:
> I know PS has been translated into Latin with the title 
of "Harrius 
> Potter et Philosophi Lapis". I would like to know how the 
translation 
> of the titles of the other four books would be like. Anyone here 
who 
> has studied Latin and could help me?
> 
> 
> Morgan D.
> Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

"Harrius Potter et Cellus Arcanus"-  Harry Potter and the Chamber of 
Secrets"

"Harrius Potter et Calix Incendium" -  Harry Potter and the Goblet 
of Fire


-Haggridd




From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 23:25:12 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 23:25:12 -0000
Subject: HUMOR: You Might Live in Minnesota If...
In-Reply-To: <20030806132853.DHFX18222.out002.verizon.net@localhost>
Message-ID: <bgs2oo+kn4e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Trisha Masen <> To which I 
(Trisha) add:
> Anyone who has ever listened to Garrison Keillor has heard of 
Lutefisk :)
> 
Garrison Keillor did a TV special a few years ago in which he visited 
an actual potluck dinner in the basement of a Lutheran church in MN. 
He asked people how they liked lutefisk and one young woman 
said, "Oh, when I was little I couldn't stand it. But now I can eat a 
whole tablespoonful."  (her actual words)


> 
> And parts of SE PA.  Within a ten-block radius of my house in 
Philly, there are probably at least ten churches of some sort.  I 
think there are about 15 bars.

Hyello!! My dad was born and raised in Philly (my maiden name is 
Reardon) and I have a couple of online friends there.


> I can say Schuylkill (SKOO-kill).
>

So can I. Because my dad's from Philly :-)

Anne U
(who believes Gail Bohacek of Dobby Road fame is also from Philly)




From heidit at netbox.com  Thu Aug  7 06:13:39 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:13:39 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HUMOR: You Might Live in Minnesota If...
In-Reply-To: <bgs2oo+kn4e@eGroups.com>
References: <bgs2oo+kn4e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1060236823.25FD2C2C@r5.dngr.org>


On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 7:25PM -0500, Anne wrote:
> Hyello!! My dad was born and raised in Philly (my maiden name is
> Reardon) and I have a couple of online friends there.
>
>>  I can say Schuylkill (SKOO-kill).
>>
>
> So can I. Because my dad's from Philly :-)

Anyone who is even vaguely willing to give Harry  Potter fanfic a try 
should read Lori's Paradigm of Uncertainty 
(http;//www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Lori) because, as a former 
Philadelphian? She really incorporates some of the 'magic' in 
Philadelphia - back in colonial times, many of the city leaders, 
including Ben Franklin, were involved in alchemy-derived projects 
including philosopher's stone things, and the history of the city is 
intertwined with seers and magic-seekers, like Madame Vlablatsky of 
Sansom Street.

Heidi, philly resident from 88-92 (penn, specifically)



From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Fri Aug  8 05:46:17 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 15:46:17 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fishing for sympathy...
References: <bgnb4e+4h1q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000001c35d9f$9bf4f0d0$69984cca@Monteith>



> Hey all.  August 4th is going down in history as Jen's Least Favorite
> Day of the Year, and I was just hoping I could have some good thoughts
> sent my way.

Sorry for your loss Jen. I lost my Mum about 17 years ago and its still
difficult at times. Being a cat lover who's ambition in life is to become
"that crazy old lady down the street - the one with all the cats", I also
know how much having a Furbaby in distress hurts. You have all the positive
energy I can muster coming your way.

Hugs
Nox




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  7 12:27:12 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 08:27:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Cornflower!
Message-ID: <20030807122712.60084.qmail@web41113.mail.yahoo.com>

*scurries into the room and hastily hangs streamers
and blows up balloons*

Yes, I know I missed a birthday. I do have the excuse,
poor one that it is, of not being able to access the
database.

Yesterday's birthday honouree was Cornflower O'Shea.
Belated birthday owls can be sent care of this list or
directly to: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com

I hope you day was magical and brought everything you
wished for.

Happy Birthday, Cornflower!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From flo.r at gmx.ch  Thu Aug  7 12:35:07 2003
From: flo.r at gmx.ch (reichenflorian)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 12:35:07 -0000
Subject: I need your help...!
Message-ID: <bgth1r+suuj@eGroups.com>

Hi everybody

Im looking for people all over the world, who are using English as 
their standard and everyday spoken language and who are willing to 
help me. I'm going to do a research about the Harry Potter books. 
The aim of this research is to find out, why an original childrens 
book like the Harry Potter books attract so many adult readers.

I'm a 18 years old boy from Switzerland and have chosen this task 
for my diploma work.
I've written 4 question papers and now I'm looking for adult readers 
(older than 18 years), who have read the Book(s) and who would like 
to help me with my work by filling in these question papers. Please 
send a mail to flo.r at gmx.ch and I will send the questions to you! It 
would be very nice if you could spend 15-20 minutes to answer these 
questions. The more answers I get, the better and deeper the 
research will be!

If you would like to know more about the results of the research, 
just write to me!

Thank you in advance

Florian Reichen





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Thu Aug  7 14:45:02 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 14:45:02 -0000
Subject: Value of guns
In-Reply-To: <bgpgh7+o52c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgtole+3s0u@eGroups.com>

David:

> I could've sworn that the reason US citizens carry guns is for 
> protection against the *British*, who, as is well known, would 
>force them to drink tea if they did not maintain eternal armed 
>vigilance.

Nah, that's just a fairy tale.  

The *real* reason US citizens pack heat is so that, when they 
finally figure out that Republicans aren't looking out for the 
little guy, they can blow their own brains out!  :-D 


 
> The fact that the British, by and large, do not own or carry guns 
> shows just what a corrupt and effete race we are, and a moral 
>danger to the rest of the world.

You can say that again!

I mean, just *look* at the way the Brits charged right into the war 
in Iraq!  ;-)

Cindy -- who doesn't fire anything more dangerous than spitballs




From gandharvika at hotmail.com  Thu Aug  7 15:59:45 2003
From: gandharvika at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 15:59:45 +0000
Subject: You Might Live in Michigan If...(WAS You Might Live In Minnesota If...)
Message-ID: <BAY9-F52dNFex1tqrdw0002205b@hotmail.com>

>Anne U Wrote:

>(who believes Gail Bohacek of Dobby Road fame is also from Philly)

Yes...Philly by way of Mo-Town  :)>


You Might Live In Michigan.....

...If you define Summer as three months of bad sledding.

...If your definition of a small town is one that doesn't have a lake.

...If your family breaks into violence during the UM-MSU game (any sport!).

...If snow tires come standard on all your cars.

...If at least 50% of your relatives work for the auto industry.

...If you have ever gotten frostbitten and sunburned in the same week.

...If you can identify an Ohio accent.

...If owning a Japanese car was a hanging offense in your home town.

...If you think Alkaline batteries were named after a Tiger outfielder.

...If you point at the palm of your right hand when telling people where you 
grew up.

...If someone aks you if you've been to Europe and you answer, "No, but I've 
been to Ann Arbor".

...If "Down South" to you means Toledo.

...If you have any idea who Bob Ufer was.

...If octopus and hockey go together as naturally as hot dogs and baseball.

...If traveling coast to coast means going from Port Huron to Muskegon.

...If you think "going up north" would be a great vacation....in January.

...If you refer to your relatives in southern Michigan as "trolls" or 
"lopers".

...If the "Big Three" can mean either Ford, Chrysler and GM or Domino's, 
Little Ceasar's and Hungry Howie's.

...If a Big Mac is something you can drive across.

...If you have no problem spelling Mackinac Island.

...If you have as many Canadian coins in your pockets as American ones.

...If your kid's baseball and softball games have ever been snowed out.

...If you know that a place called "Kalamazoo" really exists.

...If you bake with "soda" and drink "pop".

...If you know what a pastie is.

...If you drive 70 mph on the highway and pass on the right.

...If you don't have a coughing fit from one sip of Vernor's.

...If you know how to play Euchre.

-Gail B.

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail




From madelynx at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  7 17:18:42 2003
From: madelynx at yahoo.com (Madelyne X)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 17:18:42 -0000
Subject: You are cordially invited to join a Snape/OFC sanctuary
Message-ID: <bgu1li+8thb@eGroups.com>

To all Snape Fans here:

Veresna's Veneries Too is extending a warm invitation to any of you 
who would like to join our month old yahoo group. Here is a brief 
summary of what we are about:

Veresna's Veneries was founded as a place for the writing of Veresna 
Ussep, the pen name of an author whose favorite character just 
happens to be Severus Snape (anagrams, anyone?) Most of the Harry 
Potter fanfiction to be found here revolves around this dark and 
dangerous Potions Master of Hogwarts. Not all of it is erotica, 
but the stories that fall within this genre have definitely earned 
their NC-17 rating. Some of the stories are based upon other 
memorable characters that the infinitely talented Mr. Alan Rickman 
has brought to life. Who knows, some original fiction may someday 
be stored here as well.

The women who have since joined this group are a very talented 
circle of authors and artists - primarily for the tending, care and 
respect of the Snape/OFC (Other Female Char) genre (yes, 
Snape/Hermione shippers are welcome too.) We often have very 
creative Round Robin stories going on throughout the week and lately 
they have been centered around a volunteering member of the group to 
be Snape's current fem fatale. The discussions are interesting and 
stimulating - always a bit cheeky. We strive to be an open minded 
but polite bunch so therefore have virtually no need of heavy 
babysitting type moderation. There are currently two chats held on 
Wednesday and Saturday. Veresna's Veneries Too has currently a 
comfy number of 124 members and is a *very* active yahoo group so if 
you'd like to jump in and mingle, compare notes with with other 
Snape/OFC authors, post art work or just lurk, this is the place for 
you!

Do drop by for a cup of tea - we'd love to have you. :)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Veresnas_Veneries_Too/

~M
The Keeper of His Buttons and Boots




From sandyluppino at comcast.net  Thu Aug  7 18:21:03 2003
From: sandyluppino at comcast.net (sjlupin)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 18:21:03 -0000
Subject: Popular and Unpopular Names
In-Reply-To: <bg96fe+o4qb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgu5af+i9o3@eGroups.com>

> 
> It seems kind of Jewish-American-Princessy to me.*  And kind of 
cute 
> and girly-girlish.  I do not want to be any of those things.  And 
> when I look at it in print I often think, "That's ME?," but maybe 
> everyone has that experience, the way a word will look unreal if 
you 
> write it over and over again.
>

Amy - It is funny how different people interpret names differently! I 
have always loved the name Amy and named my daughter Amy (actually it 
is Amelia, but we call her Amy). One of the reasons I always loved 
the name is that I knew some Amys growing up that were extremely 
nice, wholesome, athletic girls. All qualities I admired. I never 
thought of Amy as girly-girly or princessy! Funny, huh?!

sjlupin




From dyork at peralta.cc.ca.us  Thu Aug  7 17:57:13 2003
From: dyork at peralta.cc.ca.us (Dianna York)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 10:57:13 -0700
Subject: hi there
Message-ID: <001e01c35d0d$54f9c940$25050a0a@PCCD0002>

i think harry potter is wonderful

dianna york

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From phoebesophia at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  7 18:34:14 2003
From: phoebesophia at yahoo.com (phoebesophia)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 18:34:14 -0000
Subject: clarification of british slang
Message-ID: <bgu636+mlor@eGroups.com>

what, please, is a jammy cow?




From pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net  Thu Aug  7 18:33:52 2003
From: pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:33:52 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] clarification of british slang
References: <bgu636+mlor@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <02f101c35d12$7716c000$535fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: phoebesophia 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 7:34 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] clarification of british slang


  what, please, is a jammy cow?

  A lucky female of the species !

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From h_potter_uk at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Aug  7 20:47:44 2003
From: h_potter_uk at yahoo.co.uk (Jenny)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 20:47:44 -0000
Subject: Fifty Points to Jennifers Day
In-Reply-To: <bgogfe+nr7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgudtg+6lbq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at a...> wrote:
> Given the content of several recent threads, I declare today, 
August 
> 5th, to be Fifty Points to Jennifers Day.  Everyone named Jennifer, 
> your house gets fifty points, just because I, Joywitch M. 
Curmudgeon, 
> based on the authority vested in me by no one in particular and 
> certainly not the admin team, just feel like all the Jennifers in 
> this world deserve some points today.
> 
> --JMC


Thank you very much, Joywitch!  And a hearty "Cheers!" to you :)

Yours in Gryffindor (which was another 50 pts. richer on Tuesday),
Jenny, who usually says "who, me?" when called Jennifer ;)




From sue at simiant.com  Thu Aug  7 22:01:59 2003
From: sue at simiant.com (sueeeyqbong)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 22:01:59 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter innuendo
Message-ID: <bgui8n+b8cq@eGroups.com>

Has anyone seen this? It's really funny.

http://www.clockwork-harlequin.net/harry_potter/smut.html




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 00:33:43 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 00:33:43 -0000
Subject: clarification of british slang
In-Reply-To: <bgu636+mlor@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgur57+v75c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "phoebesophia"
<phoebesophia at y...> wrote:
> what, please, is a jammy cow?

bboy_mn:

Don't have a clue, but I am curious...

Just when, where, and how did you come across the expression 'jammy cow'?

Sounds like a cow who wears 'jammies' (pajamas).

?? "Luck as a jammy cow."

?? "It was a good day until I came across that jammy cow."

?? "A jammy cow in the hand is worth two in the bush."

?? "Well, I'll be jammmy cowed, if it isn't the Pope."

?? "I wouldn't say she was a fox, but she was a right nice jammy cow."

?? "We had such a wild session of jammy cow last night that we
actually broke the bed."

Give us a clue ;).
bboy_mn






From neonsister at ameritech.net  Fri Aug  8 02:00:03 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 02:00:03 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter innuendo
In-Reply-To: <bgui8n+b8cq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgv073+q16t@eGroups.com>

My stomach hurts from laughing and my dog is looking at me like I'm 
crazy!  Thanks for the link...too funny!

Tracy 

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "sueeeyqbong" <sue at s...> 
wrote:
> Has anyone seen this? It's really funny.
> 
> http://www.clockwork-harlequin.net/harry_potter/smut.html




From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Aug  8 03:59:33 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 03:59:33 -0000
Subject: You Might Live in Michigan If...(WAS You Might Live In Minnesota If...)
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-F52dNFex1tqrdw0002205b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bgv775+9pmh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Gail Bohacek" 
<gandharvika at h...> wrote:
> 
> You Might Live In Michigan.....
> ...If you know that a place called "Kalamazoo" really exists.

I've *been* in Kalamazoo. Twice! Once my 'family' stopped there 
overnight at the home of a friend while driving from New York 
City to Circle Pines, and once my little mob of sf fans stopped 
there to visit a different friend while driving from New 
York City to Denver. Of course, I've never seen it in daylight ... 





From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Aug  8 04:03:30 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:03:30 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament
Message-ID: <bgv7ei+rhtb@eGroups.com>

In the news coverage of the Episcopalians voting for an out gay man 
to be a bishop, there were soundbites of people who disapproved 
saying that this is different than the ordination of women because 
homosexuality is explicitly forbidden by the Bible. That got me 
curious. I am not fluent in Bible and even less so in New Testament, 
but I've gotten the impression that there are people in this Y!group 
who are quite fluent in New Testament, so my question is, can you 
tell me what the New Testament says that is explicit about 
homosexuality?  




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 04:06:57 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:06:57 -0000
Subject: Book Burners of Doom
Message-ID: <bgv7l1+5khb@eGroups.com>

I'm sure many of you have read about the recent HP book burning in
Michigan, where the book burners claimed they were defending the world
against witchcraft. 

So people in the name of fairness I'm sure, tried to defend the book
burner as having symbolic importance, and as promoting their feelings
to the great public at large. Fair enough, one could genuinely assume
that they had noble motives for their actions.

THIS JUST IN- 

Librarians and clergy at other churches expressed mixed emotions after
learning that members of the Jesus Non-denominational Church burned
"Harry Potter" books AND copies of the Book of Mormon and non-King
James Version Bibles.

Other books, magazines, posters, compact discs and movies that members
believe do not promote God also went up in smoke Sunday, as more than
50 people gathered outside the church for the fiery display. Among the
incinerated items were Shania Twain's album "The Woman in Me" and the
Dan Aykroyd movie "Coneheads."

Church members who sporadically shouted "Hallelujah," "Thank you, God"
and "Burn, devil, burn" said the fire was divinely inspired.

...and more...

http://www.detnews.com/2003/religion/0308/07/d07d-238361.htm


The Book of Mormon!!! and Non-King James Versions of the Bible!!!...
...oh yeah, this is one very stable group of nut cases. Well, I leave
them to their beliefs as misguides as I feel they may be. 

I will admit that these people has some small degree of credibility
with me until I read this. Now....? Sorry can't speak to that issue in
polite company.

All references and links were found at-

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/

Suddenly feeling sad and with a strong sense of foreboding for the
human race.

bboy_mn









From senorcaco at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  8 04:08:36 2003
From: senorcaco at hotmail.com (enjoiturbulence)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:08:36 -0000
Subject: FF-help-off topic-
Message-ID: <bgv7o4+rna0@eGroups.com>

Hey all.  I've yet to actually post here, simply cause I'm an idiot 
and can't come up with any of the theories you cats can.  I don't 
even know if this is something proper to post, but I could use some 
help.  I'm one of those dorks (see a pattern of self-deprication?) 
who is into writing HP fanfiction.  I have a handful up at 
http://www.thedarkarts.org/authorLinks/Chris_D/ if anyone is 
interested.  

I am in the middle of a long piece of fiction called "By The Sword", 
and though I am getting little reaction, I am putting a lot into 
this, much more then necissary.  One of the things I want to do in 
life is write, and I see this as the perfect exercise it perfecting 
my craft.  I have chapter 10 written, but I need some help making 
sure it is in good condition to post.  I've not heard from my beta 
reader (editor) in a while, and I want to get this up as soon as I 
can.  If anyone could help me out, with grammer, organization, 
spelling, and just keeping to grounded, I would be forever indebted 
to them (ever read Choke by Chuck Palahniuk?  Kind of like that, but 
involving no monetary donations of any kind).  If you can spare some 
time to help me out, drop me a line.  Thanks ahead of time, and much 
peace and respect to all.  one love.  chris





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Fri Aug  8 04:47:24 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:47:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Question about New Testament
References: <bgv7ei+rhtb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006301c35d68$372a8020$789ccdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

Catlady wrote:

> who are quite fluent in New Testament, so my question is, can you
> tell me what the New Testament says that is explicit about
> homosexuality?

Here are a some that are generally used:

Romans 1:27   "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the
woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that
which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their
error which was meet."
<snip>
continues on to Romans 1:32 " Who knowing the judgment of God, that they
which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have
pleasure in them that do them."

Some scriptures it's not clear that they're referring to homosexuality until
the original language is traced and the word identified.  This is way beyond
my knowledge, though!

Some of those include:

I Corinthians 6:9-11   Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit
the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,  Nor
thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall
inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed,
but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus,
and by the Spirit of our God.

I Timothy 1:9-11 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man,
but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for
unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for
manslayers,  For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind,
for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other
thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;   According to the glorious gospel
of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

In other cases, (2 Peter chapter 2, for example) the New Testament reaffirms
things from the Old Testament, such as the sins of Sodom and Gomorrha, which
when one refers back to the Old Testment scriptures, homosexuality is found
there.

Richelle





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 05:01:40 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 05:01:40 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament
In-Reply-To: <bgv7ei+rhtb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgvark+r0t2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> In the news coverage of the Episcopalians voting for an out gay man 
> to be a bishop, there were soundbites of people who disapproved 
> saying that this is different than the ordination of women because 
> homosexuality is explicitly forbidden by the Bible. That got me 
> curious. I am not fluent in Bible and even less so in New Testament, 
> but I've gotten the impression that there are people in this Y!group 
> who are quite fluent in New Testament, so my question is, can you 
> tell me what the New Testament says that is explicit about 
> homosexuality?

bboy_mn:

To my knowledge, although I will leave confirmation for more
knowledgable minds, homosexuality isn't mentioned in the new
testiment. In fact, as far as I know there are only a couple of very
brief references to it anywhere in the Bible.

To put that in perspective, I would remind you that in the laws of
Moses there are at least a couple of chapters that go on and on page
after page about adultery; plus individual references scattered
throughout the Bible. Adultery, by the way, is punishable by Death,
but most Christians against homosexuality conviniently ignore that
little bit of the Bible.

On another note, the Bible never says homosexuality is a sin; it says
gay sex is a sin, but let's not forget that it also says that all sex
outside of marriage and for purposes other than procreation is a sin
(subject to interpretation), and by the belief of many, it, the Bible,
implies that sex with yourself (if you know what I mean) is a sin.

So, in my view, homosexuality is no big deal when you consider that
there are 10 times more hetrosexual sinners out there that the church
conviniently leaves out of the discussion.

On an additional side note: research, which I've read, into the sexual
habits of hetrosexuals indicates that there are more (in actual
numbers not percentages) hetrosexual engaging in sodomy in it's
various forms than there are homosexuals. If sin is really the issue,
then why don't they focus on where the real sin is? Why? Because it's
much easier to hate someone who is different than you, than it is to
hate someone who is just like you. And let's not forget that hate
itself is a sin.

Here is all you need to know to live a good life, both morally good
and spiritually good...

Do no harm.
Do some good.

Six words say it all.

bboy_mn




From Erthena at aol.com  Fri Aug  8 05:19:08 2003
From: Erthena at aol.com (werebearloony)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 05:19:08 -0000
Subject: Latin question
In-Reply-To: <bgqvj1+f87l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgvbsc+mnl2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Morgan D." 
<morgan_d_yyh at y...> wrote:
> I know PS has been translated into Latin with the title of "Harrius 
> Potter et Philosophi Lapis". I would like to know how the 
translation 
> of the titles of the other four books would be like. Anyone here 
who 
> has studied Latin and could help me?
> 
> 
> Morgan D.
> Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br
I have the aforementioned book here and after recomending it to all 
latin students (it's amazing but either through my knowledge of lAtin 
or my knowledge of HP I can actually *read* the thing in *latin*)I 
provide the handy list here at the front of the book.

--Harrius Potter et Camera Rerum Arcanarum (Harry Potter and the 
Chamber of Secrets)

--Harrius Potter et (Ille) Captivus Askabani (Harry Potter and the 
Prisoner of Askaban, the ille in there is mine, it adds empahsis and 
considering who it is I think it should be added)

--Harrius Potter et Poculum Ignis (Harry Potter and the Goblet of 
Fire)

Now I ask a question in return of my fellow latin people How do you 
say "both buttocks still on"?

Propino tibi salutem! (or Cheers which is much easier to say)

~~loony

"Caudex! Adeps! Reliquum! Vellicatio!" -- Albus Dumbledore




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 05:40:31 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 05:40:31 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament
In-Reply-To: <006301c35d68$372a8020$789ccdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>
Message-ID: <bgvd4f+askp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...>
wrote:
>
> ...edited...
> 
> In other cases, (2 Peter chapter 2, for example) the New Testament 
> reaffirms things from the Old Testament, such as the sins of Sodom and
> Gomorrha, which when one refers back to the Old Testment scriptures, 
> homosexuality is found there.
> 
> Richelle


bboy_mn:

Again, I will yeild to those with superior knowledge, but I have read
the section in the Bible on Sodom and Gomorrha, and I can't find
anything that confirms homosexuality.

There are many Biblical scholars, who, on this issue, do not believe
that homosexuality or sex at all played a part in the downfall of S&G.
They believe that it was a general meanspiritedness and
inhospitableness that lead to their downfall. I'm pretty sure that
they are in a minority in this believe though.

My take on S&G is that these cities had degenerated into an
unrestrained state of decadence which included a basic lack of a sense
of humanity toward the fellow citizens. The society had become about
taking for pleasure, rather than loving, caring, and helping. Fellow
human beings became objects for pleasure, and in that, they lost their
humanity.

In this unbridled decadance I have no doubt that act of homosexuality
occurred, but then, just like today, a majority of those acts of
homosexuality were commited by hetrosexuals. In fact, every wave of
moral doom to ever sweep across the earth was, for the most part,
perpetrated by hetrosexuals.

So than and now, it has never been about the state of being
homosexual, but the actions and attitudes of selfish unbridled
decadance, moral corruption, and the basic lack of humanity,
compassion, and caring for other people that brought the downfall. And
that indeed is what will bring the downfall of our current society and
all future societies until we become sufficiently enlightened. 

I have to believe that it is the selfish self-serving decadent quest
for earthly pleasure that is the true sin. To abandon the spirit, and
serve only the body, surely that must be the real sin.  

I must believe that love can never be a sin, for a man to love a man
and express that love physically in a caring, loving, commited, and
compassionate way just can't be a sin in my eyes.  

As far as sin in general, I see no difference in the behavior of
hetrosexual and homosexuals. They both go to the bars on Saturday
night hoping to 'hook up'. Why should we condemn one while we ignore
the other, if the underlying intent is sin in both cases? 

For further thoughts on my views on this issue, see...

http://www.homestead.com/asian_lovr/files/issues/sodgom.html

Just a few thoughts on a subject that I realize, much like gun control
and religion in general, has the potential to skyrocket out of control
into an impossible to resolve debate. 

Let us proceed with caution.

bboy_mn







From marley2580 at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  8 09:25:43 2003
From: marley2580 at blueyonder.co.uk (marl2580)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 09:25:43 -0000
Subject: clarification of british slang
In-Reply-To: <bgu636+mlor@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bgvqan+j6m6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "phoebesophia" <
phoebesophia at y...> wrote:
> what, please, is a jammy cow?

A cow is a derogatory term used against women, it implies that 
they have the characteristics of a cow eg. stupid, slow, passive 
etc. it can be combined with many other words eg. stupid cow. 
The word jammy probably comes from jam (known as jelly in the 
US) and is used when someone has done something and got 
away with it, eg. said/done something which resulted in getting a 
promotion at work, sneaked in and stole the man you fancied. 
The only time the word jammy is not used in this context is when 
it is a Jammy Dodger which is in actual fact, a biscuit.

marley




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  8 11:38:05 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 11:38:05 -0000
Subject: Book Burners of Doom
In-Reply-To: <bgv7l1+5khb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh022t+ss6e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> I'm sure many of you have read about the recent HP book burning in
> Michigan, where the book burners claimed they were defending the 
world
> against witchcraft. 
> 
> So people in the name of fairness I'm sure, tried to defend the book
> burner as having symbolic importance, and as promoting their 
feelings
> to the great public at large. Fair enough, one could genuinely 
assume
> that they had noble motives for their actions.
> 
> THIS JUST IN- 
> 
> Librarians and clergy at other churches expressed mixed emotions 
after
> learning that members of the Jesus Non-denominational Church burned
> "Harry Potter" books AND copies of the Book of Mormon and non-King
> James Version Bibles.
> 
> Other books, magazines, posters, compact discs and movies that 
members
> believe do not promote God also went up in smoke Sunday, as more 
than
> 50 people gathered outside the church for the fiery display. Among 
the
> incinerated items were Shania Twain's album "The Woman in Me" and 
the
> Dan Aykroyd movie "Coneheads."
> 
> Church members who sporadically shouted "Hallelujah," "Thank you, 
God"
> and "Burn, devil, burn" said the fire was divinely inspired.
> 
> ...and more...
> 
> http://www.detnews.com/2003/religion/0308/07/d07d-238361.htm
> 
> 
> The Book of Mormon!!! and Non-King James Versions of the Bible!!!...
> ...oh yeah, this is one very stable group of nut cases. Well, I 
leave
> them to their beliefs as misguides as I feel they may be. 
> 
> I will admit that these people has some small degree of credibility
> with me until I read this. Now....? Sorry can't speak to that issue 
in
> polite company.
> 
> All references and links were found at-
> 
> http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/
> 
> Suddenly feeling sad and with a strong sense of foreboding for the
> human race.
> 
> bboy_mn

Do not despair - instead read "Farenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury, of 
failing that watch the film.

Bookburning has been a theme throughout history.  Remember the Tom 
Wolfe book "Bonfire of the Vanities"?  The name came from an actual 
historic event, in Florence in the 15th Century when 
a "fundamentalist" type friar, Savonarola preached against the art, 
culture and humanism of the renaissance. He prophesised that Florence 
would be destroyed by an angry god.  During this period he was 
particularly against Lorenzo de Medici (Il Magnifico) who was a 
leading patron of the arts and not to mention ruler of the Florentine 
City State.  Anyway, one of Fra Savonarola's great ideas was to 
hold "Bonfires of the Vanities" where people actually brought non-
religious works of art and such like.  It probably cannot be 
estimated just what was lost, and in the hysteria of the times even 
Botticelli sacrificed some of his own artworks.  

The point is this:

How many people (apart from historians like me) remember Savonarola?  
And how many remember Botticelli and the other artists of the Italian 
Cinquecento?

History is full of self important fools who believed they can chain 
ideas up to suit themselves but they do not prevail.

June




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  8 11:54:05 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 12:54:05 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Book Burners of Doom
References: <bh022t+ss6e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F338F5D.000003.84769@monica>

 bboy_mn
> 
> The Book of Mormon!!! and Non-King James Versions of the Bible!!!...
> ...oh yeah, this is one very stable group of nut cases. Well, I 
leave
> them to their beliefs as misguides as I feel they may be. 
> 
 
  
Actually doesn't burning religious books make *more* sense. I mean a
different interpretation of the bible to the one your particular group
believes is accurate or the religious books of another religion preaching
something different from what you think is the word of God - I can
understand religious  people getting upset about that. Makes much more sense
than burning something which is a work of fiction. Surely something that
claims to interpret the word of God in a different manner to what you
believe is sacred is much more of a threat than something which doesn't
claim to do anything but tell a good story?

K



From wgouine1 at mac.com  Fri Aug  8 12:39:12 2003
From: wgouine1 at mac.com (Peter Paul)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 08:39:12 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Latin question
In-Reply-To: <bgvbsc+mnl2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <502D7CC2-C99D-11D7-9F6C-0003935103DC@mac.com>

I have been trying to conjugate the phrase "out from under the king's 
cloak.  Can you help?

On Friday, August 8, 2003, at 01:19  AM, werebearloony wrote:

> Now I ask a question in return of my fellow latin people How do you
> say "both buttocks still on"?
>

valete!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  8 13:18:49 2003
From: fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com (martha)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 13:18:49 -0000
Subject: clarification of british slang
In-Reply-To: <bgvqan+j6m6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh07vp+5g8e@eGroups.com>


> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "phoebesophia" <
> phoebesophia at y...> wrote:
> > what, please, is a jammy cow?

...and Martha de-lurks to say:

"Cow" is usually a fairly derogatory term for a woman, in the sense 
of - for example - "stupid cow". This is a fairly unpleasant thing to 
be called if it's used in a nasty way - say you knocked over a cup of 
coffee and someone said, in harsh tones, "you stupid cow" and gave 
you a dirty look - this implies you're slow, stupid, clumsy and so 
on. It can also mean something along the lines of "bitch" - in the 
sense of "We don't care what that Skeeter cow wrote about you". Rita 
Skeeter is a "cow" because she's rude and manipulative and generally 
unpleasant, she causes unnecessary trouble. It would make sense for 
Hermione to call Pansy Parkinson a cow (and she may well do, although 
I have not my books with me, and cannot remember. I don't think she 
does, but it would make sense). However, it's not always used in that 
sense. Between friends it's much less harsh, if used in jest. If a 
friend tickled you or hit you with a pillow, you could shriek "you 
cow!" and not cause offence.

"Jammy" means, in a roundabout way, lucky, but in the sense that you 
probably didn't deserve the luck (if that makes sense). For example -
 "I thought I was going to mess up that statistics exam, but all the 
topics I crammed last night came up." "You jammy cow!" [both grin.] I 
remember being told at primary school that the term "jammy" was 
originally something said by working-class kids to other working-
class kids when the latter had managed to get jam for their bread 
without doing much.

Anyway, I hope that's helpful, and I'm headed back to Lurker's corner.

Martha la punk house-elf




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 14:33:12 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 14:33:12 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament
In-Reply-To: <bgv7ei+rhtb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh0cb8+a2l9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> In the news coverage of the Episcopalians voting for an out gay 
> man to be a bishop, there were soundbites of people who 
> disapproved saying that this is different than the ordination of 
> women because homosexuality is explicitly forbidden by the Bible. 

I believe that I read a quote from Barbara Harris, who was the first 
female Episcopal Bishop in the US, to the effect that many of the 
doom-and-gloom predictions that people have been making concerning 
the future of the church were identical to the predictions people 
were making concerning what would occur if women were ordained, and 
then, if women were made bishops.  The actual event--approval of a 
gay bishop--was not held to be the same as the previous events, but 
the reaction to it.

As for references to homosexuality in the Old or New Testaments, 
there are a collection of passages in various places that are 
generally called the "clobber" passages, in that they are regularly 
used to "clobber" gay and lesbian people.  However, there is a lot 
of scholarly focus on these passages for just this reason, and many 
theologians and clergy believe that these passages either do not 
reference homosexuality at all or in ways that are particular to the 
cultural prejudices of the day, and therefore should not inform our 
present-day ideas of sexuality.

Here are a couple of useful links for reading about this issue:

http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/freenet/rootdir/menus/sigs/life/gay/religi
on/sin

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm

There are even more links here (very long list): 

http://iwgonline.org/links/

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Fri Aug  8 15:11:25 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 10:11:25 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Question about New (now Old) Testament
References: <bgvd4f+askp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001b01c35dbf$56241d90$f2a2cdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>

bboy_mn:

> Again, I will yeild to those with superior knowledge, but I have read
> the section in the Bible on Sodom and Gomorrha, and I can't find
> anything that confirms homosexuality.

Sorry, I should've put those up to when I referred to them.  Here is the
King James Version, Genesis 19:4-5

 4  But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom,
compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every
quarter:
5   And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which
came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

The words "know them" don't mean they want to meet them.  The New
International Version is of course more modern English and says it quite
bluntly.  Verse 4 and  in NIV:

4  Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of
Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house.
5  They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring
them out to us so that we can have sex with them."

This is followed, of course, by Lot offering the men his two virgin
daughters,  who they had no interest in.

Richelle





From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  8 16:42:43 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 16:42:43 -0000
Subject: denominations on list (Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <bgv7l1+5khb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh0ju3+ladi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
> The Book of Mormon!!! and Non-King James Versions of the Bible!!!...
> ...oh yeah, this is one very stable group of nut cases. Well, I 
leave
> them to their beliefs as misguides as I feel they may be. 
> 

Hello all! Lurker surfacing. I've long been curious to ask (but don't 
know whether it's list-appropriate--if so, you are welcome to tell me 
off) since Salt Lake City has been mentioned occasionally: any LDS on 
this list?

Sophia




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 17:38:36 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 17:38:36 -0000
Subject: Question about New (now Old) Testament
In-Reply-To: <001b01c35dbf$56241d90$f2a2cdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>
Message-ID: <bh0n6s+i9fs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" 
<rvotaw at i...> wrote:
> 4  Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the 
> city of Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house.
> 5  They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? 
> Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
> 
> This is followed, of course, by Lot offering the men his two virgin
> daughters,  who they had no interest in.

And this is, of course, why I shudder at the idea of using Lot as a 
role-model.  Yes, lets all just offer up our daughters to be raped 
by enormous crowds because of the code of hospitality.

Which brings us round to what this passage is really about--rape.  
It was a very common practice in the ancient Middle East for 
victorious armies to drive their victory home by raping the members 
of the losing army.  This is not the same as two men or two women 
having loving, consensual sexual relations.  It is a violent act to 
communicate complete subjugation.  Many biblical scholars now 
believe that the men Lot was sheltering were believed (incorrectly) 
by the crowd to be enemies of the state.  The people in the mob were 
not asking to "have sex with them."  They were asking Lot to be 
patriotic and give the men up so that they could be subjugated and 
raped, so he offers his daughters to the mob instead.  What we 
really see in this passage is that it is okay for women to be raped 
but not men.  But this passage has absolutely nothing to do with 
whether two people of the same gender who love each other and have 
sexual relations are doing anything inherently wrong.  

--Barb

http://www.iwgonline.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  8 18:53:30 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 18:53:30 -0000
Subject: Stop me if you've heard this one before - the definitive personality test
Message-ID: <bh0rja+va65@eGroups.com>

Hi All

Here is a really good personality test for you to take.

Okay, here it goes.

A girl attends her mother's funeral and meets the guy of her dreams. 
He is obviously just as smitten with her and they swap telephone 
numbers.  Unfortunately she loses hers and at a loss to contact him 
again, kills her sister.

Why would she do that?
Scroll down..
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Still stuck?

Okay, the answer is that if she kills her sister, then he'll show up 
to the funeral.

Did you get the answer right?

Well...

You are a psychopath.  Please remove my name from your email 
contacts and be aware that if you make any attempt to contact me I 
shall inform the police and also delete you permanently from my 
contacts.

June




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug  8 18:57:51 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 19:57:51 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Stop me if you've heard this one before - the definitive personality test
References: <bh0rja+va65@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F33F2AF.000003.64547@monica>


lol, very good June (I snipped the whole thing so's not to give the answer
away). My dad's boss sent this out to everyone in the department on the
grounds that he felt this was something he's *really* like to know. Two of
them 'failed'. He is now very worried :)

K



From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  8 22:19:09 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 22:19:09 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh0cb8+a2l9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh17kt+skug@eGroups.com>

::WARNING::  

I kind of went into Sunday School mode, but the good kind where they
in fact study The Bible for what it is not what they were told it is.
(all verses from NIV) 

::big grin:: 


Catlady asked:
>> In the news coverage of the Episcopalians voting for an out gay 
>> man to be a bishop, there were soundbites of people who 
>> disapproved saying that this is different than the ordination of 
>> women because homosexuality is explicitly forbidden by the Bible.

 
Then Barb wrote:
> As for references to homosexuality in the Old or New Testaments, 
> there are a collection of passages in various places that are 
> generally called the "clobber" passages, in that they are regularly 
> used to "clobber" gay and lesbian people.  However, there is a lot 
> of scholarly focus on these passages for just this reason, and many 
> theologians and clergy believe that these passages either do not 
> reference homosexuality at all or in ways that are particular to the 
> cultural prejudices of the day, and therefore should not inform our 
> present-day ideas of sexuality.

You know.

I was raised Baptist and told that homosexuality is bad.  I was never
given the scripture to back it up directly but more told, it is in
there somewhere.  Isn't that a lovely thing to be told by your Sunday
School teacher?  :)  Anyway.  The Old and New Testament are tricky
though as Barb and Richelle have pointed out.  There are different
ways of interpreting events based on cultural evidence that we are
just now learning.  Often times, what we assume about a culture turned
out wrong in archeological evidence, and we must now reshape our
ideas.  Few people, and *especially* not churches, enjoy doing that,
but I digress.

Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis Ch. 18-19) is tricky as well.  It is not
positive which is the reason God destroyed the cities as The Bible
says.  All we know is that God found reason to destroy them, and
destroy them completely, based on telling Abraham "The outcry against
Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will
go down and see if what they have done is as bad the outcry that has
reached me."  Next chapter is the two angels visiting Lot's family and
being demanded by the mob to come out so they can "know them".  All we
are to conclude is that the behavior and the actions of the town are
in fact sin and thus the punishment is justified in the eyes of God.

So what was that sin?  The raping?  The inhospitality?  The man on man
sex?  Was it because they let themselves be controlled by their lust?
 It is never told.  

So where is it told, you ask.  Fair question.  Let's see.


Leviticus (third chapter of the Old Testament) has a nice list of
things for a *man* not to do in chapter 18.  In between not
sacrificing your children to Molech (who or whatever that is) and not
having sex with animals comes this verse....

Leviticus 18:22
"Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

Frankly, I find that to be very cut and dry, myself.


Unfortunately for us, the Old Testament has some other verses we kind
 of glaze over in Leviticus.  A dear, dear friend of mine pointed me
to this comic that fits what I am talking about here.  Also refers to
the above verse.  :)

http://www.ozyandmillie.net/2000/om20000814.html


Bboy wrote:
>On another note, the Bible never says homosexuality is a sin; it says
>gay sex is a sin, **snip**

Hm.  Much of that is up from interpretation, Steve.  That is what
makes religion such a private and personal faith, and also what causes
the most grief.  I personally feel it is between the believer and God.
 For example, I, myself, think sex should be kept to marriage.  But
just because I believe that does not give me the right to force you to
also believe that in order "to save your soul".  It does not require
your approval either.  It is what I interpret that The Bible is
recommending for my life.  

If you want to split hairs, in my opinion, about gay sex and loving
the same sex as yourself, that is your choice as well.  What scripture
I quoted above does allow for that interpretation.  

Do I think your interpreting God's meaning damns you to hell?  No.  
Do I disagree with you?  Yes.

Mostly because, I see nothing wrong in loving someone of the same sex
with all your heart.  That is called a best friend.  When you involve
sex in the equation, it changes to a "marriage" situation.  


Bboy also wrote:
>So, in my view, homosexuality is no big deal when you consider that
>there are 10 times more hetrosexual sinners out there that the church
>conviniently leaves out of the discussion.


First, Bboy it is "heterosexual".  I only point it out because you
misspelled it every time.

And by that logic, I can murder my next door neighbor as long as I do
it quickly and clean up after myself.  There is always someone worse
than you are.  That does not justify your actions though.  But then
again, logic and religion are not good bed fellows.

If you want to be picky, The Bible also says gluttony is a sin.  Do
you want to tell all these fat Americans that?


So my views:

Religion is of man.
Faith is of God.

Jesus says, first, love your God with all your heart, soul, and mind.
 And then do unto others as you would like them to do unto you.

I do my best to follow that.  And defend my right to do so.


Melody





From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Aug  9 01:35:23 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 01:35:23 -0000
Subject: Lot and Sodom (was Question about New (now Old) Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh0n6s+i9fs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh1j4r+ul5p@eGroups.com>

I don't really have anything to add on the original question but I 
just wanted to comment on this point.

Barb wrote:

> What we 
> really see in this passage is that it is okay for women to be 
raped 
> but not men. 

I'm not sure one can really infer this.  Just because this was Lot's 
chosen approach for dealing with the situation doesn't IMO permit 
one to make general deductions about ethics, not even for the people 
of the time.

Even for characters such as Abraham and David who get a much more 
clear cut Biblical commendation than Lot, it is a difficult matter 
to deduce that any particular action of theirs is one to be 
commended.  One of the lovely things about the narrative sections of 
the Hebrew Bible is the way the writers in the main leave it to the 
readers to draw their own lessons from the stories.

In fact one could draw a parallel between criticisms of the Harry 
Potter books because Harry is the hero and breaks rules, and 
criticisms that are sometimes levelled against the Bible because 
the 'heroes of faith' do some pretty awful things.

David




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Sat Aug  9 02:45:02 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 02:45:02 -0000
Subject: Fun with euphemisms
Message-ID: <bh1n7e+no1u@eGroups.com>

Check out the Euphemism Generator...endless fun for the easily 
amused, like myself!

http://walkingdead.net/perl/euphemism

Tracy  (I'd stay longer, but I'm busy "frosting the elves")   ;-)




From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 02:52:00 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 19:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fun with euphemisms
In-Reply-To: <bh1n7e+no1u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030809025200.16377.qmail@web14915.mail.yahoo.com>

That address didn't work for me! I really want to try this!
 
Alex Fox

Tracy <neonsister at ameritech.net> wrote:
Check out the Euphemism Generator...endless fun for the easily 
amused, like myself!

http://walkingdead.net/perl/euphemism

Tracy  (I'd stay longer, but I'm busy "frosting the elves")   ;-)


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sat Aug  9 03:12:10 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 03:12:10 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT) 
In-Reply-To: <bh17kt+skug@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh1oqa+nhlq@eGroups.com>

I don't think I'll snip any of Melody's post, because I agree with 
every word of it.  Couldn't have said it better myself.  

Personally, I am a Southern Baptist who believes sex outside of 
marriage is a sin for everyone and that gay sex is a sin as well.  I 
also happen to believe that my personal religious beliefs should not 
form the basis for government policy.  So I am in favor of civil 
unions for gays etc. to grant to them the legal rights and 
obligations that come with marriage.  Call it civil union, marriage, 
whatever.  Those of us who are religious can still be married in our 
churches, and our unions will conform with our own personal beliefs.

I just fail to see how allowing two gay men to form a civil union 
undermines the strength or importance of my marriage.  The fact that 
someone else can have what I have means that what I have is less 
important, or valued, or respected?  I just do not get it.  

Cindy -- who thinks a constitutional amendment to limit marriage to 
heterosexuals has a 100% chance of passage by Congress and 
ratification by the states, but who doesn't support the idea herself





From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Aug  9 04:14:57 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 04:14:57 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament
In-Reply-To: <bh0cb8+a2l9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh1sg1+c643@eGroups.com>

Thank you, everyone who answered my question. Melody, the point 
wittily made by the comic you linked us to, is the reason I only 
asked about the New Testament. I've heard rumors that the New 
Testament says that Christ freed Christians from "the yoke of the 
Law" (meaning the 613 commandments in Torah and their book after book 
of details). Christians, not being Jews, don't have to stick to 
kosher food, avoid wearing linsey-woolsey, be circumcised, go to the 
mikvah seven days after the end of your period in order to wash off 
the ritual uncleanness so as to be allowed to touch your husband 
(strict Orthodox couples are so careful for the husband and wife 
to avoid touching each other during the half the time she's 
ritually unclean that they don't hand each other anything lest the 
hands touch; the one puts it down on a table for the other to pick 
up; including the baby), don't have to shave your head when you're 
married (to avoid tempting other men into adultery with you) ... 

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "psychic_serpent" 
<psychic_serpent at y...> wrote:
> 
> I believe that I read a quote from Barbara Harris, who was the first 
> female Episcopal Bishop in the US, to the effect that many of the 
> doom-and-gloom predictions that people have been making concerning 
> the future of the church were identical to the predictions people 
> were making concerning what would occur if women were ordained, and 
> then, if women were made bishops.  The actual event--approval of a 
> gay bishop--was not held to be the same as the previous events, but 
> the reaction to it.

I don't doubt it. I wasn't paying attention when the Episcopalians 
admitted women to the priesthood (wasn't that like 20 years ago?) but 
much more recently there was news coverage of the Anglicans in the UK 
admitting women to the priesthood, which outraged some of the 
pre-existing priests so much that they switched to being Roman 
Catholic priests with a special exemption from the Pope so they could 
keep their wives. They had all the same rhetoric about it being clear 
doctrine from Christ himself that females can't be priests, and 
quoted Paul the prolific letter-writer to the effect that women must 
keep silent in church.




From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 04:25:27 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 21:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Book Burners of Doom
In-Reply-To: <3F338F5D.000003.84769@monica>
Message-ID: <20030809042527.23833.qmail@web14915.mail.yahoo.com>

Someone PLEASE tell me why "The Coneheads" movie was included in the all-media burning! I can sort of make a twisted sense out of the rest, but THAT???
 
Alex Fox

Kathryn Cawte <kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
bboy_mn
> 
> The Book of Mormon!!! and Non-King James Versions of the Bible!!!...
> ...oh yeah, this is one very stable group of nut cases. Well, I 
leave
> them to their beliefs as misguides as I feel they may be. 
> 

  
Actually doesn't burning religious books make *more* sense. I mean a
different interpretation of the bible to the one your particular group
believes is accurate or the religious books of another religion preaching
something different from what you think is the word of God - I can
understand religious  people getting upset about that. Makes much more sense
than burning something which is a work of fiction. Surely something that
claims to interpret the word of God in a different manner to what you
believe is sacred is much more of a threat than something which doesn't
claim to do anything but tell a good story?

K

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 07:49:13 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 07:49:13 -0000
Subject: Question about New (now Old) Testament
In-Reply-To: <001b01c35dbf$56241d90$f2a2cdd1@l3820.tjdo.com>
Message-ID: <bh291p+okcm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...>
wrote:
> bboy_mn:
> 
> > ... I have read the section in the Bible on Sodom and Gomorrha, 
>>  and I can't find anything that confirms homosexuality.
> 

>

> Richelle:
> The New International Version is of course more modern English and 
> says it quite bluntly.  Verse 4 and  in NIV:
> 
> 5  They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? 
> Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
> 
> This is followed, of course, by Lot offering the men his two virgin
> daughters,  who they had no interest in.
> 
> Richelle


bboy_mn:

The Oxford-Cambridge Revised English Bible which is a wholely new
translation from the original text, and not just a re-write of an
existing translation, says, 'Intercourse' which as I pointed out is
subject to interpretation.

So now the question is, were each and everyone of these people who
called for Lot to send the men out so they could 'know them'/'have sex
with them'/'engage in intercourse' with them, homosexual?

I still say that a vast vast majority of them were hetrosexual, and,
as I said before, it is the action of the people, and not their state
of being that is the sin. They commited a sinful act but that sinful
act had nothing to do with being gay.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 08:59:59 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 08:59:59 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh17kt+skug@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh2d6f+rrud@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> wrote:
>
> ...edited...
> 
> 
> Leviticus (third chapter of the Old Testament) has a nice list of
> things for a *man* not to do in chapter 18.  ...
> 
> Leviticus 18:22
> "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is
> detestable."
> 
> Frankly, I find that to be very cut and dry, myself.
> 

bboy_mn:
I don't think you and I are that far out of sync with each other. I
find your view very enlightened, not that you need my endorsement.

The passage you site about speaks of an action; 'Lie'. I think for
simplicity sake we can agree that it does not refer to 'taking a nap'.
So it speaks of 'to lie', but it doesn't not mention 'to be'.

But here is a another point to ponder. These books are written from a
HetErosexual point of view. For a hetErosexual man to become so
overwhelmed by lust and desire for bodily pleasure that he would go
against his core nature, against his natural instincts, and engage in
sex with another man, is certainly destestable and/or an abomonation
(depending on what version you reference). 

> Melody:
>
> A dear, dear friend of mine pointed me to this comic that fits what 
> I am talking about here.  Also refers to the above verse.  :)
> 
> http://www.ozyandmillie.net/2000/om20000814.html
> 

bboy_mn:
Excellent comic, it reflects one of the points I was trying to make
very nicely. 


> 
> Bboy wrote: (org)
> >On another note, the Bible never says homosexuality is a sin; it 
> >says gay sex is a sin, **snip**

> 
> Hm.  Much of that is up from interpretation, Steve.  ... It does not
> require your approval either.  It is what I interpret that The Bible
> is recommending for my life.  
> 

bboy_mn:
Again, I reference the point I made about about the difference between
'to lie with' and 'to be yourself'. 

As far as your comment here, suprising as you may find it, I agree
with you. 

> 
> ...edited..
>
 
> 
> Bboy also wrote: (org)
> >So, in my view, homosexuality is no big deal when you consider that
> >there are 10 times more hetrosexual sinners out there that the 
> >church conviniently leaves out of the discussion.


> Melody: 
> 
> First, Bboy it is "heterosexual".  I only point it out because you
> misspelled it every time.
> 

bboy_mn:
Sorry, I alway read and respond to posts from the website, so no spell
check handy. If I'm in doubt, I usually consult my CD-ROM dictionary.
Must have missed that one.

> Melody: 
> 
> And by that logic, I can murder my next door neighbor as long as I 
> do it quickly and clean up after myself. 
> 

bboy_mn:
I wasn't giving approval to any particular kind of action or sin, the
thrust (no  pun) of my statement was contained in "...that the church
conviniently leaves out of the discussion...".

So many of the most vocal people have no problem saying 'God hate
fags' or 'Death to fags'. But they never get around to 'DEATH' for all
their own sins. Where is DEATH to adulterers? Where is DEATH to
fornicators? Where is DEATH to all the other things in the Bible says
are punishable by death. How very convinient that the Old Testement
DEATH no longer applies when it comes to their sins.

It's really the blatant hypocricy that drives me up the wall.

This brings me to another point I would like to make. Sorry this one
will probably drag on.

I was in Wesley United Methodist Church near the Convention Center in
Minneapolis for a choir concert. I was bored while I was waiting for
it to start, and I started reading some of the books that were place
in the holder in the back of the pews. At the beginning of one of the
books, I found the Constitution of that church. The Constitution said,
that this church did NOT accept that was bound by the Laws of Moses.
Which really says, that it isn't bound by the laws of the Old Testement.

The general feeling amoung most Protestant churches it that the New
Testement supersedes the Old Testement, and outlines a new way of
living based on love and compassion.

Despite the great likelihood that their own religion does not accept
the Old Testement Laws as binding, they very conviniently trot out the
Old Testement when ever it suits them. The are especially quick to
pull it out when condeming other people while ignoring it when it
applies to them. There's that hypocracy again.

Just thought I would point that out.

> Melody:
>
> If you want to be picky, The Bible also says gluttony is a sin.  Do
> you want to tell all these fat Americans that?
> 
> ..edited...
> 
> Melody

bboy_mn:

Let me make one thing clear, I never said that gay sex wasn't a sin.
My position is that it is no more of a sin than hetErosexual sin under
the indentical circumstances. It is a sin, in the view of some, for
you son (generalization, nothing personal) to go to out to a bar and
pick up a girl for a one time sexual encounter; it is equal a sin for
a gay man to do the samething (but with another man, of course).

They are both sin, so why is the world hysterical over one, but very
conviniently ignoring the other, or at least if the do acknowledge it,
it with ->, ->, ;), ;) (short hand for nudge, nudge, wink wink).

As I said, my philosophy is based in-

Do no harm.
Do some good.

The problem is that we all delude ourselves when it comes to a clear
and accurate definition and application of what constitutes 'Harm'. In
many cases, we see no harm, because seeing no harm suits us. But it is
the real harm done, and not our opinion of harm, that creates the sin.

recommended reading (mostly recommended because I wrote it)-
http://www.homestead.com/asian_lovr/files/issues/issues.html

Title- "Is Gay Sex a Sin?"
short version, yes, but so is all sex.

Title- "A Paradox - What Makes Sex a Sin?"
short version, - harm.

Warning: There is nothing unusual on the web page cited above. If you
stray back to the main page, you will find links to adult content;
links which are clearly marked [ADULT].

I'm sinner and I'm sorry ...ummm... if I promise to be sorry again
tomorrow, do you think I could do it again tonight?

bboy_mn







From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 10:32:53 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 10:32:53 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter innuendo
In-Reply-To: <bgv073+q16t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh2ikl+rug8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Tracy" <neonsister at a...> 
wrote:
> My stomach hurts from laughing and my dog is looking at me like 
I'm 
> crazy!  Thanks for the link...too funny!
> 
> Tracy 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "sueeeyqbong" <sue at s...> 
> wrote:
> > Has anyone seen this? It's really funny.
> > 
> > http://www.clockwork-harlequin.net/harry_potter/smut.html

Have just read this.  Almost died laughing.  Still got the tears in 
my eyes. Harry Potter and the Great Big Wands indeed.

June




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 11:53:57 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 11:53:57 -0000
Subject: Stop me if you've heard this one before - the definitive personality test
In-Reply-To: <3F33F2AF.000003.64547@monica>
Message-ID: <bh2ncl+104o1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" 
<kcawte at b...> wrote:
> 
> lol, very good June (I snipped the whole thing so's not to give 
> the answer away). My dad's boss sent this out to everyone in the  
> department on the grounds that he felt this was something he's 
> *really* like to know. Two of them 'failed'. He is now very 
> worried :)
> K

I got the 'right' answer within 2 seconds. 

Well, it's the logical answer, isn't it? :-)

Err... what are you all looking at me like that for? 

Pip!Squeak




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Aug  9 12:06:31 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 12:06:31 -0000
Subject: Stop me if you've heard this one before - the definitive personality test
In-Reply-To: <bh2ncl+104o1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh2o47+lggd@eGroups.com>

Pip wrote:

> I got the 'right' answer within 2 seconds. 
> 
> Well, it's the logical answer, isn't it? :-)
> 
> Err... what are you all looking at me like that for? 

Because you are intelligent?  You are not alone: I thought the 
answer was obvious, myself.

David




From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug  9 14:23:39 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:23:39 -0000
Subject: Book Burners of Doom
In-Reply-To: <20030809042527.23833.qmail@web14915.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bh305b+a202@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, alex fox <trinity61us at y...> 
wrote:
> Someone PLEASE tell me why "The Coneheads" movie was included in 
the all-media burning! I can sort of make a twisted sense out of the 
rest, but THAT???

Uh, because the Coneheads are from France?  Just my guess.

--JMC




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 16:44:05 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 16:44:05 -0000
Subject: News Flash: Room of Requirements Alters Fan Fiction
Message-ID: <bh38cl+sjes@eGroups.com>

I hereby decree that from this day forward all slash and non-slash HP
romantic encounters will be moved from the Astronomy Tower, and
self-invented rooms and chamber of varying degrees of believability,
to the Room of Requirements.

Is this room a slash writers dream come true or what.

Sorry, just had to pass that thought along.

bboy_mn




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Sat Aug  9 17:15:42 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:15:42 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh2d6f+rrud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3a7u+nd0h@eGroups.com>

I quoted from the NIV Bible:
> > Leviticus 18:22
> > "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is
> > detestable."
> > 
> > Frankly, I find that to be very cut and dry, myself.

 
> bboy_mn: 
>The passage you site about speaks of an action; 'Lie'. I think for
>simplicity sake we can agree that it does not refer to 'taking a
>nap'.  So it speaks of 'to lie', but it doesn't not mention 'to be'.

Honestly Bboy, unless you know ancient Hebrew, we are at a lose here
as to the meaning of the phrase.  I was taught it meant to have sex
with them.  Unfortunately, I took Ancient Greek in college not Hebrew,
so I cannot confirm or deny what exactly the passage means.  But if it
means just the act of lying with a man (i.e. the same sex) is
detestable, then I think many of us as children committed that "sin".  

The fact this verse comes between a long list of "sexual do not's" in
Leviticus makes me *assume* this is a part of that list.  After all,
the next verse tells us not to lie with animals, and frankly, the Lord
Jesus Christ was born in a manger in a stable.  Do you want to say he
was in sin at that time?


>But here is a another point to ponder. These books are written from a
>HetErosexual point of view. For a hetErosexual man to become so
>overwhelmed by lust and desire for bodily pleasure that he would go
>against his core nature, against his natural instincts, and engage in
>sex with another man, is certainly destestable and/or an abomonation
>(depending on what version you reference). 

Um Bboy.  I am lost here.  I define being homosexual as having sex
with the same sex.  If I love another woman, that does not make me
homosexual.  The act of physically loving on her does make me
homosexual.  So if someone who is heterosexual, i.e. is attracted to
opposite sex, has sex with one of their own sex, then they *are*
homosexual.  No wait.  They are *bisexual*.  So is that the sin? 
Bisexuality?

And if you want to take this verse further, what if you have sex with
the same sex standing?  Is that allowed then?  Loopholes are the
freedom from conscience you know.  ;)


I wrote:
> > And by that logic, I can murder my next door neighbor as long as I 
> > do it quickly and clean up after myself. 

> bboy_mn:
>I wasn't giving approval to any particular kind of action or sin, the
>thrust (no  pun) of my statement was contained in "...that the church
>conviniently leaves out of the discussion...".
> 
>So many of the most vocal people have no problem saying 'God hate
>fags' or 'Death to fags'. But they never get around to 'DEATH' for
>all their own sins. Where is DEATH to adulterers? Where is DEATH to
>fornicators? Where is DEATH to all the other things in the Bible says
>are punishable by death. How very convinient that the Old Testement
>DEATH no longer applies when it comes to their sins.

Bboy, I *completely* agree.  It is always easier to pull the splinter
from a neighbor's eye than remove the plank from your own.  

I am well aware of the hypocrisy that can exist in mankind.  *All* of
mankind whether they are a member of a church or not.  It is sad that
adulterers do not receive the same amount of outcry as the gays are
getting right now.  Jesus dealt with this too you know.  With the
Pharisees and Sadducees.  A lady in the middle of committing adultery
was dragged away during the act by the Pharisees and Sadducees to the
square where Jesus was preaching.  I find it sad there was not enough
of them there to take the man with them...seems they forgot about
him... but I digress.  

Jesus looked at them and her when they arrives.  He crouched down and
started to draw in the dirt.  He said, let he who has never sinned
cast the first stone.  They all left.  Jesus them told her to never to
sin again and let her go.  That too can be interpreted many ways, but
what is clear is that Jesus detested those that are short sighted and
attempt  make themselves look good by finding other *they* think are
worse than them.  

All I can say Bboy, is that in my faith, God can see all and know all.
 He does not relish in the acts of those that are blind to their own
sins and quick to pass judgment on those that do.  

That does not negate whether or not homosexuality is wrong, it only
means that those that are so self-righteous to think *they* can bring
judgment in this world are wrong.  I am sorry you are in the crossfire.  


Bboy:
> The general feeling amoung most Protestant churches it that the New
> Testement supersedes the Old Testement, and outlines a new way of
> living based on love and compassion.

This is a tricky part and what also divides Jews and Christians.  When
it is not clearly spelled out in the New Testament, often times, we
revert back to the Old Testament to see what God once said.  It can be
a bit spotty, but in the realm of homosexuality, it is not clear in
the New Testament what is God's stance on the issue, as far as I know.  

So Catlady, I do not know a verse in the New Testament that clearly
states that homosexuality is a sin.  I can point you to verse that
talk about the husband and wife relationship, but not to the
relationship between those of the same sex.  

When things come down to interpretation by the believer, it can be
rather sticky.  That is what caused all these different denominations
to come forth, and that is what causes all the debate.  It is sad some
take it so far as they do, but I always thought it meant they were
leaning their faith on what they believe rather than in the existence
of God and Jesus.  But I am digressing and going into my own views of
the radicalism of some people.  


Bboy:
>Let me make one thing clear, I never said that gay sex wasn't a sin.
>My position is that it is no more of a sin than hetErosexual sin
>under the indentical circumstances.

I agree.  A sin is a sin, and my faith states that all sin is bad and
draws you away from God.  


Bboy:
> I'm sinner and I'm sorry ...ummm... if I promise to be sorry again
> tomorrow, do you think I could do it again tonight?

That is that Catholic view on things Bboy.  Party all night, and
confess all morning.  Sorry, I joke because I am dating a Catholic. 
Now *that* is fun religious debates.  

My faith says you should turn from your sin once you admit you are
sinning and follow God.  You can, and will, sin still, but you are
striving not too.  One might question why you Bboy are choosing to sin
then, but I have the feeling that you think you are doing no one harm
in your actions so why should you change?  My thoughts go to The
Simpson's and the Flanders' family children.  "Because you make baby
Jesus cry."  ;)

Sorry, that family cracks me up.  Talk about religious paranoia.  


Melody




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 17:25:24 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:25:24 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
Message-ID: <bh3aq4+ubpa@eGroups.com>

Recently we discussed the "gay issue" here in a religious context.

Some people who were personally against it, we also not in favor of
restricting it. Taking a 'to each his own, and let God be the judge'
attitude (grossly paraphrased).

If you would like to weigh in on the issue, CNN is taking a poll based
on some recent comments by Pres. Bush.

The question is-

"Should marriage be legally defined as only a union between a man and
a woman?"

Yes = restricted to Men and Women as couples

No = no restriction or legal definition regarding gender of the couple

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/30/bush.gay.marriage/index.html

Scroll a little more than half way down and you will see the QUICKPOLL
box on the left.

Currently-

51% = Yes
49% = No
10,000,000 votes cast.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Aug  9 17:31:15 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:31:15 -0000
Subject: American marriage (was Question about New Testament )
In-Reply-To: <bh1oqa+nhlq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3b53+s20i@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote:

> Cindy -- who thinks a constitutional amendment to limit marriage 
to 
> heterosexuals has a 100% chance of passage by Congress and 
> ratification by the states, but who doesn't support the idea 
herself

Really?  Is there a serious attempt to pass such an amendment?

Maybe I'm just revealing my ignorance of how these things work, but 
I would have imagined that the Supreme Court would block it (or 
don't they have the power?) on the grounds that it's an attempt to 
define 'marriage' rather than a genuine addition to the Constitution.

David




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Aug  9 17:41:51 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:41:51 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament
In-Reply-To: <bh1sg1+c643@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3bov+rsnm@eGroups.com>

Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) wrote:
> Thank you, everyone who answered my question. Melody, the point 
> wittily made by the comic you linked us to, is the reason I only 
> asked about the New Testament. I've heard rumors that the New 
> Testament says that Christ freed Christians from "the yoke of the 
> Law" (meaning the 613 commandments in Torah and their book after book 
> of details). Christians, not being Jews, don't have to stick to 
> kosher food, avoid wearing linsey-woolsey, be circumcised, go to the 
> mikvah seven days after the end of your period in order to wash off 
> the ritual uncleanness so as to be allowed to touch your husband 

Hi, Catholic here to express his viewpoint, and add to the mix 
(::shakes leaves off fur after lurking in the bushes::). I want to 
state clearly at the start that I am not that familiar with the Bible - 
I cannot for my life find a passage, as it will become clearer in a 
while. But I have been read the entire New Testament several times in 
my life (around 4, so far, since we go through it every four years, in 
regular mass), so even if I connot find things, I know they are there.

Anyway, my point: the rumour is indeed true, Cat. Jesus, amongst 
several other things, came to Earth, according to the Catholic 
Christianity I was taught (at least - I won't attempt to put words in 
other religions or interpretations of my own) to substitute the old 
Torah laws by a much simple code of love. The specific moment is when 
Jesus states "*Only* one commandment *I* give you: Love God over all 
other things, and the neighbour like a man like yourself" (emphasis 
mine) (New Testament, somewhere - probably close to Jesus' death, but 
not sure, sorry). 

Now, the 'Only' and the 'I' are important. First,the 'Only' makes it 
clear that there are no other commandments they need. The 'I' specifies 
who gives the commandment - Jesus Christ, thus God. This neatly puts 
and end to Jesus fight against the Torah, a fight that had lasted all 
his life, probably, and certainly his three years of teaching. Anyone 
fluent in the Bible can point out examples of Jesus teaching the 
Pharisees and Saducees how their methods and traditions were wrong.

This, you would think, would be a contradiction of God himself, since 
he had given those laws to the jews, and later sent Jesus to contradict 
them, but I was taught it was just a natural evolution of the education 
of the people - first specific, then generic as they "grew up" and 
learned better (as my priest pointed out a week ago, the jews had some 
very delighful customs back in the dawn of time like drinking the blood 
from the severed heads of their defeaten enemies - such people needed 
strong, no-nonsense sort of laws, and as they got more civilicised, the 
laws could be generalised).

I myself am going to give one example, unfortunately without any 
reference. I know it is there somewheere, because it was read in church 
once, but I'm sorry to say I don't remember where to find it. Anyway, 
it seems one of the laws in Leviticus concerns the treatment of lepers. 
According to this law, lepers where to be thrown out of town and any 
contact with any of them was, probably, punishable by death. Certainly 
physical contact was, but probably feeding them or joining them at 
dinner. Then, a couple thousand years later Jesus arrived and not only 
did he have contact with lepers, ate with them and talked to them, but 
also touched them and cured them. All this is obviously against 
Leviticus laws, and since Jesus, being who he is, takes precedence, it 
is one example of how he overrode such laws. My priest spoke at length 
about how Leviticus was, indeed, "old material" which had been 
substituted by Jesus' teachings. I cannot, however, state that this is 
so for all Christian religions - or even for all Catholic priests. Ever 
since Vatican II there has been much more liberty at "canon" 
interpretation (as could be seen by the letter the fundamentalist 
archbishop wrote a week ago).

So, where does New Testament stand in homosexuality issues? Comes down 
to interpretation. For example, *in my view*, it does *not* break 
Jesus' law - you are loving your neighbour like a person like yourself. 
It is a special kind of love that makes lots of people unconfortable, 
but sinners are not allowed to judge, only God is, so they should keep 
their mouths closed (IMO - I insist, just in case).

> >Melody:
> > Leviticus 18:22
> > "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is
> > detestable."

Word of Caution: we are now entering the realm of what the Old 
Testament says. I've just spent the better part of three pages 
explaining how that is no longer valid for Christians (or at least, the 
Catholic Christians I've been taught about). I am unsure of modern (or 
old, for that matter) Jew viewpoint. Last time I attempted it, I was 
told off-list that the view I had expressed of one Jew law was, indeed, 
correct in times past but had been modified in its interpretation 
since. So I'll just take to pieces that passage as I would any of HP.

bboy:
> The passage you site about speaks of an action; 'Lie'. I think for
> simplicity sake we can agree that it does not refer to 'taking a 
> nap'.So it speaks of 'to lie', but it doesn't not mention 'to be'.

Exactly: it seems Leviticus speaks of the physical act. And it is 
clear: you will not lie with a man as you would with a woman. It does *
not* mention what you feel about men - so it is irrelevant if you are a 
homosexual or heterosexual. According to Leviticus, the act of "lying 
with a man" is wrong.

> But here is a another point to ponder. These books are written from a
> HetErosexual point of view. For a hetErosexual man to become so
> overwhelmed by lust and desire for bodily pleasure that he would go
> against his core nature, against his natural instincts, and engage in
> sex with another man, is certainly destestable and/or an abomonation
> (depending on what version you reference). 

Ummm... no. According to the religions that accept the Old Testament, 
and thus Leviticus, as a Holy Book, it is written from the PoV of God, 
who is asexual. I will give you that they do seem to be written from a 
male perspective, since the previous passage (granted, could be out of 
context) does allow female homosexuality and prohibit female 
heterosexuality. I'm unsure how that is corrected, but the segment is 
clearly pointed at men. Their sexual orientation, however, is not 
mentioned, so it is assumed it applies to all of them (just as it 
applies to all ages, all races, all proffesions, etc).
 
> bboy_mn:
> So many of the most vocal people have no problem saying 'God hate
> fags' or 'Death to fags'. But they never get around to 'DEATH' for
> all their own sins. Where is DEATH to adulterers? Where is DEATH to
> fornicators? Where is DEATH to all the other things in the Bible says
> are punishable by death. How very convinient that the Old Testement
> DEATH no longer applies when it comes to their sins.
> 
> It's really the blatant hypocricy that drives me up the wall.

Agreed, drives me up the wall too.

> The general feeling amoung most Protestant churches it that the New
> Testement supersedes the Old Testement, and outlines a new way of
> living based on love and compassion.

Yep, happens in Catholic Church too, at least as far as I know (see 
above).

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 18:20:46 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 18:20:46 -0000
Subject: American marriage (was Question about New Testament )
In-Reply-To: <bh3b53+s20i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3e1u+bfq4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> 
wrote:
> Cindy wrote:
> 
> > Cindy -- who thinks a constitutional amendment to limit marriage 
> to 
> > heterosexuals has a 100% chance of passage by Congress and 
> > ratification by the states, but who doesn't support the idea 
> herself
> 
> Really?  Is there a serious attempt to pass such an amendment?
> 
> Maybe I'm just revealing my ignorance of how these things work, 
but 
> I would have imagined that the Supreme Court would block it (or 
> don't they have the power?) on the grounds that it's an attempt to 
> define 'marriage' rather than a genuine addition to the 
Constitution.
> 
> David

Maybe I'm also revealing my ignorance, but wouldn't that abrogate 
your 14th Amendment? 

The one about "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall 
abridge the privileges ... of citizens of the United States ... nor 
deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of 
the laws."

Pip!Squeak




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 18:37:35 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 18:37:35 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh2d6f+rrud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3f1f+7sa6@eGroups.com>


> I'm sinner and I'm sorry ...ummm... if I promise to be sorry again
> tomorrow, do you think I could do it again tonight?
> 
> bboy_mn

Alas, no. A thing cannot be both itself and not itself at the same 
time. You can't repent a sin in advance, since if you are willing to 
do the sin, you are not actually a truly repentant person. If you 
were a truly repentant person, you'd decide not to do the sin at all 
[grin].

You can of course, be very repentant in the morning (copious amounts 
of alcohol the night before are a great help to repentance), but 
true repentance requires genuine intention not to do the sin again.

You might fail, but you are at least supposed to try ;-)

It's that fine print, you know. Gets you every time...

Pip!Squeak

[If you think you can repent a sin in advance, try reading Dante's 
Inferno, Canto 27, where Guido da Montefeltro tells the story of how 
he made that mistake and where it got him * ;-) ]

[*Clue: you're reading Dante's story about a vision of Hell ]





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 18:56:59 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 19:56:59 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] American marriage (was Question about New Testament )
References: <bh3b53+s20i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F3543FB.000001.05489@monica>

 
 David

Really? Is there a serious attempt to pass such an amendment?
 
Maybe I'm just revealing my ignorance of how these things work, but 
I would have imagined that the Supreme Court would block it (or 
don't they have the power?) on the grounds that it's an attempt to 
define 'marriage' rather than a genuine addition to the Constitution.
 

 Me -

Actually if the US system works anything like the UK one then Congress could
pass the amendment (although we don't have a constitution here so I could be
wrong) and then someone would have to take the government to court to get it
declared unconstitutional. Since you would have to start in a lower court
and work your way up to the Supreme Court that could take years. 

K
 



From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 18:56:41 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 18:56:41 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3a7u+nd0h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3g59+v5s3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> wrote:
> I quoted from the NIV Bible:
> > > Leviticus 18:22
> > > "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is
> > > detestable."
> > > 
> > > Frankly, I find that to be very cut and dry, myself.
> 
>  
> > bboy_mn: 
> >The passage you site about speaks of an action; 'Lie'. I think for
> >simplicity sake we can agree that it does not refer to 'taking a
> >nap'.  So it speaks of 'to lie', but it doesn't not mention 'to be'.
> 
> ... I was taught it meant to have sex with them.  ...edited...  But 
> if it means just the act of lying with a man (i.e. the same sex) is
> detestable, then I think many of us as children committed that 
> "sin".  
> 

bboy_mn:

Sorry, my meaning got obscured by poor paragraph structure. The line
you were suppose to give weight to was (slightly restated)-

'I think for simplicity sake we can agree that 'lie' does not refer to 
'taking a nap'.

The implication being that I was acknowledging that 'lie' DID refer to
sex. Sorry, I guess I should have been a little more direct.


> 
> 
> >But here is a another point to ponder. These books are written from
> >a HetErosexual point of view. For a hetErosexual man to become so
> >overwhelmed by lust and desire for bodily pleasure that he would go
> >against his core nature, against his natural instincts, and engage 
> >in sex with another man, is certainly destestable and/or an 
> >abomonation (depending on what version you reference). 
> 
> Um Bboy.  I am lost here.  I define being homosexual as having sex
> with the same sex.  If I love another woman, that does not make me
> homosexual.  The act of physically loving on her does make me
> homosexual.  So if someone who is heterosexual, i.e. is attracted to
> opposite sex, has sex with one of their own sex, then they *are*
> homosexual.  No wait.  They are *bisexual*.  So is that the sin? 
> Bisexuality?

bboy_mn:

Yes, it always gets a little confusing when we use different
definitions. So, hypothetically, I am attracted to men and become
infatuated with men, and even occassionally fall in love with men (not
love, but 'fall in love'), but I never in my lifetime act on those
feelings. Am I gay or not? 

Most people would say yes, you are homosexual or as I prefer, gay,
because being gay is not an action but a state of being. That state of
being is not a sin. To act on it is, by some definition and under some
circumstances, a sin. But the same thing is true of heterosexuals, if
they never act on their heterosexual urges outside of marriage then
they don't sin, and if they do, they do.

Personally, I carry that one step farther and believe that if a male
couple is in a loving commited relationship, then there is love
without harm and therefore no sin. No harm, no foul.

On the point I was originally making, some people act out of a greed
for the pleasures of the flesh, and they don't care how those desires
for pleasure are satisfied. A straight (totally straight) man with no
affection toward, or emotional desire for the intimate company of men,
can have sex with men as a means of satisfying his earthy desire. It's
really just an elaborate form of self-gradification. Also, as someone
hinted at, as an assertion of power and dominance. 

These things do happen, and that doesn't even necessarily make him
bisexual. I see this as a greater form of decadance and sin than two
men who do have affectional desire and are pursuing potential
emotional connections. One goes against his nature because it serves
is decadant desire, the other goes WITH his nature and at least has
the potential for something deeper than pleasures of the flesh.

Keep in mind that I am not dictating reality, I'm stating my beliefs.

> 
> 
> A lady (in a Bible story) in the middle of committing adultery was 
> dragged away during the act by the Pharisees and Sadducees to the 
> square where Jesus was preaching.  I find it sad there was not 
> enough of them there to take the man with them...seems they forgot 
> about him... but I digress.  
> 

bboy_mn:

Sorry to cut so much, but we were in agreement on what was cut above,
so no point repeating it, and I think most people know this story from
the Bible, so I am going to cut it to make a completely unrelated point.

You understand that Adultry at that point in history was a property
law. It wasn't about sex and sin, it was about stealing another man's
property. If a man had sex with a dozen different slave girls,
assuming that they were his slave girls, he didn't commit adultry
because you can't steal your own property. 

So it wasn't about having sex outside his marriage, it was about
taking property that wasn't his. I'm really glad our society, or at
least most of it, has evolved beyond such a materialistic view of
women. As far as I'm concerned that 'women as property' attitude was a
sin in my book. 

I'm also a bit disturbed that most frequently the greatest weight of
punishment fell on the woman, for willingly allowing herself to be
stolen. Or perhaps, for giving away her master's property, to a poor
innocent man who was at the mercy of his natural instincts. It never
fails, they can always find some way to make it the womans fault.

> 
> All I can say Bboy, is that in my faith, God can see all and know
> all.
>

bboy_mn:
And he alone is fit to judge. True faith is between me and my God, not
between me and those who would judge me.


> He does not relish in the acts of those that are blind to their own
> sins and quick to pass judgment on those that do.  
> 
> That does not negate whether or not homosexuality is wrong, it only
> means that those that are so self-righteous to think *they* can 
> bring judgment in this world are wrong. I am sorry you are in the 
> crossfire.  
> 

bboy_mn:
I will give a big AMEN to that.

> 
> Bboy:
> > The general feeling amoung most Protestant churches it that the
> > New Testement supersedes the Old Testement, and outlines a new way
> > of living based on love and compassion.


> 
> When it is not clearly spelled out in the New Testament, often 
> times, we revert back to the Old Testament to see what God once 
> said. ... in the realm of homosexuality, it is not clear in the New 
> Testament what is God's stance on the issue, as far as I know.  
> 


bboy_mn:

True there may not be a specific statement regarding Homosexuality,
but the principles by which your life should be guided are crystal
clear, and those principles are love and compassion, not hate and
damnation. (a general statement, certainly not directed at you
personally.)

I draw upon my favorite letter by Paul to the Romans 14:13

Let us therefore cease judging one another, but rather make up our
minds to place no obstical or stumbling block in a fellow-Christian's
way. All that I know of Lord Jesus convinces me that nothing is impure
in itself; only, if anyone considers it impure, then for him it is
impure. If your fellow-Christian is outraged by what you eat, then you
are no longer guided by love. Do not by your eating be the ruin of one
for whom Christ died! You must not let what you think good be brought
into disrepute; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but
justice, peace, and joy, inspired by the Holy Spirit. Everyone who
shows himself a servant of Christ in this way is acceptable to God and
approved by men.


 
> 
> 
> Bboy: (org)
> >Let me make one thing clear, I never said that gay sex wasn't a 
> >sin. My position is that it is no more of a sin than hetErosexual 
> >sin under the indentical circumstances.


> 
> I agree. A sin is a sin, and my faith states that all sin is bad and
> draws you away from God.  
> 
> 
> Bboy:
> > I'm sinner and I'm sorry ...ummm... if I promise to be sorry again
> > tomorrow, do you think I could do it again tonight?
> 
> That is that Catholic view on things Bboy.  Party all night, and
> confess all morning.  Sorry, I joke because I am dating a Catholic. 
> Now *that* is fun religious debates.  
> 
> One might question why you Bboy are choosing to sin then, but I have
> the feeling that you think you are doing no one harm in your actions
> so why should you change?  My thoughts go to The Simpson's and the 
> Flanders' family children.  "Because you make baby Jesus cry."  ;)
> 
> Sorry, that family cracks me up.  Talk about religious paranoia.  
> 
> 
> Melody

bboy_mn:

Regarding my views on HARM, I want to make it crystal clear that I
think most people have a self-serving delusional view of what
constitutes harm. We can look at teenagers for a good illustration.
They feel invincible, so their view of harm is, if it doesn't kill me
on the spot, then there's no harm. Drink 'til you puke, if your still
alive in the morning; no harm, no foul. Or from another point of view;
if I can't see it, it doesn't exist (relative to harm).

When I say 'harm', I mean in every way, and on every front, and for a
lifetime. Again, just because you don't see the harm to a person this
week, or this month, or this year, doesn't mean you won't have done
harm to this person in their lifetime. 

In the essays I wrote and posted a link to on Sex and Sin, I go into
deeper examples of perceived harm and true harm. Harm must be weighed
over a lifetime and it must be weighed on a physical, emotional,
pschological, intellectual, and spiritual fronts. If you can truly say
you have 'done no harm' and 'done some good' on all these front, then
I simply can not find the 'sin' in your actions.

In closing, I wonder how much farther we should take this discussion.
I have truly enjoyed talking with you, and again, I find your views
enlightened, and in line with what I think a true Christian should be
(again, by no means do I imply that you need my approval in any way.
shape or form). I don't require that you agree with me. We certainly
differ on some points, but I see sound sane logic and reasoning behind
you choices, and agree or disagree with me, I still have to admire that.

I'm willing to continue, but I wonder if we aren't drifting a little
too far off group topic. Plus, the problem with religious discussion
is it can never be resolved. It is a debate that goes on forever. And
in the end, it is never the opinion of someone else that matters; it's
me, my God, my faith; a complete set.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn





From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Sat Aug  9 19:20:48 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 21:20:48 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3g59+v5s3@eGroups.com>
References: <bh3g59+v5s3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F354990.9020109@ipartner.com.pl>

Hello,

Don't get me wrong, I really respects your believes, whatever they are, 
hovewer I'd like to point out that from an atheist's point of view 
matter is quite simple.

One just have to answer simple question: Does this human behaviour harm 
other human? If it does, then it should be prohibited and I should fight 
with it using possible means; if it does not, then it's not my business.

Does then homosexuality harm other humans? It does not. So law and 
government should stay away from it.

Regards,

-- 
Pshemekan






From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 19:28:40 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 19:28:40 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <bh3aq4+ubpa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3i18+dib2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> Recently we discussed the "gay issue" here in a religious context.
> 
> Some people who were personally against it, we also not in favor of
> restricting it. Taking a 'to each his own, and let God be the 
judge'
> attitude (grossly paraphrased).
> 
> If you would like to weigh in on the issue, CNN is taking a poll 
> based on some recent comments by Pres. Bush.
> 
> The question is-
> 
> "Should marriage be legally defined as only a union between a man 
> and a woman?"
> 
> Yes = restricted to Men and Women as couples
> 
> No = no restriction or legal definition regarding gender of the 
> couple 
<snip>
> Currently-
> 
> 51% = Yes
> 49% = No
> 10,000,000 votes cast.
 
This doesn't surprise me a bit, as the country is very divided about 
this at the moment.  What does get on my nerves is the idea that if 
a majority of the people in this country are against something, that 
should settle it.  If CNN did a poll concerning whether people of 
different races should be permitted to marry and most people were 
against it, would that mean the constitution should be changed to 
reflect that?  Of course not. The Supreme Court only just put the 
kibosh on miscegenation laws in 1970 with Virginia vs. Loving, and 
ten years after that two-thirds of the people in the country were 
still against that decision; and plenty of people believed--and 
still believe--that there were religious reasons to forbid mixed-
race marriages, too.  Just because people felt very strongly about 
it didn't mean it would have been right to perpetuate the injustice.

Equal protection under the law should mean equal protection under 
the law, regardless of whether it's popular.  The Supreme Court 
recently did the right thing concerning laws that made gays 
criminals for what they did in private (not that anyone can assume 
what two people do in private, which is something a lot of folks 
tend to forget) and there is a bit of a Religious Right backlash 
because of that right now.  Even a prominent leader in Congress who 
happens to be Presbyterian (my denomination) made some ridiculous 
statement about having to "protect" marriage because it's a 
sacrament.  In some churches it is, but in the Presbyterian church 
the only sacraments are baptism and communion--he seems to have 
forgotten his Westminster Catechism.  And why Congress should be 
passing Constitutional amendments to "protect" sacraments is beyond 
me.   

Same-gender couples have been marrying in churches and synagogues 
for YEARS.  That's where it started!  It is religious descrimination 
not to recognize those marriages legally.  A Constitutional 
amendment to prevent this would probably be very popular, but it 
would be completely unjust and a way for frightened politicians 
(what, are they all channeling Fudge now?) to have easy platforms on 
which to run, something they don't think will offend anyone and will 
catapult them back to Washington.  (Or they might be afraid that NOT 
supporting the amendment will lose them their jobs, which, while it 
might be a valid fear, shouldn't prevent a person from having 
PRINCIPLES.  Yeah, I just wrote that about politicians with a 
straight face.<g>)

For all marriage laws to merely require that the two people be 
single (not already married to other people), of legal age (or with 
a parent's permission if under 18) and not too closely related to 
each other (although some places permit marriages between first 
cousins) would seem to be the most logical way to go, with no 
mention of the two people's genders anywhere in the law.  This would 
mean no unnecessary domestic partnership legislation--which is 
usually separate but unequal, and when it is actually equal it is a 
ridiculous instance of reinventing the wheel so that "they" don't 
get something that's also called "marriage".  Interestingly enough, 
a lot of same-gender couples already call what they have 
a "marriage," regardless of the law.  Words cannot be shackled and 
enslaved.  Language is evolving constantly and so is human society.  
(Not that you'd know that, sometimes.)

Here is also a link to a very interesting bit of research by OT 
scholars, including a note from Rabbi Arthur Waskow.  It's 
called "What was the sin of Sodom?":

http://www.iwgonline.org/docs/sodom.html

Information about religious support for same-gender marriage can be 
found here:

http://www.iwgonline.org/marriage/

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 19:34:32 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 19:34:32 -0000
Subject: American marriage (was Question about New Testament )
In-Reply-To: <3F3543FB.000001.05489@monica>
Message-ID: <bh3ic8+ghbe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" 
<kcawte at b...> wrote:
>  
>  David
> 
> Really? Is there a serious attempt to pass such an amendment?
>  
> Maybe I'm just revealing my ignorance of how these things work, 
but 
> I would have imagined that the Supreme Court would block it (or 
> don't they have the power?) on the grounds that it's an attempt to 
> define 'marriage' rather than a genuine addition to the 
Constitution.
>  
> 
>  Me -
> 
> Actually if the US system works anything like the UK one then 
Congress could
> pass the amendment (although we don't have a constitution here so 
I could be
> wrong) and then someone would have to take the government to court 
to get it
> declared unconstitutional. Since you would have to start in a 
lower court
> and work your way up to the Supreme Court that could take years. 
> 
> K

Well, the way the US system works you can't actually declare a 
Constitutional amendment to be unconstitutional--it's PART of the 
Constitution, so it is by definition constitutional.  That's why an 
amendment is being proposed; anything that was a mere law could be 
overridden by the Supreme Court (if you had the right mix of 
people).  If a subsequent amendment to the US Constitution seems to 
abbrogate a previous one, the previous one is considered to be 
superseded by the new amendment (which isn't to say that the 
previous amendment would be completely thrown out, but that marriage 
would be considered an exception to the rule).

--Barb

http://www.iwgonline.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug  9 20:18:22 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 20:18:22 -0000
Subject: American marriage (was Question about New Testament )
In-Reply-To: <bh3ic8+ghbe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3kue+khol@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "psychic_serpent" 
<psychic_serpent at y...> wrote:
> >  
> >  David
> > 
> > Really? Is there a serious attempt to pass such an amendment?
> >  
> > Maybe I'm just revealing my ignorance of how these things work, 
> but 
> > I would have imagined that the Supreme Court would block it (or 
> > don't they have the power?) on the grounds that it's an attempt 
to 
> > define 'marriage' rather than a genuine addition to the 
> Constitution.

Dubya announced last week that his lawyers were looking into the 
possibility.  He was careful to point out that he liked gay people 
(i.e. he still wants the gay vote) and that people shouldn't be 
prejudiced against gays because "we are all sinners."  (Thus 
implying, of course, that gay sex was sinful).

Barb:
> Well, the way the US system works you can't actually declare a 
> Constitutional amendment to be unconstitutional--it's PART of the 
> Constitution, so it is by definition constitutional.  That's why an 
> amendment is being proposed; anything that was a mere law could be 
> overridden by the Supreme Court (if you had the right mix of 
> people).  If a subsequent amendment to the US Constitution seems to 
> abbrogate a previous one, the previous one is considered to be 
> superseded by the new amendment (which isn't to say that the 
> previous amendment would be completely thrown out, but that 
marriage 
> would be considered an exception to the rule).
> 

For example, the amendment to repeal Prohibition superseded the 
Prohibition amendment.

--Joywitch, who apparently is an unrepentful sinner




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Aug  9 20:37:55 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 20:37:55 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3g59+v5s3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3m33+hg12@eGroups.com>

Steve bboy wrote:
> Personally, I carry that one step farther and believe that if a male
> couple is in a loving commited relationship, then there is love
> without harm and therefore no sin. No harm, no foul.

Ok, I've finally isolated my troubles with your argument, Steve. It's 
right there: since there is no harm, there is no *sin*. Now, before 
half the list goes up in flames, let me state my position (and maybe, 
in doing it, you'll see where I'm getting at). I believe that there is 
nothing morally wrong in homosexual (gay, since you prefer it) sex or 
love. I believe their social marriage should be legal. That has nothing 
to do with it being sin or not. Chosen the right religion, many things 
are sin - this one in particular, but so many others. Now, up to this 
point we were discussing Old Testament and New Testament definition of 
morality of gay sex. And, in that constraint, I tried to point out 
that, regardless of what we felt was correct, the Old Testament did, 
indeed, classify gay sex as sin (while New Testament leaves it to 
interpretation).

But now you've suddenly changed tables on me, and said *you* don't 
consider it sin. Now, we have a problem, here. Sin can be defined as 
"that which is declared wrong by a divinity, and thus subject to 
judgement and/or punishement by such divinity". At any rate, we need 
some sort of god in the way to define sin. Now, unless you've started 
your own religion and haven't told us, Steve, I'm afraid you cannot 
really define sin - neither can I, nor anyone that does not speak for a 
God. Ok, so maybe you are a priest for a religion, in which case you 
should've said, but until then we can discuss on the morality, where I 
agree, or in the definition of sin of a particular religion. I hope you 
see the point I'm trying to make, Steve, and don't take it the wrong 
way. In essence, it is just a nit-pick: your point is that gay sex is 
not sin, and my point is that it is not immoral, but it *is* defined as 
sin in the Old Testament.
 
> You understand that Adultry at that point in history was a property
> law. It wasn't about sex and sin, it was about stealing another man's
> property. If a man had sex with a dozen different slave girls,
> assuming that they were his slave girls, he didn't commit adultry
> because you can't steal your own property. 

Since we seem to be toning down this discussion with a little humour, 
I've been pointed at a comic making fun of George W. Bush:
http://www.ucomics.com/tomthedancingbug/
(valid today 9/8/03, after which you might have to look in the 
archives).

It does talk about your point about the old meanings of marriage, and 
puts forward some you had not contemplated. And luckily it'll make us 
laugh. I certainly chuckled.

Przemyslaw Plaskowicki (Pshemekan) (Interesting name, by the way - is 
it Russian?) wrote: 
> One just have to answer simple question: Does this human behaviour 
> harm other human? If it does, then it should be prohibited and I 
> should fight with it using possible means; if it does not, then it's 
> not my business.
>
> Does then homosexuality harm other humans? It does not. So law and 
> government should stay away from it.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Pshemekan

and, in the same line, bboy_mn:
> When I say 'harm', I mean in every way, and on every front, and for a
> lifetime. Again, just because you don't see the harm to a person this
> week, or this month, or this year, doesn't mean you won't have done
> harm to this person in their lifetime. 
> 
> In the essays I wrote and posted a link to on Sex and Sin, I go into
> deeper examples of perceived harm and true harm. Harm must be weighed
> over a lifetime and it must be weighed on a physical, emotional,
> pschological, intellectual, and spiritual fronts. If you can truly
> say you have 'done no harm' and 'done some good' on all these front,
> then I simply can not find the 'sin' in your actions.

Ok, tackling both at once: While I agree with the views expressed by 
both Steve and Pshemekan, I have to clarify something that I feel is 
important (first, a confession: Sorry, Steve, I haven't read your 
essays, and yet I'm going to give you one to read - but I do have an 
excuse: I'm working on a project where I have been documenting myself, 
and I have enough reading material to make me scream, and I really 
don't need more things floating around).

Anyway, in the issue of harm: I agree that a good legal system - is one 
that punishes only those acts which physically harms or could 
conceivably harm a non-consensual individual. Notice two things, 
though: legal system and physical harm. There is a book which is 
particularly good at making the case (although I could nit-pick a 
couple of its conclussions, but then I'm almost a proffesional 
nit-picker after joining this list):

http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/books/aint/101.htm

Why Physical Harm?
------------------

Steve has a nice list of all ways you can harm someone, including 
psychological. To which I'm going to give a counter-example (taken from 
the previous link):

"At what point does behavior become so unacceptable that we should tell 
our government to lock people up? The answer, as explored in this book: 
We lock people up only when they physically harm the person or property 
of a nonconsenting other.

Contained in this answer is an important assumption: after a certain 
age, our persons and property belong to us. Yes, if we harm ourselves 
it may emotionally harm others. That's unfortunate, but not grounds for 
putting us in jail. If it were, every time we stopped dating person A 
in order to date person B, we would run the risk of going to jail for 
hurting person A. If person B were hurt by our being put in jail, 
person A could be put in jail for hurting person B. This would, of 
course, hurt person A's mother, who would see to it that person B would 
go to jail. Eventually, we'd all be in jail."

The book is "Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do" (Peter McWilliams), on 
consensual crimes.

Indeed, no other harm but physical is measurable, so it is difficult to 
punish for any other sort of harm. While indeed all other harms can be 
scarring, a simple assumption of "psycological harm" is difficult to 
accept. Again, don't take me wrong - I agree that psycological harm is 
sometimes worse than physical one, but today it would be wrong to 
punish someone for doing it, at least without strong definitions of 
when it is scarring.


Why Legal System?
-----------------

Moral systems are private of our own, and the best you can do is leave 
other's alone (except for education purposes, i.e. teaching our sons 
our moral system). I find certain acts particularly disgusting, as well 
as immoral, for example sex with animals. I adhere to the Catholic 
morality most of the time, relaxing some parts and strengthening others 
(i.e. adapting it). But that is my own moral code, which forbids (for 
me!) certain acts, under the assumption of being morally wrong - even 
if they cause no harm. As explained in the article, and have debated 
recently, however, just because I consider it morally wrong, it doesn't 
have to be legally wrong. So bboy is free to act within the margins of 
such a moral system, and so am I. I might restrict my actions more than 
he would (note: might, I have the feeling his morality and mine are 
quite close), and fundamentalists would restrict them even more. That's 
all right - as long as they don't insist in everyone else restrcting 
themselves to what *they* consider moral (which, unfortunately, some 
do).

Barb wrote:
> For all marriage laws to merely require that the two people be 
> single (not already married to other people), of legal age (or with 
> a parent's permission if under 18) and not too closely related to 
> each other (although some places permit marriages between first 
> cousins) would seem to be the most logical way to go, with no 
> mention of the two people's genders anywhere in the law.

I would go even further and discard the "single" requirement. While I 
do have moral problems with polymarriage, I see no legal reason to stop 
it. Consanginuity might be discarded too, since nowadays defective 
fetuses are discarded, but I would recommend that anyone wanting to 
marry close relations should check if they want to have children their 
chances of it.

Back to bboy:
> In closing, I wonder how much farther we should take this discussion.
> I have truly enjoyed talking with you, and again, I find your views
> enlightened, and in line with what I think a true Christian should be
> (again, by no means do I imply that you need my approval in any way.
> shape or form). I don't require that you agree with me. We certainly
> differ on some points, but I see sound sane logic and reasoning
> behind you choices, and agree or disagree with me, I still have to 
> admire that.

I have enjoyed the discussion too, bboy, although it might rest upon 
your consciense that it might be what makes me come back from my latest 
lurking stage ;P . I have sprinkled the entire post with it, but I'll 
repeat it here: I mean no attack, no offense, no insult against anyone. 
I have tried to express my views in a way which is non-offensive and 
I'm certainly not telling anyone that their way of life is wrong - just 
that I might find it morally unsuitable *for me*. I won't deal 
judgement, because in my faith only my God can safely do that, so don't 
feel judged by me. If I have managed to offend someone, sorry. I mean 
it. It was not my intention

> I'm willing to continue, but I wonder if we aren't drifting a little
> too far off group topic. Plus, the problem with religious discussion
> is it can never be resolved. It is a debate that goes on forever. And
> in the end, it is never the opinion of someone else that matters; 
> it's me, my God, my faith; a complete set.
> 
> Just a few thoughts.
> 
> bboy_mn

Well, I quite enjoy discussions that go on forever, Steve. I joined the 
list, didn't I? Speaking of which, we never did solve the number of 
students question, did we? (Note to self: Must see what the standings 
are now). And of course it is only your personal opinion that matters - 
it has always been like this, down to Ginny's probable marriage. The 
way I look at it is that we use this to understand what that opinion 
*is* by seeing it from outside, from the eyes and the words of the 
others. If that is the case, then we have helped each other gain better 
knowledge of ourselves. Why did you think I always sign as I do? 
Because if one of my posts helps someone think clearer, then I haven't 
lost my time.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug  9 20:59:00 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 20:59:00 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh1oqa+nhlq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3nak+p8fh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...> 
wrote:

> Personally, I am a Southern Baptist who believes sex outside of 
> marriage is a sin for everyone and that gay sex is a sin as well.  
I 
> also happen to believe that my personal religious beliefs should 
not 
> form the basis for government policy.  So I am in favor of civil 
> unions for gays etc. to grant to them the legal rights and 
> obligations that come with marriage.  Call it civil union, 
marriage, 
> whatever.  Those of us who are religious can still be married in 
our 
> churches, and our unions will conform with our own personal beliefs.
> 
> I just fail to see how allowing two gay men to form a civil union 
> undermines the strength or importance of my marriage.


I don't understand.  It seems like you are saying that sex outside 
marriage, and gay sex, are sins, for everyone, but yet they are your 
personal beliefs and shouldn't affect other people, or at least 
shouldn't affect how other people are governed.  While I agree with 
the second part -- I don't really understand why, in a country 
with "separation of church and state" written into the constitution, 
people feel that their personal religious beliefs should have any 
influence on the law, I am confused about your personal beliefs and 
attitudes towards the acts which you consider to be sinful.

So, your friends who engage in gay sex (within monogamous 
relationships or not), and your friends who engage in straight sex 
who are not married, are people who you consider to be sinners, I 
assume.  How does that affect your relationship with them?  If they 
are sinners, do you refuse to, I don't know, bring your children to 
their houses?  Or does it not have any practical impact?  And if it 
doesn't have any practical impact, how is it meaningful?

It seems like you are saying that these acts would be a sin for you, 
but that other people should be allowed to do what they want, but at 
the same time you say these things are a sin for everyone, so I'm 
confused.

I guess I feel a little offended.  As a bisexual woman who has had 
sex with both men and women and has never been married, I am a little 
disturbed to find out that you consider me to be a sinner.  I know 
you don't have any problem being friends with me, because we've 
shared several yummy plates of sushi together, but it does it mean 
that you disapprove of me, or value me less, or feel sorry for me?  
Or are you saying that we are both sinners, since the amount of sushi 
we ate probably rated the sin of gluttony, so sinning is no big deal?

One time when I was in Mexico, a woman at the place where I was 
staying asked me about my religion.  I told her I was Jewish, and she 
became very apologetic.  Very nice, but very apologetic.  She told me 
that she was very sorry, but that unless I converted to Christianity 
I would burn in hell for all eternity.  She then proceeded to get her 
10 year old son to read the Bible out loud to me, which I didn't mind 
at the time because I needed to practice my Spanish and he read very 
well.  But I did feel her attitude was pretty offensive -- why should 
her beliefs affect my afterlife?

--Joywitch, who if she is sinning is doing it very happily, thank you




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 21:03:22 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 22:03:22 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Question about New Testament (with OT)
References: <bh3m33+hg12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F35619A.000001.23953@monica>

 My problem with religious (and for the purposes of this post I am only
talking about the attitudes of religious organizations not attitudes of
individuals) attitudes to homosexuality is the hypocrisy involved.

Some christian churches say that homosexuality is a sin because the bible
says so. Well the bible also has (as far as I know) verses saying that
growing two crops in the same field is a sin, that working on a Sunday is a
sin, that 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to live'. Most mainstream Christian
churches do not now consider these to be sins (although some do still try to
prevent people working on Sundays - although don't all vicars work on the
Sabbath anyway?) but homosexuality is. Why? What makes one part of the Bible
absolute whereas other parts can be discarded as and when people feel like
it. 

Also the CofE attitude towards gay clergy is slightly odd - it's OK to be
homosexual provided you're not a *practising* homosexual. The guy who was
forced to withdraw from trying to become a bishop here was gay and in a
relationship (long-standing) but celibate, which apparently made it OK.
Heterosexual clergy aren't required to be celibate but homosexual clergy are


K



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 21:41:59 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 21:41:59 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <3F35619A.000001.23953@monica>
Message-ID: <bh3pr7+375p@eGroups.com>

Kathryn writes:
> Also the CofE attitude towards gay clergy is slightly odd - it's 
> OK to be homosexual provided you're not a *practising* homosexual. 
> The guy who was forced to withdraw from trying to become a bishop a
> here was gay and in relationship (long-standing) but celibate, 
which apparently made it OK.
> Heterosexual clergy aren't required to be celibate but homosexual 
clergy are
> 
> 
> K

Uh, you are making a very common mistake.

The description of someone as 'homo or heterosexual' is a very 
modern idea. Websters has the word 'homosexual' dating no earlier 
than 1892. Even more modern is the idea that which gender you are 
attracted to somehow defines your whole personality.

Heterosexual clergy are allowed to be married because that's the 
only allowable form of sexual relationship in the C of E. If they're 
not married, they are supposed to be celibate. Some do have sex 
outside marriage, but that's human frailty.

Homosexual clergy are bound by the same rule that the only allowable 
form of sexual relationship is within marriage. Which currently 
means they're stuck - like an unmarried hetrosexual priest, they are 
supposed to remain celibate. And like unmarried heterosexual 
priests, some  are often not actually celibate - but again, that's 
human frailty. 

But the rules are exactly the same - sex outside marriage is sinful. 

It's the people who opposed Dr. John's appointment who were 
misreading the bible (IMO! IMO!). Because the Bible refers to 
*acts*. Not to inclination. If you'd told St Paul that someone who 
is remaining firmly celibate is a sinner because their inclination 
was to the same sex, not to the opposite sex, he'd probably have 
thought you nuts. Inclinations are a problem because they lead to 
acts. If you have fought your inclinations and remained chaste, 
you're doing pretty well in Paul's view. [See 1 Corinthians, Ch.7].

So the attitude isn't odd. It's simply that you are either married, 
and therefore allowed to have a sexual relationship, or you are not, 
and therefore should be celibate. 

Who you are actually being celibate from shouldn't be important ;-)

Pip!Squeak




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Aug  9 21:43:13 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 21:43:13 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <3F35619A.000001.23953@monica>
Message-ID: <bh3pth+kmd0@eGroups.com>

Kathryn Cawte wrote: 
> Some christian churches say that homosexuality is a sin because the
> bible says so. Well the bible also has (as far as I know) verses
> saying that growing two crops in the same field is a sin, that
> working on a Sunday is a sin, that 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to
> live'. Most mainstream Christian churches do not now consider these
> to be sins (although some do still try to prevent people working on
> Sundays - although don't all vicars work on the Sabbath anyway?) but
> homosexuality is. Why? What makes one part of the Bible absolute
> whereas other parts can be discarded as and when people feel like it. 

I discussed this point in my two previous posts (not that I can blame 
you for missing it - they're slightly chaotic), but in essence, it 
says: Bible has two books, Old and New Testament.Old has many laws, 
which in theory should be followed strictly by jews (That was the case 
in the middle ages, at least. I am absolutely ignorant about modern 
jewish interpretation of Korah and will not make a statement - maybe 
joywitch can). New Testament has only one rule, and a lot of examples 
of conduct. 

Thus, in priciple, christians should follow that one rule, and ignore 
all the others, interpreting every circunstance in light of that one 
rule. In practice, christianity is divided. Catholic canonic 
interpretation is passed down from the Pope. Everyone else is entitled 
their opinion, as long as it does not contradict a statement by the 
Pope made under Truth of Faith. In Protestant Churches, IIRC (please 
note, this isn't necessarily true nowadays), interpretation is entirely 
in the hand of all the clergy, and they're allowed to contradict each 
other (one of Luther's reforms, IIRC). I've no idea how this works in 
Orthodox Church or any other I might be missing, sorry.

Finally, we come to the modern day Pharesees. These are the ones that, 
for some reason, find certain acts "evil", and find a passage in the 
Bible that supports their thesis... and use it as a battering ram to 
attack other people. Normally ignoring other problematic verses about 
not throwing stones if you're a sinner yourself. I've been checking the 
archives of Ozy and Millie (the comic linked by Melody) and I invite 
everyone to read the next few comics beyond the one linked, which are 
still about the same idea. In particular, I like:

http://www.ozyandmillie.net/2000/om20000817.html

But as I say, all the ones in between (and also the next one) are good.

> Also the CofE attitude towards gay clergy is slightly odd - it's OK
> to be homosexual provided you're not a *practising* homosexual. The
> guy who was forced to withdraw from trying to become a bishop here
> was gay and in a relationship (long-standing) but celibate, which 
> apparently made it OK.Heterosexual clergy aren't required to be
> celibate but homosexual clergy are
> 
> K

Ummm... I can explain where the logic comes from, but once again, I 
want to first state that I'm *not* agreeing with it. First, let me say 
that the Catholic Church recently had a document published telling 
Catholic gays to stay celibate, since having sex would be sin for them 
(*any* sex - even with a woman). It was published by a high-ranking 
priest (archbishop, I think), but, luckily, it is not the Pope's word - 
so it is just an interpretation.

The logic is this: gay sex is sin, because it is not reproduction 
oriented (fundamentalist Catholics believe that all sex must be for 
reproduction purposes only). In fact, *being* gay is considered 
"unnatural" and "a desease", and while anyone sick is entitled 
compassion, the document stated they should prevent "passing it on". 
They seem to understand that being gay is transmisible. I won't comment 
on the details of my opinion of those views, just will say that I don't 
agree with them.

At any rate, from this PoV, I assume that CofE is thinking in more or 
less the same lines: the gay priest are not allowed to have sex, not 
because they are priests, but because *any* gay sex is sin, and they 
should, as guides of comunity, provide guidance and avoid sin.

I have to say, that, in a certain way, I do agree with this - but does 
depend on how sin is defined in each church. In the Catholic Church, it 
would make more sense, since all priests take a vow of celibacy. No-one 
forces them and so if they break it, they should be retired of their 
position. Thing is, *as long as officially, their act is sinful in 
their religion* a priest should not do it, no matter how ridiculous the 
sin is. They can, of course, lead a campaign to "un-sin" it, by 
interpretation of their religious texts.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, who wants to insist yet again that he finds nothing morally 
wrong in gay sex, regardless of what the more conservative parties of 
his Church say.





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 21:54:43 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 22:54:43 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Question about New Testament (with OT)
References: <bh3pr7+375p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F356DA3.000003.23953@monica>

  Pip!Squeak
If you'd told St Paul that someone who 
is remaining firmly celibate is a sinner because their inclination 
was to the same sex, not to the opposite sex, he'd probably have 
thought you nuts. Inclinations are a problem because they lead to 
acts. If you have fought your inclinations and remained chaste, 
you're doing pretty well in Paul's view. [See 1 Corinthians, Ch.7].

 
 Me -

Of course according to St Paul sex wasn't really something he approved of
anyway. He said that if single people and widows (oddly afaik not widowers)
absoutely *had* to have sex they should get married, but it was better not
to have sex at all (I'm seeing some major problems with that attitude, like
the extinction of the human race) - this btw is what was said in a
documentary on the history of sexuality that I saw yesterday.

Anyway thae church attitude towards sex has always been odd - and has
certain 'scales' of sin. In the medieval period the belief was that there
were two classes of women - good and not so good (I admit I forget the
actual terms) and that if men felt the urge to have 'unnatural' sex ie
anything not designed purely for reproductive purposes they should go to
prostitutes rather than inflicting these desires on their wives. Of course
at that time the majority of the brothels in London were on Church owned
land so maybe that was just self-interest speaking :)

K



From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 22:16:54 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 22:16:54 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
 
 
Message-ID: <bh3rsm+vjk0@eGroups.com>

Jumping in with both feet. . . 

Captain Cindy wrote:

 > Personally, I am a Southern Baptist who believes sex outside of 
 > marriage is a sin for everyone and that gay sex is a sin as well. I
 > also happen to believe that my personal religious beliefs should not 
 > form the basis for government policy. So I am in favor of civil 
 > unions for gays etc. to grant to them the legal rights and 
 > obligations that come with marriage. Call it civil union, marriage, 
 > whatever. Those of us who are religious can still be married in our 
 > churches, and our unions will conform with our own personal beliefs.
 > 
 > I just fail to see how allowing two gay men to form a civil union 
 > undermines the strength or importance of my marriage.

And then Joywitch wrote:
 
> So, your friends who engage in gay sex (within monogamous 
> relationships or not), and your friends who engage in straight sex 
> who are not married, are people who you consider to be sinners, I 
> assume. 

Er. I can't entirely speak for Captain Cindy, but I'd have to say that according to any 
definition of Christianity *I've* ever heard, there is no such thing as "people who you 
consider to be sinners." Every human being who ever lived since Adam and Eve -- 
except for Jesus Christ, obviously -- was/is/will be a sinner. Every selfish or hateful 
or proud *thought* that a human being has is an indication of their fundamental 
brokenness, and *everyone* is broken.

> How does that affect your relationship with them? If they 
> are sinners, do you refuse to, I don't know, bring your children to 
> their houses?

I hope not. Apart from the fundamental question of charity, it's hard to see what good 
you would accomplish waiting for dinner invites from the sinless. (Hint: you'll be 
waiting for a while.) Now, if you were concerned that the particular nature of the sin 
could somehow hurt the children -- physically, emotionally, or spiritually -- you 
might hire a babysitter or something, I guess. If you were concerned that it could 
somehow hurt yourself -- for example, if you were a recovering alcoholic and the 
person in question threw an awful lot of kegger parties -- you might decline the 
invitation. Though I hope you would still do so charitably. Which is not necessarily 
always the same thing as politely.

> Or does it not have any practical impact? And if it 
> doesn't have any practical impact, how is it meaningful?

Well. . . define "practical impact," though. The fact is that you *don't* thunderously 
denounce every sin you come across to everyone who is engaging in it, partly because 
of the obvious logistical difficulties, but also partly because, unless you stand a good 
chance of actually improving the situation, you often aren't accomplishing much other 
than being self-righteous. (Being self-righteous is also a sin.) But the fact that you 
don't always publically denounce or disassociate yourself from something doesn't 
mean that you don't consider it a sin, and it *certainly* doesn't mean that it isn't, in 
Fact, a sin.
 
> It seems like you are saying that these acts would be a sin for you, 
> but that other people should be allowed to do what they want, but at 
> the same time you say these things are a sin for everyone, so I'm 
> confused.

No, no, not really. She's saying -- I think, and forgive me if I'm mischaracterizing you 
here, Cindy -- that these acts are a sin, for herself and for everyone, but that there is 
a distinction between spiritual sin and civil crime. Lying is a sin. Envy is a sin. Hatred 
is a sin. That doesn't necessarily mean that lying, envy, and hatred should all be 
crimes. The civil authority is far better at enforcing civil order than at enforcing 
spiritual order, and sometimes ought to stay out of the latter.
 
> I guess I feel a little offended. As a bisexual woman who has had 
> sex with both men and women and has never been married, I am a little 
> disturbed to find out that you consider me to be a sinner. 

Er. She probably considers everyone of her acquaintance to be a sinner, including 
herself. After all, if a person didn't ever sin, they would be perfect, and if you've ever 
met a perfect person, I'd be interested in getting their phone number.

John Stott once wrote that in the eyes of God, we are all sexual deviants.

> snip as it's more a question for Cindy to answer personally <
 
> One time when I was in Mexico, a woman at the place where I was 
> staying asked me about my religion. I told her I was Jewish, and she 
> became very apologetic. Very nice, but very apologetic. She told me 
> that she was very sorry, but that unless I converted to Christianity 
> I would burn in hell for all eternity. She then proceeded to get her 
> 10 year old son to read the Bible out loud to me, which I didn't mind 
> at the time because I needed to practice my Spanish and he read very 
> well. But I did feel her attitude was pretty offensive -- why should 
> her beliefs affect my afterlife?

Yikes. If I had the intelligence of a mollusc, I wouldn't touch this one, but here goes.

Because truth is objective. Her beliefs cannot affect your afterlife, if by "her beliefs" 
you mean "The fact that she believes something." But her beliefs obviously can affect 
*everybody's* afterlife if by "her beliefs" you mean "Some fact about the universe 
about which she is correct." Maybe she was correct, maybe she was incorrect -- but 
she *was* factually correct or incorrect, and you're making it sound like you don't 
believe that a question of Fact even comes into it. But don't you see that if religion 
*is* a matter of objective truth -- and I frankly do not understand what other kind of 
truth there could be -- then what is true is true for everyone, and what is wrong is 
wrong for everyone, and if you or I am wrong, or (and it may be the same thing 
sometimes) *in the wrong,* then that could have immeasurably serious 
consequences? I'm not trying to say here, "Convert to Christianity," I'm simply trying 
to say that Christianity is either true or false and if it's true, then *everybody* had 
better convert to Christianity. And if it's false, then nobody should, at least not in the 
interests of truth.
 
 


Derannimer, who suspects that she is about to become a very lonely poster




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 22:25:19 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 22:25:19 -0000
Subject: "No Author"
Message-ID: <bh3scf+6pob@eGroups.com>

Darn. I wish I knew why my computer was doing this. Has anyone else ever had their 
messages attributed to "no author?"



Derannimer




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug  9 22:30:19 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 22:30:19 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <3F356DA3.000003.23953@monica>
Message-ID: <bh3slr+sgb0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" 
<kcawte at b...> wrote:

> 
> Of course according to St Paul sex wasn't really something he 
> approved ofanyway. He said that if single people and widows 
> (oddly )afaik not widowers absoutely *had* to have sex they should 
> get married, but it was better not to have sex at all (I'm seeing 
> some major problems with that attitude, like the extinction of the 
human race) - this btw is what was said in a
> documentary on the history of sexuality that I saw yesterday.
> 

Yeah, that one always gets quoted [grin]. Usually people (like the 
makers of your documentary) miss out the one vital little 
phrase: 'Because of the present crisis...' [1 Corinthians Chapter 7 
v. 26, New International translation. RSV has 'impending distress']

*What* the present crisis was, we have no way of knowing. Theories 
have included the idea that Paul expected the Second Coming any 
moment now. Alternatively, there is some evidence that there may 
have been food shortages in Corinth [which would also explain why 
the question of whether you could eat food that may have been 
sacrificed to idols was also dealt with in that letter. ]. Or it may 
have been a political crisis(this was not a fun period for the Roman 
Empire). 

But the implication is not that marriage was a bad thing full stop 
[period], but that marriage was a bad thing *at the present time*.

Pip!Squeak






From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Sat Aug  9 23:06:22 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 01:06:22 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] American's religion (Was: Re: Question about
 New Testament (with OT))
In-Reply-To: <bh3m33+hg12@eGroups.com>
References: <bh3m33+hg12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F357E6E.9010201@ipartner.com.pl>

Grey Wolf wrote (2003-08-09 22:37):

I agree with Grey Wolf.

>--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...> 
>wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Personally, I am a Southern Baptist who believes sex outside of 
>>marriage is a sin for everyone and that gay sex is a sin as well.  
>>
To which joywitch_m_curmudgeon responded (2003-08-09 22:59):

>I guess I feel a little offended.  As a bisexual woman who has had 
>sex with both men and women and has never been married, I am a little 
>disturbed to find out that you consider me to be a sinner.  I know 
>you don't have any problem being friends with me, because we've 
>shared several yummy plates of sushi together, but it does it mean 
>that you disapprove of me, or value me less, or feel sorry for me?  
>Or are you saying that we are both sinners, since the amount of sushi 
>we ate probably rated the sin of gluttony, so sinning is no big deal?
>
>One time when I was in Mexico, a woman at the place where I was 
>staying asked me about my religion.  I told her I was Jewish, and she 
>became very apologetic.  Very nice, but very apologetic.  She told me 
>that she was very sorry, but that unless I converted to Christianity 
>I would burn in hell for all eternity.  She then proceeded to get her 
>10 year old son to read the Bible out loud to me, which I didn't mind 
>at the time because I needed to practice my Spanish and he read very 
>well.  But I did feel her attitude was pretty offensive -- why should 
>her beliefs affect my afterlife?
>
>  
>
Being an atheist in Poland, where 92% of people are Roman Catholics (at 
least technically, since I myself was baptised and propably would count 
as Catholic) I only once met such behavior, when some Jehova's Witness 
heard that don't belive in God, said: "You'd better not be born at all".

Incidentally, Poles seems to be completely indifferent to religion when 
it comes to politics. We have an atheist president (and Catholic First 
Lady) since 1995, atheist Prime Minister (previous Prime Minister was a 
protestant), half of people supports abortion and death penalty (despite 
clear statements against both by Polish Pope John Paul II). To oaths if 
one wish so, may (or may not) add words "so help me God"; there are even 
two versions of Scouting Oath. Crosses are commonly hanged in classrooms 
and parliament (no objections were raised by ruling left-winged 
majority) (but not in courtrooms), and Catholic priests teach voluntary 
religion lessons at state schools.
All politicians carefully avoid using God in their speeches. This on one 
hand make Poland kind of mix of religion-state and secular state , and 
on the other created in people "Don't ask, don't tell" approach to 
religious matters.
(Preamble to Constitution says: "We, the Polish Nation - all citizens of 
the Republic,\Both those who believe in God as the source of truth, 
justice, good and beauty,\As well as those not sharing such faith but 
respecting those universal values as arising from other sources, 
(...)for our culture rooted in the Christian heritage of the Nation and 
in universal human values,(...)Recognizing our responsibility before God 
or our own consciences,")

Why am I writing all that my country propaganda? It is to show how 
strange seems to me existence of God in US citizens public life. Pledge 
of Alliegiance, Dubya's speeches, creation "science", book burning &c, 
is unthinkable to me, even though I live in a country where in 100 
persons only 8 are not Roman Catholics, and only 2 are not Christians 
(perfect birthplace for a religious state, isn't it?). I mean, US is 
viewed as a "land of the free", but sometimes I think it is just as 
religious as Iran or Afghanistan. Why is it that in my country, 
everything is being crafted so not to offend tinest minorities of 
atheists and other religions, while in much more cultural mixed US (when 
political correctness and zero tolerance often reach absurdal heights) 
politicians, judges, and other public figures often speaks about God, 
and use him/her to support their own view of right and wrong.

Grey Wolf also asked:

>Przemyslaw Plaskowicki (Pshemekan) (Interesting name, by the way - is 
>it Russian?) wrote: 
>
Close enough, it's Polish -- Przemyslaw it's old slavic name meaning 
"famous for his wisdom" (and Pshemekan is a home made version of my name 
in Vulcan language.)

Regards,


-- 
Pshemekan






From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Aug  9 23:10:04 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 23:10:04 -0000
Subject: "No Author"
In-Reply-To: <bh3scf+6pob@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3v0c+tp24@eGroups.com>

Derannimer wrote:

> Darn. I wish I knew why my computer was doing this. 

Divine inspiration?

D




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Aug  9 23:17:18 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 23:17:18 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh3bov+rsnm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3vdu+u7pt@eGroups.com>

Grey Wolf wrote:

> Ummm... no. According to the religions that accept the Old 
Testament, 
> and thus Leviticus, as a Holy Book, it is written from the PoV of 
God, 
> who is asexual. 

God is asexual?  How do you know?  Is that Catholic doctrine?

and... assuming you believe God created people male and female, 
where did that pesky human sexuality come from, if God is asexual?

David




From moaningmyrtle46 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 23:19:28 2003
From: moaningmyrtle46 at yahoo.com (moaningmyrtle46)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 23:19:28 -0000
Subject: "No Author"
In-Reply-To: <bh3v0c+tp24@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh3vi0+n9p6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> 
wrote:
> Derannimer wrote:
> 
> > Darn. I wish I knew why my computer was doing this. 
> 
> Divine inspiration?
> 
> D

I don't know what your computer was doing, but if it's anything like 
mine, which does develish stuff all the time, I can sympathize.

Hey, I don't even know if I'm in the correct chat group as I'm new.  
In fact, have never been in a chat room, ever!  I printed out 
the "rules and regulations", but I'm still confused.  I just love 
Harry Potter and all things mythical and this group was suggested.  
Am I where I'm supposed to be for just getting the hang of things, or 
will and elf be sweeping down into my computer with a disciplinary 
warning?





From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Aug  9 23:48:00 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 23:48:00 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh3vdu+u7pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh417g+q6c2@eGroups.com>

David wrote:
> God is asexual?  How do you know?  Is that Catholic doctrine?

Sort of. God hasn't got a body to be male or female with (that's 
Catholic doctrine, I think - God is spiritual, not physical). While he 
does have the position of "father", he doesn't need to sire children so 
distictive sex is unnecesary. If it helps, I'm *sure* modern doctrine 
says that angels are asexual.
 
> and... assuming you believe God created people male and female, 
> where did that pesky human sexuality come from, if God is asexual?
> 
> David

Ummm... The Bible says that Adam was lonely and God gave him a friend 
(Eve), IIRC. Besides, two sexes allows reproduction, that God does not 
need but life on this reality does (since we're supposed to grow and 
reproduce). This is doctrine, I think. (*Please* bear in mind I'm not a 
student of the Bible. My words are to be listened to with extreme 
caution).

I'll reserve my own opinion in the matter.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From moaningmyrtle46 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 23:59:27 2003
From: moaningmyrtle46 at yahoo.com (moaningmyrtle46)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 23:59:27 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh3vdu+u7pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh41sv+s6pu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> 
wrote:
> David wrote:
> 
> > 
> and... assuming you believe God created people male and female, 
> where did that pesky human sexuality come from, if God is asexual?
> 
> David

David,
I agree.  Since, according to the Bible, God is the creator of all 
and everything in the Universe, what need does He have to be sexual 
at all?

In my opinion, for too long humans have devised a God created in the 
image of humans and human nature, rather than humans being created in 
the nature of God.  Unfortunately, the men who wrote the Bible were 
of the same mindset of God being like themselves, rather than who He 
truly is.

In regards to homosexality, I personally don't think God cares and 
enough evidence has been found in biological research that perhaps 
homosexuality is a biological condition.  Since God has created 
everything, it would seem he also created homosexuality.

Also, continuing with the Bible theme, what about Jesus who 
socialized and worshipped with what was considered the worst of 
humanity at that time.  I think if he were on earth today, he would 
be repulsed by most chuches and their doctrines and would be out 
inviting people of all sexual orientation to worship God and 
socialize together. 

I'm not anit-God, but neither am a follower of any one religious 
belief.  I have tolerance for all religious beliefs but feel that all 
this religious zeal could be put to better uses and trying to decide 
if homosexuals can be Christians or Christian leaders.   

    




From dicentra at xmission.com  Sun Aug 10 00:20:49 2003
From: dicentra at xmission.com (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 00:20:49 -0000
Subject: denominations on list (Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <bh0ju3+ladi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh4351+77oa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...>
wrote:
> 
> Hello all! Lurker surfacing. I've long been curious to ask (but don't 
> know whether it's list-appropriate--if so, you are welcome to tell me 
> off) since Salt Lake City has been mentioned occasionally: any LDS on 
> this list?

Yo!  Over here!  I'm sixth-generation, pioneer stock, born and raised
in Utah, and living in SLC.  

--Dicentra, who knows of a few others but won't "out" them against
their will




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sun Aug 10 00:21:06 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 00:21:06 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh417g+q6c2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh435i+7hb3@eGroups.com>


> David wrote:
> > God is asexual?  How do you know?  Is that Catholic doctrine?

Grey Wolf replied:
> Sort of. God hasn't got a body to be male or female with (that's 
> Catholic doctrine, I think - God is spiritual, not physical). 

Lots of avenues of discussion here:

- does sexuality require a body?

- in Christian doctrine Jesus still has 'his' body post the 
Ascension - how does that affect the above view?

- does 'spiritual' entail 'not physical'?

Me (David) again:
>  
> > and... assuming you believe God created people male and female, 
> > where did that pesky human sexuality come from, if God is 
asexual?

> Ummm... The Bible says that Adam was lonely and God gave him a 
friend 
> (Eve), IIRC. Besides, two sexes allows reproduction, that God does 
not 
> need but life on this reality does (since we're supposed to grow 
and 
> reproduce). This is doctrine, I think. (*Please* bear in mind I'm 
not a 
> student of the Bible. My words are to be listened to with extreme 
> caution).

Again, you raise more questions than you answer:

- is it possible for *any* creative being to create something not 
latent in themself - IOW, if God is asexual, how could 'he' arrive 
at sexuality?

- specifically, in Christian doctrine, man is supposed to be the 
image of God.  What aspect of God is human sexuality the image of?  
(that Adam was lonely shows IMO that the image of God was incomplete 
without Eve (and, BTW, that the capacity for loneliness is divine))

- what does it mean for the church to be the 'Bride of Christ' if 
sexuality is not involved?

David




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 01:35:00 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 21:35:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Laura!
Message-ID: <20030810013500.11215.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com>

*puts large cake on the side table and starts opening
boxes of decorations*

You guys have no idea how much sacrifice was required
to turn the oven on today to bake that cake. ;)

Today's birthday honouree is Laura. Birthday owls can
be sent care of this list or directly to:
devilsangel0809 at aol.com

I hope you've been having a wonderful day, filled with
fun and magic.

Happy Birthday, Laura!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From oodaday at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Aug 10 02:07:02 2003
From: oodaday at yahoo.co.uk (dooda)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 19:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: denominations on list (Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <bh4351+77oa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030810020702.87533.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>


 "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...>
wrote:
>> 
>> Hello all! Lurker surfacing. I've long been curious
to ask (but don't 
>> know whether it's list-appropriate--if so, you are
welcome to tell me 
>> off) since Salt Lake City has been mentioned
occasionally: any LDS on 
>> this list?

>Dicentra spectabilis <dicentra at xmission.com> wrote:

>Yo!  Over here!  I'm sixth-generation, pioneer stock,
>born and raised in Utah, and living in SLC.  

>--Dicentra, who knows of a few others but won't "out"
>them against their will

And me, Dooda:

Dicentra! You live in Salt Lake? I'm an LDS Utahn too.
I'll be in Salt Lake at the end of the month, we
should get together for lunch, my treat! *Big Grin*. 

Dooda, who also know other LDS listees, but will let
them come out on their own. 





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From editor at texas.net  Sun Aug 10 02:34:36 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 21:34:36 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
References: <bh3i18+dib2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003801c35ee7$f1c54700$2204a6d8@texas.net>

I've only been following a very little bit of this, but here's my thought.

I can understand two gay people wishing to have a formal, established,
legally recognized union. It's very ostracizing to be told you *can't.* I
also understand that one reason gays want their unions to be legally
recognized, so that the same automatic actions happen should one of them
die: the remaining person is the beneficiary on the policies; he/she owns
the house, etc. As it stands, many legal instruments must be executed for
this to be true, while I, as my husband's wife, don't have to mess with it.

All of this is fine with me. What I don't like is two gay people who only
want their marriage recognized so they can get tax breaks filing jointly, or
to be able to "get" something. That sort of thing came into being to help
ease the burden of raising children, which most gay couples aren't doing.
Which is why they're well-dressed and speeding past me in their Hummers,
while I trundle along in my low-end Saturn with the handprints and stickers
all over the windows (DINK envy, sorry; and I know darn well it's not
confined to gay couples). The point is, I hear way too much "we should get
the same stuff hetero marriages get" without (in most cases) a commensurate
burden. If it's about *getting,* I think the intent is misplaced.

As for whether they're sinners or not? Surely that's between them and their
God, whoever or whatever that may be. Like abortion, which I am against but
do not think there should be a law about, this seems a personal thing. It is
not mine to judge. Nor, even if it were, *could* I, since I am firmly hetero
and have no way to identify with gay situations, feelings, and perceptions
enough for an informed judgement.

America is obsessed with sex, to the point where those who abstain are
looked at with awe or ridicule. My husband Jan loves this anecdote: if an
Italian priest were to reel home from a brothel, the folk would cluck their
tongues but say "it's human nature"; were he to reel home drunk, the folk
would be appalled. If an Irish priest were to reel home drunk, the folk
would cluck their tongues and say "tis human nature," and if he came home
from a brothel, they would be appalled. The point? To a great degree, the
sin is in the culture's perception of it as much as the act. I don't think
you get away from that until you're talking to God. If marriage had nothing
to do with sex, if it were a platonic legal relationship, nobody would be
batting an eye.

Anyway, for some reason I got the urge to throw that out for consideration.

~Amanda




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 02:43:50 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 02:43:50 -0000
Subject: Amending the US Constitution (was: Re: American marriage) 
In-Reply-To: <3F3543FB.000001.05489@monica>
Message-ID: <bh4bh6+q9rp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  David
> 
> Really? Is there a serious attempt to pass such an amendment?
>  
> Maybe I'm just revealing my ignorance of how these things work, but 
> I would have imagined that the Supreme Court would block it (or 
> don't they have the power?) on the grounds that it's an attempt to 
> define 'marriage' rather than a genuine addition to the 
Constitution.
>  
> 
>  Me -
> 
> Actually if the US system works anything like the UK one then 
Congress could
> pass the amendment (although we don't have a constitution here so I 
could be
> wrong) and then someone would have to take the government to court 
to get it
> declared unconstitutional. Since you would have to start in a lower 
court
> and work your way up to the Supreme Court that could take years. 
> 
> K


A constitutional amendment is quite different from a law passed by 
Congress, which given the right circumstances could be overridden by 
the supreme court.  If Congress passes a law, it can be vetoed by the 
president.  Congress, of course, can in turn (if the law has the 
support) override the veto.  The Supreme court has acquired the 
ability to determine the constitutionality of a law, and can strike 
down a law it deems unconstitutional.  This does take years and years 
of court cases moving up the system and the Supreme Court deciding to 
hear the case.
A Constitutional amendment must be proposed by Congress or the States 
(I forget what percentage of either must approve of the proposal).  
If the proposed amendment is passed by, say, congress, it then goes 
to the states.  Each state must vote on the law either in convention 
or through the state legislature.  I believe an amendment needs 3/4 
of the states to approve it for it to become part of the 
constitution.  Once it's part of the Constitution, only another 
amendment can change or repeal it.  

>From what I can remember, that's how it goes,

KathyK (hoping her college professors aren't cringing somewhere, for 
reasons they know not)




From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Aug 10 05:19:37 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 05:19:37 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <003801c35ee7$f1c54700$2204a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bh4kl9+ba6k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
> 
> All of this is fine with me. What I don't like is two gay people 
who only
> want their marriage recognized so they can get tax breaks filing 
jointly, or
> to be able to "get" something. That sort of thing came into being 
to help
> ease the burden of raising children, which most gay couples aren't 
doing.
> Which is why they're well-dressed and speeding past me in their 
Hummers,
> while I trundle along in my low-end Saturn with the handprints and 
stickers
> all over the windows (DINK envy, sorry; and I know darn well it's 
not
> confined to gay couples). The point is, I hear way too much "we 
should get
> the same stuff hetero marriages get" without (in most cases) a 
commensurate
> burden. If it's about *getting,* I think the intent is misplaced.

I agree with most of what you said, Amanda, except for some of the 
above paragraph.  One thing that just about every study of straight 
people's attitudes towards gays has found is that when straight 
people talk about "gays," they are almost always referring to gay 
men.  Lesbians are often invisible, despite the fact that they make 
up half of the gay population.

I can understand your annoyance at those DINKy gay men (I feel it 
too, to be honest), but they really are the simply the most visible 
of the DINKs.  Lesbian couples are not only far more likely to have 
kids (I don't know what the percentage of lesbian couples who have 
kids is, I wasn't able to find the statistics but the ones I've seen 
in the past indicate that most lesbian couples do have kids) but are 
also usually in a lower economic bracket than gay male couples.  It 
is true that most gay male couples don't have kids, though.  But not 
all straight couples have kids either.  If you are going to deny gay 
people the right to get married because they're not likely to have 
kids (I'm not talking about you, personally, Amanda, I know you don't 
feel that way) then you should deny anyone over childbearing age the 
right to get married, too.

And as for tax breaks, it depends on the particulars of the 
situation, but most people don't get tax breaks when they get 
married.  In fact, quite the opposite.  Most people wind up paying 
more taxes when they are married than when they are single.  That's 
why there has been so much debate in Congress about eliminating 
the "marriage penalty."

And while I can understand being annoyed at people who say they are 
being discriminated against just because they want some particular 
benefit without the particular responsibility, I really don't think 
that that's true of the vast majority of gay couples.  I think most 
gay couples want to get married for most of the same reasons that 
straight couples want to get married, and because they've heard all 
the horror stories about gay couples where one person has died or 
become incapacitated and the other person has been denied the right 
to see their partner, bury their partner, keep their house, raise 
their children, etc.

--JMC




From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 05:35:13 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 05:35:13 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3nak+p8fh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh4lih+109h7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon"
<joym999 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > Personally, I am a Southern Baptist who believes sex outside of 
> > marriage is a sin for everyone and that gay sex is a sin as well.  
> I 
> > also happen to believe that my personal religious beliefs should 
> not 
> > form the basis for government policy.  So I am in favor of civil 
> > unions for gays etc. to grant to them the legal rights and 
> > obligations that come with marriage.  Call it civil union, 
> marriage, 
> > whatever.  Those of us who are religious can still be married in 
> our 
> > churches, and our unions will conform with our own personal beliefs.
> > 
> > I just fail to see how allowing two gay men to form a civil union 
> > undermines the strength or importance of my marriage.
> 
joywitch: 
> I don't understand.  It seems like you are saying that sex outside 
> marriage, and gay sex, are sins, for everyone, but yet they are your 
> personal beliefs and shouldn't affect other people, or at least 
> shouldn't affect how other people are governed.  While I agree with 
> the second part -- I don't really understand why, in a country 
> with "separation of church and state" written into the constitution, 
> people feel that their personal religious beliefs should have any 
> influence on the law, I am confused about your personal beliefs and 
> attitudes towards the acts which you consider to be sinful.
>

Me, Beth:
I just want to interject that "separation of church and state" is not
written anywhere into the constitution. It was a phrase taken from a
letter written by Thomas Jefferson and has been used out of context
for decades. Here are two websites I found:

http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=9
     (this one's really long...)
http://www.christianlaw.org/separation_church_state_pf.html
	Quote: "The intent of the First Amendment and the words and actions
of our Founding Fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, clearly
demonstrate how the words "the separation of church and state" were
originally understood. These words were never intended to remove God
from government; rather they were intended to keep government from
controlling and manipulating religious practices. Unfortunately today,
two hundred years after Jefferson wrote the phrase, these words have
turned on those they were intended to protect."

Ironically, using this phrase in this way is much like people who take
a Bible verse out of context to defend their point-of-view.

joywitch:
> So, your friends who engage in gay sex (within monogamous 
> relationships or not), and your friends who engage in straight sex 
> who are not married, are people who you consider to be sinners, I 
> assume.  How does that affect your relationship with them?  If they 
> are sinners, do you refuse to, I don't know, bring your children to 
> their houses?  Or does it not have any practical impact?  And if it 
> doesn't have any practical impact, how is it meaningful?
> 
> It seems like you are saying that these acts would be a sin for you, 
> but that other people should be allowed to do what they want, but at 
> the same time you say these things are a sin for everyone, so I'm 
> confused.
> 
> I guess I feel a little offended.  As a bisexual woman who has had 
> sex with both men and women and has never been married, I am a little 
> disturbed to find out that you consider me to be a sinner.  I know 
> you don't have any problem being friends with me, because we've 
> shared several yummy plates of sushi together, but it does it mean 
> that you disapprove of me, or value me less, or feel sorry for me?  
> Or are you saying that we are both sinners, since the amount of sushi 
> we ate probably rated the sin of gluttony, so sinning is no big deal?
 
Me, Beth
I do not presume to speak for Cindy, but jibes at "Dubya" aside, I
think most Christians would tell you that all are sinners (Rom. 3:23).
As far as who an individual sinning Christian decides to associate
with, that would be, well, individual. As evidenced by the /many,
many/ denominations in the US, Christians can find plenty to disagree
on, even within the denomination they've chosen--witness the
Episcopalian debate. I have a friend who disagrees with the Roman
Catholic church's stance on lots of issues, yet remained solidly
Catholic, until shaken by the pedophilic priests scandals.

Let me just add fuel to the fire with another issue, hopefully to add
light, not heat ;o): I believed in high school that it was a woman's
right to choose whether or not she wished to seek an abortion. I held
this belief through two children, telling my shocked parents when I
was pregnant for the first time at 19 that while abortion wasn't an
option I planned to choose for myself, that having lost my college
scholarship and having clue zero what I was going to be able to do
with my life I thought I understood why other girls/women might choose
it. This served me just fine until I was five months pregnant with my
third, feeling her move around on a regular basis, and I learned that
a friend had recently aborted her 20 week pregnancy because of the
unproven possibility that she might have a child who was born
deformed. I have since come to believe that abortion is the wrong
choice, yet it still isn't my place to decide for someone else. 

Have I discussed this with my friend? No. Do I feel it's my place to?
No, this is between her and God, and if she doesn't feel convicted of
it, then my bringing it up is more likely to cause division than to
demonstrate to her love and support. And besides, I heard a speaker
say, "God doesn't need /me/ to save anyone." I think she would be
better served if I concentrated on getting the plank(s) out of my own
eyes. I don't feel the need to keep my children away from her or
picket her house or throw leaflets in her car (as someone did to mine
when I was at a bar for a wedding reception <lol!>). If it must have a
practical impact, then it is that I pray that she feels grace and
peace about her decision.

So what if a friend thinks you are wrong in something? Aren't there
people in your life that you feel are wrong or terribly misguided in
some issue and yet you are willing to overlook this because you
sincerely like them as people? Do you have to approve of everything
someone does to be their friend? I cannot say that I have ever enjoyed
sushi with you, and I'm really not even a regular lurker, so I can't
say that I know you, but from what I do know about you from your
posts, I can't believe that to be true.

I know I left things unaddressed, but I'm simply going to have to sign
off as...

Beth, who cannot deal with eternity at this moment...




From boggles at earthlink.net  Sun Aug 10 05:38:25 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 00:38:25 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <bh3i18+dib2@eGroups.com>
References: <bh3i18+dib2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f00bb5b8a2940b3@[192.168.1.100]>

At 7:28 PM +0000 8/9/03, psychic_serpent wrote:
>
>For all marriage laws to merely require that the two people be
>single (not already married to other people),

The polyamorous bisexual decides, unwisely, to stir the pot:

Why?

If everyone involved in the marriage is informed and consenting, and 
they all want to be married to each other, why prevent a marriage of 
more than two people?

(Note that this question includes the gay marriage question as a 
prerequisite, as in a union of three people at least two must be the 
same sex.)

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 06:18:19 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 06:18:19 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3slr+sgb0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh4o3b+lehu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...>
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" 
> <kcawte at b...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Of course according to St Paul sex wasn't really something he 
> > approved ofanyway. 

<snip>
>
bluesqueak: 
> Yeah, that one always gets quoted [grin]. Usually people (like the 
> makers of your documentary) miss out the one vital little 
> phrase: 'Because of the present crisis...' [1 Corinthians Chapter 7 
> v. 26, New International translation. RSV has 'impending distress']
> 
> *What* the present crisis was, we have no way of knowing. Theories 
> have included the idea that Paul expected the Second Coming any 
> moment now. Alternatively, there is some evidence that there may 
> have been food shortages in Corinth [which would also explain why 
> the question of whether you could eat food that may have been 
> sacrificed to idols was also dealt with in that letter. ]. Or it may 
> have been a political crisis(this was not a fun period for the Roman 
> Empire). 
> 
> But the implication is not that marriage was a bad thing full stop 
> [period], but that marriage was a bad thing *at the present time*.
> 
> Pip!Squeak

Our church library has a book, _What Paul /Really/ Said About Women_ 
by John Temple Bristow, that I keep recommending to people ;o) The
copy I see on B&N right now (Amazon appears to be down...) is an
updated version, but what I remember from the 1988 version was that
his premise was much of what Paul wrote was completely misinterpreted,
including that verse referenced in a post earlier about women being
quiet in church. For example, that whole submit thing? IIRC, Bristow
says that Paul deliberately chose a word for head (of a family)to mean
something like the point man that goes out into battle, /not/ the head
of the body or the head like a general (Although I do love that Man is
head, Woman is neck scene in "My Big, Fat, Greek Wedding!"), and that
the word translated as submit should more correctly be support. But
since I just read about a member who studied Ancient Greek, maybe I'd
better stop and hope someone else clarifies... 

Beth




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 08:40:35 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 08:40:35 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3m33+hg12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh50e3+er2e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...>
wrote:
> Grey_Wolf:
>
> ...large snip...
> ... your point is that gay sex is  not sin, and my point is that it 
> is not immoral, but it *is* defined as  sin in the Old Testament.
>  

bboy_mn:

Yes... yes... I do get it. I really do. Suprisingly, I agree with you.
In fact, that is the very thing I was trying to get at, and while my
many paragraphs didn't quite get the job done, you managed it in an
amazingly few words.

I will touch on a delicate area, and that has to do with whether the
Bible is a direct quote for the mouth of God, or whether it is simply
a divinely inspired work. Again, I dictate reality to no one; it's
just my opinion. Because there are so many flaws and contradictions in
the Bible, I can not accept it as the direct 'His mouth to our ears'
word of God. 

It was written by men who are flawed creature subject to prejudice,
and customs and opinions of the times. There were many things that
were considered absolute right and truth, and Jesus directly
contradicted them, many times, not just verbally but in his actions.
He violated the absolute 'Word of God' rules and regulations of his
day, or at least what people were told to believe was the absolute
'Word of God'. So, basically humanity is flawed, and therefore
anything it creates will be flawed. Not useless, not invalid, not
irrelevant, just flawed.


> 
> and, in the same line, bboy_mn:
> > When I say 'harm', I mean in every way, and on every front, and 
> > for a  lifetime.  Harm must be weighed over a lifetime and it must
> > be weighed on a physical, emotional, pschological, intellectual, 
> > and spiritual fronts. 
> 

> 
> Anyway, in the issue of harm: I agree that a good legal system - is
> one  that punishes only those acts which physically harms or could 
> conceivably harm a non-consensual individual. ...edited...
> 
> Steve has a nice list of all ways you can harm someone, including 
> psychological. To which I'm going to give a counter-example (taken
> from the previous link):
> 
> "At what point does behavior become so unacceptable that we should
> tell  our government to lock people up? The answer, as explored in 
> this book: We lock people up only when they physically harm the 
> person or property of a nonconsenting other.
> 
> ...really big edit....
> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
> Grey Wolf


bboy_mn:
Just one last comment related to harm. The legal and moral system, as
you seem to well know, are not one in the same. That which is illegal
is not necessarily immoral, and that which is immoral is not
necessarily, nor should it be, illegal. 

Harm from a legal stand point is much different than harm from a moral
and spiritual perspective.

Not pushing any implications on to anyone else in saying this, just
making an observation.

bboy_mn




From kattrap_meow at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 09:26:49 2003
From: kattrap_meow at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 09:26:49 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <p05200f00bb5b8a2940b3@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <bh534p+hp5i@eGroups.com>

This is not in response to anyone in particular's posts, but I thought I sh=
ould pop in my point of view.

I respect everyone's opinions, religious background (or not) and feelings t=
owards this controversial issue.

I consider myself a lesbian and have been in a monogamous relationship for =
over six years (longer than some marriages last). 

I am against "gay marriage" and for "domestic partnership". The difference =
is simple:
Marriage is something that roots itself in religion, many of which do not c=
ondone gay and lesbian relationships.  The legal side of marriage is also a =
large part of it, but (I believe) secondary to the religious origins. I hate=
 to step on other people's toes and make them believe that my lifestyle is e=
qual to their lifestyles.
Domestic Partnership grants the legal rights of marriage without religious =
overtones.
If my significant other gets into an accident, I can't be in the emergency =
hospital room. If she dies, I become secondary to her family (many of which =
she hasn't spoken to in years).  There are other things, but these come to m=
ind first

If a couple (whatever their relationship choice) wants to have a ceremony t=
o celebrate their partnership, they should be able to without ridicule.

I welcome positive and not-so-positive responses to this post, as everyone =
deserves to be heard.

Andrea/Kattrap





From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sun Aug 10 10:55:32 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 10:55:32 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh435i+7hb3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh58b4+af64@eGroups.com>

> > David wrote:
> > > God is asexual?  How do you know?  Is that Catholic doctrine?
> 
> Grey Wolf replied:
> > Sort of. God hasn't got a body to be male or female with (that's 
> > Catholic doctrine, I think - God is spiritual, not physical). 

David again:
> Lots of avenues of discussion here:

Note: I'm quickly approaching the end of my limited knowledge of 
Catholic doctrine here, David. Sorry I cannot be of further help
 
> - does sexuality require a body?

Yes. 'Male' and 'female' are defined as those able to produce 
spermatozoids and ovules, respectively, by Science. To be precise, male 
is the XY cromosome combination and female the XX combination. Bible 
definition is less direct, I think, speaking of ability to bear 
children for females. We could discuss the other half-dozen or so sexes 
found in human race (XXX, XXY, XXXXY etc), but since I remember 
basically nothing of them, I won't.

> - in Christian doctrine Jesus still has 'his' body post the 
> Ascension - how does that affect the above view?

In no way - I was speaking of God Father, not of Jesus or the Holy 
Spirit.
 
> - does 'spiritual' entail 'not physical'?

Yes, according to Catholic doctrine. Physical means "of this world" - 
something you can touch or feel or measure in this reality. God is 
nothing of that. By denomination his existance Spiritual, the Catholic 
Church is making the point that he is *not* part of this reality, where 
"physical" makes sense.
 
David again:
> Again, you raise more questions than you answer:

That is normally the case in religious debates, yes. I repeat, I'm no 
student of Catholic beliefs. I'm sorry I cannot be clearer.

> - is it possible for *any* creative being to create something not 
> latent in themself - IOW, if God is asexual, how could 'he' arrive 
> at sexuality?

There is nothing "wheel-like" in human nature. And yet we create 
wheels. And fire. And microchips. And...

Just because you don't have it in yourself it doesn't mean you cannot 
come up with it.
 
> - specifically, in Christian doctrine, man is supposed to be the 
> image of God.  What aspect of God is human sexuality the image of?  
> (that Adam was lonely shows IMO that the image of God was incomplete 
> without Eve (and, BTW, that the capacity for loneliness is divine))

That "image of God" phrase is very easily misused. Humans are 
imperfect. They sin, and disobey and so on. How is *that* image of God? 
It is not. Neither is their physical body. The "image of God" applies 
only to our thoughts - to our ability to know God, IIRC. You'll have to 
excuse me, I was explained exactly what "Image of God" meant (and 
particularly, what it did *not* mean, for example, our physical bodies 
are no reflection of God's) some 12+ years ago, and I've since 
forgotten the reasoning behind it. I can promise there *was* a 
reasoning, though.
 
> - what does it mean for the church to be the 'Bride of Christ' if 
> sexuality is not involved?
> 
> David

Never heard the phrase, sorry. The Church ('church' is a building that 
has been consacrated to the Christian God, so I doubt it can be bride 
to anything) is *sons* of God, in the sense He created us, according to 
Catholic doctrine. No sexuality is involved.

Hope that helps, although I doubt it,

Grey Wolf





From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 14:30:07 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 14:30:07 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <003801c35ee7$f1c54700$2204a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bh5ktf+5abo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
>  What I don't like is two gay people who only
> want their marriage recognized so they can get tax breaks filing 
> jointly, or to be able to "get" something. That sort of thing came 
> into being to help ease the burden of raising children, which most 
> gay couples aren't doing.

I'm a trifle confused by this.  Are you against mixed-gender couples 
marrying to "get" something?  This goes on all of the time, yet 
couples consisting of a man and a woman can get married at the drop 
of a hat with no problem.  I think that some mixed-gender couples 
get married for absolutely APPALLING reasons, but just because some 
same-gender couples may also get married for what some people would 
consider to be the 'wrong' reasons, that's no reason to disallow 
same-gender couples from marrying.  Equality is equality.  Mixed-
gender and same-gender couples should have the same legal right to 
screw up their lives and marry the wrong people for the wrong 
reasons, and the same legal right to pay over-priced divorce lawyers 
to get out of it again. ;)

> Which is why they're well-dressed and speeding past me in their 
> Hummers, while I trundle along in my low-end Saturn with the 
> handprints and stickers all over the windows (DINK envy, sorry; 
> and I know darn well it's not confined to gay couples). The point 
> is, I hear way too much "we should get the same stuff hetero 
> marriages get" without (in most cases) a commensurate
> burden. If it's about *getting,* I think the intent is misplaced.

Um, I have to say, I'm finding many of the stereotypes in the above 
patently offensive.  It is a stereotype that all gays are rich white 
males around the age of 42 with expensive cars and homes and no 
responsibility to anyone but their show cats or dogs.  It is also a 
stereotype to say that all married people are couples struggling to 
raise kids.  In fact, most married people in this country do not 
have children (the "burden" to which you seem to be referring).  
Should we forbid people to marry who cannot have children or who do 
not plan to?  Should we forbid elderly couples who meet in 
retirement homes to marry if they so choose?  

I know loads of gay couples raising kids for various reasons 
(children from previous mixed-gender marriages, children they had 
intentionally during the same-gender partnership, adopted children, 
children of relatives who died, etc.).  These couples with kids 
can't even, in many states, be considered a family.  Very few states 
allow second-parent adoption.  Only one of the parents is legally 
recognized and the other has no right to make medical decisions for 
the kids or even to stand in at a parent-teacher conference at 
school, and if the couple does break up, the parent with no legal 
connections to the kids cannot even get visitation rights, let alone 
fight to be the custodial parent, even if he/she has been the 
primary caregiver.  And while you might say, "Oh, well, those folks 
can get married then," this "parenting" litmus test doesn't exist 
for mixed-gender couples, so why should it exist for same-gender 
couples?  Again, equality is equality.

--Barb

http://www.iwgonline.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb
 




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 14:53:18 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 14:53:18 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <bh534p+hp5i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh5m8v+8oln@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Andrea" <kattrap_meow at y...> 
wrote:
> I consider myself a lesbian and have been in a monogamous 
> relationship for over six years (longer than some marriages last). 
> 
> I am against "gay marriage" and for "domestic partnership". The 
> difference is simple:
> Marriage is something that roots itself in religion, many of which 
> do not condone gay and lesbian relationships.  

While this it is true that many religious bodies are not supportive 
of same-gender relationships, many more are than in the past (see 
the IWGonline link below).  After all, same-gender marriages were 
celebrated first in houses of worship.  Every one of those 
ceremonies had a clergy person officiating, except for ceremonies in 
Quaker meetings (the entire meeting marries the partners--although, 
I believe, this doesn't apply to "programmed" Quakers, who do 
actually have clergy).

> The legal side of marriage is also a large part of it, but (I 
> believe) secondary to the religious origins. I hate to step on 
> other people's toes and make them believe that my lifestyle is 
> equal to their lifestyles.

But it IS equal.  Don't let other folks lay an inferiority complex 
on you!  I'm somewhat disturbed by this.  The term "lifestyle" is 
rather meaningless, first of all, and used far too often by the 
mainstream press to demonize gays.  References to "the gay 
lifestyle" are particularly heinous.  I think it's meant to refer to 
a pattern of promiscuity and irresonsibility which is NOT exclusive 
to gays.  Plenty of heterosexual people have "lifestyles" which 
include swinging, cheating on their spouses, embezzling, beating 
their kids, etc.  Most of the same-gender couples I know 
have "lifestyles" that consist of going to work, gardening, doing 
home-repair and volunteering for charity on a regular basis.  Social 
change doesn't come about without stepping on some toes.  People who 
want to be offended will be offended with or without permission. 

> Domestic Partnership grants the legal rights of marriage without 
> religious overtones.

It is not necessary for marriage to have any religious overtones at 
all.  That is the point.  Right now, a mixed-gender couple can go to 
a Justice-of-the-Peace and get married with no religious involvement 
whatsoever.  A same-gender couple cannot.  The problem with Domestic 
Partnership legislation is that while it is easier to get passed in 
some places, because the authors of such bills often go out of their 
way to emphasize the difference between DP and marriage laws, the 
very fact that there are separate laws leads to the problem of 
separate but unequal protection under the law for same-gender and 
mixed-gender couples.

> If my significant other gets into an accident, I can't be in the 
> emergency hospital room. If she dies, I become secondary to her 
> family (many of which she hasn't spoken to in years).  There are 
> other things, but these come to mind first


And while some Domestic Partnership legisation is designed to combat 
this problem, not all bills are designed this way.  Again, there is 
the separate-but-unequal problem.  Equal access to marriage would 
erase this inequality.  Marriage is not an inherently religious 
institution.  Many people claim it is, but it is actually a legal 
contract.  Some people like to have a religious ceremony go along 
with it, but this is hardly a government requirement.  Just as it is 
religious discrimination that same-gender marriages celebrated in 
houses of worship are not recognized by the government but mixed-
gender marriages celebrated in the same house of worship are, it is 
discrimination against same-gender couples who are NOT religious for 
there to be no non-religious method--legal marriage--for their 
relationship and feeling of shared responsibility toward one another 
to be acknowledged and codified.

--Barb

http://www.iwgonline.org 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Aug 10 15:02:02 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 15:02:02 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh4lih+109h7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh5mpa+ifhf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Beth" <jillily3g at y...> wrote:
> So what if a friend thinks you are wrong in something? Aren't there
> people in your life that you feel are wrong or terribly misguided in
> some issue and yet you are willing to overlook this because you
> sincerely like them as people? Do you have to approve of everything
> someone does to be their friend? I cannot say that I have ever 
enjoyed
> sushi with you, and I'm really not even a regular lurker, so I can't
> say that I know you, but from what I do know about you from your
> posts, I can't believe that to be true.

No, I can be friends with people I have disagreements with, sometimes 
over very fundamental issues.  Amanda and I are friends, for example, 
even though she is a staunch Dubya supporter and I can't stand the 
guy.  We like each even though I know beyond the shadow of a doubt 
that she is wrong and she misguidedly believes I am wrong.  ;-D  
<kisses, Amanda!>  And I have lots of other friends with misguided, 
deluded, wacky, bizarre beliefs about religious, political, moral, 
and all sort of other ideas.  Why, I even have a close friend who 
hates Hagrid, which IMO is about as misguided, deluded, wacky, and 
bizarre as you can get. <ducks as something heavy coming from the 
direction of NYC flies past her head>

But when you're talking about something as fundamental as who I 
choose to marry, that's another story.  Let's say, for example, that 
I am in love with another woman right now.  If the two of us decide 
to get married (we'd have to go to Canada or Vermont or something) 
and spend the rest of our lives together raising children and dogs 
and cats, I would expect my friends to be happy for me.  All of my 
friends.  If I had a friend who was willing to "overlook" my lesbian 
relationship, and be friends with me anyway despite the fact that she 
thought it was misguided, wrong and she didn't approve of it, I would 
probably not continue to spend much time with that person.  I would 
not feel comfortable being friends with that person, anymore than I 
would be comfortable with someone who might disapprove if I married a 
man of a different race or religion.  (Which is not to say that I 
think there is anything wrong with deciding for *yourself* that you 
want to marry only someone of the same race and/or religion as your 
own.)

Differences of opinion are one thing.  I can be friends with someone 
who thinks differently about abortion, gun control, the death 
penalty, affirmative action, the war in Iraq, the color pink, eating 
meat, or whether Snape is a vampire.  But I cannot be friends with 
bigots.  And I don't care what it says in your particular holy book --
my principles dictate that prejudice against someone because of their 
sexual orientation, race or religion is equally wrong.

--Joywitch




From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 10 15:02:25 2003
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 10 Aug 2003 15:02:25 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1060527745.22.34136.m16@yahoogroups.com>


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, August 10, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

Hi everyone! 

Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7
pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight
Saving/Summer Time.*  Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours,
but can last as long as people want it to last.

Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 
For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33

Hope to see you there! 

 





From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 15:06:53 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 15:06:53 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <p05200f00bb5b8a2940b3@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <bh5n2d+mrml@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Boggess Ramon 
<boggles at e...> wrote:
> At 7:28 PM +0000 8/9/03, psychic_serpent wrote:
> >
> >For all marriage laws to merely require that the two people be
> >single (not already married to other people),
> 
> The polyamorous bisexual decides, unwisely, to stir the pot:
> 
> Why?
> 
> If everyone involved in the marriage is informed and consenting, 
> and they all want to be married to each other, why prevent a 
> marriage of more than two people?
> 
> (Note that this question includes the gay marriage question as a 
> prerequisite, as in a union of three people at least two must be 
> the same sex.)
 
Yes and no.  When the government determined, over a hundred years 
ago, that Utah could be admitted as a state as long as the folks 
there adhered to the one-man-one-woman model for marriage, the 
existing Mormon marriages in that territory that did not adhere to 
this model involved a husband with multiple wives with no assumption 
of any interaction between the wives sexually.  I believe that this 
is also the model for Moslem marriages in which the husband has more 
than one wife.  (An argument COULD be made that it is unfair for 
these religious marriages not to be recognized by the government.)

At this time marriage laws link two people together--for there to be 
absolutely no specifics in the law about the two people's genders 
would mean the least amount of change to the law at this time.  
Plus, there would be numerous legal complications in partnerships of 
more than two people concerning insurance, child custody, wills (or 
lack thereof, if someone in the partnership were to die without a 
will), etc.  We don't have an existing set of laws for dealing with 
these kinds of complications.  I would expect another change in the 
law, to account for polyamorous relationships, to be FAR in the 
future (at least another century) if it were ever to occur at all.

--Barb





From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug 10 16:46:14 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 16:46:14 -0000
Subject: "No Author"
In-Reply-To: <bh3vi0+n9p6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh5ssm+15fp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "moaningmyrtle46" 
<moaningmyrtle46 at y...> wrote:

> Hey, I don't even know if I'm in the correct chat group as I'm new. 
 
> In fact, have never been in a chat room, ever!  I printed out 
> the "rules and regulations", but I'm still confused.  I just love 
> Harry Potter and all things mythical and this group was suggested.  
> Am I where I'm supposed to be for just getting the hang of things,
> or will and elf be sweeping down into my computer with a 
> disciplinary warning?

Welcome! I hope you find little to moan about here.

The [real-time] chat will be later this morning (morning PDT, 
evening BST, afternoon in-between). Get in Yahoo!Chat however you 
can and type:
/join HP:1

The list for discussing all matters Potter-ish (except the movies) is
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/messages
(and for discussing the movies is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/messages )

*This* list is HPfGU-Off Topic Chatter. It is where HPfGU members 
discuss matters non-Potterish. If the subject drifted from religion 
in Real Life to what religion Hermione is, the posts should move over 
to the Main List, because that would be Potterish.




From moaningmyrtle46 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 21:54:04 2003
From: moaningmyrtle46 at yahoo.com (moaningmyrtle46)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 21:54:04 -0000
Subject: "No Author"
In-Reply-To: <bh5ssm+15fp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh6ets+ph5m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "moaningmyrtle46" 
> <moaningmyrtle46 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > > 
> The list for discussing all matters Potter-ish (except the movies) 
is
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/messages
> (and for discussing the movies is:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/messages )
> 
> *This* list is HPfGU-Off Topic Chatter. It is where HPfGU members 
> discuss matters non-Potterish. If the subject drifted from religion 
> in Real Life to what religion Hermione is, the posts should move 
over 
> to the Main List, because that would be Potterish.

Thanks for the info.  My life is kind of in the sewer right now and I 
was feeling a bit depressed when I was trying to pick out a name for 
Yahoo!  Hopefully I can get this chat room stuff all figured out and 
find a little more in life to be uplifted about.  Perhaps then I can 
change my name!  And although I love all things Potter, I love to 
discuss other topics too.

Thanks again for the reply!  




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Sun Aug 10 23:33:01 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:33:01 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh3rsm+vjk0@eGroups.com>
References: <bh3rsm+vjk0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200308110133.01742.silmariel@telefonica.net>

derannimer:

>> But don't you see that if religion *is* a matter of objective truth -- and 
I frankly do not understand what
 other kind of truth there could be -- then what is true is true for
 everyone, and what is wrong is wrong for everyone, and if you or I am
 wrong, or (and it may be the same thing sometimes) *in the wrong,* then
 that could have immeasurably serious consequences? I'm not trying to say
 here, "Convert to Christianity," I'm simply trying to say that Christianity
 is either true or false and if it's true, then *everybody* had better
 convert to Christianity. And if it's false, then nobody should, at least
 not in the interests of truth.>>

Not so lonely, i'm trying to keep with Bible/Gay questions, but if that a 
religion has the truth implies the *wrong* are doomed, chances are the 
greater part of the world population is doomed even without knowing. The idea 
isn't mine, nor new.

But then, this remembers me a tale I was told at school, probably going with 
the  Alfonso X period, about two wise men from different religions that after 
debating a lot concluded that, as they couldn't settle the beliefs issue, 
they would pray for each other, because God was love, and both knew his 
friend was an excellent person, so both comforted with the view of their 
perfect, all-love God, being mercy.

silmariel





From boggles at earthlink.net  Sun Aug 10 23:41:49 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 18:41:49 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh58b4+af64@eGroups.com>
References: <bh58b4+af64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f00bb5c8172537a@[192.168.1.100]>

*Warning* *Warning* Nonstandard sexualities discussed in this post. 
If this will be offensive, please skip to the next post immediately.








At 10:55 AM +0000 8/10/03, Grey Wolf wrote:
>
>  > - does sexuality require a body?
>
>Yes. 'Male' and 'female' are defined as those able to produce
>spermatozoids and ovules, respectively, by Science.

Er, I didn't realize "Science" defined anything.  Perhaps biologists 
have done so.

However, the definition you give above is not for sexuality, but for 
sex.  I'm not sure it says anything meaningful about sexuality as 
such.  I'm also not sure it says anything about the monotheistic God, 
in particular the Christian one, either.

To address the second issue: it seems to me that the virgin 
conception of Jesus implies that the Christian God can produce 
spermatozoa, or the equivalent, and thus should biologically be 
considered male by this definition.

>To be precise, male
>is the XY cromosome combination and female the XX combination.

But this says nothing about sexuality.  There are many people with XX 
chromosomes who have very diverse sexualities: straight, bisexual, 
femme lesbian, stone butch, submissive, Domme, intellisexual, latex 
fetishist, celibate . . . dozens and dozens, many of which I haven't 
even encountered yet.  Moreover, some of those sexualities have 
nothing whatever to do with ova, or even with what's between their 
legs (or their partner's legs) at all.  It's not at all clear to me 
that a spirit (however we choose to define that) cannot have a 
sexuality, merely that it's unlikely that a spirit's sexuality has 
much to do with what's between anyone's legs, as they may not have 
any.  (Indeed, this has been my experience - that spirits can and do 
have sexualities; they're just not exactly like human sexualities.)

>Bible
>definition is less direct, I think, speaking of ability to bear
>children for females. We could discuss the other half-dozen or so sexes
>found in human race (XXX, XXY, XXXXY etc), but since I remember
>basically nothing of them, I won't.

Let me give two examples: some humans are born with an XO combination 
- that is, they have only one chromosome in their last "pair," and 
it's an X.  (This is called Turner's syndrome.)  Now, we only need 
one X (obviously, or the guys would be in trouble), so this actually 
doesn't cause huge problems in development - there are some issues 
with spacial intelligence, and minor physical problems including 
short stature.  The ovaries don't develop, so there are no ova, and 
these people are sterile.  But, to all appearances, including the 
external genitals, they are female.  Indeed, often they only discover 
that they are genetically different at puberty, when they fail to 
menstruate.  Are you really going to tell them they aren't real 
females?  And, their sexuality is usually the same pattern that we 
consider "straight female."  If they're not really females, what is 
it?

Some humans are born with an XY chromosome pattern, but their cells 
are androgen-resistant.  Thus, the Y chromosome instructions are 
never turned on, and the person develops with external genitalia that 
are female, although they do not develop ovaries or a uterus.  When 
they hit puberty, they even develop breasts on schedule, although 
they fail to menstruate.  Once again, 90% of them sow a pattern of 
sexuality that most people would identify as "straight female."  Are 
you going to tell them they aren't real women, either?  What label 
would you put on their sexuality?

And if it's this confusing and muddied for those of us with obvious 
physical manifestation, I don't think it's safe to make assumptions 
about those that dwell in the spiritual world at all.

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug 11 01:47:35 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:47:35 -0000
Subject: American's religion/ Homosexuality and Desmond Morris
In-Reply-To: <3F357E6E.9010201@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <bh6sjn+95n6@eGroups.com>

Pshemekan:
> Why am I writing all that my country propaganda? It is to show how 
strange seems to me existence of God in US citizens public life. 
Pledge of Alliegiance, Dubya's speeches, creation "science", book 
burning &c, is unthinkable to me, even though I live in a country 
where in 100 persons only 8 are not Roman Catholics, and only 2 are 
not Christians (perfect birthplace for a religious state, isn't it?). 
I mean, US is viewed as a "land of the free", but sometimes I think 
it is just as religious as Iran or Afghanistan. Why is it that in my 
country, everything is being crafted so not to offend tinest 
minorities of atheists and other religions, while in much more 
cultural mixed US (when political correctness and zero tolerance 
often reach absurdal heights) politicians, judges, and other public 
figures often speaks about God, and use him/her to support their own 
view of right and wrong.> 

I quoted such a big part of the above argument because I feel that 
Pshemekan put forward very articulately something that has always 
bothered me about both US politics and the arrogance involved in 
assuming the position of a "chosen people". Hell yeah, says Mr Bush. 
God's on our side in the fight against Eye-Rack. How do you know, Mr 
Bush? Did one of your generals get a direct line wired into the White 
House? No? You just *know*? We arra people, as Glasgow Protestant 
Rangers fans crow. And, from over this side of the pond, Christianity 
appears to be used by American public figures as an indictment of 
superiority rather than any sort of moral code. What about "Thou 
shalt not kill", Mr Heston? What's that you say? Every American has 
the right to defend his own property? And God's on your side, right? 
He's right there, handing you the bullets. Hell, you probably go out 
a-huntin' together at the weekends.
I also really liked Pshemekan's other recent post, where she pointed 
out that to sin or not to sin is not really an issue to an athesist, 
where the point becomes only "does this behaviour harm others?" 
Personally, I think this is a much healthier moral code to adopt in 
today's climate (no prizes for guessing Kirstini's religious 
beliefs). Cindy, I'm interested in how you align your belief that 
homosexual sex is sinful with the fact that you have non-het friends. 
Doesn't this implicitly condemn your friends (in your view) to 
eternal damnation? I'm not trying to start a fight, more just 
wondering how literally the Christians on list interpret the Bible. 
Perhaps I was a bit hasty in describing myself as an atheist. In my 
more refelctive moments, I do consider the possibility of a spiritual 
force beyond human ken working to order the universe, but I have 
trouble in equating my own conceptualisation of this force with the 
adoption of the 2000 year old writings of a group of Palestinian 
patriarchs as an appropriate and relevant moral code for an 
empancipated young woman in modern-day Western society. (Nice long 
sentence there for you, folks.) Personally, I feel that the teachings 
of the Bible (Jesus' "be excellent to one another" aside) have 
absolutely no relevance to my life. St Paul especially can go and 
shove it. (Sorry to drag the debate down to my gutter-al level.) I 
suppose what I'm wondering is how relevant the on list Christians 
find many of the teachings of the Bible. Do you interpret loosely or 
to the letter? Steve made an excellent point about "thou shalt not 
commit adultery" being more of a property law than anything else at 
the time of inscription, which I think is where this jumbled train of 
thought started. 

My other point was just a little tag on to the homosexuality and 
religion debate. I suppose I felt it necessary to mumble out some 
vague statment of belief before tackling this one. The British 
anthropologist Desmond Morris (author of "The Naked Ape". He's the 
lipstick/labia chap) propounded a theory that homosexuality was as 
natural a state of being as heterosexuality, and that homosexuality 
tended to occur (cross-species, not just in humans) more frequently 
at times of species over-population. Can any Brits reading this 
remember the specifics of this argument? It was the gay duck 
programme, on telly a few years ago. I kinda like that theory, but 
then I also find the concept of original sin risible. 

Kirstini, just back from Peru with millions more freckles, endless 
photos of llamas on hills, and a really bad case of jet lage. So 
apologies for the confuzzled ramblings.




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug 11 01:56:26 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:56:26 -0000
Subject: Sexuality (WAS Asexual?) 
In-Reply-To: <p05200f00bb5c8172537a@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <bh6t4a+k04c@eGroups.com>

Apologies for two posts in a row (jet-lag, lalala, see above)
Boggley Jennifer wrote:
> Er, I didn't realize "Science" defined anything.  Perhaps 
biologists have done so. However, the definition you give above is 
not for sexuality, but for sex.  I'm not sure it says anything 
meaningful about sexuality as such. <snip the rest of a really 
excellent and interesting post> 

Something that has bothered me in my reading over of this thread has 
been the confusion of the terms "gender" and "sex" (biological). One 
is not gendered from birth, one is born with a biological sex 
(usually, not always, as Jennifer pointed out). Gender is much more 
of a mental process, one of becoming, and more closely linked to 
perceptions, social mores, and sexuality as Jennifer wrote it in the 
post above. Okay, itch scratched. I'm going to go lie in bed and 
stare up at the ceiling for a few hours. Jennifer, have you read 
Jeanette Winterston's "Written on the Body"?

Kirstini  




From boggles at earthlink.net  Mon Aug 11 03:31:18 2003
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 22:31:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sexuality (WAS Asexual?)
In-Reply-To: <bh6t4a+k04c@eGroups.com>
References: <bh6t4a+k04c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f00bb5cbb8ff257@[192.168.1.100]>

At 1:56 AM +0000 8/11/03, Kirstini wrote:
>
>Something that has bothered me in my reading over of this thread has
>been the confusion of the terms "gender" and "sex" (biological). One
>is not gendered from birth, one is born with a biological sex
>(usually, not always, as Jennifer pointed out). Gender is much more
>of a mental process, one of becoming, and more closely linked to
>perceptions, social mores, and sexuality as Jennifer wrote it in the
>post above.

Heh.  I didn't even scratch the surface, either.  We also have:

  - intersexed people (who are not clearly of one biological sex or 
the other; they may be intermediate, or both, or neither)

  - intergendered people (who are not clearly of one cultural gender 
or the other, regardless of the state of their genitals)

  - transgendered people

  - eunuchs

  - people who express more than one sexuality over the course of their lives

  - people whose sexuality depends upon the person or people they're 
with at the time

  - people whose sexuality has nothing to do with anyone's biological 
sex (I touched a bit on this, but it's near and dear to me, as I 
largely fall in this category myself)


Bringing this back to the original claim that "God is a spirit, thus 
asexual,"  while not having a physical body (and this is complicated 
in the case of the monotheistic God of the book by the several cases 
in which he does seem to have a body, at least temporarily, 
especially and most famously in the case of the Incarnation in 
Christianity) may mean that one has no biological sex, I see no 
reason why it should imply that one has no gender.  And I'm not sure 
either gender or biological sex is necessary for sexuality, but it 
seems to me to be more closely linked with the first than the second.

After all (ObPotter reference), Nearly Headless Nick and Moaning 
Myrtle are in the grand tradition of ghosts, and certainly are 
bodiless, but they are obviously both gendered - Nick is a he, and 
Myrtle is a she.  Moreover, Myrtle certainly appears to have a 
sexuality, or at least something quite like it - she seems to have 
developed a bit of a crush on Harry, and it's enough to make Harry 
uncomfortable in the prefects' bathroom sequence.  This does not 
strike me as out of character for a spirit at all, and I'm willing to 
bet it didn't for most readers.

If ghosts can have gender and sexuality, why not gods?  (Granted, 
this is a futile academic exercise for the atheists among us.)


>Jennifer, have you read
>Jeanette Winterston's "Written on the Body"?

Nope, I'm afraid I haven't.  Should I take that as a recommendation?

-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 05:18:08 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 05:18:08 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <200308110133.01742.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bh78ug+39ol@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, silmariel <silmariel at t...> 
wrote:
> derannimer:
> 
> >> But don't you see that if religion *is* a matter of objective 
truth -- and 
> I frankly do not understand what
>  other kind of truth there could be -- then what is true is true 
for
>  everyone, and what is wrong is wrong for everyone, and if you or 
I am
>  wrong, or (and it may be the same thing sometimes) *in the 
wrong,* then
>  that could have immeasurably serious consequences? I'm not trying 
to say
>  here, "Convert to Christianity," I'm simply trying to say that 
Christianity
>  is either true or false and if it's true, then *everybody* had 
better
>  convert to Christianity. And if it's false, then nobody should, 
at least
>  not in the interests of truth.>>

Silmariel: 
> Not so lonely, i'm trying to keep with Bible/Gay questions, but if 
that a 
> religion has the truth implies the *wrong* are doomed, chances are 
the 
> greater part of the world population is doomed even without 
knowing. The idea 
> isn't mine, nor new.
> 

Annemehr (reading all these threads with great inerest):

Actually, there are very few religions (in my experience) that teach 
that non-believers of those religions are doomed.  All I know of are 
a few Christians and some Muslims.  I am Catholic, and we are 
sometimes accused of believing this but we don't.

Of course, there is real, objective truth about God, and all 
religions strive to know it.  And this does imply that some will 
come closer to it than others.

What do you think of this?  Suppose the whole truth about God can be 
imagined as all the sand on a very wide beach.  Each religion has a 
little pail in which they try to hold as much of the truth as they 
can.  In many ways they agree, and in some ways they disagree.  Some 
have more sand (truth) in their pails than others.  Each one also 
has some stuff in their pail that is not sand -- shells, litter, 
seaweed, what have you, which represents errors in their belief 
system.

People who are serious about their religion think that their pail 
has the most sand and least of the other stuff.

Some people may be less involved in their religion and think that 
any sand at all is fine.

Some people are searching and still looking at all the different 
pails.

Only a very few people think that their pail is the only permissable 
one to have.

Only God really *knows* which pail truly has the most sand.  In the 
end, we will all find out, not only the objective truth about those 
little pails and how much sand they had, but how very much more 
there was to God than any of us ever dreamed.

Annemehr
still looking for more sand...




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 05:49:51 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 05:49:51 -0000
Subject: American's religion/ Homosexuality and Desmond Morris
In-Reply-To: <bh6sjn+95n6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh7apv+6ta5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
In my 
> more refelctive moments, I do consider the possibility of a 
spiritual 
> force beyond human ken working to order the universe, but I have 
> trouble in equating my own conceptualisation of this force with the 
> adoption of the 2000 year old writings of a group of Palestinian 
> patriarchs as an appropriate and relevant moral code for an 
> empancipated young woman in modern-day Western society. 

*Palestinian* patriarchs? Ouch. They would have stoned you for that, 
you know :-) The Palestinians (in Biblical times) were a sepearate, 
rival ethnic group, of Greek origin.

Other than that, by the way, I agree with every word you said.


Naama 




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 06:52:40 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:52:40 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh78ug+39ol@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh7efo+ktmr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
 
> What do you think of this?  Suppose the whole truth about God can 
be 
> imagined as all the sand on a very wide beach.  Each religion has a 
> little pail in which they try to hold as much of the truth as they 
> can.  In many ways they agree, and in some ways they disagree.  >

This view of religions mostly agreeing is a bit naive, IMO. I think 
that it is engendered by limiting the point of view to the recent 
occidental religions. But Judaism, Christianity and Islam have a 
common cultural background*, so it is no wonder that they are similar 
in many ways. 
In fact, when you widen your view and look at other religions, you 
find extremely diverse beliefs and customs. For instance, did you 
know that in Zoroastrianism (the ancient Iranian religion) incest was 
a *virtue*? Or, think of the horrific Thugs -the Kali cult whose form 
of worship was a drawn out murder. Or, think of Borneo, where head 
hunting is still practised (I think). Think of the Celts and human 
sacrifice. Think of fertility rites and cultic orgies (including 
forms of cannibalism) in ancient Greek. 


>Some 
> have more sand (truth) in their pails than others.  Each one also 
> has some stuff in their pail that is not sand -- shells, litter, 
> seaweed, what have you, which represents errors in their belief 
> system.
> 
> People who are serious about their religion think that their pail 
> has the most sand and least of the other stuff.

Well, when the pail comes with an engraved notice on it: Here be the 
one and only complete and final Word of God (as do Judaism, 
Christianity and Islam), the people holding this pail are obligated 
to disregard the content of other pails. Built-in intolerance, you 
know. 

<snip>


* Let's be frank here. Islam and Christianity both begun as Jewish 
heresies. The root to the Jew hatred in both can be found in the 
peevish sense of insult that the Jews as a whole refused to adopt the 
new extension. 


Naama




From slytherin_chikka at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 07:32:50 2003
From: slytherin_chikka at yahoo.com (slytherin_chikka)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 07:32:50 -0000
Subject: to all harry potter fanfic fans
Message-ID: <bh7gr2+2sae@eGroups.com>

Please check out this new board! named Destiny Star! Thats is 
dedicated to FanFics and Fan Clubs!!! we have a wonderful extended 
Harry Potter section!!

also featuring:
Lord Of the Rings 
Pirates Of the caribbean
Yu-Gi-Oh!
Buffy the vampire
Angel and more. 

We will hold Writing Contest as soon as we have enough members! so 
come and show your talent as Destiny Star! 

URL: http://s2.invisionfree.com/Destiny_Star/index.php?act=idx

WE ARE IN THE LOOK OUT FOR STAFF MEMBERS!

Thanks for you time
-Mimi




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Mon Aug 11 12:51:37 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?=22Przemys=B3aw_=5C=22Pshemekan=5C=22_P=B3askowi?= =?ISO-8859-2?Q?cki=22?=)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:51:37 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] American's religion/ Homosexuality and Desmond
 Morris
In-Reply-To: <bh6sjn+95n6@eGroups.com>
References: <bh6sjn+95n6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F379159.8050502@ipartner.com.pl>

Kirstini wrote :

>I also really liked Pshemekan's other recent post, where she pointed 
>out that to sin or not to sin is not really an issue to an athesist, 
>where the point becomes only "does this behaviour harm others?" 
>
I am male, not female :-). Though sometimes I feel really ashamed of my 
gender. Almost all serial killers, sexual offenders, 
wife-and-children-beaters are male...

Regards,
Pshemekan




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 15:12:21 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:12:21 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh2d6f+rrud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh8bol+hqa9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
> So many of the most vocal people have no problem saying 'God hate
> fags' or 'Death to fags'. But they never get around to 'DEATH' for 
all
> their own sins. Where is DEATH to adulterers? Where is DEATH to
> fornicators? Where is DEATH to all the other things in the Bible 
says
> are punishable by death. How very convinient that the Old Testement
> DEATH no longer applies when it comes to their sins.
> 
> It's really the blatant hypocricy that drives me up the wall.
> 

Steve, you have hit on a sore point with me as well.  I personally 
believe that homosexual behavior is wrong, for the Biblical reasons 
others have listed.  However, I also believe that fornication and 
adultery are sins.

So, since I know, have friends, and am related to people who are 
committing or have committed every one of these behaviors, should I 
treat homosexuals any differently than adulterers?  Should I want to 
deny any of these groups any legal rights, or want to mistreat or 
harm them in any way?  

No.  IMO, any sin they are committing is between them and God, and 
they will one day have to answer for it, as I will have to answer for 
my own.  My job is to "do unto others as I would have them do unto 
me", and that means try to get along with everybody based on their 
personality characteristics, not on their sexual 
preference/race/religion/etc.  

My own personal paternal unit thinks that the Harry Potter books are 
Satanic and evil and I am a horrible mother for letting my oldest 
watch the first movie--I am letting sorcery and witchcraft have an 
influence over her.  Never mind that he slept around with everyone he 
could find and packed up and left his wife and kids so many times 
that we finally begged my mom to divorce him just so we'd know he 
really wasn't coming back.  

But I'm the bad parent.  Grrrr.  

OK, breathe deeply...I'm a Christian, I can forgive...somebody pass 
the chocolate, please.  :)

I couldn't possibly relate, but maybe that's a bit of what 
homosexuals feel when adulterers accuse them of sinful behavior?

Terry LJ




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 15:33:53 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:33:53 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh7efo+ktmr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh8d11+d2g1@eGroups.com>

Annemehr wrote:
> > In many ways they agree, and in some ways they disagree.  >
>

Naama replied: 
> This view of religions mostly agreeing is a bit naive, IMO. I 
think 
> that it is engendered by limiting the point of view to the recent 
> occidental religions. But Judaism, Christianity and Islam have a 
> common cultural background*, so it is no wonder that they are 
similar 
> in many ways. 
> In fact, when you widen your view and look at other religions, you 
> find extremely diverse beliefs and customs. For instance, did you 
> know that in Zoroastrianism (the ancient Iranian religion) incest 
was 
> a *virtue*? Or, think of the horrific Thugs -the Kali cult whose 
form 
> of worship was a drawn out murder. Or, think of Borneo, where head 
> hunting is still practised (I think). Think of the Celts and human 
> sacrifice. Think of fertility rites and cultic orgies (including 
> forms of cannibalism) in ancient Greek. 
>

Annemehr:
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply any amount of agreement or 
disagreement, just the fact that there would be *some* overlap.  The 
examples you cite are practices rather than the underlying beliefs, 
and I don't actually know enough about these religions to comment.  
I do know a bit more about Shintoism and Hinduism (just a bit), but 
from what I read I still can find some ideas in common with my own 
religion.  Talking about practices being widely divergent between 
religions, I find those of ancient Judaism as recorded in the OT to 
be very different from what I do as a modern Catholic, yet I find 
the underlying belief systems to be very similar, and that's what I 
was talking about.  Even human sacrifice (something even Abraham was 
recorded as being willing to do) can arise from the belief that we 
owe something to God -- a belief that's common to many religions 
even if the particular practice is not. 

Annemehr wrote:
> > People who are serious about their religion think that their 
pail 
> > has the most sand and least of the other stuff.


Naama's reply: 
> Well, when the pail comes with an engraved notice on it: Here be 
the 
> one and only complete and final Word of God (as do Judaism, 
> Christianity and Islam), the people holding this pail are 
obligated 
> to disregard the content of other pails. Built-in intolerance, you 
> know. 
>

Annemehr:
I think you are going a bit too far here.  Although I don't know any 
Muslims well enough to say, I do know plenty of Christians and Jews 
who have no problem studying other religions.  Just because someone 
believes their religion to be the truest does *not* imply 
intolerance of other people, it only opens up the *possibility* of 
falling into that error.  You'd be perfectly safe from committing 
religious intolerance if you believed one religion was just as true 
as another, but as there are points of disagreement among them all, 
you'd be reduced to some sort of "lowest common denominator" or else 
no religion at all.  Many of us can not believe *that*.
 

Naama: 
> * Let's be frank here. Islam and Christianity both begun as Jewish 
> heresies. The root to the Jew hatred in both can be found in the 
> peevish sense of insult that the Jews as a whole refused to adopt 
the 
> new extension. 

Annemehr:
Heh, well I prefer to think of them as "Jewish *offshoots*", but 
otherwise, agreed. ;)

I do still think my analogy, though flawed (as any would be, I 
suppose), is still a useful way to look at the state we are in 
regarding knowledge of God.

Thanks for replying!

Annemehr





From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 15:41:08 2003
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 08:41:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Gay Marriages
In-Reply-To: <1060591395.654.33615.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030811154108.87295.qmail@web14203.mail.yahoo.com>

Thanks Barb for a well thought out response to Amanda
Geist's post. I read Amanda's post and found myself
getting really angry for the first time since this
discussion has started here. I decided to wait for a
day or two before firing off an angry response, and
and I'm glad I did. Barb's post mightnot be exactly
what I wanted to say, but it says it in a better way
than I would have.

Tyler


Barb Wrote:

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist"
<editor at t...> 
wrote:
>  What I don't like is two gay people who only
> want their marriage recognized so they can get tax
breaks filing 
> jointly, or to be able to "get" something. That sort
of thing came 
> into being to help ease the burden of raising
children, which most 
> gay couples aren't doing.

I'm a trifle confused by this.  Are you against
mixed-gender couples marrying to "get" something? 
This goes on all of the time, yet couples consisting
of a man and a woman can get married at the drop of a
hat with no problem.  I think that some mixed-gender
couples get married for absolutely APPALLING reasons,
but just because some same-gender couples may also get
married for what some people would consider to be the
'wrong' reasons, that's no reason to disallow
same-gender couples from marrying.  Equality is
equality.  Mixed-gender and same-gender couples should
have the same legal right to screw up their lives and
marry the wrong people for the wrong reasons, and the
same legal right to pay over-priced divorce lawyers 
to get out of it again. ;)

> Which is why they're well-dressed and speeding past
me in their 
> Hummers, while I trundle along in my low-end Saturn
with the 
> handprints and stickers all over the windows (DINK
envy, sorry; 
> and I know darn well it's not confined to gay
couples). The point 
> is, I hear way too much "we should get the same
stuff hetero 
> marriages get" without (in most cases) a
commensurate
> burden. If it's about *getting,* I think the intent
is misplaced.

Um, I have to say, I'm finding many of the stereotypes
in the above patently offensive.  It is a stereotype
that all gays are rich white males around the age of
42 with expensive cars and homes and no responsibility
to anyone but their show cats or dogs.  It is also a 
stereotype to say that all married people are couples
struggling to raise kids.  In fact, most married
people in this country do not have children (the
"burden" to which you seem to be referring).  Should
we forbid people to marry who cannot have children or
who do 
not plan to?  Should we forbid elderly couples who
meet in retirement homes to marry if they so choose?  

I know loads of gay couples raising kids for various
reasons (children from previous mixed-gender
marriages, children they had intentionally during the
same-gender partnership, adopted children, children of
relatives who died, etc.).  These couples with kids
can't even, in many states, be considered a family. 
Very few states allow second-parent adoption.  Only
one of the parents is legally recognized and the other
has no right to make medical decisions for the kids or
even to stand in at a parent-teacher conference at
school, and if the couple does break up, the parent
with no legal 
connections to the kids cannot even get visitation
rights, let alone fight to be the custodial parent,
even if he/she has been the primary caregiver.  And
while you might say, "Oh, well, those folks can get
married then," this "parenting" litmus test doesn't
exist for mixed-gender couples, so why should it exist
for same-gender couples?  Again, equality is equality.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From terryljames at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 15:41:39 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:41:39 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh417g+q6c2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh8dfj+gpac@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> David wrote:
> > God is asexual?  How do you know?  Is that Catholic doctrine?
> 
> Sort of. God hasn't got a body to be male or female with (that's 
> Catholic doctrine, I think - God is spiritual, not physical). While 
he 
> does have the position of "father", he doesn't need to sire 
children so 
> distictive sex is unnecesary. If it helps, I'm *sure* modern 
doctrine 
> says that angels are asexual.
>  

I'm not Catholic, know nothing of Catholic doctrine, and can't speak 
for the Catholics...but I've read several of Andrew Greeley's books 
(a Catholic priest), and he seems to believe that the love (including 
sexual, but not limited to) that we feel for each other is a 
representation of the way God feels toward us.  Greeley states that 
God "desires" to have a relationship with us, to get (spiritually) 
close to us.  

I have no idea if this is prevailing Catholic theology, or not.  It's 
very interesting, though.

Greeley's "Irish" series starring Nuala Anne (?) is very good, but my 
favorite of his is "Contract With an Angel".  

Terry LJ




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 16:01:53 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:01:53 -0000
Subject: Question about New Testament (with OT)
In-Reply-To: <bh5mpa+ifhf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh8elh+508n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at a...> wrote:

> And I don't care what it says in your particular holy book --
> my principles dictate that prejudice against someone because of 
their 
> sexual orientation, race or religion is equally wrong.
> 
> --Joywitch

JMO here...I don't think that "prejudice against" someone necessarily 
equates to believing that some of their actions are morally wrong 
according to your own beliefs.  

I think I can believe that someone is behaving wrongly, without being 
prejudiced towards them.  I believe that I personally behave wrongly 
quite a bit, but I hope that others will still be friends with me and 
like me because of other (hypothetical) good qualities I have.  

In other words, if people don't like me, I hope it's because I'm 
cranky, not because I'm Christian/white/female/heterosexual/etc.   To 
me, prejudice is "I don't like you because you're a member of this 
group", not "I believe that some things you do are wrong, but I'm not 
going to get all fussed about it because I really do like you as a 
person, I can see that you don't believe the same way as I do, and 
it's not worth jeapordizing (sp?) our friendship over."  

Terry LJ




From senorcaco at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 16:38:21 2003
From: senorcaco at hotmail.com (enjoiturbulence)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:21 -0000
Subject: [Fic update]  By The Sword
Message-ID: <bh8gpt+rqd4@eGroups.com>

Hey there.  Chapter 10 of my piece of fiction By the Sword is up now 
at http://www.thedarkarts.org/authorLinks/Chris_D/.  One thing you 
can say about me is I never offer short chapters, with this one 
clocking in at about 18 pages.  Also, I exceeded 50k words in total 
with this chapter.  Big whoop, but it is a record for me.  

Rated PG-13 for some language and slight violence.  

Summary- The old saying goes, "If you live by the sword, you die by 
the sword." As the Warrior, the Alchemist, and others converge on 
Hogwarts, that old proverb might be proven true. A guerrila war has 
broken out, the classic fight between good and evil. Lines blur as 
drastic steps are taken, and Harry will find himself the focal point 
between two opposing armies.-- Chapter 10. Suffer the repercussions, 
the nightmares, and an a body in a nightclub.

Main Characters- A lot.  I like the Oz approach, with a huge cast and 
various storylines mingling about.  Snape, some Lucius Malfoy, Abe 
Batrak, Harry, Ginny, General Lyor Weber, Hermione, Saul Alkahest.  

Please take a look at this fic and tell me what you like or 
disliked.  How about this: you read and review this I'll read and 
review something of yours.  Cheap, but it works.  Peace, one love, 
chris d




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug 11 16:40:36 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:40:36 -0000
Subject: American's religion/ Homosexuality and Desmond Morris
In-Reply-To: <bh7apv+6ta5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh8gu4+h1c3@eGroups.com>

Naama pulled me up:
> *Palestinian* patriarchs? Ouch. They would have stoned you for 
that, you know :-) The Palestinians (in Biblical times) were a 
sepearate, rival ethnic group, of Greek origin.>  

Oops, sorry. I really meant "located in the area known as Palestine". 
Hadn't realised there was a Bible-contemporary group. Sorry if I 
caused any offence. However, I have a feeeling that the group I was 
trying to indicate would have stoned me for rather a lot of things 
anyway.
Kirstini




From editor at texas.net  Mon Aug 11 17:00:46 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:00:46 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <bh5ktf+5abo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bh8i3u+losf@eGroups.com>

Barb:
> I'm a trifle confused by this.  Are you against mixed-gender 
couples 
> marrying to "get" something?

Yes.

I had also said:
 
> > Which is why they're well-dressed and speeding past me in their 
> > Hummers, while I trundle along in my low-end Saturn with the 
> > handprints and stickers all over the windows (DINK envy, sorry; 
> > and I know darn well it's not confined to gay couples). The point 
> > is, I hear way too much "we should get the same stuff hetero 
> > marriages get" without (in most cases) a commensurate
> > burden. If it's about *getting,* I think the intent is misplaced.
> 
> Um, I have to say, I'm finding many of the stereotypes in the above 
> patently offensive.
<snip rest of stereotype offensensitivity>

Do you read parentheticals at all? What about "I know darned well 
it's not confined to gay couples" didn't you get? And in any case, 
this was an aside to a paragraph which was not the main point of my 
post.

> I know loads of gay couples raising kids for various reasons 
> (children from previous mixed-gender marriages, children they had 
> intentionally during the same-gender partnership, adopted children, 
> children of relatives who died, etc.).  These couples with kids 
> can't even, in many states, be considered a family.  Very few 
states 
> allow second-parent adoption.  Only one of the parents is legally 
> recognized and the other has no right to make medical decisions for 
> the kids or even to stand in at a parent-teacher conference at 
> school, and if the couple does break up, the parent with no legal 
> connections to the kids cannot even get visitation rights, let 
alone 
> fight to be the custodial parent, even if he/she has been the 
> primary caregiver.  And while you might say, "Oh, well, those folks 
> can get married then," this "parenting" litmus test doesn't exist 
> for mixed-gender couples, so why should it exist for same-gender 
> couples?  Again, equality is equality.

I agree. You and Tyler both totally missed my point. You got 
yourselves all wadded over what I thought was a lighthearted tossoff 
comment, and missed my first paragraph--when I said I could totally 
see the point of wanting a legally established relationship, so that 
the "auto" things that happen with the wife of a husband can also 
happen with the wife of a wife, or the husband of a husband. Gay 
couples shouldn't have to get a lawyer and have instruments drawn up 
to be able to have a legally recognized relationship: to be in the 
emergency room, to inherit, to be the beneficiary. That, to me, is 
the main reason for wanting gay marriage, and I'm totally behind it. 
The second paragraph, which is apparently the only one you saw, dealt 
with my opinion on wanting gay marriages recognized for reasons I do 
not approve of.

I'm sorry you missed that, in all that over-reaction. I thought I was 
essentially supportive.

~Amanda, who can't *wait* to hear how else she's insensitive and what 
other stereotypes she's invoked with this






From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 18:59:50 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:59:50 -0000
Subject: Prejudice
Message-ID: <bh8p36+m6e6@eGroups.com>

Joywitch wrote: 

> And I don't care what it says in your particular holy book -- my principles dictate           
> that prejudice against someone because of 
> their sexual orientation, race or religion is equally wrong.

To which Terry responded:

> JMO here...I don't think that "prejudice against" someone necessarily 
> equates to believing that some of their actions are morally wrong 
> according to your own beliefs. 
 
> I think I can believe that someone is behaving wrongly, without being 
> prejudiced towards them.

<jumps in with Terry>

Absolutely. 

There are really two questions here. 

The first is belief as regards homosexuality and the second is belief as regards 
homosexual *individuals.* Prejudice, homophobia, comes into the latter question. 
Prejudice is a belief, or series of beliefs, about individuals; ie., the stereotype of the 
"queen," or of the "butch" woman. The belief that, say, all gay men wear a lot of 
purple is a prejudice; but the belief that homosexuality *in the abstract* is itself 
wrong need not be. And *yes,* there is a distinction. It's like the difference between 
believing, say, foul things about Joe Lieberman -- or the Pope  -- and believing that 
Judaism -- or Catholicism -- is factually incorrect on certain points. You can believe 
the latter and not be anti-Semitic or anti-Catholic. Disagreement is not a guarantor of 
prejudice.

Of course, the two often go together, *in one direction*; I doubt you could very easily 
find a person who was homophobic -- that is, prejudiced against individuals -- and 
who *didn't* believe that homosexuality in the abstract was wrong, or at least in some 
other way undesirable. But they don't always go together in the other direction -- you 
could, I think, quite easily find people who thought that homosexuality was wrong but 
who did *not* have any homophobic assumptions, or prejudices, about actual gay 
*people.*

Andrew Sullivan once wrote (paraphrase) that he had a lot of liberal friends who were 
too embarrassed to go into a gay bar with him, and a lot of friends who thought 
homosexuality was a sin but never once let it affect their treatment of him as a 
person. Things are just a lot more complicated than "decent people" and 
"homophobes."




Derannimer




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 19:11:04 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:11:04 -0000
Subject: Gay vs Straight Marriage - Yes or No Poll
In-Reply-To: <003801c35ee7$f1c54700$2204a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bh8po8+94mc@eGroups.com>

It never fails.  If I want topics I love to proliferate on this list, 
all I have to do is step away from my computer for 10 days.  

I now log on, appropriately enough, from the Bay Area to find a 
fascinating discussion on gay marriage. 

Amanda wrote:

> I hear way too much "we should get
> the same stuff hetero marriages get" without (in most cases) a 
commensurate
> burden. 

Well, having just departed the only state in the union that has gay 
divorce, I hear quite a lot about the burdens as well as 
the "stuff."  It's not the part you hear about in an op-ed piece 
arguing for gay marriage, but it's a very well-understood part of the 
package.  After all, everyone knows that married couples are 
penalized by the tax sytem (I thought they got rid of that, but I 
guess it hasn't kicked in yet, because in April I noticed that once 
again our standard deduction was less than it would be if we were 
single *fume*).

Most of us don't pay much attention to either the pros or the cons of 
the bundle of civil contracts that are legal marriage.  In my 
experience, hetero couples don't get the piece of paper because they 
want the 1000 privileges that go along with that legal contract; they 
just do it because it's what most people do when they love someone 
and intend to be their partner for life, and because they think that 
if you want the orange blossoms and the white cake, you automatically 
do the trip to city hall as well.  

In fact, of course, the two things are totally separate, and hetero 
couples are often unpleasantly surprised to discover some of the fine 
print, e.g. that the state has the right to adjudicate the terms of 
property and custody arrangements if they get divorced.  That's all 
in the piece of paper we call a marriage certificate, but most people 
don't know that, nor give it a thought unless and until it becomes 
relevant to them, just as most people take for granted that they have 
durable power of attorney, inheritance rights, etc. vis-a-vis their 
spouse.  It's only those who cannot sign that contract who insist 
upon its value.  

That, IMO, is the reason gay rights activists harp on the legal 
rights and responsibilities of civil marriage--not because that's all 
marriage means, but because it is the part of the meaning of marriage 
that is denied to same-sex couples.  The spiritual and emotional 
aspects, though they are more important to the vast majority of 
married couples (gay or hetero), have been carried out by same-sex 
couples since time immemorial, even without the blessing of 
legislatures and courts.  If you hear about those bits, therefore, 
it's within the confines of a church, where some may press their 
religion to create ceremonies to recognize the sacredness of their 
relationships while others maintain that those relationships are far 
from sacred.  That isn't a matter for the courts to decide, thank 
heaven.  And you won't hear it much in your church, Amanda.  Go to a 
church where it's under debate, say your fellow Catholics <grin> of 
the Anglican communion, and you'll hear a lot about the real meaning 
of marriage, beyond any talk of legal rights and obligations. 

BTW, bboy, "Gay vs Straight Marriage" itself seems a misnomer, with 
its implication that one competes with the other (pardon me if this 
has been said already; I'm catching onto the thread late).  I'm 
bisexual, and find it both bizarre and disturbing that the rights I 
take for granted in my marriage to a man would be denied me if I were 
married to a woman.  In short, that they are not rights in the eyes 
of our government, but privileges bestowed upon those in heterosexual 
relationships.

Amy Z




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 22:50:36 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:50:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ebony!
Message-ID: <20030811225036.47060.qmail@web41112.mail.yahoo.com>

*bounces into the room carrying a VERY large cake,
sets it on the centre table and begins unpacking the
decorations*

You, over there, give me a hand with this. Start with
the streamers while I blow up the balloons. We have a
party here today. :)

Today's birthday honouree is Ebony. Birthday owls can
be sent care of this list or directly to:
selah_1977 at yahoo.com

I hope you day is filled with fun, friends, joy and
magic.

Happy Birthday, Ebony!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 03:40:25 2003
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 03:40:25 -0000
Subject: British schools
Message-ID: <bh9nj9+9jq5@eGroups.com>

Er,
Sorry to interupt this powerful and meaningful thread, but I have a 
rather trivial question;

When does school start in Britian? and when does it end?

I guess I'm just curious because here in the northeastern part of the 
US, school is generally in session from September to June.
I have recently learned that in Florida, (some friends of my 
daughters moved there two years ago), school starts as early as now 
(mid August) and ends in May.

Since I just read about GoF starting production in April,2004, I just 
got curious about the kids' school life.  I know that having 
a "normal" semester was important for Dan (and/or his folks) when 
filming CoS, so I was just wondering.

Ok, uh, we can return to normal broadcasting now.

Anna . . .(who will stay clear of that thread as I left some of my 
senses in the backwoods of rain-soaked Vermont!!)




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 06:12:45 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 23:12:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: denominations on list (Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <20030810020702.87533.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030812061245.14164.qmail@web20507.mail.yahoo.com>



dooda <oodaday at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

"sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...>
wrote:
>> 
>> Hello all! Lurker surfacing. I've long been curious
to ask (but don't 
>> know whether it's list-appropriate--if so, you are
welcome to tell me 
>> off) since Salt Lake City has been mentioned
occasionally: any LDS on 
>> this list?

>Dicentra spectabilis <dicentra at xmission.com> wrote:

>Yo!  Over here!  I'm sixth-generation, pioneer stock,
>born and raised in Utah, and living in SLC.  

>--Dicentra, who knows of a few others but won't "out"
>them against their will

And me, Dooda:

Dicentra! You live in Salt Lake? I'm an LDS Utahn too.
I'll be in Salt Lake at the end of the month, we
should get together for lunch, my treat! *Big Grin*. 

Dooda, who also know other LDS listees, but will let
them come out on their own. 

Hello all-

I am a Southern Utah Mormon. I was wondering if you all ever take HP and apply it spiritually? I see alot of spiritual references with the OT and was wondering if any of you do that? I know Dooda, and we haven't ever discussed HP on a spiritual level, in fact I don't think I have ever thought of it on that level before. I defiantly believe we can learn a lot from the experiences that they go through, kind of the "moral" of the story, but I haven't ever thought of Biblical or BOM stories while reading HP. A little long winded sorry. 

eowynn_24 ( Hoping that other LDS people will say hello.)




Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From severussnape at shaw.ca  Tue Aug 12 06:21:43 2003
From: severussnape at shaw.ca (lunalovegoodrules)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:21:43 -0000
Subject: TBAY: opening night at the WWF graphic
Message-ID: <bha11n+h25o@eGroups.com>

Well, for those who care, here's what I saw when I got into the tent. 
http://members.shaw.ca/darkthirty/wwf.html

I'm still working on a report of the first bout, but hopefully this 
will satisfy all those clamouring at my email box for fights.






From pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net  Tue Aug 12 09:32:45 2003
From: pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:32:45 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] British schools
References: <bh9nj9+9jq5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004401c360b4$b33f5d80$535fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: dradamsapple 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 4:40 AM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] British schools


  Er,
  Sorry to interupt this powerful and meaningful thread, but I have a 
  rather trivial question;

  When does school start in Britian? and when does it end?

  Actually, in the UK, we have a similar system because of differing climates. 

  In Scotland, the end of the academic year is much earlier. Do not know how much but I do know they start their academic year in mid August. Whereas for the most part, school resumes in early September and runs until the mid to end of July. This is in the public school ( state ) system. Private schools, independant fee paying schools decide individually when their terms ( the trimester system ) start and end. They finish for the summer much earlier generally and go back slightly later. 

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 12:37:52 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:37:52 -0000
Subject: Come, come ye saints...(Was:denominations on list) 
In-Reply-To: <bh4351+77oa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhan30+pi10@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Dicentra spectabilis" 
<dicentra at x> wrote:

> Yo!  Over here!  I'm sixth-generation, pioneer stock, born and raised
> in Utah, and living in SLC.  
> 
> --Dicentra, who knows of a few others but won't "out" them against
> their will

Hello, Dicentra, dooda, eowynn! Thanks for "coming out" (sounds a little 
drastic). I'm LDS too, though alas, living in Sweden and not in Utah or it would 
have been fun to meet up with you. Would be interesting to have a little 
spiritual HP-discussion sometime. :-) BTW is Pottermania really big in Utah?
I recall reading an online blurb about the CoS-movie having a huge opening 
weekend there.


Sophia




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 13:49:00 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (Terry James)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 08:49:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: denominations on list (Was: Book Burners of Doom)
Message-ID: <BAY8-F15Na2JB0Ml0Ui00017385@hotmail.com>


>From: eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at yahoo.com>
>
>Hello all-
>
>I am a Southern Utah Mormon. I was wondering if you all ever take HP and 
>apply it spiritually? I see alot of spiritual references with the OT and 
>was wondering if any of you do that? I know Dooda, and we haven't ever 
>discussed HP on a spiritual level, in fact I don't think I have ever 
>thought of it on that level before. I defiantly believe we can learn a lot 
>from the experiences that they go through, kind of the "moral" of the 
>story, but I haven't ever thought of Biblical or BOM stories while reading 
>HP. A little long winded sorry.
>
>eowynn_24 ( Hoping that other LDS people will say hello.)
>
>
>

Most definitely we do!  Sometimes on the main list if it has a canonical 
point somewhere--I must admit I'm still not entirely sure how much of it is 
appropriate for the main list and what should come over here.  Some people 
get really touchy though when you reference the Bible.  Here's basically 
what a (what's the opposite of newbie?)more seasoned listee told me:  Make 
sure you throw in the phrase "IMO" a lot, or be sure to otherwise disclaim 
any personal divine knowledge.  Not everyone interprets the Bible or other 
religious works the same way you do.

And here's what I learned from lurking on a LOTR list:  Unless JKR comes 
right out and says, quote, "Harry Potter and the Cross of Faith is a 
retelling of the crucifixion, and Harry had to die to save the wizarding 
world," don't put meanings or words in the author's mouth.  It's perfectly 
fine to say "This is something I thought of and how I applied it," but don't 
say "This is what JKR meant when she said..." People get very hostile when 
you do that.

Just my two knuts, for what it's worth.  All that said, looking forward to 
hearing what you have to say!

Terry LJ

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus




From severussnape at shaw.ca  Tue Aug 12 15:07:06 2003
From: severussnape at shaw.ca (lunalovegoodrules)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:07:06 -0000
Subject: denominations on list (Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <BAY8-F15Na2JB0Ml0Ui00017385@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bhavqq+v71r@eGroups.com>

Not sure replying to this thread is OT, in most cases... For myself, 
at any rate, what I take most fundamentally from Rowling (and that is 
how we, as critics, should probably refer to the canon, the same way 
we would refer to Merton, or Murakami, or Musil, or any other writer -
 that is, using the author's name, not a characters' name) is a 
peculiar, particular parsing of what I have referred to in a number 
of posts now as an ethical imperative, framed in a dialogue that 
strikes me as rather like secular Calvinism. Since that is how I 
frame my own so-called spiritual registers, it is not surprising much 
of what Rowling writes resonates with me. Whether this effect, which 
I am assuming is not operating in myself alone, but in the responses 
of some others, perhaps many others, as well, is a preach or a breach 
is hardly the point, I think.

Some of the points regarding the so-called spiritual that I take from 
Rowling are

- one can think what needs to be done, but doing what needs to be 
done is something else altogether (Hermione and the house elves, e.g.)
- one can do what needs to be done without philosophizing, without 
thinking about it (Harry at the second task, Harry at the dementors 
and Dudley e.g.)
- knowledge might be neutral, somewhere, but we rarely approach it or 
have it without it being, in some significant way, compromised by how 
we use it, mean to use it, or what it means to us - that is to say, 
by our desires (all the pensieve scenes, Dumbledore's abstemiousness 
with truth, the prophecy orb, Vernon and Petunia's lies regarding 
James and Lily, and others too numerous to mention)
- stepping out of societal roles is an essential gesture, at some 
point (Dobby, Firenze, Muggle parents, Arthur etc.) for there to be 
the right circumstances - that is, a measure of equality - for 
knowledge to be shared (partly why I think Harry will run away, for a 
time, in book six, and be brought or forced by circumstance back to 
Hogwarts)
- fate, an under-appreciated concept, is something rather like the 
vector of desire (momentum) within the nexus of what obtains 
(inertia) (pretty much every character in the book)
- that which does not exist has weight (Harry's parents, Riddle of 
the diary, Crumple-horn Snorkacks (lol) etc.)

Oh, time to go to work. Will reply to the hundreds of responses later.

dan (of BIC LIGHTER and ANOTHER HARRY)




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 16:12:37 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:12:37 -0000
Subject: Rowling resonates (Was:Re: denominations on list )(Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <bhavqq+v71r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhb3ll+mhls@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "lunalovegoodrules" 
<severussnape at s...> wrote:
> Not sure replying to this thread is OT, in most cases... For 
myself, 
> at any rate, what I take most fundamentally from Rowling [...]is a 
> peculiar, particular parsing of what I have referred to in a 
number 
> of posts now as an ethical imperative, framed in a dialogue that 
> strikes me as rather like secular Calvinism. Since that is how I 
> frame my own so-called spiritual registers, it is not surprising 
much 
> of what Rowling writes resonates with me. Whether this effect, 
which 
> I am assuming is not operating in myself alone, but in the 
responses 
> of some others, perhaps many others, as well, is a preach or a 
breach 
> is hardly the point, I think.
> 
> Some of the points regarding the so-called spiritual that I take 
from 
> Rowling are <snip points>
> dan (of BIC LIGHTER and ANOTHER HARRY)

Yes, Rowling does indeed resonate with some number of us.  Hans 
(Ivan Vablatsky) and Iris, as well as myself, come to mind, if I am 
not mistaken in the first two (I'd hate to put words in anyone's 
mouth).  I think we have quite varied spiritual approaches (mine's a 
Catholic background), and yet we are reacting to Rowling on this 
level.  I do also agree with all your points that I snipped.

I hope anyone who experiences this "resonance" feels free to post 
about it if they have a mind to, because I would like to understand 
what is going on here.  For myself, I have found the books to be an 
antidote to bitterness and feelings of futility, just at a time when 
I needed that.  I just can't figure out *why*.  Sometimes I read 
parts of them just to get "cheered up," and other times I worry 
about whether somebody's going to die or not.  There are other books 
that deal with someone carrying on and trying to do what's right in 
the face of obstacles, but they don't have the same effect on me.

Of course, it's also a bit scary that I've let it so deeply in, as 
there are two books to go and I don't know where we're going to end 
up!

Just one last thought: I wonder if there is anyone reading this who 
doesn't react this way to JKR's books, but to other books instead?  
What books would they be?

Annemehr
hoping this post isn't so completely personal as to be useless to 
anybody else...




From lucyliz_ward at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 16:33:52 2003
From: lucyliz_ward at hotmail.com (Fairy Queen)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:33:52 -0000
Subject: British schools
In-Reply-To: <004401c360b4$b33f5d80$535fc487@personal>
Message-ID: <bhb4tg+qf67@eGroups.com>

In answer to the question;
> 
>   When does school start in Britian? and when does it end?
>
Michelle said;
 
>   Actually, in the UK, we have a similar system because of 
differing climates. 
 (snip)
>   for the most part, school resumes in early September and runs 
until the mid to end of July. This is in the public school ( state ) 
system. Private schools, independant fee paying schools decide 
individually when their terms ( the trimester system ) start and end.
(snip) 

> 
This is correct at present, and IMHO, is the way it should stay, but 
there are plans to switch the whole system from three terms and a 
long summer holiday to six terms, with an extra holiday in the autumn 
but less time off in summer.

There is an article on the Newsround website   
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_1715000/1715254.stm 
which explains the proposals more clearly.

One reason this is being considered is to make the structure of the 
year much more regular, with all the terms an equal length, but other 
people are opposed to this because it would mean that what is now 
the 'Easter holiday' would occur on a fixed date every year, and so 
it would no longer coincide with Easter itself.

However, the government has been considering this on and off for some 
time, and whether or not the system will change remains to be seen.

Lucy xx




From pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net  Tue Aug 12 16:39:06 2003
From: pinguthegreek at pinguthegreek.net (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 17:39:06 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: British schools
References: <bhb4tg+qf67@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007901c360f0$431716b0$535fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Fairy Queen 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 5:33 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: British schools

   
  This is correct at present, and IMHO, is the way it should stay, but 
  there are plans to switch the whole system from three terms and a 
  long summer holiday to six terms, with an extra holiday in the autumn 
  but less time off in summer.

  But the big selling point in its favour is that terms won't be as long. I considered going into teaching and the thing I noticed when I helped out somewhere for a term to gain experience is that there seems to be a whole process which winds up to the end of a term, schemes of work to be completed, reports to be written, etc.  Smaller chunks of term might make things less fraught. 

  Six terms only breaks down into the six halves of the old trimester system after all. 

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 16:55:40 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 09:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Come, come ye saints...(Was:denominations on list)
In-Reply-To: <bhan30+pi10@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030812165540.84712.qmail@web20501.mail.yahoo.com>



sophiamcl <sophiamcl at hotmail.com> wrote:
--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Dicentra spectabilis" 
<dicentra at x> wrote:

> 
Hello, Dicentra, dooda, eowynn! Thanks for "coming out" (sounds a little 
drastic). I'm LDS too, though alas, living in Sweden and not in Utah or it would 
have been fun to meet up with you. Would be interesting to have a little 
spiritual HP-discussion sometime. :-) BTW is Pottermania really big in Utah?
I recall reading an online blurb about the CoS-movie having a huge opening 
weekend there.


Sophia

Hello Sophia-

It is pleasant to "meet" an LDS member that is not in Utah. Yes I believe that Pottermania is "Huge" in Utah. Though I do have to say that we had our share of anti-potter burnings. Almost everyone in my family has read the books (they all borrow mine) and we have all seen the movies. Was there a big response in Sweden to the books and movies? As for being able to meet up with us, I know that there is a small group of us saving and planning on attending the next nimbus, it would be a perfect place to meet and discuss HP and religion.

eowynn  



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 17:01:38 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (Terry James)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:01:38 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] LOTR movie resonates (was Rowling resonates) 
Message-ID: <BAY8-F126iKBsuZ2K4x000152fc@hotmail.com>




>From: "annemehr" <annemehr at yahoo.com>
  For myself, I have found the books to be an
>antidote to bitterness and feelings of futility, just at a time when
>I needed that.  I just can't figure out *why*.  Sometimes I read
>parts of them just to get "cheered up," and other times I worry
>about whether somebody's going to die or not.  There are other books
>that deal with someone carrying on and trying to do what's right in
>the face of obstacles, but they don't have the same effect on me.
>

>
>Just one last thought: I wonder if there is anyone reading this who
>doesn't react this way to JKR's books, but to other books instead?
>What books would they be?
>
>Annemehr

I have a very strong response to books, but no other books have affected me 
on the
level that you and Dan seem to be talking about.  As much as the HP books 
have warped my
worldview, I'm not even sure they're on that level. (Heresy!  Terry ducks as 
enraged HPfans throw dungbombs at her.)

However, the first Lord of the Rings movie, "The Fellowship of the Ring", 
did so.  I had previously read the books, and had trouble staying awake over 
them.  I've read them since, and enjoyed them much more, and I love 
them--but something about that first movie was a defining moment in my life.

Maybe it was the timing, coming so close after 9/11; maybe it spoke to the 
basic urge of humanity--usually stifled in adulthood--to have heroes, 
somehow to even be the hero; I don't know.  I do know that I returned to the 
theater many times (obsessively--will not say how many)  to recapture the 
feeling I walked out with every time: that I could stand up against evil, 
that I could do what was necessary, that I could stand by my friends 
regardless of what happened; that in some way, I was Frodo, and Sam, and 
Aragorn (but not Arwen; hate Arwen; with zillions of axe-wielding orcs in 
that movie, not one could manage to slice off her head?)


The second movie was wonderful, but not quite on that level, as it was just 
(to me) an interlude between the beginning and the end, and on its own did 
not accomplish much.  I expect the third one to have pretty much the same 
effect as the first.

I get all kinds of spiritual messages and content and uplifting things out 
of it, but some Tolkien fans get very snarkish about this, so we'll leave 
that alone.

Is this completely pathetic, to have such a strong response to a movie?  Oh 
well.

Terry LJ (who speaks in parentheses entirely too much)

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 18:08:27 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:08:27 -0000
Subject: Rowling resonates (Was:Re: denominations on list )(Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <bhb3ll+mhls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhbaer+t9a0@eGroups.com>

Annemehr wrote:

> Sometimes I read 
> parts of them just to get "cheered up," and other times I worry 
> about whether somebody's going to die or not.  There are other 
books 
> that deal with someone carrying on and trying to do what's right in 
> the face of obstacles, but they don't have the same effect on me.
> 
> Of course, it's also a bit scary that I've let it so deeply in, as 
> there are two books to go and I don't know where we're going to end 
> up!
> 
> Just one last thought: I wonder if there is anyone reading this who 
> doesn't react this way to JKR's books, but to other books instead?  
> What books would they be?

Not instead (HP definitely affects me this way), but also:  The 
Secret Garden.

Amy Z




From severussnape at shaw.ca  Wed Aug 13 06:23:48 2003
From: severussnape at shaw.ca (lunalovegoodrules)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 06:23:48 -0000
Subject: LOTR movie resonates (with an aside to sad denial)
In-Reply-To: <BAY8-F126iKBsuZ2K4x000152fc@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bhclhk+otn7@eGroups.com>

Terry LJ:
> However, the first Lord of the Rings movie, "The Fellowship of the 
Ring", 
> did so.  I had previously read the books, and had trouble staying 
awake over 
> them.  I've read them since, and enjoyed them much more, and I love 
> them--but something about that first movie was a defining moment in 
my life.
> 
> Maybe it was the timing, coming so close after 9/11; maybe it spoke 
to the 
> basic urge of humanity--usually stifled in adulthood--to have 
heroes, 
> somehow to even be the hero; I don't know.  I do know that I 
returned to the 
> theater many times (obsessively--will not say how many)  to 
recapture the 
> feeling I walked out with every time: that I could stand up against 
evil, 
> that I could do what was necessary, that I could stand by my 
friends 
> regardless of what happened; that in some way, I was Frodo, and 
Sam, and 
> Aragorn (but not Arwen; hate Arwen; with zillions of axe-wielding 
orcs in 
> that movie, not one could manage to slice off her head?)
> 
> 
> The second movie was wonderful, but not quite on that level, as it 
was just 
> (to me) an interlude between the beginning and the end, and on its 
own did 
> not accomplish much.  I expect the third one to have pretty much 
the same 
> effect as the first.
> 
> I get all kinds of spiritual messages and content and uplifting 
things out 
> of it, but some Tolkien fans get very snarkish about this, so we'll 
leave 
> that alone.
> 
> Is this completely pathetic, to have such a strong response to a 
movie?  Oh 
> well.

Well, this seems reasonable to me - I love, mind you, Tolkien, for 
his story and his vision, though I find his style aggravating, 
especially that quasi-KJV stuff in RoTK, and Le Guin, for her 
thinking and for her style, but Rowling partakes of the same spring, 
I say, and I feel that, in some ways, critics allow certain 
prejudices based on biographical details to colour their reading of 
Rowling. On the main list, the "defend OOP" challenge completely 
baffles me. It takes a word to respond to, and a thesis.

Jackson has done a wonderful job so far, but you are right in marking 
FoTR as almost sublime - partly, I think, because the apparent 
naivete of The Shire could be contrasted with the malice of Sauron, 
and, by extension, with the unnaturalness of the Uruk Hai (in 5/4 
time), and the unnaturalness of the dark craving for eternal life or 
power that was the undoing of the ancient world, and is, at the core, 
the vulnerablility of "men" (in the film only the Nazgul are left to 
represent that). (Not so different from Voldemort, and probably S. 
Slytherin.) Jackson conveys the spirit of LoTR, and that was his 
goal. By TT, there's little naivete left, so the film cannot be quite 
as sublime. I don't see how the RoTK film, however, can be anything 
but sublime, in the end. And very sad.

I'm hoping Cauron can at least capture some of the transcendent 
moments in PoA.

I saw FoTR 7 times at the theatre, and TT only 4, btw. Also, I too 
speak too often in parentheses.

On another subject, however, there is a big difference, though, 
between us. And that is regarding your ship, alluded to in another 
post. Now, I for one think the yellow flag is still floating quite 
near your vessel, magically staying at it's side. (I just snipped 
about 200 words of a monty python sketch about a bird.) At any rate, 
I believe you are what I'd refer to as a "hardcore shipper"

dan (in a funny mood)




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 13:12:50 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 09:12:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Mary Ann!
Message-ID: <20030813131250.74772.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com>

*skips happily into the party room, laden with
decorations and food*

Yup, another party today. Grab some streamers and
balloons and let's make this place look festive. 

Today's birthday honouree is Mary Ann. Birthday owls
can be sent care of this list or directly to:
macloudt at yahoo.co.uk

Have no idea if you're still off traveling, but where
ever you may be, I hope your day is filled with much
fun and magic.

Happy Birthday, Mary Ann!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 14:19:34 2003
From: tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com (tomatogrower88)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:19:34 -0000
Subject: Names from other books and campfire talk
Message-ID: <bhdhdm+qg1f@eGroups.com>



Hi All, I go away camping for a few days and I can hardly keep up with 
the messages. I can not even deal with the main list. On my camping 
trip I was rereading some old Agatha Christie mystries I found when I 
was cleaning my basement. I had not seen these books since High School 
more years ago than I care to remember. In Christie's Murder at the 
Vicarage two of the character names jumped out Mrs. Lestrange and 
Lucius Protheroe. Is/Was Lucius a common name in England? Is Lestrange 
a common last name? I had never heard of it until GoF.

This camping trip was with my extended family. The talk around the 
camp fire was all Harry Potter. We spent hours taking about OOP. My 17 
year old cousins says she is in love with Ron Weasley. This I think is 
the power of J.K. Rowling that persons of all ages and all professions 
like the books. It was magic how we were able to keep the conversation 
going. I just wanted to see if other people on the list have family 
they can talk to about Harry Potter.

Myrth 




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 13 16:47:29 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:47:29 -0000
Subject: Come, come ye saints...(Was:denominations on list)
In-Reply-To: <20030812165540.84712.qmail@web20501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhdq31+qole@eGroups.com>

<Was there a big response in Sweden to the books and movies? 

Yes and no. LOTR has received a lot more attention than HP, and it's 
really hard to find good HP-paraphernalia in the stores, so I haven't 
actually directly witnessed a lot of HP-interest here. There were 
even seats still available the opening weekend of CoS, wich surprised 
me. However, when the totals came in for the movie, it was at that 
time one of the best opening weekends a movie had ever had in Sweden, 
and I recently read a blurb in the paper that OotP (in english, since 
the translation isn't out yet) had sold more than any Swedish title 
this summer, which is unprecedented. So it seems to be popular 
alright, but it's not quite in the limelight the way it seems to be 
in come other countries.
 
<As for being able to meet up with us, I know that there is a small 
<group of us saving and planning on attending the next nimbus, it 
<would be a perfect place to meet and discuss HP and religion.

Yes. I need to start saving now too. Wonder when we'll know where it 
m?ght take place next time--or will it be Orlando again?


Sophia




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 17:27:19 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 10:27:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Come, come ye saints...(Was:denominations on list)
In-Reply-To: <bhdq31+qole@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030813172719.58246.qmail@web20506.mail.yahoo.com>



sophiamcl <sophiamcl at hotmail.com> wrote:


Yes. I need to start saving now too. Wonder when we'll know where it 
might take place next time--or will it be Orlando again?


Sophia

I was with some friends the other day and we read online that it was going to be held in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. I am glad that they have changed the local, I hope that we continue to go to different places each year. I hope most of all that we can have one across the "lake" in the UK, maybe even in Scotland, since that is where HP takes place, and where JKR is. I would love to be able to go and see the different places that helped to create the WW. Since LOTR seemed bigger in Sweden than HP, are you a LOTR fan as well? I am, I first read the Hobbit when I was in 5th grade and read the LOTR trilogy after that. I am grateful that I did, it was my experience with those books that made it easy for me to get lost so easily in the world of HP. Anyway I hope that you can make it to Nimbus, it would be great to meet you.

Eowynn



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 21:57:33 2003
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:57:33 -0000
Subject: Names from other books and campfire talk
In-Reply-To: <bhdhdm+qg1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhec8d+773i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "tomatogrower88" 
<tomatogrower88 at y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi All, I go away camping for a few days and I can hardly keep up 
with 
> the messages. 

> This camping trip was with my extended family. The talk around the 
> camp fire was all Harry Potter. We spent hours taking about OOP.
>
 I just wanted to see if other people on the list have family 
> they can talk to about Harry Potter.
> 
> Myrth


Funny you should ask . . .

I just returned from a week long camping trip myself, with my husband 
and my three kids; my husbands' two sisters and their families; and 
my husbands' mother, totaling 7 adults and eight children, of which 
the children ranged from the youngest (mine) at 6 years old to the 
oldest, my nephew, just three weeks short of turning 14.  It was fun!

 And yes, we are also an HP family, being introduced to it by my 
sister-in-law who lives in PA. (She and my husband are also HUGE LOTR 
fans from way back, but that's another fan group)  Here's some of the 
HP happenings:  
 My 6 yr old had his plastic "Flying Ford Anglia" and I will tell 
you, it survived some pretty good falls off some major size rocks! 
Some cracks had to be repaired a few times with spell-o-tape but it's 
still in one piece. 

The little ones tended to "pretend" HP, while my 13 yr old finished 
listening to OOTP on cd and followed along in the book, (being the 
second reading for him).  When he finished, he gave the book to his 
uncle, who, unfortunaltely, because of RL, had not even gotten half 
way through it, although he did confess to opening the book upon 
first getting his hands on it, and looked for the ill fated death.

, My nine year old nephew was having HPSS re-read to him by a number 
of family members, and his mom actually got to a passage where Harry 
states that he SWEARS  that Snape can read his mind!!  (forshadowing 
of Occlumency, anyone?)

I was fortunate enough to get a copy of the Aug 4 issue of Newsweek 
before we left so we had fun drooling over the new POA pics. 

 I also took advantage of the short moments alone to re-read and 
catch up on DV (Draco Veritas, by Cassandra Claire). 

So there you have it.  Oh, I forgot to mention that my brother-in-law 
rigged up a rope and pulley (with old bike handles to hold on to) 
sort of contraption with some trees that are on a slope in his back 
yard so the kids can play "quidditch". It's scary.  He tends to be a 
cross between Arthur Weasley and Stu Pickles in the Rugrats; 
collecting and inventing all sorts of weird things.

Well, it wasn't a vacation at the Ritz but it was fun anyway.
Till next year.  


Anna . . .(who still waiting for the mildew to dry off the mold on 
all the camping gear)






From atalante at poczta.onet.pl  Wed Aug 13 22:29:09 2003
From: atalante at poczta.onet.pl (portrait_of_mrs_black)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:29:09 -0000
Subject: seeking collabs for potterverse mayhem project
Message-ID: <bhee3l+so8i@eGroups.com>

name: PortraitOfMrsBlack 
email: atalante at poczta.onet.pl 

i had this idea ? don't ask where it came from, it's a long story ? 
anyway i thought about writing a 5th year hp fanfic /because the 5th 
year is so far most interesting to write about imnsho/. but what's so 
strange about that? well, nothing. but to the point, my friends... 

i would like it to be a completely spontanous, totally insane, not-
making-any-sense, in a way funny fic, with a little bit of everything 
anyone could wish for /your fav tv series, movies, books, comics 
etc./. 
i am trying to gather a group of people /of as many different 
nationalities as possible/ who love to make fun of things that should 
not be made fun of, who NEVER take anything serious and who LOVE to 
take up challanges. 

the method for writing this fic ? i thought about just creating a 
yahoo group or smthing. there we take turns. the ending of one's part 
of the fic should leave a challange for the next person. like: "and 
then snape entered the dungeon wearing a pink dress. how he got to 
wear it was..." got it? capeesh? good if anything is created that 
way, we'll think of beta-reading and some such nonsense. and maybe 
even post it somewhere. and become famous. and start a drugs sex and 
alcohol life of true Fanfic Icons... at least those of us who haven't 
already started it... did i say that out loud? hmm 

if you are interested, email me. if not, well, that's your problem, 
not mine 
oh and be sure your email has your: name/nickname, nationality, 
age /only if you want to/, fav hp character (one, YES, *only* ONE) 
and answers to these 3 questions: 
if in book 6 you could kill one character, who would it be? 
choose one: whisky, vodka or pina colada? 
what form would your patronus take? 

that's all i guess. off to wreak some good ol' havoc. cheers,

Mel
/PortrairOfMrsBlack/






From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com  Thu Aug 14 02:09:30 2003
From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:09:30 EDT
Subject: Harry Potter Voice Demo 
Message-ID: <18f.1e33c67f.2c6c495a@aol.com>

Hey.  A friend of mine did this...I just had to share it with you guys.  

http://members.fortunecity.com/dfg/harrypotterclips.html 


~Cassie~ 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Thu Aug 14 02:12:55 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 02:12:55 -0000
Subject: Names from other books and campfire talk
In-Reply-To: <bhdhdm+qg1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bher77+pbbf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "tomatogrower88" 
<tomatogrower88 at y...> wrote:
"I just wanted to see if other people on the list have family 
they can talk to about Harry Potter."

Most of the adults in my family have not read the books, but I do 
have a kindred Potter spirit in my 12-year-old niece Holly. We love 
to talk about the books and to speculate about what will happen in 
Harry's future. 
 A few years ago while on a family vacation she and I saw a falconry 
demonstration.  There were also other birds of prey, and when a 
European eagle owl was brought out Holly was quick to tell me "that's 
Malfoy's owl!"

Tracy





From neonsister at ameritech.net  Thu Aug 14 02:47:57 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 02:47:57 -0000
Subject: Wands
Message-ID: <bhet8t+ki8s@eGroups.com>

Every summer my city has an Irish festival, and at this year's I saw 
a Celtic astrology chart.  The animal symbol associated with my 
birthdate is a white stag...very Potter-esque!  My tree is birch. 
That got me wondering; are there any HP characters with wands made of 
birch wood?  Somebody somewhere on this list will know!

Curiously yours,
Tracy




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 04:54:22 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 04:54:22 -0000
Subject: Names from other books and campfire talk
In-Reply-To: <bhdhdm+qg1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhf4lu+dpmm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "tomatogrower88" 
<tomatogrower88 at y...> wrote:
 
> This camping trip was with my extended family. The talk around the 
> camp fire was all Harry Potter. We spent hours taking about OOP. My 
17 
> year old cousins says she is in love with Ron Weasley. This I think 
is 
> the power of J.K. Rowling that persons of all ages and all 
professions 
> like the books. It was magic how we were able to keep the 
conversation 
> going. I just wanted to see if other people on the list have family 
> they can talk to about Harry Potter.
> 
> Myrth

Only one other member of my family has read the HP books.  My 17 year 
old cousin.  We've had some chats about the books, but not recently.  
She has yet to finish OOP.  She says she wants to savor reading it so 
she's taking her sweet time getting through the book.  It's driving 
me batty.  I have to be so careful about what I say about the book 
around her.  This was quite difficult at our cousin's wedding a few 
weeks ago, but I somehow managed.
Fortunately, thanks to this group, a couple good friends, and a 
coworker, I do have some people to talk about Harry Potter with.  I 
especially like bouncing off some of the theories on this list to my 
best friend to see what he thinks.  My coworker also listens 
patiently to my rambling on about Harry Potter.  It makes me happy.

KathyK (who just saw a credit card commercial starring George 
Steinbrenner and Derek Jeter and is thoroughly disgusted)




From moza_jf at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 14 07:12:37 2003
From: moza_jf at hotmail.com (Maureen )
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 07:12:37 -0000
Subject: British schools
In-Reply-To: <007901c360f0$431716b0$535fc487@personal>
Message-ID: <bhfcp5+g74r@eGroups.com>

Hi,

As Pinguthegreek said, the Scottish academic year is slightly 
earlier than the English one.  Generally we start in late August, 
and finish mid to late June.

It'a actually fairly close to the Hogwarts school year. *g*

Oh, and we only have six years in secondary school, no upper 
sixth/lower sixth/ sixth form college.

Mo xx




From julie_balfour at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 14 12:41:28 2003
From: julie_balfour at hotmail.com (Boolean)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:41:28 -0000
Subject: Quote - please help!
Message-ID: <bhg01o+7d4q@eGroups.com>

If anyone has got a copy of GoF handy, would they be so kind as to 
email me the quote from near the end where Dumbledore talks about 
choosing between what is right and what is easy? 

Or was it Hagrid?? 

See, I need help!! 

(Also the chapter and page ref (Bloomsbury) if they have it!)

Much obliged.

Julie




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 14:19:58 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 07:19:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Quote - please help!
In-Reply-To: <bhg01o+7d4q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030814141958.78217.qmail@web40507.mail.yahoo.com>

It is Dumbledore. "Remember Cedric. Remember, if the
time should come when you have to make a choice
between what is right and what is easy, remember what
happened to a boy who was good, and kind, and brave,
because he strayed across the path of Lord Voldemort.
Remember Cedric Diggory." I have the American
paperback version so I'll explain where it is a bit so
you can find a page reference in your version... it's
on page 724, 10 pages from the end in the last
chapter, it's the last thing he says at the End of
Year Feast.  And then it goes to Harry's trunk being
packed.

One of my favorite qoutes.  Hope this helped!
~Kathryn

--- Boolean <julie_balfour at hotmail.com> wrote:
> If anyone has got a copy of GoF handy, would they be
> so kind as to 
> email me the quote from near the end where
> Dumbledore talks about 
> choosing between what is right and what is easy? 
> 
> Or was it Hagrid?? 
> 
> See, I need help!! 
> 
> (Also the chapter and page ref (Bloomsbury) if they
> have it!)
> 
> Much obliged.
> 
> Julie
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 16:02:04 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:02:04 -0000
Subject: Madonna the next JKR?  As if!
Message-ID: <bhgbps+nds4@eGroups.com>

Oh, lord.  Did anyone else see this?  One word: Gah!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/08/07/madonna.reut/index.html

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From joym999 at aol.com  Thu Aug 14 16:43:56 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:43:56 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter sightings
Message-ID: <bhge8c+ebqn@eGroups.com>

1.  I was walking past a glasses place yesterday, and I noticed a 
cardboard promotional display in the window that said "Harry Potter 
Glasses."  There didn't seem to be any display of eyeglass frames 
nearby, nor did a glance thru the window tell me anything other than 
that they have 1000s of different frames on in the store, but I was 
tempted to go in and ask to see the Harry Potter collection.  Do they 
come complete with tape holding them together, I wonder?  And are 
Impervious charms extra?

2.  In an article in today's Washington Post about young Thai-
Americans boys who spend a week as apprentice monks in their local 
Buddhist monastery (http://tinyurl.com/k11a), the article mentioned 
that the boys call the Head Abbot "Dumbledore."  Nice blend of 
cultures, that.

--Joywitch




From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 00:29:32 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 00:29:32 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter sightings
In-Reply-To: <bhge8c+ebqn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhh9hc+gn52@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at a...> wrote:
> 1.  I was walking past a glasses place yesterday, and I noticed a 
> cardboard promotional display in the window that said "Harry Potter 
> Glasses."  There didn't seem to be any display of eyeglass frames 
> nearby, nor did a glance thru the window tell me anything other 
than 
> that they have 1000s of different frames on in the store, but I was 
> tempted to go in and ask to see the Harry Potter collection.  Do 
they 
> come complete with tape holding them together, I wonder?  And are 
> Impervious charms extra?

Joywitch, the HP eyeglasses are very popular with kids. No, they 
don't come with the bridge (nosepiece) taped up, but they all have 
round frames. I think most if not all of them have metal ("wire") 
temples. The lens frames come in black and several colors (maroon, 
dark green, dark blue... geez...it didn't occur to me that these 
might be *house* colors!!) My daughter considered getting HP frames 
for her very first pair of glasses last January, but decided to get 
Nickelodeon/Wild Thornberrys frames instead. But she's already had to 
have those replaced once because the frame around one lens broke and 
couldn't be fixed (!). I think the HP glasses look sturdier.


> 
> 2.  In an article in today's Washington Post about young Thai-
> Americans boys who spend a week as apprentice monks in their local 
> Buddhist monastery (http://tinyurl.com/k11a), the article mentioned 
> that the boys call the Head Abbot "Dumbledore."  Nice blend of 
> cultures, that.
>

HP is a world-wide phenomenon so this doesn't really surprise me. I 
was chatting with a bunch of HP fans Saturday night and also on 
Monday night - all Harry/Hermione shippers, and we had people from 
all around the world - Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines, as 
well as the United States, Mexico, and the UK (okay, I guess we 
missed a couple of continents). Anyway if the abbot (head monk?) is a 
very wise man, I'd say calling him Dumbledore was a compliment :-)

Anne U
(who doesn't recall her high-school principal being anywhere near as 
wise or interesting as DD, but she was a Muggle nun...)





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Fri Aug 15 00:38:56 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:38:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Harry Potter sightings
References: <bhh9hc+gn52@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003d01c362c5$9d781d80$bda2cdd1@RVotaw>

Anne U wrote:

> Joywitch, the HP eyeglasses are very popular with kids. No, they 
> don't come with the bridge (nosepiece) taped up, but they all have 
> round frames. I think most if not all of them have metal ("wire") 
> temples. The lens frames come in black and several colors (maroon, 
> dark green, dark blue... geez...it didn't occur to me that these 
> might be *house* colors!!) My daughter considered getting HP frames 

Now see, this is not fair.  I wear glasses, I want some Harry Potter ones, but they only make them in kids sizes.  This is not fair.  I want HP glasses too(might just take a pair in every color, in fact).  And yes, I am whining and pouting.  It's just one of those days. 

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Fri Aug 15 01:55:19 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 01:55:19 -0000
Subject: Blackout
Message-ID: <bhhei7+n90l@eGroups.com>

On the count of three, everyone yell "Lumos!" and we'll see if the 
lights go on again in New York and vicinity.  ;-)

To those of you affected by the blackout  (who will obviously be 
reading this after the fact), I hope things are back to normal 
working order quickly.  

Tracy
*one....two.....three!*




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Aug 15 02:03:26 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 03:03:26 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout
References: <bhhei7+n90l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F3C3F6E.000001.28815@monica>


On the count of three, everyone yell "Lumos!" and we'll see if the 
lights go on again in New York and vicinity. ;-)
 
To those of you affected by the blackout (who will obviously be 
reading this after the fact), I hope things are back to normal 
working order quickly. 
 
Tracy
*one....two.....three!*
 
 
lol - I wonder if Bloomberg has thought of that? Does it strike anyone else
as somewhat pathetic that one lightning strike (which is what they are
currently suggesting caused the fire that started the problem) can take out
power for New York, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit, Ottowa, Toronto and
everywhere in between? I mean we are in the early part of the 21st century
and America is supposed to be the most technically advanced country in the
world.

K



From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 02:38:55 2003
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:38:55 -0000
Subject: Rowling resonates (Was:Re: denominations on list )(Was: Book Burners of Doom)
In-Reply-To: <bhbaer+t9a0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhhh3v+ddu8@eGroups.com>


  The only other books in my life that have had such an effect on me 
(at various times of my life) are The Bible and A Course In Miracles. 

  I'm now finishing up the Lord of the Rings series and even though I 
find them enjoyable, they just don't have the "portkey" effect that 
the HP books have on me.  

  I also read bits and pieces at times (not to mention going to sleep 
to the books on CD most nights) and always have a Harry book going, 
even while reading something else.

  But as I told my best friend/ roommate the other night, "yeah I'm 
obsessed, but Harry Potter's a pretty cool thing to be obsessed 
about!".

  From Tulsa's Harry Potter Central,

  Brian:-)          

  






From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Fri Aug 15 06:29:42 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:29:42 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout
Message-ID: <55.45f24a73.2c6dd7d6@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 15/08/2003 04:09:14 Paris, Madrid, 
kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk a ?crit :

> lol - I wonder if Bloomberg has thought of that? Does it strike anyone else
> as somewhat pathetic that one lightning strike (which is what they are
> currently suggesting caused the fire that started the problem) can take out
> power for New York, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit, Ottowa, Toronto and
> everywhere in between? I mean we are in the early part of the 21st century
> and America is supposed to be the most technically advanced country in the
> world.
> 
> K
> 

Okay... Some people might say Portugal is still third world (not!). But we're 
pretty normal for european standards (am living in France, so I can compare).

Which didn't prevent a strok from colliding with an electric thingy a couple 
of years back and plunging four fifths of the counrty in the dark... 
Apparently, electric stations are all interellated, and that precise moment they were 
all relying on one sub station instead of a central one. Talk about Murphy's 
Law...

In the capital we had a two to three hour blackout, in the North only about 
half an hour, but the south of the country (and by that I mean the entire 
Algarve, the entire south coast of Portugal) was in the dark for over 12 hours 
(some villages for two days).

Storks keep doing that, that's why they are sponsored in the Lisbon's zoo by 
our national electricity company... And after the blackout there was a bit of 
a broua about, not how-can-this-happen-can't-you-guys-work-better, but 
how-come-you-couldn't-make-the-stork-feel-welcome-elsewhere... 

Cristina (who happened to be home at the moment, but who has a friend who 
spent two hours in a train in the middle of pitch dark country...)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Fri Aug 15 07:57:00 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 07:57:00 -0000
Subject: Madonna the next JKR?  As if!
In-Reply-To: <bhgbps+nds4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhi3oc+d78i@eGroups.com>

Barb wrote:

> Oh, lord.  Did anyone else see this?  One word: Gah!
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/08/07/madonna.reut/index.html
> 

Y'know, JKR isn't really doing enough to promote her global image, 
is she?

I recommend:

- she should star in a film, "Desperately Seeking Euston", about a 
penniless author who one day takes a train journey

- release her first single, "Magical Girl" (CMC to write lyrics)

- publish a coffee table book, "Snape", to capitalise on her sexiest 
asset

- marry and have a child, preferably in Scotland

David




From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Sat Aug 16 08:03:06 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 18:03:06 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Names from other books and campfire talk
References: <bhdhdm+qg1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003201c363cc$f8e96770$62984cca@Monteith>

"tomatogrower88" <tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com> wrote
> Vicarage two of the character names jumped out Mrs. Lestrange and
> Lucius Protheroe. Is/Was Lucius a common name in England? Is Lestrange
> a common last name? I had never heard of it until GoF.

Lucius is a name borne by several saints <cough cough>, a common name in
anicent Rome. It was also borne by the 3rd century Pope Lucius 1 and his 2
succesors. I imagine many saints/popes names have been popular in many
places throughout the years.

LeStrange was the surname of my refrigeration mechanic, but I digress...

Nox
~"Whenever I am caught between two evils, I always take the one I haven't
tried before."
Mae West




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 15 08:36:33 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 08:36:33 -0000
Subject: Come, come ye saints...(Was:denominations on list)
In-Reply-To: <20030813172719.58246.qmail@web20506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhi62h+a7el@eGroups.com>

Eowynn wrote:
> I was with some friends the other day and we read online that it 
was going to be held in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 

Nimbus in Canada? Really? Well I guess I don't see why not. (I wonder 
what airfares Swe-Can are like.)Of course to have it in Scotland at 
some point would be a dream come true, certainly. Not least because I 
just found out that a budget airline with ridiculously low airfares 
is going to start flying Gothenburg-Glasgow next year...

>Since LOTR seemed bigger in Sweden than HP, are you a LOTR fan as 
well? 

Not so much, actually. I read the Hobbit when I was fifteen and 
enjoyed it very much, but felt the trilogy required some stamina. It 
was an enjoyable read, and the tremendous background story Tolkien 
created is very impressive, but the Ring did not touch my heart 
anything close to how HP affected me--no comparison whatsoever. 



Sophia  





From andie at knownet.net  Fri Aug 15 13:07:13 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 13:07:13 -0000
Subject: Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhhei7+n90l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhilu1+oa4p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Tracy" <neonsister at a...> 
wrote:
> On the count of three, everyone yell "Lumos!" and we'll see if the 
> lights go on again in New York and vicinity.  ;-)
> 
> To those of you affected by the blackout  (who will obviously be 
> reading this after the fact), I hope things are back to normal 
> working order quickly.  
> 
> Tracy
> *one....two.....three!*



Hooray!!! :)  Our power is back on!  I guess it came on around 12:30 
last night.  I live a bit east of the Cleveland, Ohio area, by the 
way.  It was out over 8 hours total, but we didn't lose water... I 
hear Cleveland city areas lost water, too.  

You'll also be glad to know that I was re-reading OoP (UK edition) 
until I couldn't see anymore.  *hehehe*


Andrea (who just decided to start signing her posts with her actual 
name vs. her sign in one)




From keltobin at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 14:05:42 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly Tobin)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 14:05:42 -0000
Subject: Names from other books and campfire talk
In-Reply-To: <003201c363cc$f8e96770$62984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bhipbm+gslp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> "tomatogrower88" <tomatogrower88 at y...> wrote
> > Vicarage two of the character names jumped out Mrs. Lestrange and
> > Lucius Protheroe. Is/Was Lucius a common name in England? Is 
Lestrange
> > a common last name? I had never heard of it until GoF.
> 
> Lucius is a name borne by several saints <cough cough>, a common 
name in
> anicent Rome. It was also borne by the 3rd century Pope Lucius 1 
and his 2
> succesors. I imagine many saints/popes names have been popular in 
many
> places throughout the years.
> 
> LeStrange was the surname of my refrigeration mechanic, but I 
digress...
> 
> Nox


 I was wondering if Lucius Apuleius was considered as a reason for 
the naming of Lucius Malfoy?  Apuleis is the author of the 
Metamorphoses and other works. Notable to the discussion is the fact 
that he was accused and tried for the use of magic in ancient Rome.  
It is said that he was an extremely vain fellow as well.

Kelly





From s_ings at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 17:54:00 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 13:54:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhhei7+n90l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030815175400.32844.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- Tracy <neonsister at ameritech.net> wrote: > On the
count of three, everyone yell "Lumos!" and
> we'll see if the 
> lights go on again in New York and vicinity.  ;-)
> 
> To those of you affected by the blackout  (who will
> obviously be 
> reading this after the fact), I hope things are back
> to normal 
> working order quickly.  
> 
> Tracy
> *one....two.....three!*
> 
Power has just come back on in my section of Ottawa,
after 18 hours of nothing. About 50% of the city now
has power but it is considered a rolling blackout and
none of us are assured of having continous
electricity. *sigh*

I was at work yesterday when the power went off and we
managed to get people safely out of 12 theatres in a
matter of minutes. 

I've lost everything in my fridge but had the sense
not to open the chest freezer in the basement so all
that food is still fine. Now to try and find a store
that's got power so I can get milk and have coffee.
I'm not good company without my morning coffee. Thanks
goodness only the kitten had to deal with me today. :)

Sheryll, thinking this is a piece of cake compared to
having dealt with the ice storm years ago

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From dyork at peralta.cc.ca.us  Fri Aug 15 17:53:00 2003
From: dyork at peralta.cc.ca.us (Dianna York)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 10:53:00 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout
References: <20030815175400.32844.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001001c36356$11954b80$25050a0a@PCCD0002>

hope everything is ok there and keep safe

dianna

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Sheryll Townsend 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 10:54 AM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout


  --- Tracy <neonsister at ameritech.net> wrote: > On the
  count of three, everyone yell "Lumos!" and
  > we'll see if the 
  > lights go on again in New York and vicinity.  ;-)
  > 
  > To those of you affected by the blackout  (who will
  > obviously be 
  > reading this after the fact), I hope things are back
  > to normal 
  > working order quickly.  
  > 
  > Tracy
  > *one....two.....three!*
  > 
  Power has just come back on in my section of Ottawa,
  after 18 hours of nothing. About 50% of the city now
  has power but it is considered a rolling blackout and
  none of us are assured of having continous
  electricity. *sigh*

  I was at work yesterday when the power went off and we
  managed to get people safely out of 12 theatres in a
  matter of minutes. 

  I've lost everything in my fridge but had the sense
  not to open the chest freezer in the basement so all
  that food is still fine. Now to try and find a store
  that's got power so I can get milk and have coffee.
  I'm not good company without my morning coffee. Thanks
  goodness only the kitten had to deal with me today. :)

  Sheryll, thinking this is a piece of cake compared to
  having dealt with the ice storm years ago

  =====
  "No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

  ______________________________________________________________________ 
  Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

  Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!


  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From huntleyl at mssm.org  Fri Aug 15 21:39:44 2003
From: huntleyl at mssm.org (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 17:39:44 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout
References: <20030815175400.32844.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <012b01c36375$be7c5a90$6801a8c0@huntleyl>

> Sheryll, thinking this is a piece of cake compared to
> having dealt with the ice storm years ago

Was that the same ice storm that hit Maine in '98?  I remember that -- was
out of school for something like two weeks (or was it three??). ^_~

Laura (thinking that living in a federal disaster area wasn't so bad...sort
of pretty, actually.)





From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 00:42:28 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:42:28 -0000
Subject: Blackout
In-Reply-To: <55.45f24a73.2c6dd7d6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bhjulk+51e5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, bettedavisgreen at a... wrote:
> Dans un e-mail dat? du 15/08/2003 04:09:14 Paris, Madrid, 
> kcawte at b... a ?crit :
> 
> Okay... Some people might say Portugal is still third world (not!). 
But we're 
> pretty normal for european standards (am living in France, so I can 
compare).
> 
> Which didn't prevent a strok from colliding with an electric thingy 
a couple 
> of years back and plunging four fifths of the counrty in the 
dark... 
> Apparently, electric stations are all interellated, and that 
precise moment they were 
> all relying on one sub station instead of a central one. Talk about 
Murphy's 
> Law...
> 
 
> Storks keep doing that, that's why they are sponsored in the 
Lisbon's zoo by 
> our national electricity company... And after the blackout there 
was a bit of 
> a broua about, not how-can-this-happen-can't-you-guys-work-better, 
but 
> how-come-you-couldn't-make-the-stork-feel-welcome-elsewhere... 


Haha... in Alabama, at least at the University of Alabama in 
Tuscaloosa, it is believed that the number one cause of power outages 
at that university is squirrels. Apparently they enjoy chewing their 
way through the electrical wiring, especially the lines that go into 
and out of the University's computer hub.

Anne U
(learned this from http://www.tourbus.com)





From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 02:20:44 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 02:20:44 -0000
Subject: Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhjulk+51e5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhk4ds+dg1e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <anneu53714 at y...> 
wrote:
> Haha... in Alabama, at least at the University of Alabama in 
> Tuscaloosa, it is believed that the number one cause of power 
> outages at that university is squirrels. Apparently they enjoy 
> chewing their way through the electrical wiring, especially the 
> lines that go into and out of the University's computer hub.
 
Well, I'm in Philadelphia, not Alabama, but we've had an awful time 
at our church keeping squirrels out of the lofts in the sanctuary, 
where the pipe organ works are, including the wiring that lets the 
console communicate with the pipes.  These animals will chew through 
any kind of wire they can sink their teeth into!  Our poor organ has 
been out of use more than in use in the last eight years.  Some 
folks in the congregation who are recent additions didn't even KNOW 
we had a real pipe organ--they never noticed the console behind the 
decorative wood screen and hadn't looked up and noticed the enormous 
pipes at one end of each loft (and we have some 32 footers, too, big 
square wooden pipes which bend in the middle to accomodate the slope 
of the roof).

Of course, our church is involved in a lot of peace missions, so 
we've struggled over how to deal with the squirrel problem without 
any KILLING actually being involved....which means, I think, that we 
will continued to not have an organ for quite a while longer....

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From s_ings at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 04:40:53 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:40:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Blackout
In-Reply-To: <012b01c36375$be7c5a90$6801a8c0@huntleyl>
Message-ID: <20030816044053.12134.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- Laura Ingalls Huntley <huntleyl at mssm.org> wrote:
> > Sheryll, thinking this is a piece of cake compared
> to
> > having dealt with the ice storm years ago
> 
> Was that the same ice storm that hit Maine in '98? 
> I remember that -- was
> out of school for something like two weeks (or was
> it three??). ^_~
> 
> Laura (thinking that living in a federal disaster
> area wasn't so bad...sort
> of pretty, actually.)

That's the one. I was pretty lucky to have only lost
power that time for about 4 days. I have relatives in
Quebec who had no electricity for 6 weeks.

Sheryll, who has power intermittently since about noon

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 05:34:41 2003
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 05:34:41 -0000
Subject: I love New York! Was:Blackout
Message-ID: <bhkfph+eqgq@eGroups.com>

Ok, time to get this off my chest . . .

(getting on flame proof hat and cloak just in case)

Yesterday and today were work days for me, which meant that I have 
about one hrs' commute each way, which means that I listen to the 
radio/cd/talk shows/ etc, etc. a lot.

Obviously, last nite was nothing but Blackout stories, which I was 
very interested in hearing, and, as I also live in the northeast, was 
thankful that we were not affected (Massachussetts).

All day long today and this evening I heard WONDERFUL stories of the 
people of New York pitching in, helping each other; impromptu block 
parties; extreme patience waiting for the Staten Island Ferry, ie, no 
pushing and shoving; and, as the Gov. stated, practically 'zero' 
crime rate.  Terrific!!  I applaud all of you and wish all of you 
that have no power nothing but the best.  I think you have showed the 
rest of the country an example of how disaster really does bring 
people together.

But, (here it comes), why is it that I have heard of practically NO 
OTHER CITY that was affected by this except New York?  Is it because 
of where I live, and my proximity to NY City? Is it that the media is 
only focusing on NY because of 9/11?  Were the people of Detroit rude 
and impatient waiting for the power to come back? I'm sure we would 
have heard about that!  And how about New Jersey?  Are the Casinos 
still open?  And anyone check on the milking machines in Vermont?

I'm sorry, I really don't mean to sound so sarcastic, but I guess I 
would like to know how the rest of North America that was affected by 
this is coping, and not just the same location over and over.



Any thoughts welcome (flame throwers, go away.)

Anna . . .(who will quickly hit the send button and RUN!!!) 










From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 06:26:35 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 06:26:35 -0000
Subject: I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhkfph+eqgq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhkiqr+m3qg@eGroups.com>

Anna:
<snip>
> But, (here it comes), why is it that I have heard of practically NO 
> OTHER CITY that was affected by this except New York?  Is it 
because 
> of where I live, and my proximity to NY City? Is it that the media 
is 
> only focusing on NY because of 9/11?  Were the people of Detroit 
rude 
> and impatient waiting for the power to come back? I'm sure we would 
> have heard about that!  And how about New Jersey?  Are the Casinos 
> still open?  And anyone check on the milking machines in Vermont?
> 
> I'm sorry, I really don't mean to sound so sarcastic, but I guess I 
> would like to know how the rest of North America that was affected 
by 
> this is coping, and not just the same location over and over.
> 
> 
> 
> Any thoughts welcome (flame throwers, go away.)
> 
> Anna . . .(who will quickly hit the send button and RUN!!!)

KathyK, blinking confusedly:

Other cities?  You mean there are places OUTSIDE New York City?  

Sorry for that.  I just couldn't help myself.  I live in 
Connecticut.  New York is a pretty important place to us here. :-)

Seriously, I did not watch the news for too long (after the first ten 
minutes it gets rather repetetive) but what I did see focused mostly 
on New York.  The camera shots did briefly change to show scenes from 
a couple different places.  Even when they were changing, though, the 
news people still talked about New York.  They even went to Hartford 
for a moment, but I didn't pay attention to anything said because I 
was too busy trying to see if I recognized the places in the shot.

So I guess I'm no real help since I live even closer to NYC than you 
do.

KathyK, sporting a very painful sunburn acquired at Six Flags New 
England, which was not affected by power outages.




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 06:35:18 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 23:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhkfph+eqgq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030816063518.85173.qmail@web20510.mail.yahoo.com>



dradamsapple <dradamsapple at yahoo.com> wrote:


I'm sorry, I really don't mean to sound so sarcastic, but I guess I 
would like to know how the rest of North America that was affected by 
this is coping, and not just the same location over and over.



Any thoughts welcome (flame throwers, go away.)

Anna . . .(who will quickly hit the send button and RUN!!!) 

>>>

I am really interested in hearing more about Ohio. I have heard some news reports that this all started there and I would like to hear more on how they are coping. I live in the US but I have family in Canada, most are in B.C. but I do have some that live in Toronto, I would love to hear more stories on how the Canadian Parliament is handling and coping with the outage.

I do agree with you on the fact that the media is focusing on NY more than anywhere else, probably due to 9/11. NY is also a high traffic city, lots of tourists, and well you have Broadway, the Today show, MTV, plus a host of other broadcasts and entertainment that goes on there. There are just "bigger" stories in NY I think than anywhere else.

Eowynn ( Who apologizes if any toes were stepped on.)







Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From yukon28209 at sparklingshore.com  Sat Aug 16 07:13:52 2003
From: yukon28209 at sparklingshore.com (YUkon28209)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:13:52 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <20030816063518.85173.qmail@web20510.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030816063518.85173.qmail@web20510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <a05200f03bb63884e5d1d@[68.186.28.63]>

>Anna wrote:
>
>
>I'm sorry, I really don't mean to sound so sarcastic, but I guess I
>would like to know how the rest of North America that was affected by
>this is coping, and not just the same location over and over.

Eowyn wrote:

>
>I am really interested in hearing more about Ohio. I have heard some 
>news reports that this all started there and I would like to hear 
>more on how they are coping. I live in the US but I have family in 
>Canada, most are in B.C. but I do have some that live in Toronto, I 
>would love to hear more stories on how the Canadian Parliament is 
>handling and coping with the outage.
>
>I do agree with you on the fact that the media is focusing on NY 
>more than anywhere else, probably due to 9/11.
>
>

While there's been tons about New York, I did see some coverage on 
Detroit and Ohio today watching CNBC - I also was a bit peeved not to 
hear more about metro Detroit (my hometown) and Toronto (another town 
where I've lived) but at least "Business Center" touched on it.
Cleveland's been suffering from a huge water shortage thanks to the 
blackout, and is wondering if there will be enough clean water to go 
around. I read some news stories from home thanks to Google News - 2 
million people in Detroit still without power, people running out of 
water and waiting in line for hours to get gas for their vehicles. A 
friend of mine was working at one of the auto companies and had to 
pull a shift all night to get the computer systems back on line, the 
auto plants are not doing well.

My understanding is there are some big battles between Canada and the 
US government and power companies for blame. The most recent I heard 
was that they now believe the outage started in Michigan, which went 
to Ohio to get a reserve of power, and that Ohio then triggered the 
outage by tripping the rest of the Northeastern grid.

Agreed about NY - perhaps another issue is the reliance on public 
transportation in the city, which means lots of great footage of 
people walking everywhere.
-- 



From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Sat Aug 16 07:37:49 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 03:37:49 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Blackout
Message-ID: <a3.473a82b8.2c6f394d@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 16/08/2003 04:21:59 Paris, Madrid, 
psychic_serpent at yahoo.com a ?crit :

> 
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <anneu53714 at y...> 
> wrote:
> >Haha... in Alabama, at least at the University of Alabama in 
> >Tuscaloosa, it is believed that the number one cause of power 
> >outages at that university is squirrels. Apparently they enjoy 
> >chewing their way through the electrical wiring, especially the 
> >lines that go into and out of the University's computer hub.
> 
> Well, I'm in Philadelphia, not Alabama, but we've had an awful time 
> at our church keeping squirrels out of the lofts in the sanctuary, 
> where the pipe organ works are, including the wiring that lets the 
> console communicate with the pipes.  These animals will chew through 
> any kind of wire they can sink their teeth into!  Our poor organ has 
> been out of use more than in use in the last eight years.  Some 
> folks in the congregation who are recent additions didn't even KNOW 
> we had a real pipe organ--they never noticed the console behind the 
> decorative wood screen and hadn't looked up and noticed the enormous 
> pipes at one end of each loft (and we have some 32 footers, too, big 
> square wooden pipes which bend in the middle to accomodate the slope 
> of the roof).
> 
> Of course, our church is involved in a lot of peace missions, so 
> we've struggled over how to deal with the squirrel problem without 
> any KILLING actually being involved....which means, I think, that we 
> will continued to not have an organ for quite a while longer....
> 
> --Barb
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
> <A HREF="http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb">http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb</A>
> 
> 

OH! :) That reminds me of a joke I got in my Catholicism forum:



There were three country churches in a small Texas town: The Presbyterian 
church, the Lutheran church and the Catholic church. 

Each church was overrun with pesky squirrels. 

One day, the Presbyterian church called a meeting to decide what to do about 
the squirrels. After much prayer and consideration they determined that the 
squirrels were predestined to be there and they shouldn't interfere with God's 
divine will. 

The Catholic group got together and decided that they were not in a 
position to harm any of God's creations. So, they humanely trapped 
the squirrels and set them free a few miles outside of town. Three days 
later, the squirrels were back. 

It was only the Lutherans who were able to come up with the best and 
most effective solution. They baptized the squirrels and registered 
them as members of the church. 

Now they only see them on Christmas and Easter. 


Cristina (who thinks she has never actually seen a real live squirrell... 
other than road dead)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 10:42:27 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 03:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhkfph+eqgq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030816104227.75826.qmail@web20701.mail.yahoo.com>

But, (here it comes), why is it that I have heard of practically NO 
OTHER CITY that was affected by this except New York?  Is it because 
of where I live, and my proximity to NY City? Is it that the media is 
only focusing on NY because of 9/11?  Were the people of Detroit rude 
and impatient waiting for the power to come back? I'm sure we would 
have heard about that!  And how about New Jersey?  Are the Casinos 
still open?  And anyone check on the milking machines in Vermont?

 
I live in Ohio..and I know my best friend told me that they were having they same kind of fun blockparties their.  So who knows.  I guess New York is just the bigger city.
 
I mean who cares about Toledo, Ohio anyways :) (who goes to school in Toledo..so is not being hard on the city).


We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory!  
Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2
 




Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black








---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From alexpie at aol.com  Sat Aug 16 13:30:54 2003
From: alexpie at aol.com (alexpie at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 09:30:54 EDT
Subject: Blackout
Message-ID: <181.1f3a91b1.2c6f8c0e@aol.com>

Thanks for all the kind thoughts...Next time, though, when you shout Lumos, 
could you point your wands at the Lower East Side of Manhattan?  We were out 
for twenty-nine hours...
Ba


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 13:46:54 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 13:46:54 -0000
Subject: Blackout
In-Reply-To: <a3.473a82b8.2c6f394d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bhlcke+nl13@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, bettedavisgreen at a... wrote:
 > There were three country churches in a small Texas town: The 
> Presbyterian church, the Lutheran church and the Catholic church. 
> 
> Each church was overrun with pesky squirrels. 
> 
> One day, the Presbyterian church called a meeting to decide what 
> to do about the squirrels. After much prayer and consideration 
> they determined that the squirrels were predestined to be there 
> and they shouldn't interfere with God's divine will. 

Hehe!  Well that explains it then--it's a Presbyterian church. ;) 

On the blackout (since that's the subject line), I too have mostly 
heard news about NYC, but I think that's to be expected as it's the 
biggest city in the country and all of the major networks are 
headquartered there.  On my local news, however, there have been 
stories about looting at liquor stores and other businesses in 
Ottawa (I thought Canadians were better behaved than that!) and the 
fact that it's pretty chaotic in Detroit as well.  There have also 
been a lot of long stories on the local news and in the paper about 
how the Philly area and South Jersey dodged the bullet and didn't 
get included in the blackout--which makes one wonder why the same 
safety precautions couldn't have protected the areas that WERE 
affected.

When there was a completely unrelated blackout here in Philly in the 
Center City area on Tuesday, one of the biggest concerns of the 
police seemed to be Jeweler's Row, where there is a concentration of 
jewelry stores and especially diamond dealers.  The cops were down 
there making sure every establishment had a backup security system, 
and there were also cops all up and down the major streets directing 
traffic to make up for the signals having no power.  (Although you'd 
think that if the city was going to invest in emergency backup 
generators for something, getting a system for the traffic signals 
would be a pretty good investment and free up the cops during times 
like this.)

On the night of the big blackout north of here, my husband noted 
that for some reason, that night on Charlie Rose, the Conan O'Brien 
interview was being shown again which we'd just seen the night 
before.  I reminded him that with the blackout and all, it was 
highly unlikely that Charlie Rose had been able to record a new 
segment.  He sheepishly admitted that this was true.  It was all too 
easy for us to forget what folks in NYC and in other affected areas 
were going through.  I hope everything gets back to normal for folks 
soon!

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug 16 14:15:06 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 14:15:06 -0000
Subject: Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhlcke+nl13@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhle9a+dsit@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "psychic_serpent" 
<psychic_serpent at y...> wrote:

> On the blackout (since that's the subject line), I too have mostly 
> heard news about NYC, but I think that's to be expected as it's the 
> biggest city in the country and all of the major networks are 
> headquartered there.  

I think that's the main reason why the news media -- particularly the 
big national news shows -- have concentrated on NYC.  Nothing to do 
w/ 9/11, IMO, but more to do with the fact that they all have their 
offices there, their offices have backup generators, and 
communications with other cities are limited.

> There have also 
> been a lot of long stories on the local news and in the paper about 
> how the Philly area and South Jersey dodged the bullet and didn't 
> get included in the blackout--which makes one wonder why the same 
> safety precautions couldn't have protected the areas that WERE 
> affected.

It has to do with how the interconnects are set up.  NY State, Ohio, 
and several Canadian provinces are in one region; most of NJ,  
Pennsylvania, Maryland, and DC (where I live) are in another.  The 
different regions are all interconnected, as well, but there is a 
system that disconnects one region from the others at the first sign 
of trouble.  In fact, the local electrical people here in DC have 
been on TV gloating about how well their system worked, since 
apparently it did immediately disconnect from the NY system.  
Clearly, though, a system that protects different cities within the 
individual regions is needed.

It is ridiculous that the entire region went down.  There is simply 
no type of power plant equipment failure that could affect such a 
large region, which requires hundreds of plants to supply it.  I'm 
guessing there was some sort of computer system failure, or else 
someone or something triggered a small shutdown, and the entire 
transmission switching network is just so messed up, or old, that it 
completely malfunctioned.  The latter, as I understand it, is 
essentially what happened in the big NYC blackout in 1965, but you'd 
think that someone would have solved that problem in the intervening 
38 years.
 
> When there was a completely unrelated blackout here in Philly in 
the 
> Center City area on Tuesday, one of the biggest concerns of the 
> police seemed to be Jeweler's Row, where there is a concentration 
of 
> jewelry stores and especially diamond dealers.  The cops were down 
> there making sure every establishment had a backup security system, 
> and there were also cops all up and down the major streets 
directing 
> traffic to make up for the signals having no power.  (Although 
you'd 
> think that if the city was going to invest in emergency backup 
> generators for something, getting a system for the traffic signals 
> would be a pretty good investment and free up the cops during times 
> like this.)

A backup system for the entire network of traffic signals would be 
extremely costly.  There are just so many traffic signals spread over 
such a wide area -- it would be a lot more difficult and expensive 
than, say, buying a small backup generator for a small business.  
Would it really make sense for the gov't to spend millions on backup 
systems for traffic signals for such a rare event?  It's considerably 
cheaper just to pay a few hundred cops overtime to go direct traffic 
at the main intersections.

--Joywitch, who does research on energy and electricity




From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug 16 14:31:22 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 14:31:22 -0000
Subject: Blackout stories
Message-ID: <bhlf7q+v1in@eGroups.com>

As I mentioned in the previous post, I do research on energy and 
electricity, and I want to find out how people are coping without 
electricity.  My fellow HPfGUers are usually pretty helpful with 
stuff, so I thought I'd ask you guys for the following:

If you have any stories or thoughts about life without electricity, 
send them to me. What I'm looking for is not so much "blackout 
stories" but just what it's like not to have electricity for awhile.  
For example, what did you do about food?  How did your kids cope 
without video games?  What did your family do without the 
television?  Did you go nuts without your computer?

If you know of good websites/groups that people in NYC, Ohio, 
Toronto, Ottawa, or any of the affected areas read, to post a request 
like this, please let me know.

Thanks a million!

--JMC




From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 16:55:49 2003
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (Jennifer Piersol)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:55:49 -0000
Subject: I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhkfph+eqgq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhlnml+3hn7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "dradamsapple"
<dradamsapple at y...> wrote:

<snip>

> But, (here it comes), why is it that I have heard of practically NO 
> OTHER CITY that was affected by this except New York?  Is it because 
> of where I live, and my proximity to NY City? Is it that the media is 
> only focusing on NY because of 9/11?  Were the people of Detroit rude 
> and impatient waiting for the power to come back? I'm sure we would 
> have heard about that!  And how about New Jersey?  Are the Casinos 
> still open?  And anyone check on the milking machines in Vermont?

> Anna . . .(who will quickly hit the send button and RUN!!!)

My sister-in-law lives in Farmington Hills, a suburb of Detroit.  She
was on the freeway on the way home when the power went out, and she
immediately started freaking out because she only had 1/4 of a tank of
gas in her car, and the gas stations were all offline.  So, she got
home, got into her apartment, and basically just sat there by herself
(she lives alone) debating whether or not to eat the ice cream in her
freezer.  She didn't know how long the power would be out, you see. :)
 Anyway, she eventually called my mother-in-law (by her regular phone
- cell phone wasn't working - good thing she didn't *just* have a
cordless phone, like we do) and Mom reminded her that she had a
battery-powered television.  That helped her out.

Anyway, she's a mechanical engineer who works with computers, so
needless to say, she didn't go to work yesterday.  She also couldn't
go out anywhere, because of the possibility she'd run out of gas. 
>From what I hear, she was pretty bored all day.  She did walk to a
couple of mini marts to check them out, however, and noticed that
nobody had any batteries (or bottled water) left.  There had been a
run in the wee hours of the morning, apparently, when the power was
found to still be out.

She hasn't updated us with a "summary" yet.  Visiting with her family
this weekend (they're on their way to Windsor, Canada, to visit
friends and stopping through on the way).  Didn't hear of any rioting
or looting or anything, though I also didn't hear of any amazing acts
of kindness/brotherhood, either.

Total hours of darkness: 22 hours.

-Jen

P.S.  For those who are curious, she ended up leaving the ice cream in
the freezer (and the door closed).  Sorry to say, the ice cream didn't
make it.




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 17:33:34 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 17:33:34 -0000
Subject: I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhkiqr+m3qg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhlpte+q4vp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" <zanelupin at y...> 
wrote:

> KathyK, sporting a very painful sunburn acquired at Six Flags New 
> England, which was not affected by power outages.

 linlou:

      I actually saw a report on NECN (New England Cable News for 
those outside the area) yesterday that Six Flags New England was 
affected. According to the report, a train ended up stuck at the top 
of the Cyclone coaster and passengers were walked down the service 
stairs by park personel. There were even an interview of one of the 
riders. My understanding of the report was that the park was only 
out for a couple of hours total and not nearly as affected as other 
parts of the northeast.

   linlou, very grateful to have been left with her lights on in 
Massachusetts 




From vicky07035 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 21:11:23 2003
From: vicky07035 at yahoo.com (vicky07035)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:11:23 -0000
Subject: Blackout
Message-ID: <bhm6lr+10hvd@eGroups.com>

Vic here. I had no problem with the blackout. Most of the areas in 
the surrounding parts of northern NJ were effected. I know some 
hospitals were without power but had back up generators until the 
power came on. As for the Casinios here. Think that is funny that it 
was brought up. Could you imagine you hit the jackpot and the machine 
shuts off.




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Sat Aug 16 22:06:41 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:06:41 -0000
Subject: I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <20030816063518.85173.qmail@web20510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhm9th+hia8@eGroups.com>

I live in Columbus, Ohio, which was far enough south that we were not 
affected by the blackout.  
Our state fair is going on right now, and one of the long-standing 
traditions is that every year there is a life-size cow carved out of 
butter displayed in a refrigerated showcase in the dairy building.  
Good thing the power stayed on and prevented a melted cow!  Messy, 
messy!

Tracy




From triner918 at aol.com  Sat Aug 16 22:31:08 2003
From: triner918 at aol.com (Trina)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:31:08 -0000
Subject: The real reason for the blackout
Message-ID: <bhmbbc+eirh@eGroups.com>

Arthur Weasley apparated into the power plant at Niagra and played 
with the "eckeltricity."  Gee, wait till Molly finds out what he's 
done...

Trina, all powered up in SC




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 23:59:21 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 23:59:21 -0000
Subject: I love New York! Was:Blackout
In-Reply-To: <20030816063518.85173.qmail@web20510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhmggp+22ng@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> I do agree with you on the fact that the media is focusing on NY 
more than anywhere else, probably due to 9/11. NY is also a high 
traffic city, lots of tourists, and well you have Broadway, the Today 
show, MTV, plus a host of other broadcasts and entertainment that 
goes on there. There are just "bigger" stories in NY I think than 
anywhere else.


You also have to realize that most of those reports you were getting--
the early ones at least--were from NYC because that is where 
the "media" IS. All the major networks and cable news outlets have 
large NY bureaus. They DON'T have large Cleveland news bureaus. They 
were reporting live from their NY newsrooms and relaying the signal 
to Washington for broadcast.  The early attempts I saw/heard (down 
here in Fl with our power on) were phone calls to officials in 
Cleveland and Toronto only half of which made it to the air. There 
was a lot of "can you hear me?" going on.
It got better, later that night there were live reports from several 
major cities under the blackout as makeshift connections were made. 

You do have to admit though, especially after 9/11 that watching 
NYers reaction was far more interesting than watching, say, 
Cleveland. How many people streamed over how many bridges to get out 
of Cleveland? (I'm Not disparaging Cleveland here, just speaking as 
someone with a bit of media experience.)
That so many people trapped underground in the NY Subway (anyone 
who's been down there will know what THAT'S like!)were escorted to 
safety with NO INJURIES is the most amazing news story I've heard in 
a Very Long Time.

Mel

I bet now they think they've found where the whole thing started 
there will be far more newscrews "out there"!







From melclaros at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 00:01:27 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 00:01:27 -0000
Subject: The real reason for the blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhmbbc+eirh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhmgkn+ulkv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Trina" <triner918 at a...> 
wrote:
> Arthur Weasley apparated into the power plant at Niagra and played 
> with the "eckeltricity."  Gee, wait till Molly finds out what he's 
> done...
> 


They'll never report that. They've all been olbiviated by now.

Mel--who thought something along those lines as well.




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Aug 17 01:01:18 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:01:18 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . . 
Message-ID: <bhmk4u+pkm5@eGroups.com>

. . . or is the main list still crazy busy?  I've had a hard time 
making the leap into posting because it seems that things are still 
crazy busy.  Anything I might wish to say has probably already been 
said.  If I do wade in, I can't keep up with the thread I posted on, 
let alone other interesting threads.  It's an *avalanche* of 
discussion!  I can't keep up!!!

<pant, pant>

Er, is anyone else experiencing the same thing?  Or is it just me?

Cindy -- thinking there must be a solution




From jmmears at comcast.net  Sun Aug 17 01:11:27 2003
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:11:27 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <bhmk4u+pkm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhmknv+rsl2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." 
<cindysphynx at c...> wrote:
> . . . or is the main list still crazy busy?  I've had a hard time 
> making the leap into posting because it seems that things are 
still 
> crazy busy.  Anything I might wish to say has probably already 
been 
> said.  If I do wade in, I can't keep up with the thread I posted 
on, 
> let alone other interesting threads.  It's an *avalanche* of 
> discussion!  I can't keep up!!!
> 
> <pant, pant>
> 
> Er, is anyone else experiencing the same thing?  Or is it just me?
> 
> Cindy -- thinking there must be a solution

Oh, it's not just you Cindy....not by a long shot.

There are loads of things from OoP I'd love to discuss but I just 
can't seem to grab a thread at the right moment, and I can't begin 
to keep up.

My only solution is to specialize. I'm only posting to help the Ron-
bashers see the error of their ways <vbg>.   It's not very 
satisfying to be such a one-note crank, but I can pretty much do it 
in my sleep now and speed seems to be critical these days.

Why don't you just ignore the flood and just jump in with a rip-
roaring TBAY Bang assessment?  That should give em something to 
think about!

Jo S., who can remember the good old days when she used to read 
*every* single post, and could respond on a variety of subjects.  
Sigh.




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sun Aug 17 01:21:00 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 20:21:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Is It Just Me . . .
References: <bhmk4u+pkm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00c901c3645d$d4384720$169ccdd1@RVotaw>

Cindy wrote:

> . . . or is the main list still crazy busy?  I've had a hard time 
> making the leap into posting because it seems that things are still 
> crazy busy.  Anything I might wish to say has probably already been 
> said.  If I do wade in, I can't keep up with the thread I posted on, 
> let alone other interesting threads.  It's an *avalanche* of 
> discussion!  I can't keep up!!!

It is most certainly not just you.  I keep seeing posts I want to respond too, then start to type out a long complicated response, decide it's not worth the time and effort since it probably won't get read anyway, and just delete it.  Ah, well.

Not to mention I'm sick and tired of getting long (and I mean LONG) posts that I have to scroll down through three people's different conversations, finally make it down to the current poster who has about a line or two of text.  Grr.  I don't know how I'll survive at all once school starts Monday.  After a day of little munchkins, I don't know how much higher order thinking I can do.  Considering that most posts just got skimmed and deleted this week in preparation!

Feel free to come up with a solution, Cindy, and I'll be right there with you! :)

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug 17 01:55:04 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:55:04 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
Message-ID: <bhmn9o+mcrm@eGroups.com>



--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" <jmmears at c...> 
wrote:

> Jo S., who can remember the good old days when she used to read 
> *every* single post, and could respond on a variety of subjects.  
> Sigh.

All it requires is not having a life. I read all the main list posts 
(on webview), and note down my replies in Notepad, and only post them 
if no one else has yet.

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i..> 
wrote:

> Not to mention I'm sick and tired of getting long (and I mean LONG) 
> posts that I have to scroll down through three people's different 
> conversations, finally make it down to the current poster who has 
> about a line or two of text. 

Complete agreement!!

The larger of the two other things that are wearing me down are 
posts whose writers clearly have NOT read the FAQs, the OoP FAQ, 
or the recent posts, because they ask questions that are IN THE FAQs 
or have been answered in at least half a dozen posts in the last two 
weeks.

And the other is =squabbling, of the type that darkthirty parodied as 
WWF: "Snape is a versus "Snape is perfect in every respect", or the 
same for other characters, or the shipping wars... I must be turning 
into a curmudgeon.  




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sun Aug 17 02:11:52 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:11:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Is It Just Me . . .
References: <bhmn9o+mcrm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00f201c36464$ed4ba250$169ccdd1@RVotaw>

Catlady wrote:

> The larger of the two other things that are wearing me down are 
> posts whose writers clearly have NOT read the FAQs, the OoP FAQ, 
> or the recent posts, because they ask questions that are IN THE FAQs 
> or have been answered in at least half a dozen posts in the last two 
> weeks.

Just one question, why didn't Harry see the Thestrals before OoP???  :)  Sorry, sorry, had to say it.  That one has GOT to win the prize for most asked question of all time.  At least since I've been around.  Repetitive questions bug me too.  Although I think half a dozen posts answering them is an underestimate. :)

On another note, I got up the courage to post a FILK on the main list, and that is about it for the week. I wonder if a week has ever gone by where I've posted less than that?  Except for vacation, of course.

Okay, I'll shut up and stop wasting everyone's valuable time.  I'm just trying to pass the time, I hate extra inning games and the Yankees are tied in the 10th.  Grr.

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 02:22:33 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 19:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <bhmk4u+pkm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030817022233.18851.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at comcast.net> wrote:
> . . . or is the main list still crazy busy?  I've
> had a hard time 
> making the leap into posting because it seems that
> things are still 
> crazy busy.  Anything I might wish to say has
> probably already been 
> said.  If I do wade in, I can't keep up with the
> thread I posted on, 
> let alone other interesting threads.  It's an
> *avalanche* of 
> discussion!  I can't keep up!!!
> 
> <pant, pant>
> 
> Er, is anyone else experiencing the same thing?  Or
> is it just me?
> 
> Cindy -- thinking there must be a solution
> 
> 
I definitely agree with everyone.  I'm pretty new to
all the lists (joined around January maybe?) and then
switched screen names so I had to start over on the
main list. I'm still on moderated status because I
never feel like what I have to say is very important
so I rarely post.  I too am annoyed with people asking
stupid questions.  Some people need to think before
they post to make sure they don't already know the
answer.  
I'm about to go back to college and I know I won't be
able to keep up then.  I think about unsubscribing,
but then I know I'll miss stuff I do want to know. 
The list has just gotten insane and unreadable. I hate
to suggest more sister lists but it might be the thing
to do.  It would definitely clear up space if (for
example) all shipping arguments went to another list. 

~Kathryn, who is still trying to figure out how to
juggle 6 classes and a Harry Potter obsession

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From unfauxpas at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 02:58:31 2003
From: unfauxpas at yahoo.com (faux pas)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 19:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <20030817022233.18851.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030817025831.92311.qmail@web40004.mail.yahoo.com>

First "Cindy C." wrote:
> > . . . or is the main list still crazy busy?  
> >  It's an *avalanche* of 
> > discussion!  I can't keep up!!!
> > Er, is anyone else experiencing the same thing? 
> > Or is it just me?
> > 
> > Cindy -- thinking there must be a solution 

Then Kathryn Wolber replied:
> I definitely agree with everyone.  I'm still on
moderated status because I
> never feel like what I have to say is very important
> so I rarely post.  I too am annoyed with people
> asking stupid questions.  Some people need to think
before they post to make sure they don't already know
the answer.  
> I think about unsubscribing,
> but then I know I'll miss stuff I do want to know. 
> The list has just gotten insane and unreadable. I
> hate to suggest more sister lists but it might be
the
> thing
> to do.  It would definitely clear up space if (for
> example) all shipping arguments went to another
> list. 
>

And now me (faux):

I've been on the lists since Nov. '01 and have posted
so rarely that I'm sure I'm still on moderated status.
I'm barely able to keep up and that's only because I
delete most SHIPping threads and posts by people I've
never heard of.

I've thought that maybe just splitting the list into
smaller ones with members randomly placed might work.
But then I'm afraid that my list would be missing my
favorite posters (which include you two, of course)
and my favorite topics (I'm partial to TBAY and
theories of what will happen in 6 and 7). 

I start a new job and Tuesday and will now be working
full-time. There goes my two days a week that I spent
playing catch-up.

faux
who also has considered dropping the main list and
sticking to OT and Movie.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From aimking0110 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 03:23:26 2003
From: aimking0110 at yahoo.com (Garrett)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 03:23:26 -0000
Subject: New fan fic group.
Message-ID: <bhmsfe+lt5p@eGroups.com>

Ok I've just started this fan fic and there arent many members(only 
me right now actually but) so i'm doing this to get more members. Go 
to the link below and be my first member :-D 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/americanfanfic/




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Aug 17 03:34:55 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 03:34:55 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <20030817022233.18851.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhmt4v+qh9g@eGroups.com>

Richelle wrote:

>Feel free to come up with a solution, Cindy, and I'll be right 
>there with you!

Hee!

Your wish is my command, Richelle!  ;-)

Actually, I just came back from a week at the beach, and I listened 
to most of OoP on CD on the drive.  ($43 at Costco -- such a deal!)  
All of these ideas for posts kept popping into my head, and I 
started to get bummed at the thought of the message volume on the 
main list.  

Yeah, I think the problem is the message volume, rather than message 
quality or anything like that.  To the extent I have read main list 
posts, they are plenty good, largely due to the efforts of our hard-
working and selfless List Administrators.  There are just a whole 
lot of posts, by any measure.  Heck, I remember from my research in 
writing "HPfGU:  A History" that this list (OT-Chatter) was spun off 
because of frustration with high message volume on the Main List.  
Back then, 3,000 messages a month were considered intolerable!

<checks Main List Home page statistics showing over *8000* messages 
for July and 10,600 members; laughs hysterically>

Last time, the solution was to spin off OT-Chatter and the 
Announcements list.  Now, though, the problem is just too many on-
topic canon posts, IMHO.  We could try to find some neat dividing 
line -? moving SHIP posts or TBAY posts or FILKs to a separate list, 
but none of these types of posts really accounts for a significant 
part of list volume.  The last time I checked the stats, SHIP posts 
were less than 5% of list volume, and TBAY posts were less than 2%, 
IIRC.  Besides, banishing a particular type of post to a separate 
list isn't up to me or any of us -? that's a matter for the List 
Administrators, I think.

So like I said, I was on the beach, and I started thinking about 
what businesses do when they get *too* successful and have too many 
customers.  Well, if there are too many people in line at the 
checkout, the store opens another register.  If there are too many 
people waiting to be seated for dinner, the restaurant opens an 
adjacent room.

In our case, we have too many people who want to discuss canon at 
one time.  So why don't we just open up another room for canon 
discussion?  

Yep, that's what I'm thinking right now.  I think we should just 
start another list for canon discussion.  It would have a completely 
open membership ?- it would *not* be a clique or an elite club or 
anything like that.  No, no, no.  Anyone -? wide-eyed newbie or 
crusty old veteran -- could post on the main list, the new list or 
both, as much or as little as they wanted.  The new list wouldn't 
moderate new members; hopefully most people would learn the ropes on 
the Main List.  The new list would follow all of the established 
rules of HPfGU ?- it would be an annex, really.  If the List 
Administrators are willing, the new list could be promoted right 
along with the Main List ?- after all, if lots of HPfGU members 
start posting on the new list, it should make list administration 
for the Main List that much easier.

Now, what would be the difference between the Main List and the new 
list?  How would we make sure that the new list didn't eventually 
wind up with the same message volume problems as the Main List?  

I think the main difference would be this:  the new list would have 
no limit on the number of members, but it would temporarily close to 
new members once list volume began to exceed a certain level, 
perhaps 2500 posts per month.  Once volume settled down again, it 
would open to new members again.  The idea would be that people who 
really object to high message volume could always know that there 
will be a place for discussion where message volume is kept at a 
reasonable level, but where the same high standards for post quality 
exist.  

So what do you guys think?  Is there any interest in that?  Or not?

Cindy -- who always somehow manages to take the kids to the beach 
during Discovery Channel's "Shark Week" and then has to coax them 
into the water by swearing there are no sharks in Delaware






From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 05:26:11 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <bhmt4v+qh9g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030817052611.7159.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at comcast.net> wrote:
> Richelle wrote:
> 
> >Feel free to come up with a solution, Cindy, and
> I'll be right 
> >there with you!
> 
> Hee!
> 
> Your wish is my command, Richelle!  ;-)
 

> I think the main difference would be this:  the new
> list would have 
> no limit on the number of members, but it would
> temporarily close to 
> new members once list volume began to exceed a
> certain level, 
> perhaps 2500 posts per month.  Once volume settled
> down again, it 
> would open to new members again.  The idea would be
> that people who 
> really object to high message volume could always
> know that there 
> will be a place for discussion where message volume
> is kept at a 
> reasonable level, but where the same high standards
> for post quality 
> exist.  
> 
> So what do you guys think?  Is there any interest in
> that?  Or not?
> 
> Cindy -- who always somehow manages to take the kids
> to the beach 
> during Discovery Channel's "Shark Week" and then has
> to coax them 
> into the water by swearing there are no sharks in
> Delaware

That sounds great, but...as faux said, I'd be bummed
if certain posters who's input I really enjoy didn't
go to the new list.  Since I read more than I post,
I've become fond of some people's viewpoints and I'd
want to stick to the list they're on.  It's still a
great idea and makes sense, I just think some people
might be reluctant to split up the list in that way. 
If a new list was formed, I'd probably join and see if
people were posting the kind of things I like to read
and then decide if I want to stay. Just a thought

~Kathryn, who was amused by the Shark Week story
because one time my mom let me watch the Posiedon
Adventure(boat gets hit by a whale and turns upside
down) the night before my first trip on the Cape
May-Lewes Ferry...and I had to be convinced there were
no whales in the Deleware Bay....

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From neonsister at ameritech.net  Sun Aug 17 13:57:39 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 13:57:39 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <bhmk4u+pkm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bho1kj+f35o@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote: "I've had a hard time 
making the leap into posting because it seems that things are still 
crazy busy.  Anything I might wish to say has probably already been 
said."

Very true...I am fairly new to the group, and I am strictly a lurker 
on the main list for now.  While there is a lot to wade through, I am 
impressed by the myriad of ideas, opinions, and theories discussed 
there.  And I thought X-Files fans were obsessive about details, 
lol!  

Tracy  




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Sun Aug 17 14:04:18 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:04:18 -0000
Subject: The real reason for the blackout
In-Reply-To: <bhmbbc+eirh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bho212+jdbr@eGroups.com>

Just the idea of Arthur Weasley in Niagara Falls is amusing to 
me...he would have a great time there.  The Clifton Hill area on the 
Canadian side has Ripley's Believe It Or Not, Dracula's Castle, a 
Jurassic Park mini-golf course, numerous wax museums, and unhealthy 
food galore.  Somewhat surreal even for us muggles, let alone a 
Weasley!

Tracy

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Trina" <triner918 at a...> 
wrote:
> Arthur Weasley apparated into the power plant at Niagra and played 
> with the "eckeltricity."  Gee, wait till Molly finds out what he's 
> done...
> 
> Trina, all powered up in SC




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Aug 17 14:33:09 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:33:09 -0000
Subject: "The Body Snatchers " (SPOILER)
Message-ID: <bho3n5+kbp9@eGroups.com>

Hey,

I just finished reading "The Body Snatchers," and I liked it very 
much.  But I have a little problem.

I, er, didn't get it.  <wince>

See, I was right with the story up until the last sentence, the big 
plot twist at the end where the body they snatch turns out to be a 
body that has already been dissected.

But how did that happen?  What did I miss?  What was the *point?*

Oh, I feel so *stoopid!*

Cindy -- feeling like the one person in the room who doesn't get the 
punch line of a joke




From marshamoon at charter.net  Sun Aug 17 14:54:32 2003
From: marshamoon at charter.net (Marsha)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:54:32 -0000
Subject: Out of Lurkdom with Vacation Stories
Message-ID: <bho4v8+ikvm@eGroups.com>

I usually don't post because I belong to so many HP groups and get 
so much enjoyment out of just reading the posts, but I wanted to 
share my vacation story with everyone.

First of all, I attended Nimbus with my daughter and her husband-
lots of fun, well organized, etc...and we did the Disney World thing 
while there.  A week after I got back, a friend and a took a 
combined professional/leisure trip to Scotland (15 days)-stayed in 
the Freshman dorms at the University of Edinburgh, and bussed around 
the city and also toured the entire country on the weekends.  The 
Fringe Festival was happening while in Edinburgh, which is the 
largest cultural arts festival in the world.  Here's a partial list 
of things I saw and questions that were answered for me.
Sights seen: The now Chinese Buffet that was the coffee shop where 
Rowling wrote HP, the bookstore a block down the street where I 
purchased all five books, Glencoe, where they just wrapped up 
filming, the Glenfinnan viaduct from the Chamber of Secrets movie, 
and Glen Nevis, where they filmed the Quidditch scenes.  Beautiful 
country.  Questions answered: Breakfast.  I have never seen so much 
cold toast in my life.  Racks of it.  I'm taking my film in today to 
be developed and put on disc, so if any of it turns out, I'll upload 
some of the prints-I took pictures of a man made up as a ghost 
sitting on a toilet outside a castle in downtown Edinburgh, a sign 
at Glenfinnan that said Harry Potter film location, and of course, 
the scenery.  The Chinese Restaurant/ex-coffee shop now sits atop 
Black's coffee and tea shop.  Quite an experience.  Oh, and the 
professional purpose of my trip was to tour the mental health 
facilities, so I saw the psychiatric hospitals in Edinburgh, which 
was also interesting from an HP perspective. 




From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 17 15:02:19 2003
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Aug 2003 15:02:19 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1061132539.23.57889.m18@yahoogroups.com>


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, August 17, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

Hi everyone! 

Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7
pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight
Saving/Summer Time.*  Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours,
but can last as long as people want it to last.

Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 
For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33

Hope to see you there! 

 





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sun Aug 17 15:57:44 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 08:57:44 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Is It Just Me . . .
References: <20030817025831.92311.qmail@web40004.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <006401c364d8$4d09b060$2b3c1c40@aoldsl.net>

Oy, don't get me started on the Main List.  I
read maybe one out of ever five thousand
posts and most of those are what I see in
from new members.  I'm sure I've missed a
great many wonderful posts but every time I
open my HPfGU mail box I'm like "AHHHHHHHHH".

Which is sad because there are tons of things
I want to talk about OoP with other fans,
tons of theories I have from James as Head
Boy to the epic *snort* battle between Voldie
and Dumbledore but I'm quite intimidated to
post there.  I mean, my theories aren't new
and shinny so they've probably already been
brought up, I'm not good with writing big
long posts about my thoughts and plus if I
did post I would have a hard time keeping up
with my thread with all the other great
threads going on.

I just don't think there's anything to be
done about it.  Sister lists would
be...intresting but I don't think it's quite
feasible.  Already our sister lists are less
then the membership our main list has and if
we start siphoning off posters to other lists
people will wonder where their favorite
posters have gone and it'll just be messy I
think.   Perhaps waiting it out a bit is the
only awnser.  *shrugs*

Saitaina
****

He pops into my trailer and drops this bomb
on me and now
I have to try and concentrate on blood lust
and orc slaughtering when
all I can think about is making out with the
blonde elf.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 17 17:17:49 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 17:17:49 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <006401c364d8$4d09b060$2b3c1c40@aoldsl.net>
Message-ID: <bhodbt+t9gk@eGroups.com>

Saitaina wrote:
> Oy, don't get me started on the Main List.  I
> read maybe one out of ever five thousand
> posts and most of those are what I see in
> from new members.  I'm sure I've missed a
> great many wonderful posts but every time I
> open my HPfGU mail box I'm like "AHHHHHHHHH".

I am glad others I deem as "posters I read" are having the same issues
with the main site.  I was beginning to feel bad about not reading it,
but I just do not want to.  Mostly out of sheer annoyance with the
fact most of the posts I have read are just plain boring and
repetitive.  Even with the list administration posting the FAQ and OoP
FAQ over and over again, they still do not read them.

I joined a year ago today...well the 18th but it was Sunday last year. 

::small toot on a horn::  Happy list birthday to me.  :D

Sorry, I had to throw a mini-party.  Mostly because this list has
pretty much changed my life.  Hehe...sorry that sounds so AA or
something, but all my friends are here, I found my boyfriend here,
this site gave me confidence finally to start with my thesis, which is
why I am so quiet lately mostly...ok I am babbling, but do know, this
site is a big part of my life.  I adore it.

I use to read every post each day with absolute pleasure and love for
it.  But now, I am afraid of the site.  I hate that.  I guess at
first, I told myself it will calm down in a month, but it still seems
to be going strong.  All the posters I depended on to never let me
down seem to be shying away too.  In the back of my mind, I tell
myself it will calm down eventually and we will come out of our cave,
but that is a hope.  


Saitaina wrote:
> I just don't think there's anything to be
> done about it.  Sister lists would
> be...intresting but I don't think it's quite
> feasible.  Already our sister lists are less
> then the membership our main list has and if
> we start siphoning off posters to other lists
> people will wonder where their favorite
> posters have gone and it'll just be messy I
> think.   Perhaps waiting it out a bit is the
> only awnser.  *shrugs*

Perhaps it is the only answer.  I just did not expect to have to wait
this long.  Before when y'all split the site, it was between genres
and mediums.  It made sense.  Now if you split off tbay, filk, or
ships the newbies will not know what they are and not join the split
sites since they will never see those types of posts *on* the main
site.  How will they know they will like that type of posts when they
have never read one?  


> Boy to the epic *snort* battle between Voldie
> and Dumbledore but I'm quite intimidated to
> post there.  

Oh come on, that was so funny.  Just the fact Dumbledore called him
Tom made my day.  Here everyone is afraid to say Voldemort, but if
Dumbledore could get them to say Tom instead it makes him human again
and not the "god" he thinks he is.  :D

Then he is redeemable too.  ;)


Melody





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sun Aug 17 17:22:26 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:22:26 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Is It Just Me . . .
References: <bhodbt+t9gk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a801c364e4$21f91940$2b3c1c40@aoldsl.net>

Melody wrote:

<::small toot on a horn::  Happy list
birthday to me.  :D>

Happy List Birthday too you, Happy List
Birthday to you, Happy List Birthday dear
Melody, Happy List Birthday to youuuuuu.
*smiles*

<Oh come on, that was so funny.  Just the
fact Dumbledore called him
Tom made my day.  Here everyone is afraid to
say Voldemort, but if
Dumbledore could get them to say Tom instead
it makes him human again
and not the "god" he thinks he is.  :D>

Okay, okay , so the "Tom" parts were cool but
I was left wanting...more.  But we still have
two books so I guess I'll eventually get it.
As one of the few Voldemort fangirls (er,
don't ask) I just thought he would
be...tougher.  Though I guess he wasn't
exactly prepared for what he found at the
MoM...

As for the main list, I'm sticking with the
idea of just reading subjects and glancing at
the posts that interest me.  Sure,
something's are repetitive but that can't
really be helped, diffrent ideas, diffrent
thoughts or just whole new members really
excited about something and posting it all
lead to a lot of repeating.  Plus the book
information doesn't change so we gotta chew
on something until book six.

Saitaina
****

"Sorry Vig...just seems like I'm about to
come out of a closet I didn't even know I was
in."

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sun Aug 17 17:29:20 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy St John)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:29:20 -0700
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
Message-ID: <410-220038017172920823@earthlink.net>

I'm not going to quote what people have already said, as I'm on digest
right now. Besides, I'm addressing a whole bunch of comments by a whole
bunch of people,:-)

I complely agree that the main list is more than a bit unwieldy right now.
I actually posted a message about this to the list a couple of days ago, my
attempt at a reminder for people to be careful about what they post before
they post it - to try and check that you're not asking the same question 15
people posted last week, to refrain from replying to a post before reading
all the other posts in the thread (you know how 28 people will all answer a
one-line question before checking that someone else already answered it
first). I also talked a bit about the rules - snipping, Me Too posts, that
sort of thing, because I've been really disappointed with the quality of
the list lately. I posted it to the main list because I figured if I posted
it here, the vast majority of people who I feel need to read it wouldn't
have ever seen it.

Yesterday, I gave it a bit of thought and realised that I'm probably only
actually enjoying about 4 out of every 100 or so posts. I've taken to just
deleting posts on topics that don't interest me (SHIPs, plus a whole bunch
of other things). Most of this I would read if the overall volume was
lower, but I don't have unlimited time (who does?), so I'm mostly following
Snape stuff and a few others. So, after deleting about 70 percent of the
posts unopened, I'm STILL finding an overwhelming majority of posts with
six pages of unsnipped stuff to scroll down through, just to find "Me Too!"
ARGH!!!! As someone already mentioned, these people CAN NOT have read the
FAQ. Well, when I joined this group a year and a half ago, I was actually
rather intimidated - it was obvious that the rules were taken very
seriously and that one had better follow them or risk being hated by
everyone and getting lots of howlers. <G>

I know that the mods and elves are swamped, and I think they're doing a
marvelous job, but the fact is that the list has gotten a bit out of
control. It's not just newbies that aren't following the rules now, some
old timers have slipped as well. And we talk so much about how big the list
volume is, but the point is that if everyone was at least trying to be
conscientious about posting, the volume wouldn't be nearly as big! 

Others have argued that the newbies are just excited and that's why there
are so many repeat questions (ala the Thestral threads), and that we should
all just put up with a bit of that. Well, that attitude makes me angry,
frankly. We have rules here. Big rules, which are very clear.  I have
always done my personal best to follow them. And I've made the odd mistake
now and again, just like most of us have done. No one expects perfection.
But it's obvious that a lot of people just aren't even trying. Which is
really too bad. I re-read the entire Humongous Bigfile last night, and
pretty much all the things we've complained about in this thread are
AGAINST THE RULES. I have heard that the mods are going to work on more
reminders about proper posting guidelines now that list volume has gone
down a bit, and I'm sure that will help. But for now, I'm just discouraged.

As for starting a sister group, I'm actually now a member of another group
where we're planning to have canon discussions (although that's not the
sole function of the group). I totally agree though, that I don't want to
leave this group and leave behind so many of the posters from days gone by
whom I've so enjoyed reading. Cindy, Pippin, Eileen, Elkins - there are
tons of others, too. Don't assume I don't love you if I haven't listed your
name! :-) Thing is, though, none of them seem to be posting to the main
list anymore, anyway. So I'm afraid we've already lost the input from some
of the "old crowd." And that's just a d*mned shame.

I've decided to take a break from the main list - I'm weaning myself of by
going to digest for the time being, so I can still scan for interesting
posts. I am torn about this, as I love this group, I love participating in
this group, and I've come to have warm feelings about lots of the people
here. But right now I'm NOT enjoying the group very much, and it's become a
big drain of my time for a relatively small return. Maybe in a few months
this batch of newbies will have settled in, and there won't be so many
rubbish posts. But until that happens, I want to spend the bulk of my time
somewhere else. I almost wonder if the idea of another group isn't a good
idea. For there to be an "intro" group - "HP for newbies" or something, and
once people have gotten all the thestral and gleam questions out of their
systems, they can "graduate" to a group where the level of discussion can
be higher, and more in-depth. Not sure how to go about this, though, and
I'm sure there are some who'll find this an elitist attitude. I'm not an
elitist. I'm happy for all to participate - as long as we're all following
the same rules and treating one another with respect, that is. That's not
elitism. That's just me wanting to be treated the way I treat others. 

Ah well. There's my rant. Thanks for listening. :-)

Wendy

Wendy St John
hebrideanblack at earthlink.net







From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sun Aug 17 17:39:46 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:39:46 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
References: <410-220038017172920823@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <00be01c364e6$8df7f880$2b3c1c40@aoldsl.net>

Wendy wrote:

<I know that the mods and elves are swamped,
and I think they're doing a
marvelous job, but the fact is that the list
has gotten a bit out of
control.>

We know love, trust me, we know.  And we're
trying out best to do everything but we're
only so many people.  I can tell you right
now that the concerns you are addressing ARE
at the forefront of our minds right now and
we're working on a solution.  I know, I know,
doesn't help right now but at least you know
we're not just skiving off to the Bahamas and
letting you fend for yourselves.

As I said before, I'm quite certain in my own
mind that another list would not help
matters, but it is an idea to think about
right now.  I completly understand yours, and
everyone else's feelings of frustration.   I
just don't know how to go about fixing the
problem beyond saying wait it out.

The problem I see with any plan of action is
we'll always have newbies who don't want to
read our FAQ's or past posts or even the
rules.  A separate list for them does smack
of elitism (and I know that's not what you
meant at all) but that's how some newbies may
see it.  We were all there once, bright and
shinny, bubbling over with questions about
obvious things.  I mean, my first post to the
main list was a one-liner about how I
pronounce Draco's name.  Not exactly the
thought provoking post that.

I just think a little time, a little patients
and a bit of understanding will go a long
way.  Also, feel free to bring up any ideas,
thoughts, what have yous about this to the
list administration (just email the owners
address).  We're open to suggestions...well,
reasonable ones.   Newbie Hunting would not
be exactly something we're open to. :o).

Saitaina
****
"Sorry Vig...just seems like I'm about to
come out of a closet I didn't even know I was
in."

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From lsease at innernet.net  Sun Aug 17 17:49:54 2003
From: lsease at innernet.net (simbananacat)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 17:49:54 -0000
Subject: Sirius  (need help pronoucing his name) 
Message-ID: <bhof82+d1tj@eGroups.com>


I have an embarrassing HP problem.  I don't know how to 
pronounce "Sirius".  I try to avoid using his name in conversations 
because I can't say it.  This makes it difficult to discuss his role 
in OOP.  I have tried looking it up in the dictionary but this didn't 
really help as I can never understand those pronunciation guides.  

The closest I can come is Sir-re-us (3 syllables) with the accent on 
Sir. 

What does everyone else think?




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sun Aug 17 17:49:25 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:49:25 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sirius  (need help pronoucing his name)
References: <bhof82+d1tj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00c701c364e7$e6feff40$2b3c1c40@aoldsl.net>

<The closest I can come is Sir-re-us (3
syllables) with the accent on
Sir.

What does everyone else think?>

Considering I call him Cy-rus I can't really
speak, but most often the proncunciation is
the same for the word serious.  At least
that's what people keep telling me it is.  I
stick by Cy-rus.

Saitaina
****
"Sorry Vig...just seems like I'm about to
come out of a closet I didn't even know I was
in."

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Sun Aug 17 18:01:52 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:01:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sirius  (need help pronoucing his name)
Message-ID: <25.3d07c523.2c711d10@aol.com>

In a message dated 8/17/2003 1:50:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
lsease at innernet.net writes:


> I have an embarrassing HP problem.  I don't know how to 
> pronounce "Sirius".  I try to avoid using his name in conversations 
> because I can't say it.  This makes it difficult to discuss his role 
> in OOP.  I have tried looking it up in the dictionary but this didn't 
> really help as I can never understand those pronunciation guides.  
> 

me:  
:::grins::: From someone who was dealing with the same issue until just a 
couple weeks ago, I looked it up on an online dictionary (www.m-w.com) and it 
pronounces the word aloud for you :)  
It's pronounced like the word serious.

~RSFJenny


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From PhoenixCharms at Aol.com  Sun Aug 17 18:31:57 2003
From: PhoenixCharms at Aol.com (PhoenixCharms at Aol.com)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:31:57 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sirius  (need help pronoucing his name)
Message-ID: <142.175865bf.2c71241d@aol.com>

I always pronounced it like "serious" while reading, but I guess it really 
doesn't matter how you say his name as long as you know who you're talking about 
=0)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 17 19:18:46 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:18:46 -0000
Subject: Sirius  (need help pronoucing his name)
In-Reply-To: <142.175865bf.2c71241d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bhokem+al3s@eGroups.com>

PhoenixCharms wrote:
>I always pronounced it like "serious" while reading, but I guess it
>really doesn't matter how you say his name as long as you know who
>you're talking about. 
> =0


:)

Well, I pronounce him Cirrus, like the clouds, but then again I still
say Snap instead of Snape.  ::shrugs with a grin::


Melody





From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 19:38:31 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:38:31 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <410-220038017172920823@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <bholjn+j5pf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Wendy St John" <hebrideanblack at e...> 
wrote: 
> Yesterday, I gave it a bit of thought and realised that I'm probably only
> actually enjoying about 4 out of every 100 or so posts. I've taken to just
> deleting posts on topics that don't interest me (SHIPs, plus a whole bunch
> of other things). Most of this I would read if the overall volume was
> lower, but I don't have unlimited time (who does?), so I'm mostly following
> Snape stuff and a few others. So, after deleting about 70 percent of the
> posts unopened, I'm STILL finding an overwhelming majority of posts with
> six pages of unsnipped stuff to scroll down through, just to find "Me Too!"
> ARGH!!!! As someone already mentioned, these people CAN NOT have read the
> FAQ. Well, when I joined this group a year and a half ago, I was actually
> rather intimidated - it was obvious that the rules were taken very
> seriously and that one had better follow them or risk being hated by
> everyone and getting lots of howlers. <G>

I've been having the same experience, but frankly, I think 
there's something that we can all do to help reduce this kind 
of clutter.  We can post.  When I first joined HPfGU it was with 
a rather snobbish feeling.  I didn't really believe that the 
group produced material of the kind of caliber that warranted 
all the fuss - the Humongous Bigfile, Moderated Status, etc.  
It was only after I read some posts that I realized just what an 
intelligent and talented bunch of people make up HPfGU, and 
those posts made me want to contribute something of that 
quality.  The newbies on the group right now don't have too 
many older members offering examples, and it shows.

So post.  Don't be afraid that someone's said the same thing 
already - they have.  And not just over the last seven weeks but 
over the last three years.  How many times have we told 
newbies that they shouldn't be afraid to suggest an oft-repeated 
topic, because there are always new angles and new readers?  
That's still the case.  I'm sure everyone on this thread has a lot to 
say, and I know that I'm looking forward to reading it.  I can't be 
the only one who scans the list for her favorite posters, because 
I know that those posters can be relied on to provide consistently 
high quality.  If you post, others will respond, and some of them 
will be inspired to raise the quality of their discussion.

What makes HPfGU a great place to discuss Harry Potter is not 
that there are moderators around to discourage low-brow 
discussions, but that there are great people who encourage 
high-brow ones.

Post, people.

Abigail




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Aug 17 19:55:46 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:55:46 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <410-220038017172920823@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <bhomk2+glea@eGroups.com>

Hey, again,

Wendy:

>And we talk so much about how big the list
> volume is, but the point is that if everyone was at least trying 
>to be conscientious about posting, the volume wouldn't be nearly as 
>big! 

Oh, hey, I understand this, for sure.  But I'm not so sure that it 
is really the fault of the individual posters.  There are just too 
many people talking at once, and when you have that in any social 
situation, people can't help but talk past each other.  And over 
each other too.  So we're left with people who are willing to talk 
past each other (I know -- not everyone posting is doing that, but 
many are), and people like me who would like to post but can't do so 
responsibily with list volume at these levels.


>But for now, I'm just discouraged.

<pat, pat>

Yeah.  Me too.  I feel like someone who is trying to do double-dutch 
jump rope and can't find a way to enter because the ropes are 
twirling way too fast.  It's been almost two months, and I feel like 
I'd never be able to get a word in edgewise.  Argh!!!!


>I totally agree though, that I don't want to
> leave this group and leave behind so many of the posters from days 
>gone by whom I've so enjoyed reading. Cindy, Pippin, Eileen, 
>Elkins - there are tons of others, too. 

Hey, thanks!  I've had off-lists with some of the folks I consider 
to be excellent posters, and some really are holding back because of 
the deluge.  It's a shame.  I am dying to hear their canon thoughts, 
myself.  But then again, if they jumped in now, I'd miss their post 
anyway.

And that's why I proposed such a drastic solution of having a second 
list with an open membership.  Right now, I am getting nothing from 
the main list.  Zippo.  I'm not seeing the posts of my favorite 
posters either because they aren't posting at all, or they are 
posting but I can't keep up with what is being said.  For me, I'd 
rather be on a list that is a subset of the main list and get even a 
tiny bit of the posters I like to read.  And if one of my favorite 
posters chooses only to post on the main list . . . well, I'll 
either read them there or not.  But I'm not getting to read them now 
at all, so I guess I'm no worse off, in a way.  At least I'd get to 
post without feeling that my post will be swamped, that I will miss 
replies, that everything has been said already and I'm just adding 
to the message volume problem . . . .


>So I'm afraid we've already lost the input from some
> of the "old crowd." And that's just a d*mned shame.

Yeah.  If people grow bored and wander off, well, that's the way it 
goes.  I feel pretty confident, though, that that isn't what is 
happening here.  Which is a d*mned shame, Wendy.

>Maybe in a few months
> this batch of newbies will have settled in, and there won't be so 
>many rubbish posts. But until that happens, I want to spend the 
>bulk of my time somewhere else. 

Noooooooo!  Wait!  Come on, we can fix this!  Don't go, OK?


>I almost wonder if the idea of another group isn't a good
> idea. For there to be an "intro" group - "HP for newbies" or 
>something, and once people have gotten all the thestral and gleam 
>questions out of their systems, they can "graduate" to a group 
>where the level of discussion can be higher, and more in-depth. 


That would be difficult, though, and I'm not sure it gets to the 
root of the problem, really.  I mean, we've coped with "gleam" 
questions before, and people didn't throw up their hands in 
frustration.  The reason, I think, was that there were just a few 
gleam questions now and then.  When you quadruple list volume and 
have a skeleton crew of dedicated list administrators to police 
everyone, those gleam questions can get out of control, even though 
every poster really means well when they post.

For me, I'd rather just give members of the community an option of a 
low volume place to post.  It wouldn't be elitist so long as 
membership were open, IMHO.  If no one went over there and started 
posting, then I guess that means people are willing to live with 
high post volume on the main list.  And who knows?  Maybe we'd get 
lucky and some of the old-timers would come out of hiding.

As for me, I'd probably scan the main list for posters I like to 
read, but I'd do my own posting on the smaller list.  I think.


> Ah well. There's my rant. Thanks for listening. :-)

Anytime, Wendy.  And don't go, OK?

Cindy -- smiling at the idea that she'd probably be the only one 
willing to join a new list and would sit there talking to herself, 
but excited by the prospect of winning every argument




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 17 20:37:45 2003
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:37:45 -0000
Subject: Sirius  (need help pronoucing his name)
In-Reply-To: <bhof82+d1tj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhop2p+h8bi@eGroups.com>

Hiya...

> I have an embarrassing HP problem.  I don't know how to 
> pronounce "Sirius".  I try to avoid using his name in conversations 
> because I can't say it.  This makes it difficult to discuss his role 
> in OOP.  I have tried looking it up in the dictionary but this didn't 
> really help as I can never understand those pronunciation guides.  
> 
> The closest I can come is Sir-re-us (3 syllables) with the accent on 
> Sir. 
> 
> What does everyone else think?

I pronounce it ALMOST like serious, but not quite - "serious" has a
longer first syllable, while the "Si" in "Sirius" is short.

Come to think of it, I got this from a storytape I had when I was
little. The tale's called "The Owl Who Was Afraid Of The Dark", and in
it the Black Cat tells Plop the Owl about Sirius, the Dog Star (no
coincidences there, I'll bet). So Sirius as a name is pronounced just
like Sirius the star constellation, with a short "Si", but otherwise
like "serious". In my book, anyway. :-)

Love, Alice




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Sun Aug 17 20:43:14 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:43:14 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <00f201c36464$ed4ba250$169ccdd1@RVotaw>
References: <bhmn9o+mcrm@eGroups.com> <00f201c36464$ed4ba250$169ccdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <200308172243.14081.silmariel@telefonica.net>

Catlady:
<<The larger of the two other things that are wearing me down are
posts whose writers clearly have NOT read the FAQs, the OoP FAQ,
or the recent posts...>>

Just to quote someone, not you specifically, I know you are discouraged, 
as I am. But please, I loved the level of the disscusions the group  
had before, and know many are reduced to repeating the same weak or 
without a point argument forever. I'm a newbie but seeking for help. 
Some posters on the vampire/snape/not thread are trying to do their 
best, including me, so if someone is interested, please join.

You seem to know each other, as a group, so maybe you are coordinated 
enough to select some topics for discussion and launch them. With 
announcements here or in the apropiate list, we (mere mortals) can 
track them. 

Please, I'd love disscussions the way we were.

silmariel
preparing to iron her hands, just in case



From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Aug 17 20:49:25 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:49:25 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <bhomk2+glea@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhopol+mpoi@eGroups.com>

I think Cindy's idea about a second canon list has a lot of 
potential. I wandered over here this evening really rather depressed 
with the main list, and wondering if it was all worth my internet 
bill. I don't see a single name I recognise, and am therefore already 
in a strop before it comes to scanning at the post titles, and just 
sit there going "well, that one looks rubbish. That person's got a 
stupid name, so their post is bound to be rubbish. Well, that one 
looks rubbish too..." (should probably point out that I've got the 
flu just now, and am not an especially tolerant person when 
suffering. Usually I'm lovely). The last response I made was to email 
a newbie who was objecting to SILK GOWNS being used as an acronym 
because no-one in canon wore a silk gown, and say something along the 
lines of "well, you're new. Obviously you don't know how we do things 
around here", which I'm now despising myself for.
I was considering just not checking the list for a couple of weeks 
and then trying to surprise myself again, but the thing is that I've 
just come back from holiday and part of my grumpiness stems from the 
fact that I don't feel like I've been involved in a thread for two 
weeks anyway. 
I have congested head just now, so I'm not sure if I'm making sense.
The thing is, that if Cindy moved over to a new list, the prospect of 
her winning every argument would surely be too much for many ofher 
old adversaries, and then they'd all come out of retirement and start 
arguing with her again. And I think that's a good thing, because then 
*I'd* finally get to find out the MAGIC DISHWASHER response to OotP 
(waves significantly at Melody). And right now I'm only interested in 
what's a good thing for me, because I'm ill and liable to strop if I 
don't get my own way...
Seriously, though,  I've gone all the way through this thread, and 
everyone is mourning the fact that their favourite posters aren't 
posting anymore. We could all wait and see if volume will go down a 
bit in a couple of months-as someone pointed out a few weeks ago 
(when we hit 10,000), we appear to be seeing the effects of the 
second wave of people to finish OotP just now. But then, that's what 
we all said two months ago...
I think it's worth a shot. Particularly if the other option involves 
all the great posters everyone's pining for drifting off and away.
Kirstini, and her large pile of tissues. <snuffle>




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 21:18:26 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 21:18:26 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <bhopol+mpoi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhorf2+rplo@eGroups.com>

Hi all!

  I don't consider myself an "old hand" as I have only been a list
member since April of this year, however, I'm no newbie either. I, 
too am frustrated with the volume of the main list. The first thing 
I did once the list proportions grew so huge is to cancel the e-
mails and go to webview. That said, I have become mostly a lurker of 
late, only posting occasionally if a thread perks my interest. I 
tend to watch threads for a while to see if anyone else is going to 
make my point for me before I post. Most threads, however, I just 
skip past. I did spend considerable time reading the archives and 
FAQS before I made my first post as a newbie and frankly, a lot of 
the current discussions bore me. As a pre OOtP member, any analysis 
of the first four books, without taking OOP into account simply 
don't interest me. Been there, done that. 

     Perhaps a thought for a possible spin off board could be that 
any dicussion but in some way must be OOP related?

   -linlou




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Sun Aug 17 21:42:25 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:42:25 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <bhorf2+rplo@eGroups.com>
References: <bhorf2+rplo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F3FF6C1.4020701@ipartner.com.pl>

linlou43 wrote (2003-08-17 23:18):

>Hi all!
>
>  I don't consider myself an "old hand" as I have only been a list
>member since April of this year, however, I'm no newbie either. I, 
>too am frustrated with the volume of the main list. The first thing 
>I did once the list proportions grew so huge is to cancel the e-
>mails and go to webview. That said, I have become mostly a lurker of 
>late, only posting occasionally if a thread perks my interest. I 
>tend to watch threads for a while to see if anyone else is going to 
>make my point for me before I post. Most threads, however, I just 
>skip past. I did spend considerable time reading the archives and 
>FAQS before I made my first post as a newbie and frankly, a lot of 
>the current discussions bore me. As a pre OOtP member, any analysis 
>of the first four books, without taking OOP into account simply 
>don't interest me. Been there, done that. 
>
>     Perhaps a thought for a possible spin off board could be that 
>any dicussion but in some way must be OOP related?
>  
>
I share the same experience as linlou, I joined on April this year, and 
I am also deeply bored with current discussions, because of the same 
reasons. I am trying to cope by redirecting all e-mails with Ron or 
Hermione or SHIP in subject into separate folder. And frankly this is 
only think I read, and yes -- this is very bad because I'm sure I miss 
many interesting ideas and theories (like MAGIC DISHWASHER in OotP).
OTOH I think there is easy way to fix (although not 100% nice): now 
moderators accepts any letter based on it's formal value -- proper 
quoting and is it on topic. I think that they should block e-mails based 
on it's merit. I mean, they should stop all those -- "Why Harry didn't 
saw thestrals in GOF". Some letters should never be seen by us: See post 
titled "JKR and Ron Weasley" when author stated:

"Reading the five books over again in order I get the impression that 
JKR doesn't like Ron that much."
It is obvious, that this author didn't done his/hers homework.

I joined this list after finding Fantastic Posts on the Web, and wanting to read more like them. Before OotP is was just like in the Fantastic Posts. Now signal to noise ratio is unbearable :-(

My plea to admin team, please, oh please, moderate more aggresively. I would even suggests moderating *everything* (even though I am still pretty happy with my newly acquired mod-free status), and imposing a 1 month _without_exception_ no posting status for everyone new. 

BTW, do you Admins read this topic? Or should we cross-post to HFPGUADMINS@?


Regards

-- 
Pshemekan






From severussnape at shaw.ca  Sun Aug 17 21:53:41 2003
From: severussnape at shaw.ca (lunalovegoodrules)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 21:53:41 -0000
Subject: Main list, stupid names, lack of snippage
Message-ID: <bhoth5+e8ab@eGroups.com>

I used to be darkthirty, but I decided to be lunalovegoodrules cause 
all the other luna names were taken.

First, I think the elves should be really, really clear with Geoff 
and posters like him about snipping irrelevant parts of the original 
message. And they should do it all the time, and put someone back on 
moderated status if they continue to do it. Does that make me a 
curmudgeon? No, because, anyone who's read my danger of theosophy, 
WWF or "defend Rowling" posts will know that I am one anyway!

And how about warnings over questions answered in the FAQ? I know 
yahoo doesn't have a bunch of filter capabilities to it's groups.

But siriusly, (that's how I pronounce it), I know the volume is so 
high that this is a pain, but it must be done.

As for another group, I don't like the idea, actually, because I 
think many will go to both, and it'll be even harder to follow all 
the stuff for those of us who don't judge a post by the fact that it 
came from "lunalovegoodrules" or such. (lol)

We should, though, have a place where people keep their theses, and 
develop them. I have http://members.shaw.ca/lunalovegood/ for 
example. and my

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunalovegood/

is a place to develop ideas before posting theory on the main list. 
Is it possible to have a set of pages for certain theories, 
constantly updated, so that there is something else to do other than 
follow the main list - some to do "as well" - a community of living 
theories, or some such?

I am already starting to host BIC LIGHTER and ANOTHER HARRY.

In conjunction with the dire elf warnings mentioned above, it would 
not only reduce main list volume, but enhance it as well.

I don't want anyone excluded, though.

dan (darkthirty)






From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug 17 22:31:51 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:31:51 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhovon+pr3v@eGroups.com>

I've become a curmudgeon who no longer wishes Happy Birthdays on OT, 
but *please* don't start a new list: I already have more lists than I 
have time to read!

Wendy St John wrote:

<< I posted it to the main list because I figured if I posted it 
here, the vast majority of people who I feel need to read it wouldn't 
have ever seen it. >>

I read and enjoyed your post (and those of James Redmont and others 
who are trying to educate the ignorant posters) but I've gotten the 
feeling that the people who don't read the answers to their questions 
don't read ADMIN or advisory posts either, so I am considering 
assigning myself to a one-purrson QUEST to educate them by sending 
individual off-list e-mails to the offenders (polite, gentle e-mails 
that don't let them know they're "offenders") but that would add so 
much time to the already burdensome task of reading a week's posts 
(which kept me up til 5AM this morning last night).

Silmariel wrote:

<< You seem to know each other, as a group, so maybe you are 
coordinated enough to select some topics for discussion and launch 
them. >>

Not all newbies are ignorant newbies. Don't iron your hands.

I personally vote against discussion topics or chapter discussions: I 
feel that would only INCREASE list volume, and high volume (much of 
the excess consisting of "noise") is part of the problem, as Cindy C 
said.

Kirstini wrote:

<< The last response I made was to email a newbie who was objecting 
to SILK GOWNS being used as an acronym because no-one in canon wore a 
silk gown, and say something along the lines of "well, you're new. 
Obviously you don't know how we do things around here", which I'm now 
despising myself for. >>

Don't despise yourself! I loved your post -- I was so glad that 
someone was brave enough to say that.

<< everyone is mourning the fact that their favourite posters aren't 
posting anymore. >>

Therefore, I am not anyone's favorite poster. QED. *sniffle* 
(Actually, I didn't expect that I was.)

Pshemekan wrote:

<< OTOH I think there is easy way to fix (although not 100% nice): 
now moderators accepts any letter based on it's formal value -- 
proper quoting and is it on topic. I think that they should block 
e-mails based on it's merit. I mean, they should stop all those -- 
"Why Harry didn't saw thestrals in GOF". Some letters should never be 
seen by us >>

I think that would be an effective but not easy solution: newbies 
stay moderated a little while, during which moderators reject/return 
their posts for asking questions that are already in the VFAQ or OoP 
FAQ, with a boilerplate explanation about the FAQs, and reject/return 
their posts for inadequate snipping, again with a boilerplate 
explanation. The problem is: so many posts, so few Mods and Elves.

Dan Darkthirty wrote:

<< We should, though, have a place where people keep their theses, 
and develop them. >>

I don't have a problem with theories being developed on the main 
list. But I have recently been wondering if I need a webpage page to 
store my theories, to which I could refer posters about Number of 
Students and Wizarding Economy and so on, instead of keeping my 
theories in .txt files and pasting them into reply posts, thus adding 
to list volume. Btw IIRC I said something nice about you on Main List 
yesterday, but I don't remember what.




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 22:43:39 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:43:39 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhp0er+pcod@eGroups.com>

I just want to chime in with everyone who's been saying that the main list is getting 
impossible. I *am* trying to post; but I'm not sure that anyone is reading my posts, 
and my favorite posters -- glares at Cindy -- don't seem to be posting themselves.

(Side note: Good *grief,* Captain, just *post!* I'll write you back, even if no one else 
does! And I bet Mel would too. . . )

However, I'm not sure what's to be done about it; I like -- like, I *love* -- the idea of 
a second list with, so to speak, a circuit breaker, but I simply would not go over there 
if I didn't know that all of the TBAYers -- Elkins, Cindy, Eileen, Dicentra, Marina, Pip 
-- would be coming too, because, quite frankly, those are the best posters.

*Has* anyone ever considered just capping the list? Because, frankly, it's time to do 
*something.* I'm tired of sifting.




Derannimer




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 22:55:32 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:55:32 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhp0er+pcod@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhp154+3pgj@eGroups.com>


derannimer wrote:


> I just want to chime in with everyone who's been saying that the 
main list is getting 
> impossible. I *am* trying to post; but I'm not sure that anyone is 
reading my posts, 
> and my favorite posters -- glares at Cindy -- don't seem to be 
posting themselves.



    Just to let you know, I am reading your posts. Your's I haven't 
been skipping simply because I enjoyed reading your posts before all 
this madness started and I still do. Even though I am a relative 
newbie, I too wish to see my favourite posters posting again- not 
that I really have a clue as to what to do about it either.

 -linlou





From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sun Aug 17 22:57:00 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:57:00 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <3F3FF6C1.4020701@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <bhp17s+i4t0@eGroups.com>

Hi, everyone.

Some of you know me. For those that have managed to forget me, I'm the 
one who wrote most of the OoP FAQ that is being blatantly ignored. I'll 
be two years in October, and I for one consider myself oldie. And as 
many others, I've been avoiding the main list (after the FAQ I needed a 
break, and then a project and a girlfriend have cut into my time 
somewhat).

Kristini:
> *I'd* finally get to find out the MAGIC DISHWASHER response to OotP 
> (waves significantly at Melody).

Mel just asked me to tell you that the MDDT *has* read your post, and 
that we will post our revised MD - post OoP  post when the three of us 
re-read it properly and get together. This might take a while, though, 
but rest assured we will get back to you.

> linlou:
> >     Perhaps a thought for a possible spin off board could be that 
> >any dicussion but in some way must be OOP related?

Of all the suggestions of a seperate list, this one makes most sense, 
and yet I still feel it is not the answer. Many posts - particularly 
mine, MD-related - make reference to all the books, because canon is 
canon and you pick and match from several places to be able to draw a 
full picture of a scene or character.

My own take on this problem would be to create a newbie list. It is 
essentially moderated status taken one step forward. Let me explain: 
moderated status meant checking the quality of the posts, but right now 
there are so many pendings list elves are swamped, so bad posts get 
through. Moderated status is, clearly, not working anymore. My take on 
this is to create two lists. One, open to anyone, with suggestions of 
rules and a clear goal: those that follow them are invited to join the 
other, closed but with open archives (so everyone can see what to aim 
at, and what they are missing). In that list, anyone breaking the rules 
too much would get demoted back to the other, which would keep us on 
our toes. If there is anyone that enjoys the kind of chaos of the main 
list today, he can simply stay there.

I for one would suggest to allow anyone pre-one month before OoP 
directly to the second list. The elves could then watch the other list 
for proper posts, and the chance of advancing should regulate that 
list. I hope. The problem with this (apart from sounding elitist which 
I don't want to, but is warranted by the fact that I *do* snip and *do* 
avoid one-liners, etc.) is that if the number of posters in the newbie 
list is too big, discovering the new talents would take too long and 
some of them might be discouraged.

That said, I'm not sure this idea would work. Opinions?
 
Przemyslaw Plaskowicki (I love that name, man, but I need more vowels 
to even try and pronounce it, I'm afraid) wrote: 
> I joined this list after finding Fantastic Posts on the Web, and 
> wanting to read more like them. 

In pure OT manner: hey, so did I!

> I think there is easy way to fix (although not 100% nice): now 
> moderators accepts any letter based on it's formal value -- proper 
> quoting and is it on topic. I think that they should block e-mails 
> based on it's merit. I mean, they should stop all those -- "Why Harry 
> didn't saw thestrals in GOF".
> My plea to admin team, please, oh please, moderate more aggresively. 

I agree this could be a solution, but the elves are just moderators, 
not judges. This poses a big problem - what if the poster believes 
something the elf doesn't agree with? That's an unconfortable position 
to be in, and I don't wish it for anyone. I do agree that 
single-liners, FAQs and other obvious rule breaking should be sent back 
directly with a short "read the FAQ/list rules", though.

> I would even suggests moderating *everything* (even though I am still > pretty happy with my newly acquired mod-free status), and imposing a > 1 month _without_exception_ no posting status for everyone new. 

Poor elves! They're swamped enough as it is. Many of the problems are 
caused by overloaded elves, Prz (you don't mind if I shorten your name, 
do you? It reduces the chances of horribly misspelling it. I know the 
case - my name is far longer, that's why I have an easy alias). The 
idea of not allowing people to post for a month is intriguing, but it 
would scare too many people. And many others would sign, ignore the 
list for a month, and then start from cero.

> BTW, do you Admins read this topic? Or should we cross-post to 
> HFPGUADMINS@?

They do read OT. At least the ones I know better, I've seen them post, 
so they do read. 

Our dearest Catlady: 
> Therefore, I am not anyone's favorite poster. QED. *sniffle* 
> (Actually, I didn't expect that I was.)

Ouch, but that hurts! Cat, let me tell you that you're one of my 
favourite posters, and the first one to actually identify by name and 
eagerly read when I joined. If you hadn't been the one in Chat to 
welcome me, I would've never stuck there, either.

After all, I've taken your "multiple campus" theory right into my arms, 
haven't I?

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 22:59:09 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:59:09 -0000
Subject: Asexual? (was  Question about New Testament)
In-Reply-To: <bh417g+q6c2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhp1bt+j9n3@eGroups.com>

Gosh, sex and the Bible in one thread!  How could I have let it go so 
long?  <eg>

Grey Wolf wrote: 

> Sort of. God hasn't got a body to be male or female with (that's 
> Catholic doctrine, I think - God is spiritual, not physical). While 
he 
> does have the position of "father", he doesn't need to sire children 
so 
> distictive sex is unnecesary. 

This seems logical, but also misses the basic point that an insistence 
on referring to God in male terms contradicts the assertion that God 
is purely spiritual.  Which is it?  Body that takes male form (or 
female, or both, or neither), or spirit that is beyond such 
categories?

It seems to me that one has to choose, unless one thinks that there 
are such things as male and female spiritual beings, God being chief 
among the former.

Amy Z.
not only a sinner, but an inherently inferior being because she, 
unlike God, has a very low testoste




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 23:02:03 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:02:03 -0000
Subject: rone level
In-Reply-To: <bhp1bt+j9n3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhp1hb+tsbp@eGroups.com>

Yahoomort ate the last nine letters of my last post.  There they are.

Amy Z




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 23:06:07 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:06:07 -0000
Subject: Newbie List
Message-ID: <bhp1ov+k499@eGroups.com>

GAAAAH!

I feel like an idiot for posting previously without having read the entire thread -- 
given the content of *this* post, there's some kind of cosmic irony in play here, I 
suspect -- *but.*

Wendy, I imagine you're going to get hammered for this, but *I* think it's sheer 
genius.

------------

 I almost wonder if the idea of another group isn't a good
 idea. For there to be an "intro" group - "HP for newbies" or something, and
 once people have gotten all the thestral and gleam questions out of their
 systems, they can "graduate" to a group where the level of discussion can
 be higher, and more in-depth. Not sure how to go about this, though, and
 I'm sure there are some who'll find this an elitist attitude. I'm not an
 elitist. I'm happy for all to participate - as long as we're all following
 the same rules and treating one another with respect, that is. That's not
 elitism. That's just me wanting to be treated the way I treat others. 

------------

It is *not* elitism -- it's not like they won't be allowed to *read* the main list -- and I 
certainly wouldn't have been mad if *I'd* been asked to do that. The fact of the matter 
is, as you said, Wendy, that some people apparently think that this list is some sort of 
comment board where they can just post any darn thing they want. 

<Derannimer sniffs, then realizes that she sounds like a dowager duchess>

Obviously, most of the newbies *aren't* like that -- but the great thing about a 
"newbie" group would be that the newbies who were conscientious could get 
"graduated" quickly enough; and the. . . er, *others* probably wouldn't even care to 
graduate in the first place.

Now, back to Cindy's idea of a second "circuit-breakered" canon list. . . well, Captain, 
if you're going. . . 

I guess you won't be winning all of your arguments after all. Sorry about that. ; )




IncrediblyGrumpy!Derannimer, who is glad that other people seem to be thinking the 
same sorts of things

P.S. Oh! I see that Grey Wolf is seconding the idea of a newbie list!

-----------

 My own take on this problem would be to create a newbie list. It is 
 essentially moderated status taken one step forward. Let me explain: 
 moderated status meant checking the quality of the posts, but right now 
 there are so many pendings list elves are swamped, so bad posts get 
 through. Moderated status is, clearly, not working anymore. My take on 
 this is to create two lists. One, open to anyone, with suggestions of 
 rules and a clear goal: those that follow them are invited to join the 
 other, closed but with open archives (so everyone can see what to aim 
 at, and what they are missing). In that list, anyone breaking the rules 
 too much would get demoted back to the other, which would keep us on 
 our toes. If there is anyone that enjoys the kind of chaos of the main 
 list today, he can simply stay there.
 
------------

<waves at Grey Wolf, now not quite so IncrediblyGrumpy>




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Aug 17 23:07:37 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:07:37 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhp0er+pcod@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhp1rp+h0h4@eGroups.com>

Derannimer:

>I *am* trying to post; but I'm not sure that anyone is reading my 
>posts, and my favorite posters -- glares at Cindy -- don't seem to 
>be posting themselves.

Hey, now!  Glaring at me like that dries up all of my creative 
juices!  Now I *can't* post!  :-D

>I simply would not go over there 
> if I didn't know that all of the TBAYers -- Elkins, Cindy, Eileen, 
>Dicentra, Marina, Pip -- would be coming too, because, quite 
>frankly, those are the best posters.

The only way to know is to set the list up and see who drops by, I 
guess.  (Oh, and I'd add quite a few names to the list of people I 
miss ::waves to Catlady::). 

 
> *Has* anyone ever considered just capping the list? Because, 
>frankly, it's time to do *something.* I'm tired of sifting.

I don't know what the List Administrators are thinking about that, 
but I gave it some thought myself before proposing a second list.  
(I assume you're talking about closing the main list to new members 
rather than just shutting down the list once a certain number of 
posts appear each month.)

Let's say the List Administrators capped the list tomorrow and 
didn't allow new members until list volume reached pre-OoP levels.  
This would ease the burden on the List Administrators considerably.  
After a while, everyone would learn the ropes and no one would be 
moderated.  And obviously, no one would need a list elf.  Good 
things, definitely.

The trouble, IMHO, is that many of the people on this list that I 
adore are people who joined after I did.  Had the list been capped 
after I joined, I would have missed out knowing some great folks, 
and the list would be poorer for it.  Heck, it bothers me now that 
there are undoubtedly some great newbies out there right now, and I 
am missing out on them because I can't keep up.

Also, it would trouble me to have the list closed to new members 
because it would be so, well . . .  unwelcoming.  Newbies wouldn't 
fully grasp *why* the list had been closed; they'd just know they 
had been excluded when all they want to do is talk about HP.  After 
all, everyone was plenty nice to me when I turned up.  That would 
make me feel like the list had become elitist, and my liberal 
political side would balk.  :-D

Anyway, that's the personal opinion of a list member who is about to 
celebrate her second anniversary on the lists.  Woo-hoo!

Cindy -- thinking a second list could be known as "The Balcony" and 
the moderators would be the "ushers" who aim flashlights at the 
people who are making out in the back.  Or not.




From heidit at netbox.com  Sun Aug 17 23:40:31 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:40:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] re: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhovon+pr3v@eGroups.com>
References: <bhovon+pr3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1061163635.22BE6B@r5.dngr.org>


On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 6:31PM -0500, Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) wrote:

> I personally vote against discussion topics or chapter discussions: I
> feel that would only INCREASE list volume, and high volume

If anyone is interested in chapter discussions without trying to filter 
through all the posts on the main list, we at fictionalley have been 
doing weekly chapter and character discussions, and are about to start 
chapter five. The link to the current chapter's thread is at the top of 
http://www.fictionalley.org/fictionalleypark/forums - it's easy enough 
to keep up because, unlike hpfgu's webview, all the posts on that 
chapter are threaded together.

Actually, despitebeing an admin for fa, I've always prefered discussion 
in email format, perhaps because I've read hofgu on a handheld email 
device called a blackberry since early 2001. But even I can't keep up 
with the main list, and I think my last worthy contribution to hpfgu, 
other than nimbus-involvement, has been doing the first post about whyu 
Harry couldn't see thestrals, at around 9am on June 21.

But with the volume being what it is, I've been reading and discussng 
more on FictionAlleyPark, where shipping is separated onto one 
forumboard + one thread on a separate forum, and where the books each 
have a separate forum, with one 'general book discussion' forum called 
Canon Fodder.

Plus, while we have a lot of teens on the board (it's about 30% 18 and 
under) netspeak is totally forebidden and anyone who does it 4 times, or 
posts oneliners, gets a 1 week ban.

While I don't recommend it for anyone who enjoys participating in the 
main list via email as a replacement style, if you're already on/used to 
webview or message boards in general it might be worth a glimpse.

Plus, our search engine can limit searches to single boards, searches by 
poster and nifty widlcards.

>
> << everyone is mourning the fact that their favourite posters aren't
> posting anymore. >>
>
> Therefore, I am not anyone's favorite poster. QED. *sniffle*
> (Actually, I didn't expect that I was.)

Actually, I 'keep up' with the main list by hunting down your weekend 
posts - I hope it gives me a cross section of discussion topics!

Heidi



From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Mon Aug 18 00:50:51 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:50:51 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <192.1e97684a.2c717ceb@aol.com>

About the second list idea:

I'm pretty new here (I joined in May, I think) and I've been reading this 
discussion pretty closely, mostly because the complaints of the mistakes many 
novice posters make resonate with me.  Though I'm new here, I'm not new to email 
discussion groups and even someone who is should be capable of following the 
Humongous Bigfile and reading the FAQ's. I, personally, was so intimidated I 
researched stuff in Fantastic Posts before I dared post anything to the list! :)

This leads me to suggest that perhaps a second list is an excellent idea, but 
maybe it should be made clear it is an "advanced" discussion group, and 
suggested that novice posters should get their feet wet on the main list first 
until they become comfortable with posting and then be read-only for the 
"advanced" list for a week or so they can get a feel for what goes on there.  And have 
the option of removing/moderating people who cannot adhere closely to the 
rules.  That wouldn't be elitist, because you would be allowing anyone to join in, 
but it would probably eliminate the generic newbie questions (like Thestrals) 
on this list because they'll have gotten all those out of their system by the 
time they get to the second list. Hopefully.

Just an idea... :)

~RSFJenny, who can't wait until she's no longer a newbie :)
    




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Aug 18 00:58:57 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:58:57 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <3F3FF6C1.4020701@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <bhp8ch+b7ce@eGroups.com>

Pshemekan wrote:

> My plea to admin team, please, oh please, moderate more 
aggresively. I would even suggests moderating *everything* (even 
though I am still pretty happy with my newly acquired mod-free 
status), and imposing a 1 month _without_exception_ no posting 
status for everyone new. 
> 
> BTW, do you Admins read this topic? Or should we cross-post to 
HFPGUADMINS@?

Just to let you know that members of the admin team do read these 
threads - I try to read every post on this list, though sometimes I 
get a day or two behind.

Thank you Pshemekan and everyone else who has put forward ideas for 
how to resolve the problems we have had since the release of OOP.

I think people have identified two problems:

- a high number of posts which break list rules, particularly on 
snipping (clipping), or which repeat recent discussions (which isn't 
against any rule but can be irritating and indicates that the poster 
isn't trying to check that their idea has already been discussed);

- a high volume of good posts

I'm not sure what do do about the second problem: shuffling some 
posts onto another list would still face you with the problem of 
choosing what to miss out on.

However, there is something everyone can do to help with the first 
problem. If you see somebody persistently breaking the rules (and I 
appreciate in the deluge it's hard even to do that), it's OK to 
email the admin team at:

HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

and we will try to do something about it. We can (and do) of course 
act on our own initiative, but it's enormously helpful to have more 
persectives on the way the list is working, and to know it isn't 
just the admin team being picky. Remember, though, that if a 
complaint does lead to an offlist rebuke, or even moderated status, 
you will be unlikely to hear about it, since telling people off in 
public tends not to work as a way of getting them to change their 
behaviour.

Please don't 'name and shame' bad posters here, though - that way 
total breakdown lies.

David





From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 01:27:46 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 18:27:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OT]-Joining other lists:(
Message-ID: <20030818012746.73705.qmail@web40512.mail.yahoo.com>

Wow!
I tried to join another HP Yahoo group. I want to rip
my hair out...all of it.  I read through a few recent
posts and no one snips and they don't use subject
headings.  I noticed that one thread about the GoF
movie had ALOT of posts so I clicked on one of the
later ones and it was ALL one line posts.  I'd kill
myself if I stay on that list.  Seriously, one of the
posts said "but GoF is longer" and that was the whole
post.  
The rules of this list have made me a huge list snob
because I can't stand disorganized posts (but don't
get me wrong, that's a good thing).

So back to the new list idea.  I think the way it's
sounding is good.  With a beginning list where people
get used to the rules and then "graduate" to the new
list.  Yes it may come off a little elitist, but I
people who REALLY want to talk about Harry Potter
would tolerate it.  I know I would have put up with it
at first.  I also like the idea that the archives
could be open because then lurkers who might stay on
the newbie list a little longer could still read the
high calibur posts and ideas.

Just my two knuts,
~Kathryn

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Mon Aug 18 02:39:17 2003
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (lunalovegoodrules)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 02:39:17 -0000
Subject: New list ideas, acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bhp8ch+b7ce@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhpe8l+sqgl@eGroups.com>

David:

> Please don't 'name and shame' bad posters here, though - that way 
> total breakdown lies.
 
Sorry about that, of course, I knew the person I mentioned, as an 
example, wasn't on this list, but that doesn't justify it.

I know it wouldn't suit most, but I like, sort of, the idea of 
an "advanced" list, though I might call it a "theory" list, or 
something similarly intimidating... yet, what would that entail? 
Entering the main list and reading TBAYs - I was here almost a year 
before I even started reading them, and there are some good arguments 
there, some really interesting theories, that certainly qualify for 
advanced -  the cosmopolitan character of hpfgu would be weakened if 
those all went to "advanced". And, in some rare cases, the ship stuff 
is quite germane...

Yet, porphyria has told me she can no longer read all the posts, and 
told me to send her any of my "good" ones... So, yeah, some so-called 
good posters do find the list unmanageable. 

Could be, like, FATHEAD (For All Theories Having Extended Analysis 
and Documentation)

or ANAL RETENTIVE (Analysis, Numinosity, Alchemy and Long-windedness: 
Reading Everything Tends to Ennervate Non-newbies, Trying Intelligent 
Viable Externalization for Theories Extended, Overlong, Reasoned, and 
Intellectual Excellent)

or something like that.

But a newbie arena is possible too.

dan




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 03:01:16 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 03:01:16 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <bhodbt+t9gk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhpfhs+f78l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> 
wrote:

> 
> I am glad others I deem as "posters I read" are having the same 
issues
> with the main site.  I was beginning to feel bad about not reading 
it,
> but I just do not want to.  Mostly out of sheer annoyance with the
> fact most of the posts I have read are just plain boring and
> repetitive.  Even with the list administration posting the FAQ and 
OoP
> FAQ over and over again, they still do not read them.
> 

I never thought I would be posting this, but I feel that the list 
ran more smoothly when it was more actively moderated.  I remember 
reading many ADMIN posts warning about just such issues as are 
bothering us all today.  I myself have received guidance for some of 
my past posts, which I heeded-- unlike tose ADMIN warnings for 
content.  I think the huge increase in membership, and therefore in 
volume of posts, coupled with much of the olde posters effectively 
leaving the ongoing discussions at the main list, have also led to 
less oversight as to longish quotes, one-line posts, repetitive 
posts, etc. 

This may be the natural order of things, and once a mb gets too 
unwieldy, it must "swarm" and generate new hives like honeybees do.  
I dunno.  I do know that, for a couple of years plus, this was a 
stimulating and congenial place to talk about all things HP.


> 

 Before when y'all split the site, it was between genres
> and mediums.  It made sense.  Now if you split off tbay, filk, or
> ships the newbies will not know what they are and not join the 
split
> sites since they will never see those types of posts *on* the main
> site.  How will they know they will like that type of posts when 
they
> have never read one?  
> 
> 

Well, I used to surf all the accessory liss for interesting 
headings.  If a listee wants to call attention to a TBAY theory, 
SHIP, etc.  there is nothing stpping them from plugging it on the 
main list.

Haggridd

> Melody




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 03:43:57 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:43:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Jo!
Message-ID: <20030818034357.99982.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com>

*sneaks quietly into the party room with her trusty
box of decorations, hoping no one notices the lateness
of the hour*

I have a good excuse for crawling in at the last
minute. I was at a birthday party. Honest. Yeah, I
know it sounds hokey, but it's true. 

Today's birthday honouree is Jo Crabtree (Professor
Phlash). Birthday owls can be sent care of this list
or directly to: crabtree at ktc.com

Jo, I hope your day was wonderful, magical, and filled
with friends and laughter.

Happy Birthday, Jo!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf (who really did go to a
party, for someone who attended a party of hers 40
years ago)

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From eberte at vaeye.com  Mon Aug 18 03:54:29 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 03:54:29 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me . . .
In-Reply-To: <20030817052611.7159.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhpill+rql6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn wrote:
> 
> ~Kathryn, who was amused by the Shark Week story
> because one time my mom let me watch the Posiedon
> Adventure(boat gets hit by a whale and turns upside
> down) the night before my first trip on the Cape
> May-Lewes Ferry...and I had to be convinced there were
> no whales in the Deleware Bay....
> 
Whale?  In Poseidon Adventure?  I sure don't remember that part.  I 
thought that the ship was swamped by a tidal wave (although that 
seems equally improbable.)  
Agree with all comments on the main list volume.  It is a pity that 
the volume is keeping some of the older (perhaps I should say, more 
*long-term*) members of the list from posting.  I have lurked on the 
main list for years (since the old days on egroups!) and have only 
recently started posting.  Now I am feeling guilty as though I am 
part of the problem about which everyone is complaining.  It reminds 
me of a comment that I once read made by an old-timer on the Hamptons 
about the hoards of tourists that were descending upon the sleepy 
little towns--"They come here for something that they destroy by 
being here."  (Or something to that effect.)  
Sorry old-timers. Come back.  All the long-term lurkers know you all 
by name and are interested in what you have to say (even if it is 
about Harry seeing/not seeing thesrals, James being Head Boy when he 
was not a prefect and (my personal least favorite) the number of 
students at Hogwarts.)

Elle (who seems to recall a lot of teeth-gnashing about recurrent 
questions referring to "the gleam in DD's eye" and James/Lily coming 
out of Voldemort's wand in the wrong order after GoF was released)




From elfundeb at comcast.net  Mon Aug 18 06:41:30 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 06:41:30 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <bholjn+j5pf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhpseq+qif8@eGroups.com>

I think there may be some hope that list volume will become more 
manageable within the foreseeable future.

On June 21, we had approximately 7700 members on the main list.  
There are now, less than 2 months later, something like 10,600 
members.  The rate of joining, and the rate of posting in that time 
has been beyond all our wildest speculations.

In the first week after OOP came out, we had over 100 members joining 
every day.  That amount slowly declined to an average of about 50 per 
day, which held steady for awhile.  Now, with summer winding down, 
the numbers have declined further, so for the last week or we've 
averaged 25 new members per day.

Why is this relevant?  The typical posting pattern seems to be that 
many active new members join and within a few days become quite 
active in posting.  The majority of these members slow down their 
posting rate to a trickle very quickly, so the ripple effect of our 
current lower join rates may be felt on the list soon.

There's also the fact that OOP release coincided with the onset of 
summer, when many people are on vacation from school and have more 
free time to surf the internet and find, join and start posting to 
HPFGU.  And new members are most likely to start out with questions 
we've already heard before and that old members don't want to discuss 
anymore.  IIRC, it was also true last summer that a large number of 
newcomers dominated the posting on the list, and our favorite posters 
were fairly quiet.  When fall arrived, and work and school got back 
into full swing many of the summer joiners quieted down, but the old 
regulars returned.  I'm hoping that the same will happen this fall.  

I agree 100% with Abigail's point on how best to maintain quality on 
the list:

> So post.  Don't be afraid that someone's said the same thing 
> already - they have.  And not just over the last seven weeks but 
> over the last three years.  How many times have we told 
> newbies that they shouldn't be afraid to suggest an oft-repeated 
> topic, because there are always new angles and new readers?  
> That's still the case.  I'm sure everyone on this thread has a lot 
to 
> say, and I know that I'm looking forward to reading it.  I can't be 
> the only one who scans the list for her favorite posters, because 
> I know that those posters can be relied on to provide consistently 
> high quality.  If you post, others will respond, and some of them 
> will be inspired to raise the quality of their discussion.
> 
> What makes HPfGU a great place to discuss Harry Potter is not 
> that there are moderators around to discourage low-brow 
> discussions, but that there are great people who encourage 
> high-brow ones.
> 
> Post, people.
> 
And this is also the reason why I personally don't think a second 
list is a good idea.  I believe the best way to encourage new members 
to post the way we want them to is to set the standard ourselves; new 
members' first impression of what the group expects is formed by the 
recent posts they read.  A newbie list isn't going to be able to 
maintain the standard.  Also, to me it's not very welcoming to shunt 
newbies off to a second-string list while the really good discussion 
is taking place on a list where they have no voice.  

It's a daunting task to read through the main list these days.  Yes, 
there are posts out there with very poor form (and they're not all 
from the 3000 most recent members).  But I also always find 
intelligent and insightful posts written newbies that we would not 
read if their contributions were shunted off to another list.  

Debbie  





From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 18 06:44:12 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 06:44:12 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhpsjs+fjla@eGroups.com>

Hi,

I've read with great interest the various suggestions people made 
regarding the main list. Personally, I don't like very much the idea 
of having another list for newbies. I'm not sure why. Possibly 
because I don't like the idea of *selection*. Also, it's basically 
extending the idea of putting newbies on moderated status, which, 
once the number of newbies spirals out, becomes too difficult to 
manage for the administrators. 

My idea (very tentative) is splitting the list to daughter lists 
according to types of discussion. 
For instance, Personalities and Relationships: where all discussions 
of Ron's jealousy, Snape/Hagrid's merit as teachers, James & Sirius 
as bullies, etc. Ships should belong here, but maybe should be 
further split to a seperate list. 
Another list would deal exclusively with Consistency in the 
Potterverse: number of students in Hogwarts (God, I'd love to see the 
back of that one!), astronomical speculations, days of the week, all 
geographical speculations (location of Godric's Hollow - goodbye!), 
etc. 
Other types of discussion that I can think of are: 
Literary Analysis (in which goes threads comparing HP to Jane Austen 
and is HP children's literature, to name two of the most recurring 
topics)
Plot Speculation, which would include ESE debates, the gleam, MAGIC 
DISHWASHERS, etc.

The major problem I see with this is the difficulty in categorizing 
one's own post. Is a post supporting LOLLIPOPS, for instance, a Plot 
Speculation or Personalities and Relationships? A possible answer is 
that it's not really important. The main point is to have lists of 
manageable size (in post volume, not number of members). So, just 
post it to where it seems reasonably appropriate. Of course, if 
people make too glaring mistakes, they can be corrected and the 
thread shifted to the appropriate list.


What do you think?

Naama









From punkieshazam at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 07:49:00 2003
From: punkieshazam at yahoo.com (punkieshazam)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 07:49:00 -0000
Subject: New list ideas, acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bhpe8l+sqgl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhq0dc+eq72@eGroups.com>

> Could be, like, FATHEAD (For All Theories Having Extended Analysis 
> and Documentation)
> 
> or ANAL RETENTIVE (Analysis, Numinosity, Alchemy and Long-
windedness: 
> Reading Everything Tends to Ennervate Non-newbies, Trying 
Intelligent 
> Viable Externalization for Theories Extended, Overlong, Reasoned, 
and 
> Intellectual Excellent)
> 
> or something like that.
> 
> But a newbie arena is possible too.
> 
> dan

I have always considered myself a comparative newbie. Tonight I 
discovered that I joined the list about the same time as Cindy. Guess 
that makes me not only elderly, but an oldbie. I personally vote for 
FATHEAD. Seems to fit my mind set. 

I am nominally retired. Have the remnants of a business that suddenly 
has a lot of work, so I have not had the 5-6 hours to surf the web 
that I usually do. There were something like 15,000 posts in the 
first 2-3 weeks after OoP. No way can I keep up with that. This list 
is getting hard to keep up with. It is late and I am getting 
incoherent, but I have given up on the main list. Back to lurkdom.

Punkie

Petunia is a Squib! (I am very disappointed that I can still use 
this. I was hoping that part of *everything* that Dumbledore was 
going to tell Harry was about his Aunt Petunia. JKR just compounded 
the problem for me.)





From judy at judyshapiro.com  Mon Aug 18 07:56:42 2003
From: judy at judyshapiro.com (Judy)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 07:56:42 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhpsjs+fjla@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhq0rq+krfs@eGroups.com>

Hi, everyone!  I don't usually post here, but I heard that there was a
thread about the problems with the main list.

I'm one of the elves, and I can tell you that we have been totally
swamped since OoP came out.  This has made it very hard to do anything
about the repetitive posts and such on the main list. Yes, we've
considered enslaving -- er, recruiting -- more elves, but it takes a
long time to learn to do pendings and such, so this would not be an
immediate solution.

I personally like the idea of closing the main list and directing
newbies to another list.  One of the benefits to closing the list
would be that elves would be able to pay more attention to the posts
by non-moderated members.  This would include both replying to good
posts, and doing something about bad posts.  In order to free up elf
time, though, the newbie list would have to be unmoderated, or at
least not moderated by the existing elves. My idea is that after a
month or two, members could leave the newbie list and go on moderated
status on the main list.  I don't think it would be all that hard to
explain to new members why we doing this -- the main list is FULL. 
10,000 members.  Too many.

However, clearly some other people don't like the idea of a different
list for new members, and I have no idea what the overall level of
support is for a newbie list.  

I think Debbie has a good point; the list may become more interesting
in a few weeks, once school has started. There seems to be a lot of
repetitive posts each summer.  Hey, new paper reporters call this
"silly season!"  But, given the size of the list, just the end of
summer may not be enough. So, please keep your suggestions coming!  We
elves are paying close attention.

-- Judy Serenity




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Mon Aug 18 11:10:58 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:10:58 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems - new problem identified
In-Reply-To: <bhq0rq+krfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhqc82+ud17@eGroups.com>

Judy wrote:
> I'm one of the elves, and I can tell you that we have been totally
> swamped since OoP came out.  This has made it very hard to do
> anything about the repetitive posts and such on the main list. Yes,
> we've considered enslaving -- er, recruiting -- more elves, but it
> takes a long time to learn to do pendings and such, so this would not
> be an immediate solution.

I respectfully disagree. You need help, but not with pendings. Pendings 
are tying up most of the elves's time, and is serving no purpose. The 
intention of pendings was to stop people from breaking the rules, but 
the rules are being broken anyway. The way I understand it, not all of 
the people blatantly breaking the rules in the main list can be 
unmoderated. Some must be moderated, and their low-quality posts are 
getting through. Someone mentioned pointing fingers privately and Cat 
is even considering taking it upon herself to police the list. The 
elves don't need more help in pendings - they need to revise the system 
and start punishing those that are breaking the rules sistematically. 
Good, fast filters would be to send back any posts breaking the rules 
with a note stating "read the FAQ" or "read the rules". No explanaition 
- let them to figure it out for themselves. Or a short "One liner" or 
"Me too" or "FAQ-covered" or "Spelling mistakes".

And once the pendings are streamlined, get a few sub-elves with little 
or no mod powers to help identify those posters that are breaking the 
rules outside moderated status. Some mod could start a list of 
offenders, and if a name gets called too much (like for 5 different 
posts) put them back to moderated immediately.

Those are solutions I've come up right now. There might be more. The 
important thing right now is that the list is mod-less. I've known that 
sort, and it will degenerate, not get better. There are some people 
that enjoy that sort of thing (beats me why), but it does happen, and a 
lot, in the Internet. If we want the list back to the high level 
discussion it was, policing will be needed, and soon.

> I personally like the idea of closing the main list and directing
> newbies to another list.  One of the benefits to closing the list
> would be that elves would be able to pay more attention to the posts
> by non-moderated members.  This would include both replying to good
> posts, and doing something about bad posts.  In order to free up elf
> time, though, the newbie list would have to be unmoderated, or at
> least not moderated by the existing elves. My idea is that after a
> month or two, members could leave the newbie list and go on moderated
> status on the main list.  I don't think it would be all that hard to
> explain to new members why we doing this -- the main list is FULL. 
> 10,000 members.  Too many.

Read my post on the matter - the main list wouldn't need moderated 
status anymore. The newbie list (or if you prefer, moderated list) 
would be free for all, with elves and volunteers looking thorugh it for 
good posters to allow to the main list. The main list would have oppen 
archives, and closed admission. Any rule breakers would be sent back to 
moderated list. It is, in essence, a step forward from a moderated 
system that is clearly broken. I think such system might be 
self-regulating, but I'm unsure. We'd have to see.
 
> However, clearly some other people don't like the idea of a different
> list for new members, and I have no idea what the overall level of
> support is for a newbie list.  

People complain such list would mean missing good posts. Not according 
to my idea - anyone can post, and you can volunteer to look through it 
to find good posts and good posters to take to the other list. It would 
be a list like the one we have right now: full, chaotic, with rule 
breaking. So it wouldn't be *worse*. It might be better, knowing that 
good behaviour is rewarded, though.

Which brings me to my *new* point. I've been doing some maths. Pre-OoP, 
we had 42% of the archives full. Two months later we have 52%. At 
current rate we will fill the list in ten months. Less if the posting 
rate continues to grow, and even less if something is not done about 
non-snipers (a one line post suddenly is 17k big). We're looking at the 
end of the list before next summer. And they don't make them this big 
anymore. Something has to be done, and has to be done *soon*.

> I think Debbie has a good point; the list may become more interesting
> in a few weeks, once school has started. There seems to be a lot of
> repetitive posts each summer.  Hey, new paper reporters call this
> "silly season!"  But, given the size of the list, just the end of
> summer may not be enough. So, please keep your suggestions coming! 
> We elves are paying close attention.
> 
> -- Judy Serenity

I disagree with this too - I doubt that the end of summer will bring 
that much relieve. That kind of one-liners don't take much to post. The 
people that are doing it will still find time to post "LOL" under a 
funny post even in breaks of work. No, solution is *not* sitting it 
out, I'm afraid. We're giving solutions, I hope, and I would like to 
ask to everyone to continue to think. There might be a best solution 
we're missing.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From alison.williams at virgin.net  Mon Aug 18 11:43:57 2003
From: alison.williams at virgin.net (bluetad2001)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:43:57 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhq0rq+krfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhqe5t+hkav@eGroups.com>

I'm a relative newbie here but have been using yahoogroups and 
similar since they started up, and I am a list owner.  (Of a 
relatively small, closed list - that's as much as I can cope with!)

I've seen a lot of good lists fall into chaos and I'd hate to see 
that happen to HPFGU.  

FWIW I'd say a separate 'newbie' list wouldn't help.  I've seen 
something like this done and what happens is people don't get the 
chance to interact with more experienced people, don't get the 
feeling of a stable community, and don't get the feeling that they've 
joined a community that is welcoming and has high expectations of 
them to contribute appropriately right from the start.

So what IS the solution?  Moderation, moderation, moderation!

I know the moderators are volunteers and it must be overwhelming but 
its the only thing that works.  I'll admit I've been guilty - at 
least once recently - of dashing off a reply too quickly, not being 
careful enough to snip the previous comments, and I haven't even had 
a friendly warning, let alone a howler!

I know its a shame if people get frightened off posting but the 
problem is caused mostly by over-enthusiasm rather than anything else 
so just a bit of 'dampening' may be necessary.

I'd also be inclined to support the idea of more specific sub-groups 
or sister-lists but I know my interests are narrower than many 
peoples are, so that may not work for the majority.

At any rate its good to hear that people are trying to find a 
solution.  

Very many thanks to those who do the work!

Alison






From southernscotland at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 13:08:42 2003
From: southernscotland at yahoo.com (\lila phillips)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 06:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <1061194404.578.73847.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030818130842.36345.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey, so now I know that all those great posters ARE
still around! They've just gone AWOL - or OT, in this
case!

I've dropped out of the Main List (roughly equal now
to the population of China), too, because of the
volume (rather like my carb intake at a buffet line
after breaking Atkins). 

However, I really like the suggestion of forming
another list - with the new list being for the OLDER
joiners, not the newbies, like some of you all said.
Let's leave the original list to the newbies for now.
In that way it wouldn't be elitist.

Perhaps to make it fair, newbies could "graduate" to
the second list upon the first anniversary (or another
specified period of time) of their joining. 

Also, it makes me happy to know that the folks whom I
have enjoyed so very much are still around! Waves to
them (but you cannot see me, can you? oops!)!

One last thing: I'd like to thank all the volunteers
who work so hard on the Main List. The job must be
like trying to get the lights back on in NYC over
there. 


lilahp (who is ready to sign up today for a second
list) 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From Ali at zymurgy.org  Mon Aug 18 13:16:14 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 13:16:14 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhqjiu+7n4e@eGroups.com>

Hi,

Just to say I'm yet another "oldbie" (well, semi-oldtimer) and Elf 
who has at times felt very despondent with the Main List recently.

You are not alone in thinking that standards have fallen. They have. 
I think that this is a result of a collision of several different 
elements - newbies, new book and Summer fatique. It is also true 
that the elves have been inundated. I accept that the work that we 
do behind the scenes is invisible, but it is there and it does help.

I also am reluctant to think that a new newbie list would solve the 
problem. I do remember that one did exist, and I did join it 
fleetingly over 18 months ago. I have no idea what it was called and 
who ran it. The only person who I can recall being part of the group 
was Hollydaze. I don't know if anyone else can remember that group?

I am in favour of supporting old members who have fallen foul 
of "our ways" by returning them to moderated status if they have 
trouble with our policy guidelines. I am proposing that we reimpose 
our old "howler" system and maintain a database of offenders, using 
a 3 strikes and you're back on moderated status. This database and 
howler system would have to be run by the admin team, but there is 
nothing to stop anybody informing us if they think that there is a 
problem. We *will* deal with it.

In terms of the general quality of the list, I have noticed several 
interesting threads, but they have been lost amid chaff. However, I 
think that as Abigail says we all have a duty to protect and uphold 
the standards on the list that we love. That means posting!


Ali




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Mon Aug 18 13:31:59 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?=22Przemys=B3aw_=5C=22Pshemekan=5C=22_P=B3askowi?= =?ISO-8859-2?Q?cki=22?=)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 15:31:59 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhqe5t+hkav@eGroups.com>
References: <bhqe5t+hkav@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F40D54F.6030208@ipartner.com.pl>

bluetad2001 napisa :

>FWIW I'd say a separate 'newbie' list wouldn't help.  I've seen 
>something like this done and what happens is people don't get the 
>chance to interact with more experienced people, don't get the 
>feeling of a stable community, and don't get the feeling that they've 
>joined a community that is welcoming and has high expectations of 
>them to contribute appropriately right from the start.
>
>So what IS the solution?  Moderation, moderation, moderation!
>  
>
I agree.
I think that introducing more agressive moderation will have a 
psychological effect on people -- "Gee, this list is moderated, I could 
post it, but it will propably want go through moderators, so I don't 
bother sending." This would mean less posts for house elves to moderate.

Another thought is suggestion to moderators being specialized -- If 
someone's little obsessions are SHIPs (like myself), she (he) propably 
had read almost everything on that topic. So if someone try to post 
about it, that specialised elf should response for instance: "that was 
already dicussed, see this thread in archive", or -- "you misquoted JKR 
see: quickquotesquill for real quote"; or "OK -- but where is the canon 
for that?"; or even post with note: "That topic was discussed here 
(msg-id) and here (msg-id), but some of authors points were not 
covered." That would mean switching elves into editors but also 
quenching list to bearable limits. Also such model of moderating will 
induce people to writing more thoughtfull posts, check their sources 
etc. Even catching before posting letters when author had obviously 
wrongly remembered canon would seriously help.

In difficult times we need unpopular solutions!

Regards,


-- 
Pshemekan





From s_ings at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 15:32:10 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:32:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <bhpseq+qif8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030818153210.21444.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- elfundeb2 <elfundeb at comcast.net> wrote: > > 
> 
> I agree 100% with Abigail's point on how best to
> maintain quality on 
> the list:
> 
<<<< So post.  Don't be afraid that someone's said the
same thing already - they have.  And not just over the
last seven weeks but over the last three years.  How
many times have we told newbies that they shouldn't be
afraid to suggest an oft-repeated topic, because there
are always new angles and new readers?  That's still
the case.  I'm sure everyone on this thread has a lot
to say, and I know that I'm looking forward to reading
it.  I can't be the only one who scans the list for
her favorite posters, because I know that those
posters can be relied on to provide consistently high
quality.  If you post, others will respond, and some
of them  will be inspired to raise the quality of
their
discussion.
 
What makes HPfGU a great place to discuss Harry Potter
is not that there are moderators around to discourage
low-brow discussions, but that there are great people
who encourage high-brow ones.
 
Post, people.>>>>

I have to agree with this as well. The best way to
encourage new members to post quality messages is to
lead by example. Yes, the ratio of good posts to
repetitive or less interesting ones is high. Yes, it's
hard to find the quality posts amid the rest. But they
are there. And the more people making quality posts,
the more new members will see what made this list a
great place to discuss Harry Potter. 
 
> And this is also the reason why I personally don't
> think a second 
> list is a good idea.  I believe the best way to
> encourage new members 
> to post the way we want them to is to set the
> standard ourselves; new 
> members' first impression of what the group expects
> is formed by the 
> recent posts they read.  A newbie list isn't going
> to be able to 
> maintain the standard.  Also, to me it's not very
> welcoming to shunt 
> newbies off to a second-string list while the really
> good discussion 
> is taking place on a list where they have no voice. 
> 
Not only is it not going to be very welcoming to send
new members off to another list, it also won't help
them learn what we expect on this list. So that's
basically a "me, too" on what Debbie has said. 
> 
> It's a daunting task to read through the main list
> these days.  Yes, 
> there are posts out there with very poor form (and
> they're not all 
> from the 3000 most recent members).  But I also
> always find 
> intelligent and insightful posts written newbies
> that we would not 
> read if their contributions were shunted off to
> another list.  

Another good point. Putting new members on another
list will deprive us of some excellent posts. And
Debbie is correct that not all the messages coming
through in poor form are from new list members, so
having new members on another list is no guarantee
that things will improve. 

Personally, I think starting another list smacks of an
elitest, "we're better than you and can't join us
until you're good enough" attitude. I honestly don't
think that's the impression that we would want to give
new people looking for a place to discuss Harry
Potter. 

Sheryll, finding all the suggestions being offered
very interesting

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 15:40:26 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 15:40:26 -0000
Subject: HP for Grown Ups - Suggestions for Improvement
Message-ID: <bhqs1a+6ta0@eGroups.com>

There are a couple thread going on right now in the OT group about how
difficult it has become to read, track, and respond to messages in the
Main groups, as well as repetative and poorly researched messages.

Suggestion:

1.) Change the access parameters of the group to allow non-members to
read the posts, but NOT to respond to them. In other words, read-only
access that is limited to 'Messages' area.

This would encourage people with a short term desire or interest to
read the latest views on HP, but not join the group. 

People with one quick thought would be less likely to jump in with
'done to death' posts and poorly researched responses.

If after reading the group for a while, they decide they want to join,
then they can go ahead and do so with the same moderated provision we
have now. 

This would discourage I guess what we could call frivolous posting.


2.) For those of you who have been around a while, and who either get
the digest or receive post via email, consider temporarily switching
to reading the group on the web. This will help unclog your email box,
and makes it easier to read through the post Subject Headings and pick
and choose what you want to read.

Example; there is a thread on Charlie Weasley's age that has been
going on for days and probably hundereds of post, can't imagine how or
why that thread went on for more than 6 post before the question was
sufficiently answered. So using web view, I was very easily able to
avoid all the 'Charlie Weasley's Age' post. No offense intended to
anyone who posted in that thread, I am well aware that threads
frequently morph beyond the original question, so the thread may have
dealt with other subjects. 

My only point is that when you can view a long list of Subject
headings, it's a lot easier to pick and choose what you want to read.

2a.) Also, to those who talked about withdrawing from the club, I
would suggest you just temporarily switch to web viewing of the club. 

That way you maintain your member status and at the same time unclog
your email box.

2b.) Pick and choose - seriously, pick and choose without mercy.
Really, you don't have to read every post. At ultra-high volume times
like this, I read posts that seem interesting or deal with my favorite
subjects. I'm always up for a good 'defending Ron' or 'defending
Neville' discussion, but rarely read Snape, Slytherin, or Draco. I'm
alway up for 'how the wizard world works', portkeys, wands, and
magical creatures, but rarely read SHIPS, ESE (Ever So Evil). TBAYs
are fun, but I could never do it, so they are a little intimidating,
and require some time to get a sense of the character's personalities,
so I don't read them that often, but when I do I'm always impressed by
the skill it take to write them.


3.) Last month there were 8200 posts, so far this month (Aug 18) there
are 3200, so the volume is dropping quickly. I suspect next month, it
will be back pretty close to normal.


4.) Give old links to Newbies- As bad as Yahoo Search capabilities are
(I just spent hours searching for one of my own posts) it would be
nice it the long term members made the effort to refer Newbies back to
existing posts that answered their question or dealt with the same
subject. Perhaps even a mild and friendly suggestion that if they
still have ideas or comment after reading what is already written, we
will be happy to continue to discuss the subject. 

This would show Newbies that we are willing to talk with them and that
while limited Yahoo group search can provide answers to their questions.


5.) Cut the moderator and List Elves some slack. I'm pretty sure that
even as obssessed of HP fans as they are, they do have lives and other
responsibilities.

6.) SNIP... SNIP... SNIP... and MORE SNIP...
Snipping and editing out unneeded information from the previous poster
is really boring and tedious, but not as tedious and boring is having
to wade throught ten old paragraphs to find one new one at then
bottom. Not SNIPPING is something we all get lazy and do, and within
certain limits, it's OK, but at times like this we need to set an
example for how it should be done.

So, let's show the Newbies how it is suppost to be done. Snip out
unneeded paragraphs AND within paragraphs snip out unneeded words from
sentences. Frequently, if you trim extraneous words from a paragraph
you can reduce it to one fourth it's original size and still keep the
original posters full thought.

If we lead by example, instead of getting lazy, as we all do, we can
show Newbies how it is suppose to be done.


7.) Reformat the paragraphs of the previous poster.
This is also boring and tedious, but I find it very tedious to read
posts that have lines and paragraphs broken up into unnecessary short
lines. Each time a person replies in a thread, the 'Psycho Wordwrap'
compounds itself into paragraphs that are difficult to read.

This is especially a problem on my computer because I use a somewhat
large font. Not really 'that' large, still normal by any standard, but
Yahoo in it's infinite wisdom adds additional 'page display' wordwrap
that makes posts difficult to read.

In some other groups, instead of quoting the previous poster like this-

>This is the first line.
>This is the second line.
>This is the third line.

It's done like this-

>>> This is the first line. This is the second line.This is the third
line. <<<

This eliminates any problems with wordwrap, including the problem with
lines wrapping at the advert that is usually found at the top of the page.

Just a suggestion.

8.) Paragraphs and LOTS OF THEM.
This is more of a general rule. I think it is a lot easier to read,
and a lot easier to follow the train of thought when reading on-line
when thoughts are broken up into small 'take it in in a glance' size
bites. 

- Use many more paragraphs than you would in normal printed writing,
and many more than you would when adhering to standard rules of
writing. NEVER write huge long paragraphs. That's a good way to get
people to avoid your post and move on to the next one.

- Don't indent. That may be how your teacher told you to do it, but it
doesn't work on the web. Three first-line indented paragraphs on the
computer screen are no different than one large paragraph. Save or
eyes and our ulcers, and use a full blank line paragraph separator.

Just some general suggestion. I realize this deteriorated into a rant,
but I think the first couple points are valid for the group in general.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn










From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 16:35:17 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 16:35:17 -0000
Subject: Is It Just Me? (Cont.)
In-Reply-To: <20030818153210.21444.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhqv85+dhri@eGroups.com>

Debbie wrote:

> > I agree 100% with Abigail's point on how best to
> > maintain quality on 
> > the list:
> > 
> <<<< So post.  Don't be afraid that someone's said the
> same thing already - they have.  >>>>

That's good for quality in some ways, but I continue to be concerned 
about how it affects the volume problem.  It goes like this:

(1) I can't read all the posts, so I post my opinion, 

(2) and no one else can read all the posts either (except for the 
devoted and life-less <grins appreciatively at Catlady>), so they 
don't read my opinion but post their own, 

(3) and you get even MORE people talking past each other.  Overhigh 
volume is the enemy of high-quality conversation.

I've had this sensation of escalating an arms race whenever I've 
clenched my teeth, said "damn the last 4000 posts, I'm posting 
without reading them," and posted.  I'm glad to have an 
administrative blessing on doing so, but I'm still not content with 
the solution.

Amy Z




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Aug 18 16:36:06 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 16:36:06 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems - new problem identified
In-Reply-To: <bhqc82+ud17@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhqv9m+82oo@eGroups.com>

A few random remarks.  And this is long, I'm afraid.  Sorry.

But first . . . 

I just want to echo the sentiments of those who have thanked the 
list administrators.  I am not one now, but I was in the past.  And 
I can certainly tell you that it is difficult and time-consuming 
work, and there is a *lot* of it, not to mention the touchy 
interpersonal issues.  I do appreciate the efforts that have been 
made to improve things, but, well . . . it seems that there is much 
frustration out there that still needs to be addressed.

Judy:

> I'm one of the elves, and I can tell you that we have been totally
> swamped since OoP came out.  

Oh, I believe this!  Definitely.

<eases back into padded rocking chair, clutches worn shawl around 
shoulders, prepares to pontificate>

When I was involved in list administration, there were 42 people.  
Some people just lurked, but people worked pretty hard.  For 
instance, I did *thousands* of pending messages while I was an 
elf/mod (pending messages are messages from moderated members that 
need to be approved, rejected or edited).  On a busy day, I might 
check the pending messages section and find eight messages -- many 
days there would only be two or three when I checked in.  If there 
were eight, I'd roll my eyes and dive in, and it might take 30 
minutes just to handle those pending messages.  Handling eight, I 
believed, was a lot of work.

I have heard that pending messages activity is through the roof now 
-- there are sometimes over 50 pending messages at one time.  This 
means that some list administrators are probably killing themselves 
to keep up, which leads to burn out, errors and long delays before 
approved messages hit the list.  This cannot be any fun.

Complicating matters, I suspect, is that there are not enough people 
working in list administration.  There are only 26 people on the 
list administration team right now.  When I was there, however, it 
never happened that all mods/elves/geists would be actively working 
at the same time.  People have real lives, need breaks, travel, have 
exams, etc.  And some folks have specialized roles and don't do the 
day-to-day work (sending howlers, handling pending messages, posting 
admins, greeting new members) at all.  In short, you need a lot of 
people working to make a list of this size work well.

I glanced at the names of the members of the list administration 
team, and, unless things have changed dramatically, I can guess that 
there are only around *15* people actively doing the day-to-day work 
of moderating a list of over 10,000 people.  We have known OoP was 
coming since January, we had an administrative reorganization in 
April, but for some reason months have passed and we don't have 
enough warm bodies, IMHO.  

That, to me, could easily be where the core problem lies.  So if we  
insist on maintaining a skeleton crew and list volume stays at 
record levels, no one is going to be happy.

The solution, I think, is to get enough people involved in list 
administration so that the list administrators can enforce the 
rules, read the list so they know what is happening there, and 
hopefully enjoy the list themselves as best they can.  

This list has a huge membership, and lots of folks would undoubtedly 
be willing to help shoulder the load.  I think we should take them 
up on it.  Yes, it takes time to train new people, but if this 
process isn't started now, we'll be no closer to fixing these 
problems.


Grey Wolf:

>You need help, but not with pendings. Pendings 
> are tying up most of the elves's time, and is serving no purpose. 

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there.

Just so we all understand how the system works (unless it has 
changed -- correct me if I'm wrong, list administrators), all new 
members begin on moderated status.  Their messages must be approved 
or rejected by a list administrator, and if they violate the rules, 
they are advised on where they have strayed.  Most folks learn the 
ropes fairly quickly as a result, and they are usually taken off 
moderated status after submitting four good posts on separate days 
that comply with the rules in all respects.  If the message is 
rejected or edited by an elf, the message does not count as one good 
enough to justify de-modding the member.  Thus, the system is very 
labor-intensive, but the list is protected from all spam and posts 
that violate the rules.  

The problem, though, is the system can't run itself.  It is 
unreasonable to expect any list administrator to spend more than 30 
minutes a day handling pending messages, IMHO.  It can be a real 
grind.  But if the list had a sufficient number of administrators, 
many of the quality control problems would be solved, I suspect.

>The elves don't need more help in pendings - they need to revise 
>the system and start punishing those that are breaking the rules 
>sistematically. Good, fast filters would be to send back any posts 
>breaking the rules with a note stating "read the FAQ" or "read the 
>rules". 

Well . . . that's pretty much the way it worked when I was in list 
administration.  We tried to be courteous and explain to members why 
their posts had this or that problem, and most people seemed to 
appreciate that approach.  But that takes time.  And personnel.


 
> And once the pendings are streamlined, get a few sub-elves with 
>little or no mod powers to help identify those posters that are 
>breaking the rules outside moderated status. Some mod could start a 
>list of offenders, and if a name gets called too much (like for 5 
>different posts) put them back to moderated immediately.

Yep, that gets done too, more or less.  When the system isn't 
overloaded, the administrators do pay attention as best they can and 
they address problems off-list in a very efficient and courteous 
manner.

 
Judy:

> I think Debbie has a good point; the list may become more 
>interesting in a few weeks, once school has started. 

Hmmmm.  Maybe.  Or we may be in an August vacation lull, with 
everyone gearing up for a new wave of thestral questions in 
September.  

<feels cold chill>

Sheryll:

>Personally, I think starting another list smacks of an
>elitest, "we're better than you and can't join us
>until you're good enough" attitude. I honestly don't
>think that's the impression that we would want to give
>new people looking for a place to discuss Harry
>Potter. 

Amen to that!  

Personally, if we started a second list that did *not* have an open 
membership, I wouldn't join it as a matter of principle.  I think 
closed discussion groups are divisive, not nice, and not necessary, 
really.  Nah, I think if we have a second list, it has to be open.  
The minute we start saying so-and-so isn't good enough or popular 
enough for Our Special List, well . . . I just can't get on board 
with that.  I might start having flashbacks to certain playground 
experiences I'd rather not think about.  :-D

Along those lines . . . 

I came awfully close to just starting another list with an open 
membership and letting the chips fall where they may.  Hey, when 
faced with a clear problem, I'd usually prefer to do *something* 
rather than do nothing.

And then I chickened out.

<hangs head in shame>

Man, I don't want to moderate some new list and deal with all the 
headaches.  I don't want the list administrators to be angry with 
me, viewing the second list as unwanted competition.  I couldn't 
guarantee that old friends would start posting again.  People who 
have spoken have very different ideas already about how such a list 
ought to work.  And I sure wouldn't want the thing to flop.  

So.  I guess I just have to wait and hope things get better before 
they get worse.  

Seriously, though.  I do appreciate that the list administrators are 
paying attention to this discussion and are making good points.  I 
assume that each of you is speaking in his/her personal capacity.  

So I hope it's OK to ask this directly:  do you have a plan to deal 
with the problems that folks have identified in this discussion, or 
are you working on one?  Can you tell us what you have decided and 
what you are considering?  And what can we do to help?

Finally, here's a very radical suggestion I haven't heard yet . . . 

I think the list administrators should close the list to new posting 
for one week (or longer) and should use the time to regroup.  Invite 
new elves, train them, and give them jobs.  Review the posting since 
OoP to find repeat offenders and place them back on moderated 
status.  Completely re-work the old VFAQs to reflect the repetitive 
questions folks are asking right now, and then send it out to every 
member.  Prepare a document explaining the HPfGU customs on 
snipping, with examples, and send that out.  That sort of thing.

I can only speak for myself, but I'm willing to be patient and give 
you all time to do that.  I think if we pull together, we can fix 
this place up a bit.

Cindy -- also thanking the list administrators for allowing us to 
borrow OT-Chatter to have this discussion





From joym999 at aol.com  Mon Aug 18 17:36:56 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 17:36:56 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhr2ro+c6j3@eGroups.com>

Well, as yet another former member of the Admin Team, I'll stick my 2 
knuts in, although IMO those of us who deserted you probably don't 
have a whole helluva lot of moral authority here.

I don't think that any of the solutions proposed so far are very 
useful, but I do have a couple of suggestions that may (or may not) 
be useful.

1.  Ask people to voluntarily limit their posts.  While we do have 
10,000 members, only a small minority of them actually post.  Some of 
them post A LOT.  Many of them post TOO MUCH.  We could ask people to 
limit their posts to one per day (or something).  Will that cramp 
some people's style?  Maybe.  Will we lose some brilliant insights, 
and some brilliant members, if we impose this rule?  Maybe, but we're 
losing both now because the list is so unreadable.

2.  Slow down.  We know the elves are swamped.  Let the messages pile 
up in pending for a little longer.  Membership in HPfGU is a 
privilege, not a right.  If newbie's posts don't show up on the list 
for a day or so, so be it.

3.  As Cindy said, you probably are short-staffed, but recruiting new 
elves has its pros and cons, and anyway it is an internal Admin Team 
matter that is none of non-Admin Team members' business.  But, have 
you considered any creative alternatives?  Are there list policing 
responsibilities that non-Admin Team members could do that might 
help?  I occasionally send offlists to people answering informational 
questions.  Would you like non-Admin team members to engage in more 
offlisting to answer questions, provide helpful suggestions, etc.?

4.  Send out more Special Notice Admin Posts.  Some people just need 
to be reminded that there are rules they have to follow.  Or send 
mass ADMIN offlists to the people who don't seem able to remember the 
rules.

--Joywitch, the deserter




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Aug 18 17:51:19 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 10:51:19 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems - new problem identified
References: <bhqv9m+82oo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <015101c365b1$55a1f500$e9311c40@aoldsl.net>

Cindy wrote:

<I glanced at the names of the members of the list administration
team, and, unless things have changed dramatically, I can guess that
there are only around *15* people actively doing the day-to-day work
of moderating a list of over 10,000 people>

Not to talk out of school but that numbers actually...wrong.  Everyone
who is currently active (ie: Not away, suffering computer
malfunctions, not in the loony bin) is pitching in and helping out.
Just had to mention that.

<Thus, the system is very
labor-intensive, but the list is protected from all spam and posts
that violate the rules. >

Nope you got it right there.  Just wanted to add that if you guy saw
some of these posts, you would bow down to the pendings system.  You
think some of what we have is bad...you ain't seen nothing.

<Seriously, though.  I do appreciate that the list administrators are
paying attention to this discussion and are making good points.  I
assume that each of you is speaking in his/her personal capacity.  >

I certainly hope we are as if anyone's taking my comments in an elfly
capacity I'm in deep trouble. Nope, I'm just speaking for me, a list
member who just happens to be an elf and can see both sides of the
argument.

<So I hope it's OK to ask this directly:  do you have a plan to deal
with the problems that folks have identified in this discussion, or
are you working on one?  Can you tell us what you have decided and
what you are considering?  And what can we do to help?>

We are listening, we are hearing and we are working.  We just don't
have anything to give you all yet.  I know it's the same old song and
dance routine but this came up at the EXACT moment we were discussing
this amongst ourselves, trying to figure out what to do.  ALL of the
suggestions here are being taken notice of, and seriously debated.
All I can ask, personally, as myself, is you just give us a little
time to figure out, basically, where we go from here.

One of the main problems on my end, is that before OoP came out, we
didn't have to face the fact that we were a VERY large group.  But
with the release of OoP I myself and probably other admins have come
to the realization, we're not the little group we used to be.  We're
HUGE and we can't exactly use the old methods anymore.  Changes have
to be made.  The problem is figuring where's the best place for the
changes, what's the best course of action for the list.  And this
takes time.  A solution is being worked on, but we can't do it
over-night which I'm sure you all understand.

I know I've said it before and the words are sounding false, but I'm
right there with you in your frustration.  I just deleted everything
out of my HPfGU main list folder un read because I didn't have the
time nor energy to read it.  And that's bad both personally and as an
elf because I'm supposed to read those.  So yes, the frustration, the
annoyment, the "Wasn't this just discussed?  I don't want to read
about this again." is here with me too.  All I can ask is a bit of
time while we figure this mess out.

Saitaina
****
"Sorry Vig...just seems like I'm about to come out of a closet I
didn't even know I was in."

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first
into a tree because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still
be having a better day than I am today."




From glcherry at bellsouth.net  Mon Aug 18 20:33:16 2003
From: glcherry at bellsouth.net (stardancerofas)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 20:33:16 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhrd6c+bnh8@eGroups.com>

Hi all!
Okay, we all know the Main List is having problems, and as a relative
newbie (but someone who hasn't been on Moderated Status for a long
time), and someone who joined Pre-OotP, let's face facts.
It's not really that people haven't read the FAQ, it's that they're so
excited. I nearly went nuts reading all the 'laws of the group' before
I even thought of posting....guess what. I *don't * really remember a
single word of them. They didn't call it the BHF for nothing. It was
BIG, it was Humungous, and it was Filed...right back in the grey
matter with what happened in Second Grade :)
I, in my (not always) humble opinion, don't think the answer would be
'more list'. What some (and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to
figure out who, just read the list) newbies need is for some of the
Veterans to private mail them, and gently, *guide* them. If possible
that is.
Alot of the newer members are excited about finding others to talk
with. They're surprised by the ideas, that they themselves might have
had, and anxious to discuss, to DEATH! every little detail.
We don't need more lists. What we all need is a whole lot of patience.
Trust me, as a Star Wars Veteran, alot of these people are not going
to hang around. HP is new, exciting, hot....you get the idea.
Patience in dealing with the Main List is essential right now. Read
the posts that might be of interest to you. 
Or, do what I did. Go to digest. I did it for OT Chatter, and the Main
List. It helps alot.
Enough Rambling for now.
Lorrie 





From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 20:56:23 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 20:56:23 -0000
Subject: Disheartened Newbie
Message-ID: <bhrehn+phig@eGroups.com>

Hi All,

I have been a member here since the beginning of June.  I debated for 
months whether or not to join and I held off until my need to talk 
about Harry Potter increased so dramatically right before the release 
of OOP that my friends couldn't stand listening to me anymore.  With 
no one to turn to in my RL, I joined.

I was immediately impressed with the high quality discussions I found 
here.  I kept relatively silent (I don't think I got off moderated 
status until sometime after OOP was released, when I couldn't stop 
myself from throwing in my two cents) and poked around the files and 
the archives a bit.  I didn't know what FILKs were and those Theory 
Bay posts were quite intimidating.  In fact, they still are.  I very 
much enjoy reading them, but I will probably never visit there 
myself.  

I have been following the threads related to the status of this group 
very carefully since someone picked my correction of another poster 
to begin his rant about posting correct information and looking up 
canon.  

Some of the following discussion has caused me to feel various 
emotions.  Not wanting to shoot out a response based solely on anger, 
panic, or even cheer, I continued reading.  But now I am calm, so I 
will hopefully be responding properly to what has been said.

First, even though I have only been here a little over two months, I 
too have found the repetition on the list quite boring.  I also get 
annoyed when people get their canon wrong.  I do my best to help out 
by finding appropriate quotes and page numbers because my books are 
generally on my desk, easily accessible while playing on the 
computer.  I even roll my eyes at some of the headings, and 
groan, "The Marauders Map again?  Wasn't that just brought up 
yesterday?"

Second, I used to try to read all the posts because even though I 
don't respond to most, I find it respectful to do so.  Unfortunately 
the volume is much too great to do that, so I've begun to pick and 
choose my topics, as many here have had to.  

Third, when I do post something, I do my best to make sure it has 
some substance to it, that no one else recently has posted the same 
thing, and that the canon I use is correct.   I usually try to do 
some proper snipping.  I try to omit any spelling and grammar 
errors.  I've never jumped in with a "me too" without something to 
add.  I'm not always successful, but I try not to irritate anyone 
with my postings.

Okay, so why am I posting this?  Why have I given this the title 
of "Disheartened Newbie"?  

Well, the discussion of a "newbie list" is a start.  As someone who 
never asked, "What's up with the Thestrals?" and never would for I've 
read the FAQs, I think I would shoot myself if I had to sit in a 
group and read endless discussions on that subject or on Dumbledore's 
gleam (discussions of which I now avoid like the plague).  

I would also read the posts of the "older" list and feel very 
discouraged that I could not actively participate in those 
discussions until I've been deemed "worthy" to go there or had been 
in the "newbie" group long enough.  By the time I got to the "older" 
list, my thoughts would be irrelevant as the members would have moved 
on to other topics.  That would discourage me from posting or wanting 
to be here at all.

And the idea sounds elitist, no matter how it would be done.  But 
that could just be the newbie in me talking. :-)

Another thing I find disheartening:

Although there seems to be a number of members who don't mind reading 
posts about the same things and encourage us newbies to post our 
thoughts, there are also a number of folks who do not seem as 
welcoming of this sort of thing.  To even read the discussions here 
on OT about that make me feel I should just keep my mouth shut.  It's 
quite a slap in the face in a group where I've felt very welcome 
until now.

And yet another:

I've read from several members that they are selective in their 
readings of messages.  I have mentioned above that I do not read all 
the posts, either.  I generally go by which topic I'm interested in 
at the moment.  I see that some use this method, as well.  

What I also read is that some folks only read posts from people they 
know.  Well if that's the case, I should just pack it up and call it 
a day, shouldn't I?--Oops, there's some of that anger I mentioned 
rearing it's ugly head.  Some who have said this are people whose 
ideas and theories I have a lot of respect for. 

To think I am not given the time of day just because I haven't been 
around for ages is upsetting.  Admittedly, I look for certain 
people's messages, too.  I will read them even if I'm not interested 
in the thread because those people always have something insightful 
to add.  But I don't skip posts based on who wrote them.  A lot can 
be missed out on that way.  

Forgive me if I misinterpreted what people have said, but that is how 
it comes across to this newbie.

Finally, I would just like to add that I very much enjoy this group.  
I spend a lot of time reading messages and reading the books because 
of what has been discussed in these messages.  So I thank everyone 
who contributes to the list for giving me more than I ever could have 
imagined to think about in the Harry Potter books.  

And I want to thank the ADMIN team for doing their best to keep this 
list as high quality as possible while still making us new folks feel 
welcome.

Thanks for your time,

KathyK (hoping the feelings of unwelcomeness go away quickly and that 
I don't sound too whiny)




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 20:57:54 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 13:57:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhrd6c+bnh8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030818205754.7943.qmail@web40510.mail.yahoo.com>

I have a question about one of the suggestions to help
the problem.  Alot of people have said veteran members
could e-mail rule breaking newbies offlist with a
friendly reminder.  My question is, if I did that and
someone took it not so kindly could I get in any kind
of trouble with the list?

~Kathryn

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug 18 21:00:29 2003
From: michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 22:00:29 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
References: <20030818205754.7943.qmail@web40510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c365cb$c53dbd30$e35fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kathryn Wolber 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:57 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems


  I have a question about one of the suggestions to help
  the problem.  Alot of people have said veteran members
  could e-mail rule breaking newbies offlist with a
  friendly reminder.  My question is, if I did that and
  someone took it not so kindly could I get in any kind
  of trouble with the list?

  Speaking as a list elf for over two years , we would hope anyone doing such a task would be tactful about it. If someone really were to be very unhappy about exchanges, you could approach the list admins. You would not be in trouble for being friendly as far as I can see. 

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 21:26:25 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 14:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <001e01c365cb$c53dbd30$e35fc487@personal>
Message-ID: <20030818212625.83208.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Pinguthegreek <michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Kathryn Wolber 
>   To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:57 PM
>   Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List
> Problems
> 
> 
>   I have a question about one of the suggestions to
> help
>   the problem.  Alot of people have said veteran
> members
>   could e-mail rule breaking newbies offlist with a
>   friendly reminder.  My question is, if I did that
> and
>   someone took it not so kindly could I get in any
> kind
>   of trouble with the list?
> 
>   Speaking as a list elf for over two years , we
> would hope anyone doing such a task would be tactful
> about it. If someone really were to be very unhappy
> about exchanges, you could approach the list admins.
> You would not be in trouble for being friendly as
> far as I can see. 
> 
>   Michelle
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]

Thanks, I just wanted to ask because I saw a really
annoying one line response today and didn't know if I
would be out of line to send a friendly reminder. 
Maybe if people did this when they caught it the rule
breakers would catch on:)
~Kathryn


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 21:39:00 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 14:39:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <20030818212625.83208.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030818213900.47365.qmail@web20504.mail.yahoo.com>



Kathryn Wolber <katydid3500 at yahoo.com> wrote:

--- Pinguthegreek <michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Kathryn Wolber 
>   To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:57 PM
>   Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List
> Problems
> 
> 
>   I have a question about one of the suggestions to
> help
>   the problem.   A lot of people have said veteran
> members
>   could e-mail rule breaking newbies off list with a
>   friendly reminder.  My question is, if I did that
> and
>   someone took it not so kindly could I get in any
> kind
>   of trouble with the list?

 

As a relative newbie to the group(comparatively speaking).I know that mistakes will happen. I guess what I wanted to say was this. I welcome any help, mind I will get a little hurt and offended if that help comes in a negative way, but if you just wrote me back and said, " you need to watch your snips," or " that should be OT" I am not going to care. Even if you email me and say we have covered this topic a thousand times please read the archives, and perhaps a Little guidance in the right direction, I wouldn't mind. I too get tired of the same topic coming up that had been dissected to the skeleton the week before. So feel free to correct me anytime, I promise i won't yell ( To loud,...jk)

Eowynn
> 
> 

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Mon Aug 18 22:01:34 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:01:34 EDT
Subject: Disheartened Newbie
Message-ID: <18b.1e5cd908.2c72a6be@aol.com>


KathyK:

>Okay, so why am I posting this? Why have I given this the title 
>of "Disheartened Newbie"? 
>
>Well, the discussion of a "newbie list" is a start. As someone who 
>never asked, "What's up with the Thestrals?" and never would for I've 
>read the FAQs, I think I would shoot myself if I had to sit in a 
>group and read endless discussions on that subject or on Dumbledore's 
>gleam (discussions of which I now avoid like the plague). 

I don't like the idea, either, Kathy. As someone has already pointed out, 
"newbies" (a term I tend to avoid as I think it rather patronising) come in all 
shapes and sizes. Some leap, fully formed, onto the screen, immediately 
producing beautifully written, original, well thought out, well formatted posts that 
demonstrate that they understand our posting conventions. Others...well, 
others take more time. For various reasons. I don't think that all new members 
should be lumped together as a group.

<>
And the idea sounds elitist, no matter how it would be done. But 
that could just be the newbie in me talking. :-)

No. *I* think it sounds elitist, too. Let's face it, we are accused of being 
elitist on occasion simply because we moderate at all.

>Another thing I find disheartening:
>
>Although there seems to be a number of members who don't mind reading 
>posts about the same things and encourage us newbies to post our 
>thoughts, there are also a number of folks who do not seem as 
>welcoming of this sort of thing. To even read the discussions here 
>on OT about that make me feel I should just keep my mouth shut. It's 
>quite a slap in the face in a group where I've felt very welcome 
>until now.

There is no rule in this group about not revisiting old topics. Yes, it can 
become tedious for members who have heard it before and frankly, we are hearing 
it again at more frequent intervals. But we were all new once and I daresay 
most of us have at some point revisited an old topic that we thought we'd 
discovered for ourselves.

It's very simple. If you no longer wish to discuss or read about a particular 
topic, just don't open that thread.

But there is a big difference between reopening a topic of discussion and 
demonstrating that you have never looked at the VFAQs. Or noticed that your 
particular query was answered yesterday. Or even a few hours ago.

There has to be some give and take. All posters, new and old have to make 
some reasonable effort and older members need to understand that it is much, much 
harder on a list of over 10000 to avoid repeating subjects than it was on a 
list of 4000.
Newer members need to understand that it *is* hard for older members. When a 
list increases in size as much as this one has, inevitably it loses some of 
its intimacy

>And yet another:
>
>I've read from several members that they are selective in their 
>readings of messages. I have mentioned above that I do not read all 
>the posts, either. I generally go by which topic I'm interested in 
>at the moment. I see that some use this method, as well. 

Yes. Well, if you're not blessed with infinite time, the volume is so great 
that you *have* to be selective and this is a sensible way to do it.

>What I also read is that some folks only read posts from people they 
>know. Well if that's the case, I should just pack it up and call it 
>a day, shouldn't I?--Oops, there's some of that anger I mentioned 
>rearing it's ugly head. Some who have said this are people whose 
>ideas and theories I have a lot of respect for. 

It's another survival strategy, but perhaps more short-sighted.
But what I would say is that if you follow the list for some time, what you 
will find is that the group of core posters changes over time. There is a 
pattern, whereby new members join the group and post at a relatively high rate and 
then start to slow down, their places being taken by newer posters. I just 
looked at the most recent page of posts over on Main and I reckon that half of 
them are by what I would regard as "new" posters. They only get known, because 
they post. 

If you write good (or conversely bad! <g>) noteworthy posts, you will be 
noticed and you will be read.

>To think I am not given the time of day just because I haven't been 
>around for ages is upsetting. 

That's not the case. If I wrote on the main list, I'd probably be overlooked 
by most selective readers now because I *have* been around for ages, but 
haven't had the time (or, frankly the inclination, with the current volume) to post 
much recently. And I used to be a Very Frequent Poster. 

>Admittedly, I look for certain 
>people's messages, too. I will read them even if I'm not interested 
>in the thread because those people always have something insightful 
>to add. But I don't skip posts based on who wrote them. A lot can 
>be missed out on that way. 

Very true.

>Forgive me if I misinterpreted what people have said, but that is how 
>it comes across to this newbie.

It is always valuable to know how new members feel. Your view is no less 
valid just because you are new.

>And I want to thank the ADMIN team for doing their best to keep this
>list as high quality as possible while still making us new folks feel 
>welcome.

Thank you. I'm glad that has been your experience.

~Eloise

    
    



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From punkieshazam at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 22:18:31 2003
From: punkieshazam at yahoo.com (punkieshazam)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 22:18:31 -0000
Subject: Roundabouts
Message-ID: <bhrjbn+82f6@eGroups.com>

Last week a friend from Denver came down here on business. She and I 
went out for lunch and then out to the mesa to buy some produce from 
one of the farmers there. On the drive she told me about her most 
recent visit to the UK. She was complaining about the roundabouts. I 
have never been in the UK and my experience of roundabouts is limited 
to Aspen and Vail which have small, four road roundabouts and I hate 
them. 

Anyway, she said that her experience was that the roundabouts in 
Scotland were the most difficult because they are so poorly marked. 
She also said that everyone who lived there that she talked to hated 
them. While she was talking about this, it occured to me that what 
she was describing was very similar to the function of the round room 
in the Department of Mysteries. Does anyone with direct experience of 
Scottish driving have any ideas about this? JKR comments on 
schooling, government and personal relationships. Why not a lampoon 
of driving and roadways? Or maybe not.

Punkie

Petunia is a Squib!




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 22:20:12 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 15:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Disheartened Newbie
In-Reply-To: <18b.1e5cd908.2c72a6be@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030818222012.63968.qmail@web40504.mail.yahoo.com>

In light of this thread, I suggest that we all start
saying we have problems with rule-breakers...not
Newbies.  As all newbies aren't rule-breakers and all
rule-breakers aren't newbies.  Kathy is obviously a
newbie who is doing everything correctly to the best
of her abilities and I feel bad that we've hurt her in
our problem solving attempt.

~Kathryn

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 18 22:29:42 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 22:29:42 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems and Solutions
In-Reply-To: <20030818213900.47365.qmail@web20504.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bhrk0m+ujm8@eGroups.com>

Eowynn wrote:
>So feel free to correct me anytime, I promise i won't yell ( To
>loud,...jk)

See and that is the problem Eowynn.  Do you really want twenty posters
emailing you because you did not clip properly?  Because they read the
questions two weeks ago, and find that you are asking now too
repetitive?  How forceful is too forceful?  Is a sentence enough, or
if some odd poster gave you a small dissertation as to the virtues of
clipping and reading *every* single post that was before you joined
before posting?  What does not offend one person, greatly offends
another.  I should know.  Because sometimes when I think I am being
gentle, people have told me I come off as sounding blunt and
defensive.   Funny thing is, by my estimation, I could have been worse.

And that is the problem I see with regular posters policing the site.
 They do not know if someone else is also emailing.  At least MEG can
somewhat track their actions.  Non-MEG's are not empowered to do
enforce their "reminder" emails.  They are just being annoying flies
to posters that obviously do not care to read the rules, follow them,
or think they are that important.  If they did, they would be striving
for excellence.

Then what if that poster you sent an email to saw one of your posts
was not up to what he saw was the standard?  Oh, then a fight will
break out.  So we need *official* moderators to be the police.  There
is no citizen's arrest here.  

But there are too few moderators now.  From Cindy's numbers, the crop
has been cut almost in half.  Saitaina says that those that are left
are working diligently, but it is not enough it seems.  For no one
expected...*this*.

But *this* is what we have now.  And we have, from the looks of the
thread and the seriousness of it, honest posters that want to help and
find a solution.  From my tally we have:


1) go and post.

Fair enough.  But frankly I think we all have posted since June 21st
and we watched our posts get sucked into the vortex which is the list.
 Even now, I just checked, and we average, still, 30 posts every two
hours.  When I joined a year ago, it was 30 posts every 12 hours.  If
I took the time to write a tbay, which takes on average 4-5 hours, it
would not even be up on the front page of the web browser long enough
for anyone to see it.  All that time, and it would be lost in the
shuffle.  *That* is a big reason why I am not posting.  The site is
not manageable.


2) another list that is a graduation list.

While in theory it will solve *our* problem, it does not encourage
newbie excellence.  I read the newbie that posted here, and I
understand her concerns.   I had them too a year ago.  I got so tired
of being called a newbie as if my thoughts were not good enough for
them.  All I knew was that if anything I said was good, they would
eventually see it and get past my newbie badge.  I am not even sure
when I graduated from oldie to newbie (probably in my tenth tbay), but
I seem to have now.  

Newbies, please do not be discouraged that oldies grumble.  We are
just that.  Old.  We get cranky and set in our old ways, but do know
that we do appreciate the newbie that takes the time to learn the
rules and stick around.  We do like people that love HP.  That is why
we are all here.  It took me a couple of weeks to realize that, but
oldies *do* like newbies.  Keep the conversations fresh and the ideas
flowing strong.  :)

Ok?  ::kiss kiss::  

Ok went off on tangent.(something I am well known to do ::big grin::)

Splitting the list will make the oldies *feel* better.  Which I for
one think we have a big enough chip on our shoulder as it is for
surviving this long.  We do not need a list to make it bigger.  And I
still question the policy to pass listees from one list to the other.
 How exactly is that selected?  Isn't the policy of moderated status,
in essence, the same thing.  They cannot post unless they abide by the
rules.   


3) More moderators.

I think this would help.  Training factor and trust factor needs to be
explored, but I for one can think of at least ten people, probably
more, that I would nominate.  People want to help.  That is a good way
to do so.  Seems, from the MEG that have posted here, that this is
honestly being explored.


4) The site is filling fast.

I say this because it is a good point.  The site is at 52% right now.
 Back in June it was 42%.  Now I know the site will slow some, after
looking at the month numbers on the main lists the numbers during the
months *are* larger, the site is growing at alarming speeds.  At this
pace, or even a little bit lesser one, the site will fill up fast. 
Not that this is a pressing issue, it is one I think that should be
considered when thinking of solutions.  We do not have a cap on the
membership.  We *do* have a cap on the amount of space our posts are
allowed to take in the group. 


Ok, I will stop for now.  This is getting long.  I am enjoying this
discussion, but also getting depressed.  I desperately want to find a
solution that makes everyone happy, but I feel like some tough
decisions will need to be made.  Must they only be made by MEG?  Can
we set up a poll to ask what the listee populace wants?  

Maybe I am just a lover of power of the people though.  And not to let
someone else do the work either.  I see a lot of people in this thread
putting a lot of time to make this site a lot better.


Melody




From michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug 18 22:36:26 2003
From: michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:36:26 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Main List Problems and Solutions
References: <bhrk0m+ujm8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c365d9$2e1829f0$e35fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Melody 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 11:29 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Main List Problems and Solutions


  Ok, I will stop for now.  This is getting long.  I am enjoying this
  discussion, but also getting depressed.  I desperately want to find a
  solution that makes everyone happy, but I feel like some tough
  decisions will need to be made.  Must they only be made by MEG?  Can
  we set up a poll to ask what the listee populace wants?  
  Now me : I am all for such a thing. But at 10,000 members and rising, how do we establish what is enough to carry a vote ? Just a first past the post system or what ? And please do not discount our expereince of knowing what will and won't work in terms of list management. I would hate to see the baby thrown out with the bathwater. 



  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Mon Aug 18 23:07:19 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:07:19 EDT
Subject: 100% OT: Any lawyers here?
Message-ID: <127.2f57f23e.2c72b627@aol.com>

Hi, 

   Are there any lawyers or law students, or people just educated with the 
law on this group? I need some legal advice, I think. Well, really, I just have 
a question. 

  I'll present it here so you can just respond: Is it still blackmail if what 
you're threatening to do is legal? 

  This is the situation. My father has not paid child support for years. We 
have a warrant for his arrest in this state, California, but I have been told 
by a lawyer and a police officer that I need a warrant for his arrest in his 
state, Florida, in order to have him arrested. Now, in order to get a warrant 
for his arrest in Florida and subsequently have him arrested, I have to be in 
that state. Which I can do, but obviously, I'm reluctant to get into all that 
drama.

  I have tried quite a few times to ask for money from him when I have needed 
it--basically asking for a small portion of the more than one hundred 
thousand dollars he still owes us. Whether or not he has ever given me that money is 
complicated. He's sent small amounts of money as gifts, he's sent gifts like a 
computer, etc. But I have only directly asked for money twice. He hasn't 
directly said 'no, I won't pay.' But the result has been the same--no money. 

  So, if I said to him, that unless he gives me four months worth of what he 
owes ($4,320)--what I am legally entitled to and which he has illegally 
refused to pay--I will then make it my business to come down to Florida, get a 
warrant for his arrest, and have him arrested--which legally, I can do: is that 
still blackmail? 

  I'd appreciate any help on the matter, including links to web sites that 
might help if you aren't interested in detailing it all yourself. I sought out 
asking a lawyer on a list that is unrelated to lawyer-ness because I was hoping 
that I would get clear, easy-to-understand information. You know, I'd get to 
talk to someone as a person who happens to be a lawyer and shares an interest 
(HP) with me, not just a lawyer. 

Thank you so much for your time, 

Melinda 

   



From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Mon Aug 18 23:12:49 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:12:49 EDT
Subject: LAWYERS Previous Post: Addition
Message-ID: <156.2321f524.2c72b771@aol.com>

Hi again, 

  I'm really sorry to post again on this heavily OT subject, but in addition 
to my previous post, I forgot to add that I want to know if it would be 
illegal blackmail--as in, my father could sue or criminal charges could be brought 
against me, etc. 

Thanks again, 

Melinda 
P.S. I know this is all stuff I should pursue info about elsewhere, I know, 
and I have been, so please forgive me for bothering you guys here.



From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Aug 18 23:17:15 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:17:15 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Main List Problems and Solutions
In-Reply-To: <bhrk0m+ujm8@eGroups.com>
References: <bhrk0m+ujm8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1061248666.85E1DD0@s5.dngr.org>


On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 6:32PM -0500, Melody wrote a lot of astute things, 
but I'm going to focus on only one of them:

> 4) The site is filling fast.
>
> I say this because it is a good point.  The site is at 52% right now.
>  Back in June it was 42%.  Now I know the site will slow some, after
> looking at the month numbers on the main lists the numbers during the
> months *are* larger, the site is growing at alarming speeds.  At this
> pace, or even a little bit lesser one, the site will fill up fast.
> Not that this is a pressing issue, it is one I think that should be
> considered when thinking of solutions.  We do not have a cap on the
> membership.  We *do* have a cap on the amount of space our posts are
> allowed to take in the group.

No, actually. Yahoomort has a cap.

We have Paul Kippes.

None of you probably know him, but without him, hpfgu would not exist as 
we know it. Back about 3 years ago this week, Paul created a wonderful 
program that harvests messages from a yahoogroup and reuploads them 
elsewhere. As I understand it, Paul has a full archive of this list, at 
least through the spring. When the need arists, Paul can upload the 
first X thousand messages to a different Yahoogroup where they'll serve 
as an archive. For a look at what this looks like, visit the 
hpfgu-archives yahoogroup.

This is actually one area where "power to the people" can't work, 
although it may for other projects, as the archives, in zip format, and 
the fantastic posts pages are stored on hpfgu's website, which is hosted 
by fictionalley.org on the dedicated server we have. Someone - or 
multiple someones - need to keep those passwords, keep up the domain 
namw registration and be listed as 'owner' for the Yahoogroups such that 
they're not deleted by a disgruntled ninny who hacks into the owner's 
account, as happened on st patrick's day, 2002. And there are some who 
may feel that there's an inherent hierarchy in whoever keeps that info, 
although imho, for technical things like that, there isn't. Not really.

Heidi
Former meg member
Current faq team member
Protector of the server
Speaking solely as an individual



From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 18 23:44:28 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:44:28 -0000
Subject: The server preserver (was: Main List...)
In-Reply-To: <1061248666.85E1DD0@s5.dngr.org>
Message-ID: <bhrocs+k4e9@eGroups.com>

I wrote unaware:
>>We do not have a cap on the membership.  We *do* have a cap on the
>>amount of space our posts are allowed to take in the group.


Heidi explained: 
>No, actually. Yahoomort has a cap.
> 
>We have Paul Kippes.
> 
>None of you probably know him, but without him, hpfgu would not exist
>as we know it. Back about 3 years ago this week, Paul created a
>wonderful program that harvests messages from a yahoogroup and
>reuploads them elsewhere. 


How cool is THAT!

Oh, I feel much better about that then.  I hated the idea we were
being pressured into a decision.  Ok, so with that off the shoulders,
then MEG/we do have time to decide this shift well.  

You know.  We should have an appreciate-the-listee-behind-the-scenes
day more often.  :)


Melody
who is understanding more and more how deeply loved this site really is




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Mon Aug 18 23:56:19 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:56:19 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems - new problem identified
Message-ID: <3c.33c3237f.2c72c1a3@aol.com>

In a message dated 8/18/2003 12:38:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cindysphynx at comcast.net writes:


> The solution, I think, is to get enough people involved in list 
> administration so that the list administrators can enforce the 
> rules, read the list so they know what is happening there, and 
> hopefully enjoy the list themselves as best they can.  
> 
> This list has a huge membership, and lots of folks would undoubtedly 
> be willing to help shoulder the load.  I think we should take them 
> up on it.  Yes, it takes time to train new people, but if this 
> process isn't started now, we'll be no closer to fixing these 
> problems.
> 

As a big supporter of moderated status for incoming members (yes, even when 
it was me on moderated status, because then I knew that when my post got 
through I was on the right track with acceptable posting!), this caught my eye. 

How does one get involved in list administration? If you're looking for help, 
will it be announced on the list?  As someone who ran a RolePlaying group (of 
a mere 90 members at peak, LOL), I'd be thrilled with the opportunity to help 
because then I'd have nothing to complain about because I'd be part of the 
solution. 

Just curious.

~RSFJenny  
btw- what is UP with this list? I miss emails from this list daily, I have to 
go to the website to find the missing ones, if I'm lucky enough to realize 
there *are* missing posts.  Is it that bad on the main list too (Yahoomort??) 
and I just don't notice due to the # of posts?? Or, worse, is it just me??


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 01:04:27 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 01:04:27 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems and Solutions
In-Reply-To: <bhrk0m+ujm8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhrt2r+pigc@eGroups.com>

Thank you, Melody, for a thoughtful post which I will snip most of. 
She said one thing we needed was:

> 3) More moderators.

I hereby volunteer as a new moderator. Administrators, you can 
contact me offlist if you think I have what it takes.

Next -

After all our grumbling, I have noticed a decided up-tick in the 
quality of messages over the last day or so. I hope it continues.

Regarding the other solutions proposed here recently - I am opposed 
to breaking the list into more "daughter" lists. I think this would 
only compound the problem of sorting through the messages to find 
what one wants to read. Like Catlady, I actually DO read every single 
message every day. Lifeless ones, unite! :) I am also opposed to the 
idea of a newbies list. If that is unmoderated, then it will quickly 
devolve into a mess of fangirls, me-toos, and other junk and will 
discourage anyone from wishing to wait it out until graduation. If 
the newbies list is moderated, then what have we gained?

However, I would support the idea of new members being admited to the 
group in a read-only manner for a period of time before being 
advanced into moderated status and then to non-moderated status. I 
think this would give new members a period to become acclimated to 
the standards that we expect from them. This would be a non-
exclusionary introduction to our list. It would also reduce the 
strain on mods because it would allow new posters to get past the 
enthusiastic beginner posts and decide if this group is really 
something that they wish to become a member of.

I would also suggest a more ruthless treatment of rules violators. 
None of this three-strikes-and-you're-moderated business, IMO. I 
think One Violation should put one back in moderated status. OK. 
Maybe two. Moderated status doesn't mean they are gagged, just that 
they need to be more careful.

Perhaps there could be special-purpose elves, say ones who specialize 
in sending messages to posters who are posting off-topic messages on 
the main list - thus, violators would be sure to get one warning, but 
wouldn't get flooded with similar corrective messages from well-
meaning members. Now THAT would be intimidating.

I'll quit now and keep it short.

Constance Vigilance, elf-wannabe.




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Aug 19 03:32:50 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 03:32:50 -0000
Subject: LAWYERS Previous Post: Addition
In-Reply-To: <156.2321f524.2c72b771@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bhs5p2+99nk@eGroups.com>

Hi, Melinda,

>   I'm really sorry to post again on this heavily OT subject, but 
>in addition to my previous post, I forgot to add that I want to 
>know if it would be illegal blackmail--as in, my father could sue 
>or criminal charges could be brought against me, etc. 

I'm a lawyer and, erm, I don't know the answer to your question.  
Dang, how embarrassing!  I know that I as a lawyer have an ethical 
obligation never to try to achieve a settlement by threatening 
criminal action (uh, I think that's the rule), but I don't know if 
it's actionable for lay people.

If I were you, though, I would phone up some of the family law 
clinics and legal aid clinics in your area.  One of them could 
answer your question without breaking a sweat, and the advice would 
apply to your jurisdiction.

Good luck!

Cindy






From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 04:15:13 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 21:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: LAWYERS Previous Post: Addition
In-Reply-To: <bhs5p2+99nk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030819041513.17461.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>



"Cindy C." <cindysphynx at comcast.net> wrote:
Hi, Melinda,

>   I'm really sorry to post again on this heavily OT subject, but 
>in addition to my previous post, I forgot to add that I want to 
>know if it would be illegal blackmail--as in, my father could sue 
>or criminal charges could be brought against me, etc. 
 

<snip>

If I were you, though, I would phone up some of the family law 
clinics and legal aid clinics in your area.  One of them could 
answer your question without breaking a sweat, and the advice would 
apply to your jurisdiction.

Good luck!

Cindy

>>>

Cindy has a valid point. I have a father that is also a deadbeat, I also happen to have a mother who works for ORS in Ut. In Ut they have certain procedures they follow. They have a certain amount of notices for failure to pay that go out, then they begin to garnish the obligees wages, and if that doesn't work the case gets turned over to the AG's office for court procedures. My mother has also participated in many of the court hearings, often times resulting in a judgment to pay by a certain time or face jail time, court fees, plus having to catch up on your back child support. If you would like I could get some more info for you on this.

Eowynn





 
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 19 04:29:16 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 04:29:16 -0000
Subject: Roundabouts & a bit of a driving rant
In-Reply-To: <bhrjbn+82f6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhs92s+osq5@eGroups.com>

"punkieshazam" wrote:
> Last week a friend from Denver came down here on business. <snip> 
> Anyway, she said that her experience was that the roundabouts in 
> Scotland were the most difficult because they are so poorly 
marked. 
> She also said that everyone who lived there that she talked to 
hated 
> them. While she was talking about this, it occured to me that what 
> she was describing was very similar to the function of the round 
room 
> in the Department of Mysteries. Does anyone with direct experience 
of 
> Scottish driving have any ideas about this? JKR comments on 
> schooling, government and personal relationships. Why not a 
lampoon 
> of driving and roadways? Or maybe not.
> 

Now me (Wendy):

While I'm preparing to tackle a response to the "BIG" discussion 
going on now on this list, I thought I'd write an "easy" little post 
in response to this one.

I doubt that JKR is complaining about the driving and roadways. I 
can't swear to it, but frankly, in my experience, driving in the UK 
is FAR more pleasant in almost every way than driving in the U.S. 
(at least in the parts of the U.S. where I've driven, which are 
varied and more than I want to name in this post, but I will say 
cover east, west and middle).

As for roundabouts, I'm really surprised that someone you know was 
ocmplaining about them. I lived in Scotland for two years, and I 
LOVE roundabouts. In my experience, it is a much quicker system than 
stoplights and stopsigns that are used in the U.S. You don't have to 
stop your car every time you come to an intersection, and rarely 
have to wait for any length of time even when you do stop. It's 
a "give way" system, so if there's no one else around, you don't 
stop - you just keep going. There are a few roundabouts with traffic 
signals, in cities and particularly busy areas, but in general it's 
much more efficient (IMO). I LOVE roundabouts, and I miss them very 
much now that I'm back in the U.S. Maybe there are some that are 
poorly marked (?) but that really wasn't my experience. Perhaps it's 
just that as an American driving in Scotland, your friend was 
already feeling confused by driving on the left, and so didn't have 
the proper attention for street signs. Then again, opinions differ 
on what constitutes "proper" signage, so that could be the trouble, 
too.

As for driving in general, I think that drivers in the U.K. tend to 
be more skilled on average than U.S. drivers. Before anyone flames 
me for this, let me explain. First of all, *in my experience,* it is 
much more difficult to pass the driving exam in Britain than it is 
in the U.S. (at least in California, where I sat my practical 
driving test many moons ago). When I moved to the U.K, I'd been 
driving for something close to 20 years, and I still failed my first 
practical exam. (Passed the second time, though). There is a 
different standard of skill expected in terms of the way you 
actually handle your automobile. Plus, in order to drive a standard 
transmission legally, you must test on a standard transmission 
(that's not how it was when I took my test in CA - everyone tested 
on an automatic, because they're so much easieer to drive, and then 
went out and drove standards anyway, whether they really know how to 
do it properly or not). 

I think there's also a bit of a different attitude towards driving, 
at least in some places. You asked specifically about Scotland, and 
I found Scottish drivers to be FAR more courteous, certainly VASTLY  
more curteous than the drivers I encounter on highways in the Bay 
Area now. And a lower percentage of things like "cell phone" 
drivers. And I can't remember ever seeing something that looked 
like "road rage" to me. Part of the reason is that you just have to 
pay more attention driving in Scotland. Both in cities (Edinburgh is 
the one I've driven extensively) and outside, there are lots of 
roads where two cars can't pass safely. And I'm not talking about a 
car each way - I mean there is only room for ONE car to go through a 
particular bit of road (especially when cars are parked at the 
curb). So, you get used to driving more carefully, paying a lot of 
attention, being prepared to stop at pretty much any time when 
you're not on a highway or particularly large road, and being very 
friendly about giving way when you're "playing chicken" with an 
oncoming driver. There's lots of waving thanks at other drivers, 
something you don't see a whole lot of here, even on those few 
occasions when the other driver actually *has* been courteous. (I'm 
talking California here, Bay Area and Los Angeles, because that's 
where I do my driving these days. People in other parts of the 
country may be lovely now). 

On the whole, I found Scotlnd a very lovely place to drive. 

Oh - and I just thought of something else. I doubt JKR would say 
much of anything about the driving conditions, as last thing I 
heard, she doesn't actually drive. She may not even be licensed. 
That's not particularly unusual. I know lots of people in the U.K. 
who simply don't drive because they don't need to. Public 
transporation is much better there than it is here, in general 
(there may be areas of the U.S. which have excellent public 
transporation. I have never lived in one, though). She may have 
gotten a license recently, though, so don't quote me on this.

Okay. So, there are my thoughts (hopefully not terribly 
controversial). If you are a U.S. driver and feel insulted, you 
probably should be. For the most part, I think we're rubbish 
drivers! <evil grin>. Okay - that's not entirely true . . . I would 
only think you *personally* are a rubbish driver if you are in the 
habit of tailgating, speeding up when you see someone signaling to 
change a lane in front of you, or talking on your cell phone while 
you drive. If you do these things, then rest assured that I think 
you're a rubbish driver, and I hope you don't live in my 
neighborhood.

Okay. Rant over. <G>

Wendy




From catlady at wicca.net  Tue Aug 19 04:41:30 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 04:41:30 -0000
Subject: Main List / Good Luck, Melinda / Roundabouts
Message-ID: <bhs9pq+k0mr@eGroups.com>

Does the automated e-mail sent to everyone who clicks to join our 
Y!Group give the URL of the OoP FAQ (thank you, Grey Wolf, for 
writing it!) as well as the VFAQ?

Grey Wolf wrote:

<< Cat, let me tell you that you're one of my favourite posters, and 
the first one to actually identify by name and eagerly read when I 
joined. If you hadn't been the one in Chat to welcome me, I would've 
never stuck there, either. >>

Wolfie! How nice to see you! Congratulations on the girlfriend. I 
shouldn't have begged for compliments, but I am basking in the warm 
glow of your compliment.

Cindy C. quoted Deranimer:

<<I simply would not go over there if I didn't know that all of the 
TBAYers -- Elkins, Cindy, Eileen, Dicentra, Marina, Pip -- would be 
coming too, because, quite frankly, those are the best posters. >>

and added:

<< The only way to know is to set the list up and see who drops by, 
I guess. (Oh, and I'd add quite a few names to the list of people I 
miss ::waves to Catlady::). >>

*basks happily*

Is anyone in touch with Elkins? She hasn't posted in a while -- I
 used Yahoo!mort's search to find her latest post, 2/21/2003. I hope 
she knows that not only has she become archetypal in TBAY, but people 
are still quoting her essays.

Heidi wrote:

<< Actually, I 'keep up' with the main list by hunting down your 
weekend posts - I hope it gives me a cross section of discussion 
topics! >>

Ooh, I feel flattered. 

It's not *really* a *cross* section, as I don't reply to "why didn't 
Harry see the thestrals?" posts and lately I haven't been responding 
to How Many Students? posts, and also I don't reply to posts which 
have already been adequately replied to by others. 

Elle wrote:

<< (my personal least favorite) the number of students at Hogwarts.) 
>>

Ouch! You probably are glad that I don't keep posting my long rant on 
that subject once a week.

RSFJenny wrote:

<< I, personally, was so intimidated I researched stuff in Fantastic 
Posts before I dared post anything to the list! :) >>

Admirable! Kudos to you. 

Grey Wolf wrote:

<< I've been doing some maths. Pre-OoP, we had 42% of the archives 
full. Two months later we have 52%. At current rate we will fill the 
list in ten months. Less if the posting rate continues to grow, and 
even less if something is not done about non-snipers (a one line post 
suddenly is 17k big). >>

Moderators can delete posts from the archive. Can they edit posts in 
the archive so as to preserve the one line that's new? If not, maybe 
HPfGU needs a new rule that posts can be involuntarily deleted for 
severe snipping violation.

Steve bboy_mn wrote:

<< 4.) Give old links to Newbies- As bad as Yahoo Search capabilities 
are (I just spent hours searching for one of my own posts) it would 
be nice it the long term members made the effort to refer Newbies 
back to existing posts that answered their question or dealt with the 
same subject. >>

Yes, it would, but it takes way much TIME just to READ all the posts, 
more to reply, and MUCH MORE to Y!search out the remembered good 
posts from ... 10,000 posts ago? The best I can manage is to refer 
people to Fantastic Posts.

Cindy C wrote:

<< Completely re-work the old VFAQs to reflect the repetitive 
questions folks are asking right now, and then send it out to every 
member. >>

When James Redmont suggested on Main List that there should be a Fact 
FAQ, I suggested off-list that he write it, and he said he'll do it. 
Could some MEG contact him to avoid duplicate effort?

<< Prepare a document explaining the HPfGU customs on snipping, with 
examples, and send that out >>

That is the ADMIN post on Snipping ("no, not Shipping") that gets 
posted occasionally, but apparently not read by the violators.

KathyK is:

<<hoping the feelings of unwelcomeness go away quickly and that I 
don't sound too whiny >>  

You sound like you need a hug. *hugs Kathy* Your Main List posts are 
cool.

Melinda wrote:

<< This is the situation. My father has not paid child support for 
years. We have a warrant for his arrest in this state, California >>

Good luck sorting him out, Melinda!

Wendy St John wrote:

<< As for roundabouts, I'm really surprised that someone you know was 
complaining about them. >>

Yes, on another list, a Brit wrote:

<< In Britain, the roundabout has been perfected as an efficient 
traffic junction. Unlike some types of traffic circle, the traffic on 
the roundabout has priority over traffic entering so it does not fill 
up with traffic and jam. The traffic goes round in a clockwise 
direction, which would be anti-clockwise if we drove on the right.

Today traffic has become so heavy at some large roundabouts, that 
traffic lights have been installed at the entry junctions.

The are also small roundabouts and some places such as Swindon there 
is a ring of small roundabouts called the magic roundabout. See
http://www.swindonweb.com/life/lifemagi0.htm

See also
http://engr.oregonstate.edu/~taekrtha/round.html
http://www.roundaboutsusa.com/intro.html
http://www.therecord.com/links/links_0303271031.html
http://www.ci.federal-way.wa.us/depts/pw/traffic/roundabout.htm
http://www.vicpark.org/kent_roundabouts.htm   >>




From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 04:44:01 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 04:44:01 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems - new problem identified
In-Reply-To: <bhqv9m+82oo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhs9uh+itp5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C.":

<BIG SNIP>
 (Grey Wolf said:)
> > And once the pendings are streamlined, get a few sub-elves with 
> >little or no mod powers to help identify those posters that are 
> >breaking the rules outside moderated status. Some mod could start 
>a list of offenders, and if a name gets called too much (like for 5 
> >different posts) put them back to moderated immediately.

<BIG SNIP>

 (Cindy C.)
> I think the list administrators should close the list to new 
>posting for one week (or longer) and should use the time to 
>regroup. Invite new elves, train them, and give them jobs.  Review 
>the posting since OoP to find repeat offenders and place them back 
>on moderated status.  Completely re-work the old VFAQs to reflect 
>the repetitive questions folks are asking right now, and then send 
>it out to every member.  Prepare a document explaining the HPfGU 
>customs on snipping, with examples, and send that out.  That sort 
>of thing.
<Snip end of Cindy C's post>.

A Goldfeesh:
Now I believe Cindy C. has a -Wonderful- idea!  Give the list a 
break for a week up to a month. Give the Mods a breather to regroup.
Let people know where the archive Yahoo lists are to skim through 
them to keep them entertained.  I know I enjoyed skimming through 
them when HPFGU was slower. :)

Then I was going to suggest this but Joywitch beat me to it:<SNIP> 
>4.  Send out more Special Notice Admin Posts.  Some people 
>just need 
>to be reminded that there are rules they have to follow.  Or 
>send 
>mass ADMIN offlists to the people who don't seem able to 
>remember the 
>rules.

I agree- remind the list more often of the rules, emphasizing 
snipping and one-liners.

Then there was a suggestion of individual "oldbies" on their own, 
without Mod authorization, remind erring posters of the rules. 
However, as Melody pointed out, someone might be corrected by 
several "oldbies" and feel jumped on.  I know in that situation I'd 
feel offended as a new or old member. 

However, if some people (who didn't want to or have time to be a 
full time Mod) were deputized into a sub-group to remind posters of 
mistakes. This way a single poster wouldn't get hit with a bunch of 
corrections.

A (really an Amy, too) Goldfeesh
(who also thanks the Mods for all the work they put into this site 
also and who loves the way the opening page of HPFGUs webview has 
been remade with the Spiffy links.)

I would also like to thank Cindy C. for putting me in the OT TBay a 
while back too.  Thank you!  (Hangs head in shame as she hasn't done 
this before)




From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 04:59:38 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 04:59:38 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems - new problem identified
In-Reply-To: <bhs9uh+itp5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhsarq+hvdi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "ameliagoldfeesh" 
<ameliagoldfeesh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C.":
> 
> <BIG SNIP>
>  (Grey Wolf said:)
> > And once the pendings are streamlined, get a few sub-elves with 
>little or no mod powers to help identify those posters that are 
>breaking the rules outside moderated status. Some mod could start a 
>list of offenders, and if a name gets called too much (like for 5 
>different posts) put them back to moderated immediately. 
<BIG SNIP>

 A Goldfeesh- immediately hanging her head in shame (agan) because 
she meant to put a big "Yes, I agree with Grey Wolf" after quoting 
him.  And to avoid a one-liner, I'd like to say that I wouldn't like 
the idea of seperating out into more sister-list subgroups.  No, not 
even for Shipping- even though it drives me nuts the number of 
Shipping posts I delete. (No offense meant to Shippers, it's just 
not my thing.) Nor would a list for new members be good, I agree 
it'd seem elitist and I might miss out on wonderful new posters.

One way I've found to handle the list volume is to get individual 
mails and delete them based on topic (and occasionally posters).  
I've also started deleting nearly any posts that are 5k or smaller- 
once again it depends on the poster.  

A Goldfeesh
(wondering if Dylan's new movie Masked and Anonymous will ever come 
to Iowa)




From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 04:59:44 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 04:59:44 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems - new problem identified
In-Reply-To: <bhs9uh+itp5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhsas0+8ls1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "ameliagoldfeesh" 
<ameliagoldfeesh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C.":
> 
> <BIG SNIP>
>  (Grey Wolf said:)
> > And once the pendings are streamlined, get a few sub-elves with 
>little or no mod powers to help identify those posters that are 
>breaking the rules outside moderated status. Some mod could start a 
>list of offenders, and if a name gets called too much (like for 5 
>different posts) put them back to moderated immediately. 
<BIG SNIP>

 A Goldfeesh- immediately hanging her head in shame (agan) because 
she meant to put a big "Yes, I agree with Grey Wolf" after quoting 
him.  And to avoid a one-liner, I'd like to say that I wouldn't like 
the idea of seperating out into more sister-list subgroups.  No, not 
even for Shipping- even though it drives me nuts the number of 
Shipping posts I delete. (No offense meant to Shippers, it's just 
not my thing.) Nor would a list for new members be good, I agree 
it'd seem elitist and I might miss out on wonderful new posters.

One way I've found to handle the list volume is to get individual 
mails and delete them based on topic (and occasionally posters).  
I've also started deleting nearly any posts that are 5k or smaller- 
once again it depends on the poster.  

A Goldfeesh
(wondering if Dylan's new movie Masked and Anonymous will ever come 
to Iowa)




From catlady at wicca.net  Tue Aug 19 05:12:23 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 05:12:23 -0000
Subject: merchandise
Message-ID: <bhsbjn+q92r@eGroups.com>

I got a Domestications catalog in my junk mail today (as a cat, I 
like looking at pictures of comfy beds the same way that my spouse 
likes looking at pictures of naked women) and was astonished to find 
a Halloween section, with bedsheets and bedspreads and table settings 
... click on http://tinyurl.com/kg0y to look at it.

(that's www.tinyurlcom 's translation of: 
http://www.domestications.com/feature_prods.asp?dept%5Fid=27000&featur
e=season&sub%5Ffeature=Season+%2D+Halloween#feature )

"Halloween Cotton Puff / Comforter Set and Cotton / Jersey Knit 
Sheet Sets" has bedsheets with a pattern of flying broomsticks, 
witchy hats, owls, and bats. 





From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 19 06:11:10 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 06:11:10 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhrd6c+bnh8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhsf1u+kli3@eGroups.com>

Lorrie wrote:


> Okay, we all know the Main List is having problems, and as a 
relative
> newbie (but someone who hasn't been on Moderated Status for a long
> time), and someone who joined Pre-OotP, let's face facts.
> It's not really that people haven't read the FAQ, it's that 
they're so
> excited. I nearly went nuts reading all the 'laws of the group' 
before
> I even thought of posting....guess what. I *don't * really 
remember a
> single word of them. They didn't call it the BHF for nothing. It 
was
> BIG, it was Humungous, and it was Filed...right back in the grey
> matter with what happened in Second Grade :)

Now me (Wendy):

Well, I have just a couple of things I yet want to add to this 
discussion, and this seemed a good place to start, as I particularly 
want to address this comment, as, (in my also not-so-humble 
opinion), you've put your finger on the button.

People aren't reading/following the posting guidelines.

But I very strongly disagree with your attitude that this is okay, 
somehow, and to be expected because the document is "too" long, and 
so of course all of us have filed the information back with info 
from second grade.

When I joined this group, it was very clear to me that the group was 
serious about these rules. I read them carefully, and for a year and 
a half have done my best to follow them. I've made mistakes - but 
never because I didn't KNOW the rules. My mistakes were 
carelessness - forgetting to snip, or forgetting to change the 
address of a post I meant to send privately, whatever. It is not 
impossible to have a good working knowledge of the material in the 
posting guidelines. I have. And I'm certainly not the only one. A 
few months ago, it seemed to me as though the vast majority of 
listees had this knowledge, and we were each doing our best to 
follow the rules.

Let's face facts: the group has rules. When each of us joined, we 
were made aware of these rules. When did that change? Just because 
someone is new and "enthusiastic" doesn't mean they should be held 
to a lower standard than the rest of us. Sorry to rant at you like 
this (I know you aren't the only one who feels this way), but I'm 
just not sure that membership is this group should be a "right" of 
anyone who wants to sign up. I always felt it was more of 
a "privelege." That's the point of being on moderated status, after 
all. You have to prove that you can follow the rules in order to be 
given the privelege of unmoderated status. Now, it seems to me that 
there are more than a few people posting to the list who really 
haven't earned this privelege, because they simply aren't following 
the rules. Laziness, enthusiasm, can't be bothered to learn the 
rules - doesn't matter. There is no excuse for this, because it 
shows a lack of respect for the rest of us when they behave this way.

It seeems to me that it's a problem of list volume-to-elves ratio 
here. Moderation just isn't working the way it used too because 
there are so many messages. But I resent the implication that those 
of us who've been doing our best (and reading, trying to remember, 
and following the guidelines) should now be subjected to reams of 
posts from people who refuse to do these things.

I'm not saying "newbies" here. I'm talking about rule-breakers. And 
I don't feel that someone who isn't willing to follow the rules has 
some sort of "right" to post here. 

I'm finding myself really angry about this, so it probably sounds 
harsh. Maybe I am taking this too seriously. But, on reading it 
through a second time, I realise that I really do mean what I'm 
saying, so to tone it down would seem a bit ingenuous of me.

Okay - just a couple more quick things . . . 

I think it was Abigail who suggested we post, post, post:

I have been. And some of my posts have gotten a fair response. But 
there have been others that have received no response whatsoever. 
Not little throw-away comments, either. Posts that I've taken a 
great deal of time to write (and follow all list rules in doing so). 
Then, nothing. Okay. Maybe my comments were just stupid or boring. 
Or maybe I'm just so brilliant that there was nothing left to say 
<g>. But it's still a bummer. If the list volume is so high that 
things I've worked hard to write are going unread, that's not a good 
use of my time and effort. And I've been guilty of the other side of 
this - I've read some excellent posts, and thought - wow, I should 
offline this person. And then didn't, figuring someone else would. 
Maybe that just hasn't been the case. In my favour, I have sent a 
LOT of offline comments. Just not all the ones I felt moved to send.

So what's to be done? I love the idea of having newcomers to the 
group have a period of time in which they can only read posts 
without replying. A week or two. Just to get the gist of both the 
tone of discussions here, the proper way to go about formatting and 
posting messages, and also an idea of what actual topics have been 
discussed. 

But that's not really going to address the situation now, as it 
hardly seems fair to put people who've already joined onto this sort 
of probation. So, I think the mods just need to really crack down on 
violations, reject posts that are improper, and put repeat offenders 
back on moderated status. I feel a bit guilty saying this, as none 
of the work would fall to me. I'm not a mod. Then again, I've never 
been asked to become one (I'd have been willing), nor have I ever 
seen mentioned anywhere the process for becoming one. 

Okay. I think that's about all I have. Thank heavens, you're all 
thinking! <G> I don't intend to leave the list forever, but as I 
mentioned earlier, I am going to take a brief web-view break. It's 
rather liberating to wake up in the morning and not find 123 posts 
in my inbox waiting to be dealt with. 

(Guess I lied in my post to you, Saitana, didn't I?) <G>

Wendy






From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 19 06:17:10 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 06:17:10 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhsf1u+kli3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhsfd6+s6g8@eGroups.com>

Oops - I wrote:

> I'm finding myself really angry about this, so it probably sounds 
> harsh. Maybe I am taking this too seriously. But, on reading it 
> through a second time, I realise that I really do mean what I'm 
> saying, so to tone it down would seem a bit ingenuous of me.

I meant "disingenuous," of course.

Just goes to show that even someone who is trying really hard can 
make a mistake. I read the thing through three times before I posted 
it. At least I'm aware that I've broken the rule about checking your 
work to make sure it's what you want to say before posting it. <G> 
Hope you won't all hate me now. <G>

Wendy





From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 07:40:44 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 00:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Roundabouts & a bit of a driving rant
In-Reply-To: <bhs92s+osq5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030819074044.25135.qmail@web21109.mail.yahoo.com>

Wendy, in part:
> I think there's also a bit of a
> different attitude towards driving, 
> at least in some places. You asked
> specifically about Scotland, and 
> I found Scottish drivers to be FAR
> more courteous, certainly VASTLY  
> more curteous than the drivers I
> encounter on highways in the Bay 
> Area now.

<grin>  Oh my yes...can't imagine the 
drivers on the Bay Area or Los Angeles 
highways display the kind of courtesy 
I saw on the roads in the UK: my cab 
drivers navigated the long, winding, 
and very dark country roads while 
carefully turning their high beam down 
EVERYtime we met oncoming traffic.

Okay, part of that MAY be to prevent 
blinding them to our whereabouts...

Wendy, in later part:
> Public transporation is much better
> there than it is here, in general 
> (there may be areas of the U.S. which
> have excellent public transporation.
> I have never lived in one, though).

Are you sure?  One area of the US that 
has great public transportation is 
San Francisco, which is at the heart of 
the Bay Area.  I must have read half of 
the public library on the buses...how I 
miss my FastPass...  NYC is another.

There must be other cities...

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 08:34:53 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 01:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: "Tales of the City" + anagrams {from HPFGU-Movie - Re: HP on TV}
In-Reply-To: <bhorcv+m18e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030819083453.2531.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com>

The ever-so-under-the-weather Kirstini, 
responding to a suggestion that HP be 
made for the smaller screen, in part:
> It's an interesting idea. My mind
> jumped immediately to the television
> series of my other favourite book
> series, Tales of the City, which was
> produced by Channel 4 in Britain, 

Well now, Channel 4 did have a BIT of 
help from PBS and Showtime et al from 
this side of the pond... <g>

Anyway, <tangent alert> I'm so glad you 
mentioned Tales of the City!  Finally I 
can ask this of someone - which anagram 
is more clever:

JKR's for TR/LV ~or~ 
Armistead Maupin's for you-know-who 

(oh dear, are we in spoiler territory)?

Here's another anagram: 

"Armistead Maupin" = "Is a Man I Dreamt Up" 

believe it or not!  Quick, someone check 
out the anagrams for JKR's names.  <g>

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Aug 19 09:29:16 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:29:16 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems and Solutions
In-Reply-To: <1061248666.85E1DD0@s5.dngr.org>
Message-ID: <bhsqlc+k54d@eGroups.com>

Heidi wrote:

> We have Paul Kippes.
> 
> None of you probably know him, but without him, hpfgu would not 
exist as 
> we know it. Back about 3 years ago this week, Paul created a 
wonderful 
> program that harvests messages from a yahoogroup and reuploads them 
> elsewhere. As I understand it, Paul has a full archive of this 
list, at 
> least through the spring. When the need arists, Paul can upload the 
> first X thousand messages to a different Yahoogroup where they'll 
serve 
> as an archive. For a look at what this looks like, visit the 
> hpfgu-archives yahoogroup.

For anyone who finds that there are insufficient posts on the main 
list at the moment to keep them busy, the urls are:

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives/files/
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives2/files/
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives3/files/

I believe there are three Yahoogroups because of Yahoo's limitations 
on space in the Files area of a group.

David




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Aug 19 14:02:51 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:02:51 -0000
Subject: Main List / Good Luck, Melinda / Roundabouts
In-Reply-To: <bhs9pq+k0mr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhtamb+jq4i@eGroups.com>

Catlady wondered:

> Is anyone in touch with Elkins? She hasn't posted in a while -- I
>  used Yahoo!mort's search to find her latest post, 2/21/2003. I 
>hope she knows that not only has she become archetypal in TBAY, but 
>people are still quoting her essays.

She is terrific, isn't she?

A few of us hear from her off-list now and then, so she hasn't left 
the community completely.  She's taking a break for RL reasons.  I 
suspect she'll be back.  I certainly hope so, anyway. 

<lowers voice to a whisper>

I know she read OoP in one sitting and liked it.  One of these days, 
I'd love for her to tell me what to think about it.  :-D

Cindy




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 19 14:57:02 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:57:02 -0000
Subject: merchandise
In-Reply-To: <bhsbjn+q92r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhtdru+3tk0@eGroups.com>

How fun!  Thanks for the link, Catlady.  I love Halloween 
stuff...never thought of a shower curtain, though!  

Yesterday I was at the craft store looking at the Halloween 
decorations and found a fuzzy black owl with wire feet (so it can 
perch dramatically on household objects, I suppose) which I had to 
have.  It's so ugly, it's cute.  It has some real black feathers on 
it, golden eyes, and a sprinkling of dark green glitter on it.  

I'm working on a name...   ;-)

Tracy




From glcherry at bellsouth.net  Tue Aug 19 22:09:17 2003
From: glcherry at bellsouth.net (stardancerofas)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:09:17 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhsf1u+kli3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhu76d+v39f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Wendy" <hebrideanblack at e...>
wrote:
> BIG SNIP> I am keeping a very big part of Wendy's post in this, just
for understanding , :)
> Now me (Wendy):
> 
> Well, I have just a couple of things I yet want to add to this 
> discussion, and this seemed a good place to start, as I particularly 
> want to address this comment, as, (in my also not-so-humble 
> opinion), you've put your finger on the button.
> 
> People aren't reading/following the posting guidelines.
> 
> But I very strongly disagree with your attitude that this is okay, 
> somehow, and to be expected because the document is "too" long, and 
> so of course all of us have filed the information back with info 
> from second grade.

> Lorrie Says (okay take deep breath and don't get pissed off) "my
attitude that this is okay? Excuse me Wendy, but never did I say that
this was okay, no did 'my attitude' imply that. Also there is a
discussion on the Main List about the InterNet and Understanding...you
might have a look at that one. I'm only suggesting that people CALM
DOWN a little about breaking the rules. I'm NOT saying being lazy is
alright, just a little expected. I do think a little less of the
Veterans who are JUST as guilty. And yes, to a degree it is to be
expected. OotP opened a whole new can of worms for everyone. It ain't
just new people  doing alot of this but people who have been around a
whole lot longer than you or I have. Is it right? No, has it happened Yes!

Wendy:
> When I joined this group, it was very clear to me that the group was 
> serious about these rules. I read them carefully, and for a year and 
> a half have done my best to follow them. I've made mistakes - but 
> never because I didn't KNOW the rules. My mistakes were 
> carelessness - forgetting to snip, or forgetting to change the 
> address of a post I meant to send privately, whatever. It is not 
> impossible to have a good working knowledge of the material in the 
> posting guidelines. I have. And I'm certainly not the only one. A 
> few months ago, it seemed to me as though the vast majority of 
> listees had this knowledge, and we were each doing our best to 
> follow the rules.

> Lorrie says (no being snide I promise :) ) I'm so glad that someone
on the planet has the brain power to remember EVERYTHING. I *wish* I
could do that.
Wendy said:
> Let's face facts: the group has rules. When each of us joined, we 
> were made aware of these rules. When did that change? Just because 
> someone is new and "enthusiastic" doesn't mean they should be held 
> to a lower standard than the rest of us. Sorry to rant at you like 
> this (I know you aren't the only one who feels this way), but I'm 
> just not sure that membership is this group should be a "right" of 
> anyone who wants to sign up. I always felt it was more of 
> a "privelege." That's the point of being on moderated status, after 
> all. You have to prove that you can follow the rules in order to be 
> given the privelege of unmoderated status. Now, it seems to me that 
> there are more than a few people posting to the list who really 
> haven't earned this privelege, because they simply aren't following 
> the rules. Laziness, enthusiasm, can't be bothered to learn the 
> rules - doesn't matter. There is no excuse for this, because it 
> shows a lack of respect for the rest of us when they behave this way.

> To which Lorrie replies: If you feel this strongly, then the only
solution is to email the OWNERS of the list and keep emailing them
until they do something about it. Membership is a privilege, not a
right, but the only one who can do anything are the MODs, List-Elves,
and OWNERS.

Wendy said:
> It seeems to me that it's a problem of list volume-to-elves ratio 
> here. Moderation just isn't working the way it used too because 
> there are so many messages. But I resent the implication that those 
> of us who've been doing our best (and reading, trying to remember, 
> and following the guidelines) should now be subjected to reams of 
> posts from people who refuse to do these things.
> 
> I'm not saying "newbies" here. I'm talking about rule-breakers. And 
> I don't feel that someone who isn't willing to follow the rules has 
> some sort of "right" to post here. 
> 
> I'm finding myself really angry about this, so it probably sounds 
> harsh. Maybe I am taking this too seriously. But, on reading it 
> through a second time, I realise that I really do mean what I'm 
> saying, so to tone it down would seem a bit ingenuous of me.

> Lorrie says: Have a coke and a smile, or a cup of tea and a biscuit.
You're really getting too worked up over something that *will* work
out right. The rules DO need to be obeyed (and that's a line that
unfortunately got edited out of my original post). All I'm saying is
for everyone to quit (pardon the language) bitching about it on list
and start complaining to the MODS and OWNERS. *Nothing* can be done by
us, only them. If the list is our Hogwarts, then Take it to the Heads
of House (the MODS) OR Dumbledore (The Owner).

> >Wendy Wrote:
> So what's to be done? I love the idea of having newcomers to the 
> group have a period of time in which they can only read posts 
> without replying. A week or two. Just to get the gist of both the 
> tone of discussions here, the proper way to go about formatting and 
> posting messages, and also an idea of what actual topics have been 
> discussed. 

> Lorrie: I agree with this option. IF enough of us stand behind it.

Wendy wrote:
> But that's not really going to address the situation now, as it 
> hardly seems fair to put people who've already joined onto this sort 
> of probation. So, I think the mods just need to really crack down on 
> violations, reject posts that are improper, and put repeat offenders 
> back on moderated status. I feel a bit guilty saying this, as none 
> of the work would fall to me. I'm not a mod. Then again, I've never 
> been asked to become one (I'd have been willing), nor have I ever 
> seen mentioned anywhere the process for becoming one. 
> 
> Lorrie again: All I'm going to say one more time, is that in the end
this will straighten itself out. People will learn the RULES, they
will learn to SNIP, they will learn that ONE LINE replies are bad!,
AND I'd be willing to bet money that in awhile, alot of these people
WON'T be here.
hp IS THE hot, new trendy thing right now. Most of those (myself
included) who joined before OotP didn't know about this or any of the
HP lists. I joined, then unjoined in one day. I was a little leery the
first time, didn't want to make a mistake, and thought I wouldn't fit
in. We all fit in, in one way or another, and we all learn from the
Group. Hell, I never knew what a TBAY post was and have now learned
how to do those. Not well mind you, but I am learning!
This is a difficult time for the list, the Mods, List-Elves and
probably Owners as well. Everyone take a deep breath. This is SUPPOSED
to be fun, relaxing, something that drags us away from the insanity of
real life. It will get better! 
Lorrie
(who hopes she hasn't ticked Wendy off, and isn't ticked off at Wendy :) )




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Aug 19 23:31:27 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 23:31:27 -0000
Subject: Disheartened Newbie
In-Reply-To: <bhrehn+phig@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhuc0g+h3qi@eGroups.com>

Hi,

I wanted to take a minute to reply to Kathy because she raises a 
number of good points. . . . 

Kathy:

> Although there seems to be a number of members who don't mind 
>reading posts about the same things and encourage us newbies to 
>post our thoughts, there are also a number of folks who do not seem 
>as welcoming of this sort of thing.  To even read the discussions 
>here on OT about that make me feel I should just keep my mouth 
>shut.  It's quite a slap in the face in a group where I've felt 
>very welcome until now.

Well, it *is* a slap in the face.  You're right.  When we express 
irritation with "newbies" in general, we are basically 
stereotyping.  Am I guilty of it?  <wince>  Probably, and if I 
offended our newer members, I do apologize.

To make it up to you, Kathy, I will cheerfully reveal that I joined 
before moderated status, and I am thankful for that.  I was such a 
*nightmare* new member that I think I'd never have been released 
from moderated status.  I broke every single rule in the book.  
Repeatedly.  I meant well, but just didn't have a clue.

For better or worse, some people are just more patient, kind and 
welcoming than others.  That's to be expected in a group of this 
size.  But the reason this group is so big is that most people are 
wonderful.  They'll find you eventually, I think.

> What I also read is that some folks only read posts from people 
>they know.  Well if that's the case, I should just pack it up and 
>call it a day, shouldn't I?--


Heck, no.

My own practice is that I choose to read posts based on a number of 
factors:  the author (we all do make friends and are interested in 
what the people we know best have to say), the subject, my time 
constraints, whether the post is formatted properly, and most 
importantly, a quick assessment of whether the post will make me 
laugh or teach me something.  That means there are new members I 
read from the moment they join, and older members I hardly ever 
read.  I think that's OK, so long as you, er, don't get much more 
specific than that in stating your personal preferences, if you know 
what I mean.

I think it helps to remember that we were all new members once, and 
we stuck around because someone, somewhere was kind to us and made 
us feel welcome.

Along those lines, I guess I'd just like to caution against sending 
people off-list messages taking them to task about list rules or 
anything else if you can help it.  That's why we have list 
administrators; that is their job, and they have systems in place to 
make sure no one gets duplicate rebukes about mistakes.

Instead, I find it far more rewarding to look for new members who 
*are* doing it right and have interesting things to say.  You 
shouldn't be at all shy about sending someone an off-list praising 
their post if you can't really reply on-list.  Most people are 
absolutely thrilled to receive praise, which makes them feel welcome 
to post more.  

Speaking for myself, I was nervous about how my posts would be 
received, and getting off-list praise really helped me want to stick 
around.  It is also how I made almost all of my close off-list 
friendships, and it is really nice to have those when you get a bit 
bored with the canon.  


> KathyK (hoping the feelings of unwelcomeness go away quickly and 
>that I don't sound too whiny)

Cindy -- who thinks you sound like someone who is very good at 
expressing her thoughts in a reasonable way and will like it here 
just fine




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 19 23:36:18 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 23:36:18 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhu76d+v39f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhuc9i+kvff@eGroups.com>

Lorrie said:
>I'm only suggesting that people CALM DOWN a little about breaking the
>rules. I'm NOT saying being lazy is alright, just a little expected.
>I do think a little less of the Veterans who are JUST as guilty. And
>yes, to a degree it is to be expected. 

Lorrie, I think everyone here on this site *is* being calm.  We are
just concerned.  A few posters not obeying the rules it to be
expected.  But, this is not just a few.  This is becoming an epidemic.


Lorrie wrote:
>(no being snide I promise :) ) I'm so glad that someone on the planet
>has the brain power to remember EVERYTHING. I *wish* I could do that.

Lorrie, Wendy is not talking aobut memorizing everything.  But I think
remembering three basic rules of clip posts to reflect exactly what
you are replying too, no one line posts, and follow basic proper
grammer is reasonable.  

Also know Lorrie, that most of us that are posting on this site *have*
memorized four HP books, two movies, two short school books, and are
working on the fifth really thick book.  I can tell you almost
precisely where to find where Ogg is mentioned in the books, who the
weatherman is in the first book, and how many times Harry's scar has
hurt in each book.  Lorrie, you are dealing with people that *can*
memorize everything in HP and recall it at will.  I think remembering
the rules are within reason to ask when it takes a lot of memory to
follow and participate in all the discussions.


Lorrie wrote:
>If you feel this strongly, then the only solution is to email the
>OWNERS of the list and keep emailing them until they do something
>about it. Membership is a privilege, not a right, but the only one
>who can do anything are the MODs, List-Elves, and OWNERS.

But this is the purpose of OT.  To discuss our concerns in life.  In
love.  In religion.  In this site.  We all love it here.  We really
do, or we would not have stuck around here so long.  Theses are our
friends, and when we have concerns we talk about them.  The list elves
*are* talking back on this thread.  We are discussing this with the elves.


Lorrie wrote:
>*Nothing* can be done by us, only them. If the list is our Hogwarts,
>then Take it to the Heads of House (the MODS) OR Dumbledore (The >Owner).

Hehe, well in the books we so love here on this site, it *is* the
students that ever get anything done.  ::big grin::

Well except in MD....  ::bigger grin::


Lorrie wrote:
>This is a difficult time for the list, the Mods, List-Elves and
>probably Owners as well. Everyone take a deep breath. This is
>SUPPOSED to be fun, relaxing, something that drags us away from the
>insanity of real life. It will get better!

It is a difficult time for the site.  And I think this thread is being
rational, calm, and collect in its discussions.  It is exploring
options, trying to find solutions, and addressing concerns.  That is
all.  It is just the agreed forum to chat together as a group about
concerns not related to canon.  And a thread, I feel, that is making
things happen so that everyone else can see.  We are a united site,
and this thread shows it.  At least to me.


Melody




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Tue Aug 19 23:52:38 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 23:52:38 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhu76d+v39f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhud86+lmjq@eGroups.com>

> > Lorrie Says (okay take deep breath and don't get pissed off) "my
> attitude that this is okay? Excuse me Wendy, but never did I say that
> this was okay, no did 'my attitude' imply that.

On the contrary, Lorrie, the entire initial exposition carried a clear 
undertone of "I don't remember the rules, so what?" that is exactly 
what Wendy pointed out. I didn't actually read it that way, but going 
back right now I see clearly what Wendy spotted. IMO, you should have 
clarified then that you weren't proud of not remembering the rules.

> Also there is a
> discussion on the Main List about the InterNet and Understanding...
> you might have a look at that one. I'm only suggesting that people
> CALM DOWN a little about breaking the rules. 

You're certainly not going to achive that by shouting at us. I can 
asure you that my hearing is quite good, no need to raise the voice. 
See, I'm concerned. I'm no mod, but I can smell a flame war as well as 
the next one, and this topic is starting to burn. Please calm down, 
this list is for calmed discussion of HP off-topic.

And I don't agree - "calming down about breaking the rules" is, at this 
point, a bad move. The rule breakers are already taking too many 
liberties. You don't want to allow them even more.

> I'm NOT saying being
> lazy is alright, just a little expected. I do think a little less of
> the Veterans who are JUST as guilty.

I disagree. Veterans, from my point of view, aren't breaking the rules 
- they aren't posting at all. See, my definition of newbie is one that 
breaks the rules and has done so since they joined. Thus, some aren't 
ever newbies, and others are newbies for years. Maybe there are a 
couple of people that have been around for a few months and are 
breaking the rules. Sincerely, they are just a statistical footnote 
compared to the newbies (my definition) that are breaking rules right 
now.

> And yes, to a degree it is to be
> expected. OotP opened a whole new can of worms for everyone. It ain't
> just new people  doing alot of this but people who have been around a
> whole lot longer than you or I have. Is it right? No, has it happened > Yes!

Well, I for one (and I've been around a long time) didn't expect this 
to happen. I didn't go all dizzy in the head because of the new book. 
My main theory - MD - was given more canon than almost any other, and 
that didn't make me go bonkers. I did raise my fist in victory sign 
after the "need to know" canon and after Dumbledore's lying, but that's 
it. And it certainly didn't spill on to my posts. No, I don't think 
blatant rule-breaking should be expected or allowed or ignored.

> > Lorrie says (no being snide I promise :) ) I'm so glad that someone
> on the planet has the brain power to remember EVERYTHING. I *wish* I
> could do that.

Interesting... Most of the members of this list carry in their heads 
the entire canon of HP. At present, this includes 4 books (of 
above-average length), 2 schoolbooks and countless interviews. OoP is 
being examined now, so it's canon is shacky at this point. We don't 
remember every comma and full stop, but we do remember the essence and 
the main ideas. Compared to that, the HBF was a small thing.

> To which Lorrie replies: If you feel this strongly, then the only
> solution is to email the OWNERS of the list and keep emailing them
> until they do something about it. Membership is a privilege, not a
> right, but the only one who can do anything are the MODs, List-Elves,
> and OWNERS.

You know, that is exactly what we are doing here. This entire thread is 
a calmed discussion of possible solutions to a problem. Two or three 
mods/list elves are participating, and many more are reading it. There 
is no owner, so you cannot write to him, but we have always felt that 
discussing this in the open rather than everyone submit half-cooked 
ideas directly. Look at my own participation: I suggested two lists, 
but now I realise that it wouldn't work, because another list-member 
has pointed out vital mistakes. Yes, the mods/list elves make the final 
decission, but we're all grown-ups here, we can all come with the right 
answer, and discussing things is the best way to achieve that. 

> > Lorrie says:
> You're really getting too worked up over something that *will* work
> out right.

It's nice to have optimistic people. Unfortunately, I'm one of nature's 
pessimistics, and sincerely, from my PoV things won't get better, 
particularly if left unchecked. Rule breaking is self-maintaining. The 
more rules are broken, the easier it becomes. IMO, things *won't* work 
out right just because. Measures need be taken, and the mods are 
swamped enough as it is. I think that giving them a hand is not that 
bad. I know several of them. They are just human, and have so many 
things in their plate right now that any contribution helps.

> All I'm saying is
> for everyone to quit (pardon the language) bitching about it on list
> and start complaining to the MODS and OWNERS. *Nothing* can be done
> by us, only them. If the list is our Hogwarts, then Take it to the
> Heads of House (the MODS) OR Dumbledore (The Owner).

Excuse me for saying this, but so far the only bitching seems to have 
come from your corner. Yes, Wendy might have been a tad out of tone, 
but everyone else has been maintaining proper tones all along. And, as 
I have mentioned before, we are talking to mods here. They don't live 
in some other, superior, plane of existance. They are here with us. 
Post little because they don't have time, but I have on the very best 
authority that they *are* listening. Oh, and we *can* do something: we 
can come up with solutions, thus making the mods' life easier.

> > >Wendy Wrote: I love the idea of having newcomers to the 
> > group have a period of time in which they can only read posts 
> > without replying. A week or two.
> 
> > Lorrie: I agree with this option. IF enough of us stand behind it.

See, I don't like this. Anyone willing to join but that cannot be 
bodered to obey the rules will join, wait two weeks (without reading, 
or reading very little) and then start as if nothing had happened. 
Besides, at this time, all they would see is that rules in this list 
can be ignored, since everyone is doing so. Which is exactly what we 
*don't* want.

> Lorrie again: All I'm going to say one more time, is that in the end
> this will straighten itself out. People will learn the RULES, they
> will learn to SNIP, they will learn that ONE LINE replies are bad!,
> AND I'd be willing to bet money that in awhile, alot of these people
> WON'T be here.

Maybe. But then again, maybe not. Wishful thinking and sitting around 
for things to get better works wonderfully when things do get better. 
But if they don't, you've wasted a lot of time. Yes, maybe this will 
blow out, but as a pessimist I've learned to hope for the best but 
prepare for the worst, which is what we were trying to do.

> This is a difficult time for the list, the Mods, List-Elves and
> probably Owners as well. Everyone take a deep breath. This is
> SUPPOSED to be fun, relaxing, something that drags us away from the
> insanity of real life. It will get better! 
> Lorrie

Or then again, it might not. And if things don't get better, and we 
don't do anything now, then it might be too late to do anything at all.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, who wishes to calm things down, but is very aware that he is 
probably not the best to do so.





From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 00:34:51 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 17:34:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OT]-Main list idea
Message-ID: <20030820003451.48205.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com>

Ok, this idea has sort of been looked at but not
totally.  And this is something I just came up with so
I won't mind if anyone tells me it would never work,
no feelings will be hurt.  

Ok, well we've determined that one of the biggest
problems is that the MODS and Elves are overloaded
with work.  And then we said that we can't have
individuals messaging rule-breakers off-list because
if too many people did it the person might not take it
well.  
So what I was thinking was that list members could
email the ADMIN team when we see a broken rule and
then they could just send them one email (or if we did
switch to putting people back on moderated the person
could be put on moderated).  That way people won't be
bombarded with email for making one mistake, and it
won't just be the ADMIN team looking out for rule
breaking.
The glaring problem I see is that multiple people
would be emailing offenders names to ADMIN, but if the
offenders name was in the subject line, then they
could just delete the extras w/o even looking at them
so minimal time would be lost.

Just a thought,
~Kathryn

P.S. You now have permission to poke as many holes in
my idea as humanly possible....go!

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 00:57:15 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 00:57:15 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhud86+lmjq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhuh1b+r30b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> > > Lorrie Says 

> >  I'm only suggesting that people
> > CALM DOWN a little about breaking the rules. 
> 
> You're certainly not going to achive that by shouting at us. I can 
> assure you that my hearing is quite good, no need to raise the 
voice. 
> See, I'm concerned. I'm no mod, but I can smell a flame war as 
well as 
> the next one, and this topic is starting to burn. Please calm 
down, 
> this list is for calmed discussion of HP off-topic.
> 
> And I don't agree - "calming down about breaking the rules" is, at 
this 
> point, a bad move. The rule breakers are already taking too many 
> liberties. You don't want to allow them even more.
> 
(snip)

 
> > > Lorrie says:
> > You're really getting too worked up over something that *will* 
work
> > out right.
> 
> It's nice to have optimistic people. Unfortunately, I'm one of 
nature's 
> pessimistics, and sincerely, from my PoV things won't get better, 
> particularly if left unchecked. Rule breaking is self-maintaining. 
The 
> more rules are broken, the easier it becomes. IMO, things *won't* 
work 
> out right just because. Measures need be taken, and the mods are 
> swamped enough as it is. I think that giving them a hand is not 
that 
> bad. I know several of them. They are just human, and have so many 
> things in their plate right now that any contribution helps.
> 

[snip]
 
> > Lorrie again: All I'm going to say one more time, is that in the 
end
> > this will straighten itself out. People will learn the RULES, 
they
> > will learn to SNIP, they will learn that ONE LINE replies are 
bad!,
> > AND I'd be willing to bet money that in awhile, alot of these 
people
> > WON'T be here.


> 
> Grey Wolf, who wishes to calm things down, but is very aware that 
he is 
> probably not the best to do so.

I snipped as much of this excellent post as I could while still 
preserving one thread of argument by grey wolf, with with I agree.
If no oversight is performed, and posters are left to post as they 
please in disregard of the rules, you will not see things settling 
down, but a kind of Gresham's Law "Bad money drives good money out 
of circulation") for posts.  As Grey Wolf mentioned, veterans will 
simply not post, and as the percentage of irresponsible posts rises, 
ever more of the better-behaved psters will move elsewhere.

Haggridd





From glcherry at bellsouth.net  Wed Aug 20 01:47:05 2003
From: glcherry at bellsouth.net (stardancerofas)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 01:47:05 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bhujup+knul@eGroups.com>

Okay, this is for all those (Namely Grey Wolf ) :) who think that I am
the one who's wrong. Let's forget tone, attitude, and 'talent' . And
yes I do have knowledge of the books and the movies, and the 2 school
books. Just for the sake of argument. Do I remember everything all at
one time? No. But, I do try, and when in doubt I look it up.
I do have the perfect solution for the Main List Problem.........

Let's form a posse, rope the offenders, take out behind the barn (and
you can use mine) and beat the crap out of them!

It's a joke people. (Just to make sure).
And for those who don't like jokes (I went Marauding in the Full Moon,
and Mars is Bright tonight), it all comes down to one question.....

What are you prepared to do? What can we do about the Main List
Problem? I really do believe that it will calm down. I do believe that
people will...eventually....get around to reading all the rules, and
following them. If they don't if they keep doing what they are doing,
people will not respond to them. It's simply a matter of time.

Lorrie 




From editor at texas.net  Wed Aug 20 02:29:55 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 21:29:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] [HPFGU-OT]-Main list idea
References: <20030820003451.48205.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003401c366c2$f1e34d80$836463d1@texas.net>

This is me just speaking as Amanda, not on behalf of the list admins.

Kathryn:

> Ok, this idea has sort of been looked at but not
> totally.  And this is something I just came up with so
> I won't mind if anyone tells me it would never work,
> no feelings will be hurt.
>
> Ok, well we've determined that one of the biggest
> problems is that the MODS and Elves are overloaded
> with work.  And then we said that we can't have
> individuals messaging rule-breakers off-list because
> if too many people did it the person might not take it
> well.

I really must be out of the loop. When did we say that?

> So what I was thinking was that list members could
> email the ADMIN team when we see a broken rule and
> then they could just send them one email (or if we did
> switch to putting people back on moderated the person
> could be put on moderated).  That way people won't be
> bombarded with email for making one mistake, and it
> won't just be the ADMIN team looking out for rule
> breaking.
> The glaring problem I see is that multiple people
> would be emailing offenders names to ADMIN, but if the
> offenders name was in the subject line, then they
> could just delete the extras w/o even looking at them
> so minimal time would be lost.

People already do this. They email the owners address pointing out actions
they'd like taken. It *does* help, we appreciate it. Maybe you pointing it
out will increase volume and help us keep a handle on things better.

Thanks for a constructive direction for a change! (watch out for that mob
with the torches and pitchforks, off on your left)

~Amanda




From lita at sailordom.com  Wed Aug 20 02:43:03 2003
From: lita at sailordom.com (Lita)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 20:43:03 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhujup+knul@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BB683C57.4BBF%lita@sailordom.com>

On 8/19/03 7:47 PM, "stardancerofas" <glcherry at bellsouth.net> wrote:

> What are you prepared to do? What can we do about the Main List
> Problem?

Well, right now, I think that all the people participating in the thread are
prepared to offer constructive solutions and discuss them--which is really
the first step. Many people have offered to help out and have even offered
their services as list elves. It's not like this is a thread where everyone
is just complaining without offering any solutions or is not willing to be
proactive.

> I really do believe that it will calm down. I do believe that
> people will...eventually....get around to reading all the rules, and
> following them. If they don't if they keep doing what they are doing,
> people will not respond to them. It's simply a matter of time.

I will have to respectfully disagree on this, though. I don't think just
sitting back and doing nothing will in any way help the situation. Why would
people get around the reading the rules after they've already been
participating? Tolerating posters breaking the rules gives the impression
that the rules don't matter. I find it highly unlikely that rule-breaking
posters are going to go "oh, I guess I should read the rules and follow them
now" at some point in the future.

I disagree with the idea that the rule-breakers will want to learn the rules
because they won't get responses to their posts. The thing is, there's
simply too many of the rule-breakers for that to happen--it will simply go
on as it has been, with the many rule-breakers responding to each other.

What needs to happen is that those posters breaking the rules need to know
that 1.) the list has rules and 2.) the list rules have to be followed. As
someone who's moderated and owned large mailing lists, I think that the only
way this is going to happen is through guidance and strong, proactive
moderation. My experience tells me that it's not just going to magically fix
itself.

I really liked the idea of closing the list for a short period of time--say,
a week. This would allow the mods to regroup. It would also send a strong
message to the list that many of the current posting behaviors are not
acceptable. This would also give time for the moderators to make something
of a fresh start.

I also liked the idea of not allowing new members to post at first (I think
two weeks was the number I saw). That will cut down on the over-enthusiasm,
IMO. Frankly, I think it will also turn off those individuals who subscribe
and want to participate with no intention of reading or following the rules.
But those who really want to participate in the reasoned, intelligent
discussion that HPforGrownUps is known for will certainly be willing to
stick around. It can be a period for new members to lurk and become familiar
with the rules. (And it's technically possible, as well--there is an option
in YahooGroups that allows you to disable posting by specific members. I
think the initial moderated posting status should still be employed--this
would then be a time for new members to become accustomed to posting on the
list.

For those members that are already posting and breaking the rules, I think
the only way to deal with that is with strong moderation--something like a
warning first, and placement on moderation after a second offense. The
messages from those on moderated status would have to be gone over to keep
offenses from reaching the list. There's some logistical issues that would
have to be worked out (for example, making sure people only got a warning
from one elf, keeping track of who has warnings, etc.). It's doable, but it
will take a lot of work and will probably require some more list elves. :)
But I really think that it can, and should, be done--or, at the least,
*something* has to be done.

For now, I'll add my name to those willing to become a list elf. :) I've
been a member for almost a year, and while I don't post much, I've been
really distressed at the downturn in quality of the main list. I'm willing
to help however possible.

Lita




From catlady at wicca.net  Wed Aug 20 02:56:00 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 02:56:00 -0000
Subject: merchandise
In-Reply-To: <bhtdru+3tk0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhuo00+kl4k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Tracy" <neonsister at a...> 
wrote:

> Yesterday I was at the craft store looking at the Halloween 
> decorations and found a fuzzy black owl with wire feet (so it can 
> perch dramatically on household objects, I suppose) which I had to 
> have.  It's so ugly, it's cute.  It has some real black feathers on 
> it, golden eyes, and a sprinkling of dark green glitter on it.  
> 
> I'm working on a name...   ;-)

How about Phineas Nigellus?




From catlady at wicca.net  Wed Aug 20 02:55:17 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 02:55:17 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <BB683C57.4BBF%lita@sailordom.com>
Message-ID: <bhunul+pfp0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Lita <lita at s...> wrote:
 > 
> I really liked the idea of closing the list for a short period of 
> time--say, a week. This would allow the mods to regroup. It would 
> also send a strong message to the list that many of the current 
> posting behaviors are not acceptable. This would also give time for
> the moderators to make something of a fresh start.

I was thinking about this suggestion last night (while supposed 
to be sleeping) and I noticed that one advantage of a week without 
HPfGU posts *except* the one Special Announcement Admin post 
explaining that the list is being closed to new posts for just one 
week for everyone to review the rules about snipping and to review 
the FAQs, then people would at least NOTICE the Special Announcement 
because it wouldn't get lost in a torrent of other posts.




From judy at judyshapiro.com  Wed Aug 20 05:40:44 2003
From: judy at judyshapiro.com (Judy)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 05:40:44 -0000
Subject: Disheartened Newbie; read-only status?
In-Reply-To: <bhrehn+phig@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhv1ks+t8cp@eGroups.com>

KathyK said:
>>> I have been a member here since the beginning of June. <<<

Kathy, in my book, you aren't a newbie anymore.  Still, in case you
feel that you are new, I want to make clear why my comments on main
list problems have focused on the new members.  It's not that I feel
the problems are primarily the fault of new members -- as I've said,
the rule-breaking posts on the main list are mostly coming from
established members.  The reason I've focused on new members is that 
our current system for handling new members is incredibly
time-consuming.  We send each new member a welcoming email, answer
their questions, review all of their posts for at least a few days,
edit or send back all posts that break rules, keep track of all good
posts, keep track of which new members have enough good posts to get
off of moderated status, discuss which members with marginal posts
need to stay on moderated status a while longer, change the Yahoo
status of each member who "graduates" off of moderated status, and
send an email to every new member who graduates.  Lately, this has
been taking so much time that we can't do much else, and the main list
has developed problems as a result.  Established members are aware
that the new members are taking up all our time, and some of them
resent it.  

The reason I liked the idea of a different list for new members is
that it would allow elves to devote more time to the main list as a
whole.  However, people here have brought up a lot of problems with a
separate "newbie list", so I'm now less enthusiastic about the idea. 

KathyK also said:
>>>> some folks only read posts from people they know. Well if that's
the case, I should just pack it up and call it a day, shouldn't
I
 To
think I am not given the time of day just because I haven't been
around for ages is upsetting.<<<

All of us were new once, and as Eloise noted, few people post actively
on the main list for long.  Just write good posts, and people will
read them.  (Well, to the extent that anyone can read anything with
the list volume as high as  it is now.)  What usually happens is, a
new member will see an interesting post, the new member writes a good
response to it, and voila -- the new member is now on the list of
"people to read" of the members who were following that thread.  
That's how just about everyone with a "following" on the main list
acquired it, and when list volume is at normally levels, it usually
doesn't take very long.  


Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several
people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only" status
for a certain amount of time.  Think back to when you first joined
HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this policy?  Would
you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able to
post? 

I'm thinking that putting new members on "read only" status for a
while this would encourage new members to read the list and learn the
rules before posting, and it might encourage the really impatient
people, who want to talk but don't want to listen, to go elsewhere.
Both of these things would lower the amount of pending messages to
review, which would free up elf time to do other things such as
dealing with rule-breakers. 

Having new members spend some time on read-only status also might cut
down on the "Why didn't Harry see the thestrals?" type of post.   My
impression is that most good posters do spend at least a few days
"lurking" before they post -- I believe that one exceptional member
actually read the whole main list, which had maybe 35,000 messages at
the time, before her first post.  (I'll bet a lot of you can guess who
that is!) The people who say  "Hey, I bet no one else noticed that
Harry should have seen the thestrals at the end of GoF" are the ones
whoa ren't willing to read before they post. So, this rule might tend
to keep out the rule-breakers, while not discouraging good posters. 
What do people think of having new members lurk for a while, and if
you like the idea, how long should they have to wait before making
their first post? 

-- Judy Serenity




From judy at judyshapiro.com  Wed Aug 20 05:53:47 2003
From: judy at judyshapiro.com (Judy)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 05:53:47 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems - new problem identified
In-Reply-To: <bhqc82+ud17@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhv2db+jg9j@eGroups.com>

I know that I'm late on responding to this, but I wanted to give
some more information on what the HPfGU list elves do, and why
we've been so swamped. 

Grey Wolf said:
>>>>Pendings are tying up most of the elves's time, and is serving no
purpose. The intention of pendings was to stop people from breaking
the rules, but the rules are being broken anyway. The way I understand
it, not all of the people blatantly breaking the rules in the main
list can be unmoderated. Some must be moderated, and their low-quality
posts are getting through. <<<<

Very few problem posts get through pendings. [For anyone who doesn't
know, new members at HPfGU start off on "moderated status", where all
of their posts must be reviewed before being forwarded to the list. 
The place where new members messages wait to be reviewed is called the
"pendings queue," and the messages to be reviewed as called
"pendings."]  You can check for yourself that most problem posts come
from unmoderated members. If you click on "view source" on a post in
webview, it will tell you if the post was approved or not.  (The name
of the elf who approved the post, if any, will be shortly about the
actual message text.)  If the post was not approved, that means the
member is unmoderated.  (If you see problems posts that were
moderated, feel free to drop us an email and let us know!) 

 Just because a member has been around for a while, doesn't
necessarily mean that member follows the rules.  So, I disagree with
your claim, Grey Wolf, that moderators would not be needed on the main
list if we had separate list for newbies.  If the problem were just
with the new members, we would have been able to fix it already. 

 A big part of the problem is that sloppiness is contagious.  When
members see someone else not snipping and so forth, some of them start
to feel that they can do it, too. No question, we need to fix this
ASAP. 

As for pendings serving no purpose, let me tell you that these days,
most pending messages are either rejected or edited (usually for
snipping) before being allowed on the main list.   So, if we let new
members post without having their posts reviewed first, we'd have a
lot more posts that really break the rules.  Also, it's not clear how
new members would even learn the rules.  A lot of new members just
don't seem to pick up the rules by reading them.  If we don't tell
them exactly what they are doing wrong, they won't change.  This is
one of the reasons why doing pendings takes so long -- each time a
message breaks one or more rules (which is most pending messages) the
elf has to send an email to the new member, explaining what needs to
be changed. 


Cindy said, regarding when she was a Mod:
>>>On a busy day, I might check the pending messages section and find
eight messages -- many days there would only be two or three when I
checked in. If there were eight, I'd roll my eyes and dive in, and it
might take 30 minutes just to handle those pending messages. Handling
eight, I believed, was a lot of work. 
I have heard that pending messages activity is through the roof now --
there are sometimes over 50 pending messages at one time. This means
that some list administrators are probably killing themselves to keep
up, which leads to burn out, errors and long delays before approved
messages hit the list. This cannot be any fun. <<<

Let me add that Cindy was amazingly efficient at doing pendings and
that I consider doing 8 in 30 minutes to be fast.  And yes, we now
sometimes have 50 or more messages pending.  I've done 52 in a row by
myself, and I know I'm not the only elf who has done this many in one
go.  This meant sending something like 30 messages to newbies, each
one explaining how their post needed to be modified.  It also meant
recording the names of the 22 or so good posters, so they could get
credit towards "graduating" from moderated status.   

So, pendings overload is a main reason why we are having trouble
dealing with problem posts by established members, and why so few of
the elves post on the main list these days.   It is also why any
solution that requires more messages to go through pendings isn't
going to work.  In other words, ideas such as having all messages go
through review by elves, or keeping new members on moderated status
for a longer time, aren't practical because they require just too much
work, even if the pool of elves were expanded.

Cindy gave a good description of how new members get off of "moderated
status" in post 17595.  The system still works pretty much the
same as
she described it, except that we now have a provision aimed at getting
members off moderated status after three days of good posts, if none
of those posts had any problems at all.  

Joywitch said:
>>> Are there list policing responsibilities that non-Admin Team
members could do that might help? I occasionally send offlists to
people answering informational questions. Would you like non-Admin
team members to engage in more offlisting to answer questions, provide
helpful suggestions, etc.? <<<

Yes, there are.  One of the elves (Ali, maybe?) recently suggested
here that members should email the List Admins to tell us of bad
posts, and some of the members here have also said they would like to
do this..  In fact, we are thinking of formalizing this system
--recruiting list members to read all the posts on the main list, and
report back on the ones that break the rules.  Then, one of the elves
could email the rule breaker, and repeat offenders would be put back
on moderated status.

While we are working on such a system, list members can just go ahead
and do this informally.  Say that you happen to go to the main list
and read the most recent 40 posts.  You notice that 10 of these posts
have serious problems.  Send us an email saying "I read posts #786586
through #786626, and found that the following posts had problems." 
Then, give us a list of the problem posts, and what was wrong with
them. You don't have to say much -- just "Post #786586, snipping. 
Post #786589, rude.  Post #786601, one-liner."  (I am deliberately
avoiding using real post numbers, to avoid casting aspersions on any
actual posts.)   This would really help.  The address is
HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com (omit the space.)  I see that
Kathryn Wolber just sent us an email about some one-liners she found
-- thanks, Kathryn!

Providing helpful suggestions or answering factual questions is great.
 However, Kathryn Wolber wondered:
>>>  Alot of people have said veteran members could e-mail rule
breaking newbies offlist with a friendly reminder.  My question is, if
I did that and someone took it not so kindly could I get in any kind
of trouble with the list?<<<

I think that if you were polite and the recipient were just being
unreasonable, then no, you would not be in any trouble.   However, it
really requires diplomacy to tell someone that they have broken the
rules without offending them. It is very easy for this sort of thing
to devolve into a flame war. In fact, the elves are thinking of having
just a few elves designated to send this sort of email, so as to give
the task to the elves that are best at being diplomatic.  So, it's
certainly OK to volunteer answers to questions, tell people where to
find information, and so forth.  But, if someone is driving you crazy,
I think it would be better to tell the elves, rather than trying to
handle it yourself.  Also, if the elves are told, they can put the
person back on mod status if the problem continues. 

In terms of other suggestions, how do people feel about closing the
main list for a week?  I think Rita the Catlady is right that it might
be the only way to get the attention of some of the rulebreakers.   I
don't think that it would be enough by itself, though, to really
address the main list's problems. 

Hmmm
 lots of interesting ideas have been proposed here!   Thanks
to everyone who has made suggestions.  Also, a big "You're Welcome" to
those who have thanked the list admins!

In terms of what else individual members can do right now, please keep
presenting your suggestions, either here or via email to the elves.  
  I also liked a lot of Steve's ideas  (post #17953.) 

-- Judy Serenity




From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Thu Aug 21 06:18:30 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 16:18:30 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
References: <bhujup+knul@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <011101c367ac$0b8139c0$7c984cca@Monteith>

Relative Newbie here, so please don't bite (not too hard anyway) LOL!

Just a note on snipping...

Those who do snip and only leave the "parts of the post relevant to the
point they are making" are then often pounced upon by those who made the
original post because "you left out the part where I said..."

Just an observation...

Nox
~ Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.




From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Wed Aug 20 07:08:33 2003
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 20 Aug 2003 07:08:33 -0000
Subject: New file uploaded to HPFGU-OTChatter 
Message-ID: <1061363313.2159.81704.w73@yahoogroups.com>


Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the HPFGU-OTChatter 
group.

  File        : /The Traitors Blood/CHAPTER ONE.doc 
  Uploaded by : firebolt1982 <firebolt1982 at yahoo.co.uk> 
  Description : Chapter One 

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/files/The%20Traitors%20Blood/CHAPTER%20ONE.doc 

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

firebolt1982 <firebolt1982 at yahoo.co.uk>
 







From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 20 07:36:59 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 07:36:59 -0000
Subject: Disheartened Newbie; read-only status?
In-Reply-To: <bhv1ks+t8cp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhv8er+q1jn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Judy" <judy at j...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several
> people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only" 
status
> for a certain amount of time.  Think back to when you first joined
> HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this policy?  Would
> you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able to
> post? 

My main reason I had for looking for an HP forum, was to ask a most 
burning and "original" question - why didn't Moody portkey Harry via 
Harry's toothbrush (or some other mundane object)? HPFGU didn't have 
any rules, big files or anything then, so I just went ahead and 
posted my question. Didn't lurk, didn't read previous posts. A 
typical bumbling newbie. At that point, I certainly wouldn't have 
stayed if I was on read only status. 

I'm not sure it would encourage new members to read the list. Maybe 
it would simply encourage them to go elsewhere (which is a type of 
solution, actually <g>). A question, when someone on moderated status 
wants to posts a question that is fully answered in the FAQs, do the 
moderators tell him/her that and send the post back? If not, maybe 
they should - or would it be too time consuming or something? 

Finally, this thread has focused on how to deal with rule breaking 
members. I have to say that in my opinion, that's not the list's main 
problem. The main problem is volume, volume, volume. Even if each of 
the hundred or so posts a day were both rule abiding and brilliant, 
it would still be almost impossible (for most of us) to read them 
all, or even filter them effectively. My main filter now is, and I'm 
a bit ashamed to admit it, who is the author. I'd like to get to know 
the new members, but I'm overwhelmed by the sheer volume. And I'm on 
web view. I don't know how people deal with getting hundreds of e-
mails a day. I really don't. 


Naama 




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 08:21:20 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 08:21:20 -0000
Subject: Disheartened Newbie; read-only status?
In-Reply-To: <bhv1ks+t8cp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhvb20+k658@eGroups.com>

Judy Serenity:

Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several
people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only" status
for a certain amount of time.  Think back to when you first joined
HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this policy?  Would
you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able to
post? 

KathyK:

I just checked to see when I made my first post as compared to when I 
joined.  I joined on June 5.  I made my first response on June 13.  I 
then made two on June 19, with a bunch more after the OOP release.  
Those first weren't of much substance.  If I hadn't been so geared up 
for OOP, I think I would have lurked much longer than a week before 
posting.  I usually like to get the hang of things before plunging in 
headfirst.  

While I had a general grasp of the rules I think hanging around and 
watching a while longer would have been beneficial.  I spent some 
time reading some of the Fantastic Posts and learning what ESE!Lupin 
was all about, but if I didn't have anything to do but read, I would 
have spent more time with these areas rather than eagerly looking for 
a thread I could add something to.  

And in reading the current messages I tried to absorb how people 
wrote and responded to posts.  Sometimes it sunk in with my own 
responses and sometimes it didn't.  I've been looking through some of 
my previous messages to see if I've been breaking the rules (I think 
I'm getting paranoid <g>).  While I make an effort to snip and clean 
up my posts, I can see that I still need to be more ruthless and more 
careful in that area.  

Reading more neat and tidy messages, without my own excitement 
pushing me to throw my thoughts out there, I think I might have 
learned this lesson more quickly and I might have been more 
consistent with my posting format. 

I am a patient, easygoing person so I wouldn't have minded waiting a 
couple weeks to begin posting.   Besides, couldn't new members, in 
the interim, check out what's happening on the OT and Movie lists, 
something I did not do for at least a month?  Even then it was only a 
cursory look.   

KathyK (coming out firmly in favor of read-only status for new 
members) 

...and because I just can't shut up tonight...

On a separate note, I want to thank everyone who responded so kindly 
to my concerns.  I appreciate the time you took to listen, help me 
out, and explain a few things.  I also want to apologize to everyone 
for panicking and overreacting a bit.

Have a great ni--er, morning!  How do I always manage to stay up 
three hours later than I intended to?




From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 10:49:44 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 10:49:44 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <011101c367ac$0b8139c0$7c984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bhvjo8+ba5c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> Relative Newbie here, so please don't bite (not too hard anyway) LOL!
> 
> Just a note on snipping...
> 
> Those who do snip and only leave the "parts of the post relevant to the
> point they are making" are then often pounced upon by those who made the
> original post because "you left out the part where I said..."

Nox, 

Could you give a for-instance?  Does this pouncing take place on
 or off-list?  Generally speaking, it can be difficult to find a 
representative quote from a given post, and I suppose some 
posters could be concerned about being misrepresented (about a 
year ago, I wrote a post which started with a rather inflamatory 
statement which I then qualified in the ensuing two paragraphs.  
So many people latched on to that first sentence, and quoted it 
without the stuff that followed, that it has become synonimous 
with a mind-set that many list members find very disagreeable, 
and which I don't hold myself).  However, pouncing as a response 
is probably (again, I'm speaking without knowing the specifics of 
the case) not acceptable.

If you find yourself having problems quoting briefly from a post, 
try to find the most representative paragraph, and offer an 
apology for not quoting the whole thing.  You can summarize 
the rest of the quoted post, or suggest that your readers go and 
read the whole thing.

Abigail




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 20 11:06:05 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 11:06:05 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhunul+pfp0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhvkmt+otan@eGroups.com>

Cat wrote:
> I was thinking about this suggestion last night (while supposed 
> to be sleeping) and I noticed that one advantage of a week without 
> HPfGU posts *except* the one Special Announcement Admin post 
> explaining that the list is being closed to new posts for just one 
> week for everyone to review the rules about snipping and to review 
> the FAQs, then people would at least NOTICE the Special Announcement 
> because it wouldn't get lost in a torrent of other posts.


Very good reason, but I also want to chime in, as I run off to work
with toast in my mouth after this, many of the battleharden posters on
this site *have* already, or are going to, take a break for a while. 
We are closing the site down in our mind.  We have done that for two
months kind of to wait this wave out because everyone is excited and
we cannot blame them.  But now it is not going a way and the excuse of
OoP enthusiasm has waned.    

Last time we closed the site, it was because of a book.  It was just a
dam though and caused a complete circus afterwards drowning *all*.  If
we shut the site down now, when everyone's ethusiasm has waned, we
might get it through to those that will stick around anyway that rules
are important.  Also that it takes a lot to make this a good site.   

Also, those that are here only to post their ideas and not interact,
would move on, which frankly, to me, is a good thing.  The point of
this forum is to have HP discussion.  If you are not here to do that,
then we should not nurture an environment that caterers to you.

OK have to run, but tear this apart as you see fit.  :D


Melody




From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Thu Aug 21 11:08:52 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:08:52 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Main List Problems
References: <bhvjo8+ba5c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003701c367d4$9dd1b5c0$6c984cca@Monteith>


Hi Abigail


> Could you give a for-instance?  Does this pouncing take place on
>  or off-list?

Sorry. It's just something I noticed on-list occasionally, and no, no one
has said anything to me off-list. "Pouncing" was perhaps the wrong word to
use, denoting an attack, but if someone is refering to a post and only wants
to address a particular line or paragraph, well, there's nothing wrong with
that. But some people, on occasion, take umbrage that a line is left out.
Generally, I use a quote (as above) and just assume (which I perhaps
shouldn't) that most people will remember enough of the post referred to to
know what I'm raving on about. LOL!


> If you find yourself having problems quoting briefly from a post,
> try to find the most representative paragraph, and offer an
> apology for not quoting the whole thing.  You can summarize
> the rest of the quoted post, or suggest that your readers go and
> read the whole thing.

Yes, this is the best idea. I'm quite daunted by the whole "messages"
section, trying to find the relevant post in there is like, well, its the
*worst*.

Thanks for the feedback.

Nox
~Never knock on Death's door:
Ring the bell and run. (He hates that!)




From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 11:25:04 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 04:25:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Disheartened Newbie; read-only status?
In-Reply-To: <1061369117.1244.58509.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030820112504.94991.qmail@web11005.mail.yahoo.com>

>    From: "Judy" <judy at judyshapiro.com>
> 
> Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several
> people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only"
> status
> for a certain amount of time.  Think back to when you first joined
> HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this policy?  Would
> you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able to
> post? 

I'd say different people join a group for different reasons. Many join
because they have something to ask right away, and if they can't find
the answer in the FAQs or by searching the archives (or if they don't
have the patience to do that, which is a more common case), they want
to barge in immediately. For those, a temporary read-only status would
be a terribly cold shower.

Me? My story is, I was researching some stuff for my fics, and ended up
in the FAQ site. That was how I learned about the existence of the
HPfGU. Since many faqs had links to messages I could only read by being
a HPfGU member, I became a member. I got the BHF, was deeply impressed
and intimidated by it, and thought I would never have the guts to post
to the group ("My gosh, what if I make a mistake and get a Howler????")


But the debate in the list was, at the time, irresistible. Eventually
(after about one month of lurking, I think) I decided I really had to
join in for real and sent a long, carefully planned post about the
portrait of fat characters in the books. Got no response from the list,
but Elkins replied to me off-list with a very gentle "me too" (because
those are supposed to be off-list, and I knew that because I *had* read
the BHF). From them on, I lost my fear to post, but not my fear to make
mistakes. So I only posted when I had something to say, and was always
very careful about it.

And I thought that was how the game was supposed to be. I loved the
list precisely because of that. Because it wasn't a list for grown-ups
only in the name, and it didn't have a formal age restriction,
apparently aware that we can find maturity in teenagers and immaturity
in fifty-year-olds. No, the list simply had rules that demanded the
posters to be as mature as we could possibly be, and a moderating team
willing to enforce those rules. 

It is true that those who will enforce rules won't always be seen as
"nice". Moderators who are too worried about being nice usually have
very chaotic groups, as they don't have the heart to tell people to
change their habits. And I used to think the highest things about this
group because the MEG had the guts to do what they had to do to keep
things working as planned. I even changed the way I moderate a group of
mine, inspired by the way things were managed here. 

So the answer for your question, Judy: it wouldn't have made any
difference to me. I probably would still have waited (as I did) a lot
more than only two weeks before posting. I would have posted only when
I was ready to post, after assimilating the rules and learning the
group's dynamics, and not a moment before.

After all, it is one of the classical rules of Netiquette for groups:
lurk for a month, learning how the group works, before posting for the
first time. Just because very few people remember that one (or know
about it), it doesn't mean it's not a good advice.


Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Aug 20 13:05:34 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:05:34 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhujup+knul@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bhvrmu+4bmc@eGroups.com>

Lorrie wrote:
> Okay, this is for all those (Namely Grey Wolf ) :) who think that I
> am the one who's wrong. Let's forget tone, attitude, and 'talent'.And
> yes I do have knowledge of the books and the movies, and the 2 school
> books. Just for the sake of argument. Do I remember everything all at
> one time? No. But, I do try, and when in doubt I look it up.

Ok - so you look it up. That's the next best thing. Do you also look up 
the rules before posting? Check if you are breaking any rules? See, I 
don't care if you can or cannot remember the entire canon. I just 
pointed out that, in this list, those that post regularly *do* carry 
the whole canon in their heads, and that, compared to that, remembering 
the rules is not only easy, it is expected. You were sent a copy of the 
rules when you joined. I still have it, and re-read it often, to keep 
up to date. When the HBF was shortened, I kept both.

See, I'm not attacking you, nor criticising your lack of memory. Only 
pointing out that, in this list, you're expected to follow the rules. 
You can learn them, reason them out or simply check them after 
finishing each post. The way you do it is up to you, but I don't think 
it is unreasonable of anyone here to expect all the others to follow 
the rules. And of course, if you find it unreasonable, no-one is 
forcing you to stay. Create another HP discussion, put your own rules, 
and run it without forcing anyone to follow them. One word of caution, 
though - such rule-less groups of HP have been tried and degenerated 
*very* fast in the past. That is why I'm concerned about what is going 
on. I don't want HP4GU to follow the same course.

> What are you prepared to do? What can we do about the Main List
> Problem? 

I'm prepared to have a nice, calm discussion where everyone expresses 
their point of view and reasons it out, so a solution as perfect as can 
be thought out is achieved. For the last couple of days, we've been 
discussing back and forth, examining and cross-examining each other's 
ideas, and we've got to the point were some of them look feasible. 
Problems were identified, causes isolated and solutions proposed, 
teared to bits, reconstructed, refined and given a polish. Not all 
solutions worked, but that's to be expected. And, IMO, this has proven 
much better for the main list than your "wait and see" idea.

> I really do believe that it will calm down.

Yes, I heard you the first time. But then, even as now, there is no 
reasoning behind it in the post. You might have experience in this 
matter or some knowledge of the ways these things work, but if such is 
the case, you haven't told us about it. And it's a little difficult to 
believe a theory without the reasoning, I'm afraid. 

You did mention being in another list were things got better - Star 
Wars. Well, I can give you two places were it didn't: EV Nova forum and 
the WoW forum. What they are about is irrelevant (videogames, in case 
anyone is particularly interested). Both became awashed with newbies 
just like this one and they never got better. The first one (last I 
heard) was closed down, deleted and rules heavily changed. The other is 
still going, but calmed discussion is impossible at this point.

Furthermore, several listees have written their point of view. Me, 
Haggridd, Melody, etc. We've pointed out that rule breaking is 
self-encouraging. That an ambient were rules are broken without 
consequence encourages to keep breaking them. And we've pointed out 
that this is what is happening right now. You have not given our 
arguments any counter-arguments, and thus they still hold.

> I do believe that
> people will...eventually....get around to reading all the rules, and
> following them. If they don't if they keep doing what they are doing,
> people will not respond to them. It's simply a matter of time.
> 
> Lorrie

On the contrary. People that are breaking the rules are answering one 
another - and as long as they do so, they won't feel compelled to read 
the rules. Because some of those rules - like snipping - are unheard of 
in other forums, people from such forums just copy the enrtire old post 
(or their browser does it for them) and they just scroll to the bottom 
and add "LOL" and post. The original member gets it, copies-pastes and 
send backs with "thanks". This takes, tops, five minutes. A careful 
post takes, on average, an hour. In that time, there have been 12 one 
liners. Probably even more. It is self perpetuating because those that 
write one-liners and can't be bodered to snip answer each other and 
transform the rules, from those written (de jure) to those obeyed (de 
facto). 

To give a RL example: in my own country, something similar happens. 
No-one respects speed limits, and since no-one does and police seldom 
give out speeding tickets, they keep doing it. It's been like this for 
20 years now. Sincerely, waiting for people to read the rules didn't 
work in that case, I don't see why it should work in this one. Care to 
express your reasoning?

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Aug 20 13:57:59 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 13:57:59 -0000
Subject: Main list ideas/problems
In-Reply-To: <003401c366c2$f1e34d80$836463d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bhvup7+eovc@eGroups.com>

> Kathryn:
> > And then we said that we can't have
> > individuals messaging rule-breakers off-list because
> > if too many people did it the person might not take it
> > well.

This is Amanda just speaking as Amanda, not on behalf of the list 
admins.
> I really must be out of the loop. When did we say that?

It wasn't said by mods, it was reasoned a few posts back - and I 
whole-heartedly agree. One thing is getting an off-list mail telling 
you off for rule breaking and signed "<name> Elf, for the Admin Team", 
and another very different is getting told off by fellow members, with 
no official authority, for breaking the rules. Particularly if you get 
20 of those. Howlers are bad, but at least they're official.

> People [...] email the owners address pointing out actions
> they'd like taken. It *does* help, we appreciate it. Maybe you
> pointing it out will increase volume and help us keep a handle on 
> things better.

But then, of course, is that you'll suddenly get 10 times as many 
letters to the admins that you'll have to go through, check to see if 
the person being pointed was really breaking the rules, and decide what 
to do about it. That's the bad part of it, but I have to say that of 
all the cons of all the ideas so far, this is the least bad. I think it 
has many possibilities, in fact. Particularly coupled with a couple 
others.

Lita:
> I really liked the idea of closing the list for a short period of 
> time--say, a week. This would allow the mods to regroup. It would 
> also send a strong message to the list that many of the current 
> posting behaviors are not acceptable. This would also give time for 
> the moderators to make something of a fresh start.

I like this idea myself. I think that, in fact, it's already 
unnoficially happening. Many of the old-timers have fled the main list 
(hopefully not forever, although some might). Closing down the list 
would send a clear message: "This is *enough*". Those that are trying 
to obey the rules would hopefully understand the need for it, those 
that are breaking the rules might get bored and go to some other place 
were they can shout their ideas all they want without breaking rules. 
And of course, that would give the mods time to implement a new 
strategy, get maybe a group of rules-enforcers into place from their 
own number, and maybe remind everyone just how the list is suposed to 
work.

Judy Serenity:
> Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several 
> people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only" 
> status for a certain amount of time. Think back to when you first 
> joined HPfGU. Would you have been upset if we had had this policy? 
> Would you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able 
> to post?

I would've left for a week, come back and posted in whichever thread 
seemed interesting. So that measure, in my case, would've been 
innefective. That said, my first post was one of my theories (not the 
first posted, the first written - didn't get through) on the working of 
magic (AK, to be exact). Not your usual newbie question. As usual for 
my posts of this kind, it was long, it was involved, and no-one 
answered it. The next one was on the working of the Veritaserum (this 
one *did* get answered. It sunk, in fact. Oh well, you can't win every 
round). But then, I'm not a good lurker - as most of you probably know. 

However I always read as much as I can on a subject before posting, 
because I try not to repeat what others have said. So I think I'm not 
the archetypical rule-breaker (I do have problems with English, 
particularly irregular verbs and double letters, but the list has been 
forgiving so far, for which I'm extremelly thankful).

> Grey Wolf (me!) said:
> <<<< The way I
> understand it, not all of the people blatantly breaking the rules in
> the main list can be unmoderated. Some must be moderated, and their
> low-quality posts are getting through. <<<<
> 
> Very few problem posts get through pendings. [...] You can check for 
> yourself that most problem posts come
> from unmoderated members. [...](If you see problems posts that were
> moderated, feel free to drop us an email and let us know!) 

I stand corrected - sorry for the assumption. However, I still hold 
that the rule-breakers were allowed to be unmoderated a little too 
soon. That's why I said the moderated status is not working - you're 
suposed to learn the rules while under it, so you don't break them once 
out. And it is not happening. Granted, my first ideas for solutioning 
it weren't exactly viable, but I think colectively we're getting there.

>  Just because a member has been around for a while, doesn't
> necessarily mean that member follows the rules.  So, I disagree with
> your claim, Grey Wolf, that moderators would not be needed on the
> main list if we had separate list for newbies.  If the problem were
> just with the new members, we would have been able to fix it already. 

Errr... I never claimed that. Ummm... I discarded my idea of separate 
lists publicly a few posts back, but you know me - I can't let this 
sort of missinformation lying around. The idea behind two lists was to 
substitute the pending system (which is active moderation) for a pasive 
moderation. It doesn't work, but that's unimportant know. The important 
point was that is was a way to give the mods *more time* to moderate 
the main list, since it needs moderating because the unmoderated 
members are breaking the rules. My reasoning went: mods should be 
telling those people off. Why aren't they doing it? Because they've got 
too many pendings, mostly. How do we solve that? No more pendings. And 
from there, the idea of newbie list was born. But, as I say, that is 
out of the window now. The reasons against it are too bad, IMO.

>  A big part of the problem is that sloppiness is contagious.  When
> members see someone else not snipping and so forth, some of them
> start to feel that they can do it, too. No question, we need to fix
> this ASAP.

Yep, my point precisely. Of course, since mods still have pendings, 
mods are still short on time. That's why I think a week (or two) of 
closed list might give you time to regroup and grow and apply 
solutions. It is in esence the same reasoning as before - get those 
pending messeges out of the way, give you time to do something else.

I realise that I might be centering too much on pendings, but as I 
understand it, right now, they are so time consuming that it saps away 
all energy, which is why the main list has gone unsupervised (and has 
fallen into chaos).

> As for pendings serving no purpose, let me tell you that these days,
> most pending messages are either rejected or edited (usually for
> snipping) before being allowed on the main list.   So, if we let new
> members post without having their posts reviewed first, we'd have a
> lot more posts that really break the rules.  Also, it's not clear how
> new members would even learn the rules.

OK, another clarification: I said they're not serving any purpose 
*right now*. I loved the idea of moderated status, and was the reason 
why I joined in the first place. But *right now* the moderated status 
is not managing it's purpose of teaching the new members the rules. I 
wish it did work, but it doesn't. I've come to realise since that post 
that the trouble is not at the moderated status end, but rather in what 
you brilliantly call "contagious sloppiness". I'm sorry I lashed out 
against the moderated status - I really like it, and I can asure you I 
don't want it to disapear. But at the time, it seemed one of the 
problems to solve, since it seems to be broken.

> If we don't tell
> them exactly what they are doing wrong, they won't change.  This is
> one of the reasons why doing pendings takes so long -- each time a
> message breaks one or more rules (which is most pending messages) the
> elf has to send an email to the new member, explaining what needs to
> be changed. 

I wonder... could you simply send a brief note, like "one liner" or 
"FAQ-covered" or "spelling"? This would make it much faster (although, 
admitedly, it would be breaking a rule youselves), by leaving them to 
work out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Then again, I think 
Cindy mentioned that such sort messages don't work, since they're 
ignored or even worse discussed. That's why I think closing the list 
might be better. Give you breathing room, stop pendings from 
accumulating, etc.

> So, pendings overload is a main reason why we are having trouble
> dealing with problem posts by established members, and why so few of
> the elves post on the main list these days.   It is also why any
> solution that requires more messages to go through pendings isn't
> going to work.  In other words, ideas such as having all messages go
> through review by elves, or keeping new members on moderated status
> for a longer time, aren't practical because they require just too
> much work, even if the pool of elves were expanded.

That's clear enough, so that's out for now. But then, I've always aimed 
at reducing pendings. The question is what to do about it. And, right 
now, I think that this might be a good emergency plan:

1) Close the list for, say, two weeks. Elves take a day free to rest 
(or even more), then decide on the strategy to follow.

2) The strategy is put into motion with a silent list. For example, a 
group of sub-elves (elven enforecers? goblins?) track down and list 
rule-breakers in the main list, puts the worst back into moderation.

3) The mods send notices explaining all this to everyone, and train a 
few new elves to helps with pendings.

4) the list re-opens, hopefully with a calmer ambient. The enforcers 
keep an eye on the list, while the pendings are dealed with an 
increased group.

This plan (which is not mine, I nicked and borrowed from many members 
in this thread) *might* work. But then, at the time I thought a newbie 
list would work too, so I'm not 100% sure. Anyone willing to poke 
holes?

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf

PD: "Taking from one is stealing. Taking from many is research" Murphy 
Law. I still would like to be able to tag by name the members who fist 
posted those ideas in the 4-step plan, but I don't have that much time, 
sorry. All of you who came up with them, *thank you!*





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Wed Aug 20 15:14:22 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 17:14:22 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Disheartened Newbie; read-only status?
In-Reply-To: <20030820112504.94991.qmail@web11005.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030820112504.94991.qmail@web11005.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200308201714.23104.silmariel@telefonica.net>

Judy:
> > Think back to when you first joined
> > HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this policy?  Would
> > you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able to
> > post?

Morgan D:
<<After all, it is one of the classical rules of Netiquette for groups:
lurk for a month, learning how the group works, before posting for the
first time. Just because very few people remember that one (or know
about it), it doesn't mean it's not a good advice.>>

ESL warning

I didn't even knew what nettiquette was when I joined this list, in 
April. I saw PS, then read it and decided to roleplay in Howgarts, so I 
searched for canon resources. After finishing the Lexicon, I craved for 
essays and follow the links to the faqs. I even read HPfGU Wildest 
Speculations, but I waited months to join, and I did it just to be able 
to read those fantastic posts.

I wouldn't have had a problem with a read only period, if just politely 
explained that the huge amount of information that this list deals with 
requires a learning period, just not to ask a question that was 
answered yesterday. 

I had seen groups (my friends were in then) that run wild, so I expected 
strong rules about posting if this group maintained a good level. It 
was my first group, so I loved all the help I received from the 
moderators, including the humongous file.

Everytime I wrote I though I was going to receive a Howler for bad 
grammar. I was offered grammar check, but the fact is I didn't wan't to 
put more work on the mods so I tried to make posts as short as 
possible. After OoP, I knew the level was so down that even my poor 
level was unnoticed. I wouldn't mind a link to nettiquete rules, it is 
hard to adapt to a group like this. 

As an example, reading all the threads debating the problem with the 
list, I've realised that when I've not posted a response because it 
would be just a sorry (with no more info), I should have done it 
off-list.  

So a read only period is ok, but I'd like to find a way not to lose 
those newbies that have read a lot before joining, do their homework in 
faqs and the like, read and lurk for a few or ten days and then answer 
if they don't find anything and after waiting to see if someone 
responses. They exist, I know they do.  

silmariel



From Ali at zymurgy.org  Wed Aug 20 15:17:00 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:17:00 -0000
Subject: Re Main list ideas/problems
Message-ID: <bi03dc+qb7l@eGroups.com>

Whilst I am only speaking in my personal capacity, I would like to 
thank everyone for their constructive comments and criticism for the 
way forward.

IMO it would not be a good idea for veteran members to e-mail errant 
posters about their shortcomings. This is not because I don't think 
that you will do it very well, but there is a danger that one poor 
member would get loads of e-mails. I don't think that would be fair. 
Instead, please could you tell us via the owner e-mail address. We 
have now got a database in which we will record misdemeanours so 
that we can keep an eye on individuals. We will return them to 
moderated status if necessary.

I notice that several people have suggested closing the group to new 
members for a short period, whilst we get our act together. With 
respect, I don't think that a week would work. At the moment we are 
getting in the region of 20 -25 newbies a day. Over one week, there 
absence would not make sufficient difference to bring about the 
changes that you wish.

I am actually in favour of list closure for a period, whilst 
allowing newbies read-only status, this is something we have been 
considering but perhaps for a month.

For a long time, I have also thought it a good idea for all newbies 
to begin life with only read-only privileges. I'm sure that this 
would stop many of our "drive-by" posters - the sort whose posts you 
thankfully don't have to see, but which wastes alot of our time. 
However, as so many of you have said, many of us have personalities 
which means we would either not bother to join in the first place, 
or we would join, do nothing for a week, and then start posting. 
Again though, it is something that could be tried on a trial basis.

Please keep your ideas coming.

Ali




From lita at sailordom.com  Wed Aug 20 17:06:53 2003
From: lita at sailordom.com (Lita)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 11:06:53 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re Main list ideas/problems
In-Reply-To: <bi03dc+qb7l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BB6906CD.4C41%lita@sailordom.com>

On 8/20/03 9:17 AM, "Ali" <Ali at zymurgy.org> wrote:

> I notice that several people have suggested closing the group to new
> members for a short period, whilst we get our act together. With
> respect, I don't think that a week would work. At the moment we are
> getting in the region of 20 -25 newbies a day. Over one week, there
> absence would not make sufficient difference to bring about the
> changes that you wish.

Actually what was suggested was that the *list* be shut down for a period of
time--like what was done in June when OOP came out--so that no new posts are
generated. At least, that's what I was suggesting. :) As I understand it,
the number of newbies is a problem in that their pending messages and other
admin functions are tying up the list elves' resources. But, their messages
are not the rule-breaking ones appearing on-list.

Shutting down the entire list would, IMO, send a strong message to those who
are breaking the rules. For one, it is the best way I can think of to get
everyone's attention, which, let's face it, is a difficult thing to do with
the current signal-to-noise ratio. :) A simple ADMIN message is just not
going to cut it on its own. But closing the list to posting will demonstrate
that breaking the rules won't be tolerated, which is, IMO, what really needs
to happen.

> I am actually in favour of list closure for a period, whilst
> allowing newbies read-only status, this is something we have been
> considering but perhaps for a month.

Closure to posting or to new subscriptions? Because I do agree with you that
simply closing the list to new subscriptions probably wouldn't work. For
one, you would still have to deal with pending messages from moderated
members, which wouldn't free up the elves much or give them much of a break.
For another, I don't think it will make much of a difference in the current
posting problem, as it isn't posts from just-joined newbies that are getting
on-list. From what I understand, you elves are handling that--with and
amazing amount of effort, yes, but it *is* getting done. :) (Three cheers
for the elves!) The problem on-list is with established posters and newer
(non-moderated) posters not following the rules.

> For a long time, I have also thought it a good idea for all newbies
> to begin life with only read-only privileges. I'm sure that this
> would stop many of our "drive-by" posters - the sort whose posts you
> thankfully don't have to see, but which wastes alot of our time.

You know, this is an excellent point, one that didn't really occur to me at
first. It seems to me that the pending messages are taking up an inordinate
amount of the elves' time. Anything that would cut down on the
"time-wasting" pending posts would be probably be most  welcome. :)

> However, as so many of you have said, many of us have personalities
> which means we would either not bother to join in the first place,
> or we would join, do nothing for a week, and then start posting.
> Again though, it is something that could be tried on a trial basis.

Well, for me, I don't think a week or two without posting privileges would
have discouraged me from joining. However, I mostly read the list, not post.
I can count the number of posts I've made to the main list since I joined in
October on one hand and still have fingers left. :) But, clearly 10,000
people are not posting, so I actually think my experience of the list is
very close to that of the most HP4GU members.

To be honest, I think that such a requirement would actually *encourage* me
to join. Part of why I was attracted to HP4GU in the first place was because
of the high posting standard of the list. Frankly, I wasn't (and still
aren't) interested in a high volume list where my time is going to be
wasted. A high volume list full of quality posts is worth my time, but I
don't want to have to go through a high volume list full of bad posts and
pick out the occasion gem.

Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I think it's simple courtesy to get
familiar with the list rules and lurk before posting to a new list. Too many
mailing lists don't expect (let alone demand) this part of simple Netiquette
anymore, and I rather think a lot of people newer to the Internet aren't
even really aware of it. To me, a list with a mandatory lurk policy would be
very attractive. :)

Lita




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 17:29:58 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 17:29:58 -0000
Subject: Disheartened Newbie; read-only status?
In-Reply-To: <bhv1ks+t8cp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi0b6m+qchk@eGroups.com>

--- Judy asked:

> Now, I have a question for you, and for everyone else here. Several 
people have suggested that new members be placed on "read only" 
status for a certain amount of time.  Think back to when you first 
joined HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this policy?  
Would you have left, or would you have stayed and waited to be able 
to post? 

Constance Vigilance (me)

I would have stayed, certainly. My first posts were rejected by my 
elf anyway (I was proposing a future Petunia/Snape ship after Vernon 
expires from apoplexy - it was deemed uncanonical.) But I did stick 
it out and I'm still here after almost two years.

--- Judy: I believe that one exceptional member
actually read the whole main list, which had maybe 35,000 messages at
the time, before her first post.

Constance Vigilance (me)

Gee, doesn't everyone do that? It took me a few months, but I did 
slog through all 45,000 posts on the list at that time, the ones on 
the old group, too. (Of course, I was out of work at the time.) Not 
to mention reading all the posts in the current deluge. Does that 
make me exceptional, too? Or just very, very sad ...

Constance Vigilance, who still thinks that, uncanonical or not, 
Petunia and Snape would make a perfect couple. And giggles at the 
idea of Harry and his new Uncle Severus.




From smiller at dslextreme.com  Wed Aug 20 17:48:58 2003
From: smiller at dslextreme.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 17:48:58 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhud86+lmjq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi0caa+gtm5@eGroups.com>

In response to Grey Wolf's suggestion about a Beginner's list:

I think we are coming to agreement that an unmoderated beginners 
(newbies) list is probably not such a good idea, I think maybe one 
new list might be helpful. I suggest a Quick Questions list (possibly 
unmoderated?) where new members could post questions like Thestrals 
or What is a flint. I can see where a beginner with basic questions 
like that could be intimidated by an attempt at searching back 
through thousands of questions for something like that. I know that 
the questions are already answered in FAQ, but the point is that 
people keep asking these questions, proving that the FAQ isn't really 
solving the problem.

Just an idea. Fire away.

Constance Vigilance




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Wed Aug 20 18:50:45 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 18:50:45 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bi0caa+gtm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi0fu5+c0ge@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Susan Miller" 
Constance Vigilance wrote:
<Snip>

> I think maybe one new list might be helpful. I suggest a Quick 
> Questions list (possibly unmoderated?) where new members could 
> post questions like Thestrals or What is a flint. I can see where 
> a beginner with basic questions like that could be intimidated by 
> an attempt at searching back through thousands of questions for   
> something like that. 

<Snip>

> Just an idea. Fire away.

A 'QwikQ's' list?

How do we distinguish between a QwikQ and a thread-provoking short 
question?

I'm not against the 'short questions list' idea, I'm just trying to 
figure out how the elf-doing-pendings could work out that Question A 
(Why was James Head Boy if he wasn't a prefect) is a Quick Q, 
whereas Question B (Are Hogwarts head boys always prefects?) is 
thread provoking and so Main List.

'How many students are there at Hogwarts' is a *very* short 
question. It has provoked reams upon reams of replies, much 
mathematical calculation, and endless dissection of canon. And it 
seems so simple ... 


Maybe if we worked out a list of 'these get short answers'/'these 
don't'?

Pip!Squeak





From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 19:02:21 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 19:02:21 -0000
Subject: Re Main list ideas/problems
In-Reply-To: <BB6906CD.4C41%lita@sailordom.com>
Message-ID: <bi0gjt+8ua3@eGroups.com>

Lita wrote: 
> Shutting down the entire list would, IMO, send a strong message to 
those who
> are breaking the rules. For one, it is the best way I can think of 
to get
> everyone's attention, which, let's face it, is a difficult thing 
to do with
> the current signal-to-noise ratio. :) A simple ADMIN message is 
just not
> going to cut it on its own. But closing the list to posting will 
demonstrate
> that breaking the rules won't be tolerated, which is, IMO, what 
really needs
> to happen.

Annemehr:
I agree with Lita.  I have been following this thread with great 
interest, and the more I think about it, closing the entire list for 
a while may be a very good idea.  I think (is this what you had in 
mind?) that it should be "read-only" for everyone but the ADMIN team 
during that time.  This way, the Elves get a chance to confer and 
decide what needs to be done, and there is the further (not to be 
underestimated) benefit that everyone can take advantage of the time 
to look through the existing messages.  Meanwhile, it might be 
useful to have some volunteers updating the FAQs or trolling 
for "fantastic posts."

Meanwhile, the ADMIN team would update us with their own posts.  
When the new FAQs and fantastic posts are done, they could upload 
those also. I am also wondering if you would need to close the list 
for more than a week, but offer updates at reasonable intervals, in 
order to accomplish what needs to be done.

As for having a "read-only" term for newbies when the list is 
reopened, I agree with this also.  When I joined, I admit I did post 
the same day ::blushes::, but this group was such a treasure that I 
would gladly have spent a read-only time reviewing the messages, 
FAQs, etc. 

Something certainly needs to be done to restore the group to the 
high standards it had before.  The only people you are going to 
anger in accomplishing this will be the people with lower 
standards.  This is not an "elitist attitude" (though you will be 
accused of having one), it merely results from the fact that this is 
HP for *grownups* and some people aren't going to like that.  I 
actually think that many of the rulebreakers have caught the 
rulebreaking "bug" and may appreciate bringing the standard back up 
as much as we would.  I, for one, am completely behind your efforts, 
and volunteer my services if I can be of any help.

Something that's just occurred to me is that maybe you cut the 
HBFile a bit too much, so that it is not quite as useful for those 
who want to post quality messages.  It seemed fine to me when you 
first posted the new version, but then I had been around for months 
already.  I think I will look at the two versions again, remembering 
how it was to be a newbie, and see where I might have been confused 
(as I tend to need things spelled out explicitly when I am learning 
something new). 

Annemehr
approaching my one-year anniversary on the main list, and not 
wanting to lose it now 





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 19:56:37 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 19:56:37 -0000
Subject: Note: Volume of Post in Main Group.
Message-ID: <bi0jpl+m9qn@eGroups.com>

I know the main group has been a little nuts lately, but the volume of
post has dropped substantially, and I anticipate that by the end of
next month things will be back to normal.

Volume-
June = 7267
July = 8234
Aug = 3568 (to date); extrapolated to end = 4500

Based on the rate of change I put next months total at around 2,000 to
3,000 which is at the high end of the normal range.

I think the best thing to do is for everyone to be selective in what
they read, and for the MODS to wait until we see the trends for next
month. 

I already see the quality of posts improving. So, I suggest we do NOT
rush in and fix it until we are sure it's broken.

I also think we all need to stand reverently the next few times we
log-on and give a appreciative bow to the Mods and Elves for all the
hard work they have done in the last few months.

I know offer my humble bow. [Bows deeply]

bboy_mn





From smiller at dslextreme.com  Wed Aug 20 21:39:20 2003
From: smiller at dslextreme.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 21:39:20 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bi0fu5+c0ge@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi0pq8+e7dn@eGroups.com>

--- bluesqueak responded to my suggestion about a Quick Questions list

> How do we distinguish between a QwikQ and a thread-provoking short 
> question?

My idea was that it would be the questioner who decides that what 
they have is a quick question. If the Q-list is prominently 
advertised on the HP4GU front page, I think beginners might choose to 
post a quick question there "What is canon?", etc. Especially if they 
thought that they might get an answer that they could actually find 
rather than buried in 300 other messages that day.

-- bboy pointed out that the volume is decreasing.

I've noticed that, too. I've also noticed that the quality seems to 
be increasing. But I don't think the problem will solve itself. For 
one thing, as soon as there is another movie or book, we are right 
back where we started. And don't forget, part of the decreasing 
volume is a result of our best posters having gone silent. Our 
membership is twice what it was a year ago. Expecting the posting 
volume ever to return to what it was back then is wishful thinking, 
IMO.

To summarize, my suggested solution to the Mods would be:

1 - close the list for a short while to regroup
2 - train more mods
3 - establish a q-list for quick questions
4 - put beginners on no-post status at first
5 - have the mature community assist the mods by alerting them to 
poor posts, using some structured format for easy identification of 
duplicate alerts.

I am enjoying this discussion, btw.

Constance Vigilance




From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 21:40:49 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 21:40:49 -0000
Subject: Note: Volume of Post in Main Group.
In-Reply-To: <bi0jpl+m9qn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi0pt1+2b2h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> I know the main group has been a little nuts lately, but the volume of
> post has dropped substantially, and I anticipate that by the end of
> next month things will be back to normal.
> 
> Volume-
> June = 7267
> July = 8234
> Aug = 3568 (to date); extrapolated to end = 4500

It's also worth noting that if you devide the June total into pre- and 
post-OOP numbers, you get 5000 posts in the ten days after OOP 
was published.  That's the equivalent of 15,000 posts in one month, 
which only serves to illustrate how quickly the message volume is 
deflating. 

Abigail




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Wed Aug 20 21:43:27 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 21:43:27 -0000
Subject: Re Main list ideas/problems
In-Reply-To: <bi03dc+qb7l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi0q1v+s0u5@eGroups.com>

Hi,

Ali:

> I notice that several people have suggested closing the group to 
>new members for a short period, whilst we get our act together. 
>With respect, I don't think that a week would work. 

I agree that closing the list to posting would help.  In fact, I 
believe it is the only viable solution at this point.  

IMHO, one week is not nearly long enough.  Personally, I would 
suggest that the closure be as long as it needs to be for the elves 
to re-group, add new elves and take the other steps I suggested 
earlier -- a month, most likely.  If six weeks are needed, take 
them, I say.  From where I sit, I have been deprived of the main 
list for two months now.  I can survive another month hiatus if the 
result will be a fully-staffed ADMIN team and a well-run list.  

> I am actually in favour of list closure for a period, whilst 
> allowing newbies read-only status, this is something we have been 
> considering but perhaps for a month.

I'm not sure that read-only status would matter much.  

Assume NewMember!Cindy shows up -- no netiquette experience and 
*dying* to ask a question.  My message will likely be rejected, and 
that will get my attention very quickly.  So I don't see a reason to 
subject those who do their homework to a probationary period when 
doing so won't even guarantee that rulebreakers will post properly 
the first time they post.

Cindy -- who thinks the Elves should slam their dishtowels down and 
walk out on strike 'cause that would be Ever So *Bangy*




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Aug 20 22:12:59 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 17:12:59 -0500
Subject: Main List Problems & Solutions
Message-ID: <026701c36768$3c4fd370$d5a2cdd1@RVotaw>

Well, the first step in solving a problem is admitting there is a problem, right?  So we're half way there. :)  Now, as for solving it.  I really like the idea of splitting up the list into sections.  Like the Quick questions idea.  I get emails from the main list, and if there were a quick question section that would be something easier to navigate by the list, not by email.  And would relieve a bit of the volume of the main list.  

Now, as for dividing up the main list into subcategories, I'm all for that.  For example, I'm not a shipper at all.  If it happens, this one hooks up with that one, fine, but I'm not all that interested in that sort of thing.  Now, not every post that has shipping is generally classified as shipping.  Like all the who is gay/why/why not posts.  Not my cup of tea.  So, sure, I just delete and move along.  But it sure does fill up the mailbox when it comes around.

Another thing, I have been hesitant recently to post anything remotely off the current topics, as it seems every time I have in recent times, if I get a reply at all it's almost snappish.  Not pointing fingers by any means, since I can't even think of a name off hand. :)  Just stating facts.  And I generally acknowledge when I'm saying something outlandish, but most of it's not nearly as outlandish as some theories.  So why am I saying this now?  I don't know, but it's one of the reasons I haven't been posting much on the main list.  I don't know if I'm just wasting my time typing it all out to send a well thought out post that gets to response.

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kelleythompson at gbronline.com  Thu Aug 21 00:18:12 2003
From: kelleythompson at gbronline.com (Kelley)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 00:18:12 -0000
Subject: Note: Volume of Post in Main Group.
In-Reply-To: <bi0jpl+m9qn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi1344+oi28@eGroups.com>

Steve, thanks so much for mentioning these things!  I'd like to add 
some general comments and observations.

Steve wrote:
> I know the main group has been a little nuts lately, but the volume 
of post has dropped substantially, and I anticipate that by the end of
> next month things will be back to normal.
> 
> Volume-
> June = 7267
> July = 8234
> Aug = 3568 (to date); extrapolated to end = 4500
> 
> Based on the rate of change I put next months total at around 2,000 
to 3,000 which is at the high end of the normal range. >>>

Probably, or quite soon thereafter.  There are several factors that 
come into play here:

We've had thousands of new members join since OoP was released.

New members are often pretty eager and excited to join in the 
discussions.  (I know for lots of us, myself included, it's so 
wonderful, dare I say a life-changing epiphany <g>, to find the 
group, to find there are *so* many other adults out there who love 
the books as much we do, adults who discuss the books in such depth, 
create such elaborate theories.  So interesting, so fun!  I'm not 
alone!) :-D

After an initial burst of excited posting, people often fall into a 
more 'restrained' level of participating.  Sometimes it's just that 
they've said what they wanted to say, discussed any given topic as 
much as they care to, and then just read along, watching for new 
ideas, new twists on old ideas, and chime in when they're inspired.  
This pretty much correlates with the big drop in posting after those 
first few weeks after OoP came out.

Another factor -- for most of our membership (I'm pretty sure), it's 
summertime.  Vacation time.  Meaning lots of folks just have more 
spare time to engage in the discussions.  I've been saying to some of 
the other list elves that in the next few weeks when people are going 
back to school, many list members are just not going to have the time 
to spend online, which will (*should*) cut the posting rate.  

> I think the best thing to do is for everyone to be selective in what
> they read, and for the MODS to wait until we see the trends for next
> month. 
> 
> I already see the quality of posts improving. So, I suggest we do 
NOT rush in and fix it until we are sure it's broken. >>>>

Extremely good point.  I'd like to add:

After GoF, much of the initial discussion was about on-the-surface 
stuff -- Moody, the Gleam, the tournament, the Yule Brawl, the Kiss, 
Cedric, the Wand Order, etc., etc., etc.  It takes some time to 
really mull the book and its connection to / place in the rest of 
canon to get to the more in-depth discussion.  Lots of the more 
elaborate and hardcore theorizing just needed time to brew and 
percolate.  It'll happen with OoP, too.

Also, it takes this time for new members to get acclimated to not 
only the rules of the group, but its style as well.  I know my own 
posting improved drastically over time as I 'got to know' HPfGU.  It 
takes a little while to get the hang of proper snipping, attributing, 
etc., as well as to get into the more in-depth theorizing, too.  Of 
course, it doesn't take this time for everyone, but for many (most, 
probably) it does. 

And, many, many "old" posters are still around, just waiting for 
things to slow down before they begin posting again.  From everything 
I've been seeing and hearing, this group (the old posters-in-waiting) 
is pretty darn big.  There are *lots* of us who are biding our time; 
guess since we've been waiting for three years to discuss OoP, a few 
more months is a drop in the bucket.

> I also think we all need to stand reverently the next few times we
> log-on and give a appreciative bow to the Mods and Elves for all the
> hard work they have done in the last few months.
> 
> I know offer my humble bow. [Bows deeply] >>>

Haha!  Oh, thanks, Steve!  I personally really appreciate that. :-)

--Kelley, the mostly-unknown List Elf ;-)





From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 01:51:15 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 01:51:15 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <20030818130842.36345.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bi18ij+g9qo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "\\lila phillips" 
<southernscotland at y...> wrote:
> Hey, so now I know that all those great posters ARE
> still around! They've just gone AWOL - or OT, in this
> case!
> 
> I've dropped out of the Main List (roughly equal now
> to the population of China), too, because of the
> volume (rather like my carb intake at a buffet line
> after breaking Atkins). 

ROTFLMAO, Lila!! Thank you for this great comparison. The Main List 
*HAS* felt like it suddenly contained the entire population of China. 
Or maybe it was just that each of the 3,000 people who joined in the 
month or so after OotP was released decided to post 333,334 messages 
(which I think multiplies out to approximately 1 billion), or the 
equivalent of one post per person IN China. (That's what it felt like 
to me anyway.) I attempted to read the main list for about one week 
after OotP but it was too scary. So I gave up for awhile, then went 
back occasionally and was dismayed to see the kinds of problems 
people have been commenting on here. So basically I haven't even 
looked at the main list for at least a month...and I have to say I 
don't really miss it. Most of the folks whose posts I've enjoyed 
since I joined the HP fandom last November seem to post here (though 
on different topics) and I suppose if I had a really burning question 
about OotP, I could probably ask it here or off-list and get a 
reasonable level of response (rather than hundreds of messages per 
day, which I simply can't plough through).

I'm relieved to discover that plenty of other people can't handle the 
main list these days. Now I don't feel so bad about ignoring it :-) 
Anyway, I'm too busy hanging out with my SHIP-mates on Live Journal 
and Yahoo!Messenger and attempting to write fan fiction to worry 
about why the hell Harry wasn't able to see the thestrals prior to 
OotP...or whether Snape is a vampire (and I always thought he had 
porphiria...)

Anne U
http://www.livejournal.com/users/anneu53714







From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Aug 21 02:36:05 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 02:36:05 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
In-Reply-To: <bhvkmt+otan@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi1b6l+spav@eGroups.com>

Melody wrote: 
>>>many of the battleharden posters on this site *have* already, or 
are going to, take a break for a while. We are closing the site down 
in our mind <snip> now it is not going a way and the excuse of OoP 
enthusiasm has waned.>>>>

I dunno. This evening (alright, it's three in the morning), I 
wandered into the main list, expecting more of the same - badly 
snipped incoherant posts, with some randomly named authors, which 
would make me angry and therefore disrupt my sleeping patterns 
further (I don't know why I do it). I was really rather excited, 
therefore, to find lots of little surprises on the list. Spanking new 
TBays from Abigail, Marina and Derranimer, all "battlehardened" 
posters if ever I've read them (no offense, ladies), some lovely 
posts from Talisman and Kneasy (not so battlehardened, still worth 
reading in Kirstini-world) and some rather wonderful, thought-
provoking discussion on rape and Umbridge from various people, many 
of whose names I didn't recognise (this is a big thing for me, as I 
came back from holiday and went into a massive strop about not 
recognising anyone anymore. And then Kathryn's post made me hang my 
head a lot), all of whom operated at what people have been calling 
the "pre-OotP standard". I felt like a kid in a sweet shop. Actually, 
I'll rephrase. I felt like a starving orphan child who had just been 
handed the keys to a sweetshop *and* her Hogwarts letter. And some 
new shoes. Because I really like new shoes.

So cheered was I, in fact, that I scrumpled up the petty little note 
I'd been keeping of badly snipped posts and one-liners, all ready to 
SNEAK to MEG and bother everyone (before that, I was taking discreet 
theraputic revenge by emailing bad posters, but a few days lurking 
around on these threads made me feel thoroughly ashamed of myself). 
Yeah, they're still around. But I only found two today, and the 
quantity of quality posts more than made up for it. Don't close down 
in your mind, Melody. Come and have a look at what's still out there. 
And once you've done that, blooming well post the MDDT response to 
OotP! Don't you people realise you have a responsibility to your 
fans? 

Kirstini
All serenity and good karma today. Mostly.




From maria_kirilenko at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 02:46:47 2003
From: maria_kirilenko at yahoo.com (maria_kirilenko)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 02:46:47 -0000
Subject: Main List Problems
Message-ID: <bi1bqn+lppe@eGroups.com>

Hi,

I've been following this discussion for a few days now, ever since 
returning from my no-Internet summer holidays. Looking at what's been 
happening on the main list, I think I've started to understand how 
traveling by Floo powder feels. <g>

Some comments on the possible solutions:

Richelle wrote:
> Now, as for dividing up the main list into subcategories, I'm all 
> for that.  For example, I'm not a shipper at all.  If it happens, 
> this one hooks up with that one, fine, but I'm not all that 
> interested in that sort of thing.  

I don't know. I don't like this idea too much, and I don't think that 
it will work, really. 

You're proposing to split off SHIP posts. Others have suggested 
making separate lists for TBAY and FILK posts. But there are people 
who read all types of posts. And it's a bit unfair to make those of 
us on webview who read everything check several HPfGU Yahoogroups in 
order to keep up with everything.

Besides, there's this Sorting problem that will inevitably arise. A 
non-prefixed post can spin off TBAY and SHIP discussion, and the 
opposite is also true. For example, Elkins's Crouch nonology consists 
of eight TBAY posts and one TBAY SHIP post. Responses to these 
consist of several TBAY and several unprefixed posts. So you see, 
it's hard to predict where discussion spun off of any kind of post is 
going to lead.

Perhaps more important, though, is the fact that SHIP, FILK, and TBAY 
posts comprise only a small part of list volume. I quote from Cindy's 
message #17542:

> We could try to find some neat dividing line -? moving SHIP posts 
> or TBAY posts or FILKs to a separate list, but none of these types
> of posts really accounts for a significant part of list volume. 
> The last time I checked the stats, SHIP posts were less than 5% of
> list volume, and TBAY posts were less than 2%, IIRC.

Anyway, even though this solution addresses the volume problem, I 
don't think it's going to be very effective. And it doesn't address 
the rule-breaking problem, which IMHO is the more urgent one. 
---end this part---

I really like the idea of putting the list on read-only status for 
everyone but the Mods for as long as it's needed for the Mods and 
Elves to regroup. BTW, I'll be glad to help out if new elves are 
needed.

However, I *don't* like the idea of making a separate newbie or 
oldbie list, and I *don't* like the idea of closing membership for a 
while, for reasons that have been mentioned by other posters.

Also, I think that placing new members first on read-only, and only 
then on moderated status is a really good idea.

Judy asked:
> Several people have suggested that new members be placed on "read
> only" status for a certain amount of time.  Think back to when you
> first joined HPfGU.  Would you have been upset if we had had this
> policy?  Would you have left, or would you have stayed and waited
> to be able to post? 

Hmm. Lesse. I joined December 5, and posted on... er... the same day 
<irons hands>. I read all of the HBF and had no problems following 
the rules, though. But I'm sure that I wouldn't have left the group 
had I not been able to post for the first week or two. The strict 
rules of HPFGU, once I read them, have only increased my respect for 
the list. 

Some other comments:

Kelley wrote:
> There are *lots* of us who are biding our time; 
> guess since we've been waiting for three years to discuss OoP, a
> few more months is a drop in the bucket.

Creepy. You're almost quoting Voldemort. ;-) 

Constance Vigilance, about reading old posts:
> Gee, doesn't everyone do that? It took me a few months, but I did
> slog through all 45,000 posts on the list at that time, the ones on 
> the old group, too. 

<blush> All I ever did was read most of the Fantastic Posts referred 
to in the FAQs. I also read cross-referenced posts, and skimmed the 
subject lines in the archives to find interesting topics.

Maria Alena, offering a humble bow and volunteering her services in 
the sponsored Gryffindor common room scrub. <g>




From faura2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 12:09:39 2003
From: faura2002 at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?faura=20manila?=)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:09:39 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Fwd: Mars Watch 2003 - 2 Moons 
Message-ID: <20030821120939.25291.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com>


Another opportunity to marvel at God's awesome creation; and respond with praise.....Watching Mars this coming 27 Aug, below is the time table.       Sun Set & Mars Rise Times for August 27-28, 2003                 for cities in Asia & the PacificBelow you will find sunset times, Mars rise times (when Mars rises above the local horizon) and Mars transit times (when Mars is directly overhead) for several cities in Asia and the Pacific. The times are for the evening of August 27, 2003, and the early morning of August 28, 2003. If your city is not listed, you can use the city closest to your location. The best time to start viewing Mars through a telescope is a couple of hours after Mars rises above the horizon.|---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Australia           | Sun Set  | Mars Rise| Mars Transit       || City, State         | (August  |          | (Overhead)         ||                     | 27)      | (August  | (August 28)        ||               
      |          | 27)      |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Baku, Azerbaijan    | 8:21 pm  | 8:49 pm  | 1:56 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Beijing, China      | 7:54 pm  | 8:23 pm  | 1:31 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Canton (Guangzhou), | 7:49 pm  | 8:09 pm  | 1:43 am            || China               |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Chengdu, China      | 8:33 pm  | 8:56 pm  | 2:20 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Chiang Mai, Thailand| 7:43 pm  | 8:01 pm  | 1:40 am            ||                     |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Chittagong,         | 7:14 pm  | 7:34 pm  | 1:09 am            || Bangladesh          | 
         |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Da Nang, Vietnam    | 7:04 pm  | 7:20 pm  | 1:03 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Dacca, Bangladesh   | 7:21 pm  | 7:41 pm  | 1:14 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Donetsk, Ukraine    | 8:20 pm  | 8:54 pm  | 1:44 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Hiroshima, Japan    | 6:44 pm  | 7:09 pm  | 12:27 am           ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Ho Chi Minh City,   | 7:06 pm  | 7:20 pm  | 1:09 am            || Vietnam             |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Hong Kong           | 7:45 pm  | 8:05 pm  | 1:39 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| In Chon, South Korea| 8:10 pm 
 | 8:38 pm  | 1:50 am            ||                     |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Irkutsk, Siberia    | 9:03 pm  | 9:41 pm  | 2:19 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Kawasaki, Japan     | 6:16 pm  | 6:42 pm  | 11:59 am           ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Kazan, Russia       | 8:52 pm  | 9:33 pm  | 1:59 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Kiev, Ukraine       | 8:54 pm  | 9:30 pm  | 2:13 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Kobe, Japan         | 6:33 pm  | 6:59 pm  | 12:16 am           ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Kuala Lumpur,       | 8:20 pm  | 8:31 pm  | 2:29 am            || Malaysia            |          |          |                   
 ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Kyoto, Japan        | 6:31 pm  | 6:57 pm  | 12:13 am           ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Manila, Philippines | 7:11 pm  | 7:28 pm  | 1:12 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Minsk, Belarus      | 9:13 pm  | 9:52 pm  | 2:25 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Moscow, Russia      | 8:37 pm  | 9:19 pm  | 1:45 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Nagasaki, Japan     | 6:52 pm  | 7:17 pm  | 12:37 am           ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Nee Soon, Singapore | 7:10 pm  | 7:21 pm  | 1:21 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Pusan, South Korea  | 7:58 pm  | 8:24 pm  | 1:40 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------||
 Pyongyang, North    | 8:16 pm  | 8:44 pm  | 1:53 am            || Korea               |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Seoul , South Korea | 8:09 pm  | 8:36 pm  | 1:48 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Singapore, Singapore| 7:10 pm  | 7:21 pm  | 1:21 am            ||                     |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Surabaya, Indonesia | 6:28 pm  | 6:36 pm  | 12:45 am           ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| St. Petersburg,     | 9:18 pm  | 10:06 pm | 2:14 am            || Russia              |          |          |                    ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|| Suva, Fiji          | 6:58 pm  | 7:01 pm  | 1:23 am            ||---------------------+----------+----------+--------------------|Hello
 everyone,It's going to be a rare sight so remember -  don't miss the opportunity to view 2 moons in the sky -> 27 AUGUST 2003Never again in your lifetime will the Red Planet be so spectacular!This month, the Earth is catching up with Mars,an encounter that will culminate in the closest approach between the two planets in recorded history. The next time Mars may come this close is in 2287.Due to the way Jupiter's gravity tugs on Mars and perturbs itsorbit,astronomers can only be certain that Mars has not come thisclose to Earth in the last 5,000 years but it may be as long as60,000 years.The encounter will culminate on August 27th when Mars comes towithin 34,649,589 miles and will be (next to the moon) thebrightest object in the night sky. It will attain a magnitude of-2.9 and will appear 25.11 arc seconds wide.At a modest 75-power magnification Mars will look as large as thefull moon to the naked eye. Mars will be easy to spot. At thebeginning of August, Mars will rise in the east
 at 10p.m. and reachits azimuth at about 3 a.m. By the end of August when the twoplanets are closest, Mars will riseat nightfall and reach itshighest point in the sky at 12:30 a.m. That's pretty convenientwhen it comes to seeing something that no human has seen inrecorded history. So mark your calendar at thebeginning of Augustto see Mars grows progressively brighter and brighter throughoutthe month.Share with friends, children and grandchildren and with everyoneyou know, as No one alive today will ever see this again.--- End forwarded message ---



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Thu Aug 21 16:02:36 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 16:02:36 -0000
Subject: Dear Dr. Phil . . . 
Message-ID: <bi2qes+dkqg@eGroups.com>

Dear Dr. Phil,

I am writing to you because of my three children.  They are on 
summer break, and they are driving me wild!  The oldest fights with 
the middle child, and as soon as I separate them, the middle child 
fights with the youngest, and as soon as I separate them and apply 
bandages to their wounds, the youngest has started up with the 
oldest!  Our little poodle is high-strung and doesn't like conflict, 
so he jumps into the fray and tries to nip whichever child forgot to 
feed him.

I've tried everything, Dr. Phil, and nothing works.  Last summer, I 
threw the lot of them out of the house into the backyard (I gave 
them water), and that got their attention.  That won't work this 
year because the temperatures in our area have been unseasonably 
cool all summer.

I'm running out of options and I'm getting desperate here!  I'm not 
allowed to beat them (I asked the police and they were very firm 
about that).  I could strangle them, but everybody would figure out 
that I did it because my wedding ring would leave a mark.  

Help me, Dr. Phil!  If I could go on your show, I know we could work 
through these problems before the commercial break.

Cindy -- all three kids start school on Tuesday, and the poodle 
stays with me




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 16:26:14 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice though
In-Reply-To: <bi2qes+dkqg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030821162614.73642.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi guys,
 
I am a college senior majoring in Early Childhood/Elementary education (we do not have elementary in Ohio anymore).  And I am graduating this December (very excited about this) and I'm very frustrated with the facts that I am living in the only state that really does not have a shortage in teachers.  
 
In fact, my best friend graduated last December and has applied to just about every school in the area and has yet to get a job.  She has been subbing in several districts but a full time job has not been available.  What she is finding is that there are approximately 300 applicants for every teaching job that she has tried to apply for.  It is almost impossible for her to find a job.  Does anyone have any ideas on what an education major can do if she can't teacher?  Because at this point I'm frustrated with teaching, I do still want to work with children in some entity but I also want to have a chance at a job.  
 
I could do headstart I'm sure and graduate school (my ultimate goal is to be a school counselor.  I have been inspired by things that have happened in my own life.  As well as trying to get my social workers license *graduate school will help me do that.*  But at the momment teaching is looking like a pointless endeavor.  
 
What states have major shortages?  Are there any states with shortages in the elementary school years?  I'm finding more and more that I should have just gone into social work to begin with, but hindsight is always 20/20.  
 
~Melanie


We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory!  
Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2
 




Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black








---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 21:06:30 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 14:06:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice though
In-Reply-To: <20030821162614.73642.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030821210630.15430.qmail@web20511.mail.yahoo.com>



Melanie Black <princessmelabela at yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi guys,

I am a college senior majoring in Early Childhood/Elementary education (we do not have elementary in Ohio anymore).  And I am graduating this December (very excited about this) and I'm very frustrated with the facts that I am living in the only state that really does not have a shortage in teachers.  
What states have major shortages?  Are there any states with shortages in the elementary school years?  I'm finding more and more that I should have just gone into social work to begin with, but hindsight is always 20/20.  

~Melanie
We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory! 

Eowynn:

Hi Melanie. I have a sister that is graduating in the same field, she is hoping to start her own day care out of her house so that she can be home with her kids. As far as states that have a shortage of teachers... I don't know about other states out west but UT is in some need. They have coaches for some of the teams teaching classes that they know little more than the students do. You may not want to make the move to UT, but I would seriously look at some of the western schools, I know NV just got a huge shock with the rating on its teachers, they couldn't all speak English fluently ( which I took to mean that they had heavy accents and the people testing them just didn't understand them.) Anyway just some thoughts, hope all works out for you and your friend.

Eowynn  













Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Thu Aug 21 21:16:58 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:16:58 -0000
Subject: How many discussion group posters does it take to change a lightbulb?
Message-ID: <bi3csa+33so@eGroups.com>

How many discussion group posters does it take to change a lightbulb? 

1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been 
changed 

14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the 
light bulb could have been changed differently 

7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs 

7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light 
bulbs 

5 to flame the spell checkers 

3 to correct spelling/grammar flames 

6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" 

... another 6 to condemn those 6 as anal-retentive 

2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is 
"lamp" 

15 know-it-alls who claim they were in the industry, and that "light 
bulb" is perfectly correct 

19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take 
this discussion to a lightbulb forum 

11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light 
bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum 

36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to 
buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this 
technique and what brands are faulty 

7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs 

4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the 
corrected URL's 

3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to 
this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group 

13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including 
all headers and signatures, and add "Me too" 

5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they 
cannot handle the light bulb controversy 

4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?" 

13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions 
about light bulbs" 

1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and 
start it all over again.

------

Does it ring any bells?

Hope it helps,

Grey Wolf, who found this very amusing and hopes you find it too, but 
is not 100% sure so he opens his fire-proof umbrella just in case





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Thu Aug 21 21:37:48 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 16:37:48 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice though
References: <20030821162614.73642.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00cb01c3682c$77badad0$9f9ecdd1@RVotaw>

Melanie wrote:

> What states have major shortages?  Are there any states with shortages in the 
> elementary school years?  I'm finding more and more that I should have just 
> gone into social work to begin with, but hindsight is always 20/20.  

Come on down to Louisiana.  Plenty of teacher shortages here.  They have trouble getting certified teachers in New Orleans always, and I know when I first started teaching (five years ago) I was still getting calls from East Baton Rouge parish several weeks into the school year from principals still looking for teachers.  I know many schools in Texas usually have plenty of openings as well, they usually come over here to the teacher job fairs.  Plus several districts usually come from California looking to hire teachers.  

Obviously, there are school districts where it is very difficult to get on.  Livingston Parish, for one, here in Louisiana.  Don't even bother unless you're related to someone.  Seriously.  But for the most part there are always a number of openings.  My school hired at least 9 or 10 new teachers this year alone, six of them are brand new teachers (the others are transfers).  Naturally, the pay scale is lower down here in the south, but the cost of living is too.  Especially if you're content to rent an apartment and not looking to buy a house right away.

Richelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From meboriqua at aol.com  Thu Aug 21 21:55:17 2003
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:55:17 -0000
Subject: Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice though
In-Reply-To: <20030821162614.73642.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bi3f45+2g5n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black wrote:  
>  
> What states have major shortages?  Are there any states with 
shortages in the elementary school years?  I'm finding more and more 
that I should have just gone into social work to begin with, but 
hindsight is always 20/20.>

Hindsight sure is.  I am still kicking myself for not going into 
social work as well.  I would love to do counseling instead of 
teaching for the same kids I work with now.

All I can say about teacher shortages is that teachers are needed 
nearly everywhere.  Here in NYC they are desperate but many teachers 
don't stick around after being placed in the schools that need them 
the most.  I love teaching high school and I love my students and I 
don't mind working in the South Bronx, but that's me.  The conditions 
suck and the state and city are always breathing down our necks and 
making sudden changes that have no rhyme or reason to them.  Of 
course, even with all of our problems, I think everyone should come 
and teach here in the city, but unlike where Richelle lives, NYC is no 
place to save money when you are a teacher and the stress level can be 
truly overwhelming at times.

Are you really willing to move away from Ohio to pursue teaching?  If 
you are, I think you won't have any trouble finding a position.  I'd 
also be really impressed because I hate leaving the city.  I'm a New 
Yorker through and through.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who still hates when summer ends, no matter 
how much she loves her students 
*****************************************************




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 22:23:19 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:23:19 -0000
Subject: Harry's Sweaters
Message-ID: <bi3gon+h8rn@eGroups.com>

Hello everyone,

I am new to this group.  I don't know if this has been brought up 
before, but I just love those sweaters that Dan Radcliffe wears in 
the movies.  (Not the Weasly ones.)  Does anyone know where I can 
obtain the patterns to knit them?

Thanks,
D




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 22:14:53 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 15:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice though
In-Reply-To: <bi3f45+2g5n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030821221453.65292.qmail@web20710.mail.yahoo.com>

Jenny wrote: 
Are you really willing to move away from Ohio to pursue teaching?  If 
you are, I think you won't have any trouble finding a position.  I'd 
also be really impressed because I hate leaving the city.  I'm a New 
Yorker through and through.

My reply:  That's a very good question.  At the present time I really have nothing in Ohio to keep me here.  I broke up with my long time friend, and my parents are moving to Florida.  
 
However, I do have close friends on the other side of the state.  I am thinking about relocating there after graduation.  However, I'm not sure.  Actually the funny thing is, NYC comes to my school to recruit teachers.  I should check it out at the job fair.  
 
I have family in New York and I have always wanted to work in the inner city.  Those are the kids that need teachers the most.  
 
~Melanie


We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory!  
Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2
 




Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black








---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 23:22:33 2003
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (Jennifer Piersol)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 23:22:33 -0000
Subject: Wicked screensaver
Message-ID: <bi3k7p+qd3v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, <susannahlm at y...> wrote:
> Please see the attached file for details.
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ahh, another reason I'm glad email attachments are not permitted.

I propose a contest.

Let's see which member of the board gets the most sobig worm virus
mails in one day.  It's only 4:20 here, and I've already gotten 24 in
my yahoo.com account (none in my other personal mail, miraculously).

-Jen, who hasn't had to be de-wormed yet, knock wood.




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Thu Aug 21 23:28:06 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:28:06 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Wicked screensaver
References: <bi3k7p+qd3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F455586.000001.35445@monica>


 
Ahh, another reason I'm glad email attachments are not permitted.
 
I propose a contest.
 
Let's see which member of the board gets the most sobig worm virus
mails in one day. It's only 4:20 here, and I've already gotten 24 in
my yahoo.com account (none in my other personal mail, miraculously).
 
-Jen, who hasn't had to be de-wormed yet, knock wood.
 

I haven't even had to have my virus checker catch any yet (thank Merlin) but
I have had four that look like they would have been viruses had yahoo groups
not stripped them of the attachments in the last day.


K



From kelleythompson at gbronline.com  Thu Aug 21 23:39:13 2003
From: kelleythompson at gbronline.com (Kelley)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 23:39:13 -0000
Subject: Wicked screensaver / Channeling Voldemort...
In-Reply-To: <3F455586.000001.35445@monica>
Message-ID: <bi3l71+ilnf@eGroups.com>

--Jen wrote:
> Ahh, another reason I'm glad email attachments are not permitted. >>

Yep, everyone, as Jen said, attachments aren't going to get through 
from any HPfGU-Anything group, so don't worry -- you won't get it 
from us.  Of course, this thing is *everywhere* so keep to the "Don't 
open any attachments you're not expecting, have up to date anti-virus 
protection".  Btw, the List Elves are deleting those messages from 
all the groups as we see them...

And, I've been wanting to reply to this:
Kelley wrote:
> There are *lots* of us who are biding our time; 
> guess since we've been waiting for three years to discuss OoP, a
> few more months is a drop in the bucket.

Maria:
>> Creepy. You're almost quoting Voldemort. ;-) <<<

LOL!  Even creepier -- I didn't even notice that.  Hm, my scars 
aren't hurting, none of my dark marks are burning...  Probably better 
keep an eye on me, anyway, eh?

Off to an Occlumency lesson,

--Kelley    :-D





From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Fri Aug 22 00:02:50 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:02:50 -0000
Subject: How many discussion group posters does it take to change a lightbulb?
In-Reply-To: <bi3csa+33so@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi3mja+lha1@eGroups.com>

Grey Wolf wrote:

> How many discussion group posters does it take to change a 
lightbulb? 
> 
<Snip the list and add:>

One list elf to point out that lightbulbs aren't mentioned in canon, 
so that they are off-topic on the Main List ...


:-)

Pip!Squeak





From desiivy at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 00:26:35 2003
From: desiivy at yahoo.com (desiivy)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:26:35 -0000
Subject: Wicked screensaver
In-Reply-To: <bi3k7p+qd3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi3nvr+upm6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer Piersol" 
<jenP_97 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, <susannahlm at y...> wrote:
> > Please see the attached file for details.
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> Ahh, another reason I'm glad email attachments are not permitted.
> 
> I propose a contest.
> 
> Let's see which member of the board gets the most sobig worm virus
> mails in one day.  It's only 4:20 here, and I've already gotten 24 
in
> my yahoo.com account (none in my other personal mail, miraculously).
> 
> -Jen, who hasn't had to be de-wormed yet, knock wood.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Hi, 
    I think I have missed something here. I got a bunch of emails I 
didn't recognize, I didn't open them. Just because I didn't trust 
them to open. But still I had no idea what they were. 
 Then I read these posts and was hoping that someone here can 
enlighten me. 
                   Thanks ~IVY~





From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 00:28:41 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:28:41 -0000
Subject: How many discussion group posters does it take to change a lightbulb?
In-Reply-To: <bi3csa+33so@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi3o3p+dbj9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> How many discussion group posters does it take to change a 
lightbulb? 
> 
> 1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been 
> changed 
> 
> 14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the 
> light bulb could have been changed differently 
> 
> 11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light 
> bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum 
> 
> 36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, 
where to 
> buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for 
this 
> technique and what brands are faulty 

> 5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they 
> cannot handle the light bulb controversy 
> 
> 4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?" 
> 1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now 
and 
> start it all over again.
> 
>

279 to ask "Why was the person most likely to actually see the 
lightbulb unable to see it?"

<ducking>

Anne U
(wondering if the thestral issue was resolved on the Main List, but 
too chicken to check for myself ;-)





From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 01:11:33 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 01:11:33 -0000
Subject: Wicked screensaver. . . No! It really *is* me!
Message-ID: <bi3qk5+r48g@eGroups.com>

I am *appalled.* I'm so sorry. I guess, er, my account does have it, then?

Btw, Jen wrote that she "hasn't had to be de-wormed yet." Does that mean that there's 
something I can and have to do to fix this? I didn't realize that.



Derannimer




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 01:23:09 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 01:23:09 -0000
Subject: Pssssst.
Message-ID: <bi3r9t+h1v4@eGroups.com>

Hey. Guys. Go check out Message #78305.

Guess who's back?




Derannimer, singing "For She's a Jolly Good Fellow," corny as it may be




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 22 02:05:04 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 02:05:04 -0000
Subject: Wicked screensaver. . . No! It really *is* me!
In-Reply-To: <bi3qk5+r48g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi3tog+2t48@eGroups.com>

Derannimer wrote:
> I am *appalled.* I'm so sorry. I guess, er, my account does have it,
>then?


Acutally Derannimer, I managed to post the "Thank You" one in the
other site, and I *know*, without a shadow of a *doubt*, that I did
not send any email nor did I try to post.  I happened to click over to
the site and delete it the moment I saw it, but I shocked me.  I mean
I know I did nothing to do that.

Seems somehow the virus/worm thing got sent here and it picked an
email address at random.  I mean I do not have these sites in my email
account either, so I don't know how I managed to do that other than
something else did it for me.

Anyway, don't feel bad Derannimer.  It seems to be going around
*majorly* today.  I personally delete anything in my email account
that has an overly large K or has one of those titles that indicate
that worm thing.


Melody
don't you just love my technical names for things.  :D




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 02:05:36 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:05:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: How many discussion group posters does it take to change a lightbulb?
In-Reply-To: <bi3mja+lha1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030822020536.19652.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>

Pip!Squeak:
> One list elf to point out that
> lightbulbs aren't mentioned in canon, 
> so that they are off-topic on the
> Main List ...

Passing over some essence of murtlap 
to the list elf who seems to be 
channeling Lee Jordan...

Petra
a
n  ;P

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From huntleyl at mssm.org  Fri Aug 22 02:11:18 2003
From: huntleyl at mssm.org (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:11:18 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Pssssst.
References: <bi3r9t+h1v4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005401c36852$f1f88970$6801a8c0@huntleyl>

 Derannimer:
>Hey. Guys. Go check out Message #78305.
> 
> Guess who's back?

*raises her hand* Ooo, ooo!! I know, I know!! Pick me!!

*says in a singsong voice* We've got an Elkins, we've got an Elkins..

Laura (who is repressing the urge to maul her favorite poster repeatedly.)
 




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 02:22:44 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Wicked screensaver. . . No! It really *is* me!
In-Reply-To: <bi3qk5+r48g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030822022244.34724.qmail@web40513.mail.yahoo.com>


--- derannimer <susannahlm at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am *appalled.* I'm so sorry. I guess, er, my
> account does have it, then?
> 
> Btw, Jen wrote that she "hasn't had to be de-wormed
> yet." Does that mean that there's 
> something I can and have to do to fix this? I didn't
> realize that.
> 
Well what I heard about this virus is that...how do I
explain...Ok, let's say I had the virus (which I
don't) well my computer would send itself out in
emails that say they're from people in my address
book.  So it seems that you don't have it, but that
someone with your name in their address book has it. 
But I don't understand how it got on the list from
that. I don't particularly understand it.  If you have
an anti-virus you should probably scan your computer
just to be safe.  Actually, everyone should.  And
don't take my word on how that works, I might have
mixed it up with another virus, as my college has sent
me about 10 virus warnings in the past 2 days, but I'm
pretty sure that's how the Sobig one is supposed to
work.
~Kathryn

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 02:24:35 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 02:24:35 -0000
Subject: Pssssst.
Message-ID: <bi3ut3+rfu4@eGroups.com>

Laura signed herself:

> Laura (who is repressing the urge to maul her favorite poster repeatedly.)

Maul? As in, affectionately maul?



Derannimer, who apologizes for the one-liner, and who knows that "affectionately 
maul" probably could have been put better
 
 
 
 

        




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 02:33:27 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice though
In-Reply-To: <20030821162614.73642.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030822023327.84260.qmail@web40505.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Melanie Black <princessmelabela at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>  
> I am a college senior majoring in Early
> Childhood/Elementary education (we do not have
> elementary in Ohio anymore).  And I am graduating
> this December (very excited about this) and I'm very
> frustrated with the facts that I am living in the
> only state that really does not have a shortage in
> teachers.  

> What states have major shortages?  Are there any
> states with shortages in the elementary school
> years?  I'm finding more and more that I should have
> just gone into social work to begin with, but
> hindsight is always 20/20.  
>  
> ~Melanie

Well I'll go ahead and add Maryland to the list of
schools with an extreme teacher shortage.  It's really
bad, my Sophomore chem teacher was the track coach
with a chemistry degree and no teacher training.  He
was terrible.  He would lose graded papers and then
when we found them on his mess of a counter he'd mark
down the grade he put on them and say they were late. 
And my mom is a Kindergarten teacher and one of the
assistants wants to be a teacher but she can't pass
the Praxis I...I don't know how she passed the SATs if
she can't pass the Praxis.  I did a practice test
tonight and my approximate scores were in the 180s. 
Oh well. I hope you find a job you love, whatever that
maybe!
~Kathryn

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Aug 22 03:26:05 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 03:26:05 -0000
Subject: read-only
Message-ID: <bi42gd+q6bg@eGroups.com>

Judy Serenity wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/17641 :

<< Think back to when you first joined HPfGU. Would you have been 
upset if we had had this policy? Would you have left, or would you 
have stayed and waited to be able to post? >>

Back in 1999, I first joined Harry Potter Anonymous, where I was told 
about the Y!club precursor of this HPfGU, and joined it. I found HPA 
by e-groups search for Harry Potter, and read every post in the web 
archive before I joined, to make sure it was what I wanted. (Even so, 
IIRC my first post was a stupid newbie post, replying to a 
Harry/Hermione ship post by saying that the then-latest book, PoA, 
had given us a strong hint that Harry was interested in Cho.) The 
HPfGU web archive was only read-able by members, so I had to join in 
order to read every post in the archive in order to be properly 
prepared to post. I took some vacation time from work for 
archive-reading purposes. I could never join HPfGU now, because there 
isn't enough vacation time in the universe to catch up on almost 
18,000 posts. 

Grey Wolf wrote in  
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/17651 :

<< And of course, if you find it unreasonable, no-one is forcing you 
to stay. Create another HP discussion, put your own rules, and run it 
without forcing anyone to follow them. >>

Send them to HPA 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotteranonymous/messages/ which no 
longer has any rules (nor much activity) since its owner went away 
(maybe to college?). 






From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 05:14:30 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 05:14:30 -0000
Subject: Dear Dr. Phil . . .
In-Reply-To: <bi2qes+dkqg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi48rm+ib1l@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote:

> I'm not 
> allowed to beat them (I asked the police and they were very firm 
> about that).  I could strangle them

Is that what the police told you?  They must be parents themselves...

Amy Z




From huntleyl at mssm.org  Fri Aug 22 02:41:27 2003
From: huntleyl at mssm.org (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:41:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Pssssst.
References: <bi3ut3+rfu4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000e01c36872$809dede0$6801a8c0@huntleyl>

> Maul? As in, affectionately maul?
>
> Derannimer, who apologizes for the one-liner, and who knows that
"affectionately
> maul" probably could have been put better

*Blinks*  Actually...I was plotting to hold her down while I extracted her
brain through her nose.  Then, I planned to eat it in hopes of absorbing her
knowledge and using it to write fantastic posts.

Goshdarnit.  You caught me. *sigh*

^_~ To keep this semi-relevant to the ongoing discussion here on OTChatter,
I really think that the only way the problems on the Main List are going to
be solved is if experienced posters such as Elkins (and you too,
Derannimer!) gets their butts over there and begin a methodical take-over.
You know, a no-holds-barred, no-prisoners-taken type deal.  *thinks* Only
with email.  I'm not making sense anymore, am I?

It'll get better.  *nods* In fact, it already is.  The poor newbies just
need someone to set an example for them.

Laura (from Maine, where every mauling is an affectionate mauling. ^_^)






From silmariel at telefonica.net  Fri Aug 22 09:30:04 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:30:04 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: How many discussion group posters does it take to change a lightbulb?
In-Reply-To: <bi3o3p+dbj9@eGroups.com>
References: <bi3o3p+dbj9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200308221130.04084.silmariel@telefonica.net>

 Anne escribi?:
> 279 to ask "Why was the person most likely to actually see the
> lightbulb unable to see it?"

2 to ask if changing a lightbulb furthers the plot

1 to ask if we are sure the light bulb isn't a bulbimagus or a dead 
wizard

4 to launch a SHIP between the lightbulb and the light switch

8 that have read the SHIPs posts and wonder about the lightbulb's 
sexual orientation

5 to debate the moral/religions implications of light

1 to say Evil!Lightbulb

1 L.O.O.N that points out five instances in canon where bulbs are 
hinted.

silmariel
it may be the fever



From heidit at netbox.com  Fri Aug 22 10:35:34 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 10:35:34 -0000
Subject: HPfGU FAQ About to Update: Read any good fanfics recently?
Message-ID: <bi4rlm+pgbq@eGroups.com>

In days of yore, when there were only a few thousand members of 
HPfGU, only a few hundred Harry Potter fics on ffn, no Harry Potter-
focused fanfiction archives, and regular discussion/recommendation 
of HP fanfics on the main list Ebony and Penny created the very 
first HPfGU Fanfic FAQ. 

Since then, it's been updated a few times, and the current version 
can be found here: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/fanfiction.html  

Since the release of OotP, however, it's due for another update. 

As the FAQ is set to include recommendations by HPfGU 
listmembers, though, we need your help in compiling it. Please send 
your fanfic recs to fantastic_posts at yahoogroups.com using this 
template:

Fanfic Title:
Author:
URL: 
Rating (if any): 
Summary:

You can also discuss fanfics you like here on OTC, but it'll be 
easier for us to compile the FAQ if people use the template above. 

Thanks for your help and participation!

Heidi for the HPfGU FAQ Squad





From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Fri Aug 22 11:00:22 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:00:22 -0000
Subject: Wicked screensaver. . . No! It really *is* me!
In-Reply-To: <20030822022244.34724.qmail@web40513.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bi4t46+eakg@eGroups.com>

derannimer wrote:
> I am *appalled.* I'm so sorry. I guess, er, my
> account does have it, then?

Probably not. See, the way this virus works is infecting one computer, 
reading as many files as it can looking for addresses (including the 
cache of your browser, which would include pages from HP4GU, from which 
the address was picked) in your archives, web-pages visited, emails 
etc. I could give you a link to the place where they detail the 
complete list.

Then, the virus sends itself to all those places, and modifies the 
"from" so it points to some of the others. This is done to hide its 
steps, making it much harder to erradicate and particularly to find the 
creator.

So, derannimer, you should check just in case, but the fact that the 
e-mail seems to come from you is pretty good clue that it wasn't sent 
by you, but from someone who knows you (or rather, someone from the 
list - we're the perfect breeding ground, since our browsers hold the 
addresses of many people).

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, happy that Macs don't catch viruses hardly ever





From s_ings at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 11:40:50 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 07:40:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ali! (Belated)
Message-ID: <20030822114050.92410.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com>

*a Birthday Elf with bandaged hands slinks dejectedly
into the party room, takes her trusty box of
decorations and starts making everything look extra
special*

Quick, someone give me a hand. I missed yesterday's
birthday and we need to make this place look
fantastic.

Yesterday's birthday honouree is our very own
hard-working Ali. Belated birthday owls can be sent
care of this list or directly to Ali at zymurgy.org

Wishing you peace, happiness and the company of good
friends.

Happy Birthday, Ali!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From terryljames at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 22 14:13:30 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (Terry James)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 09:13:30 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use advice
 though
Message-ID: <BAY8-F41E2sCRBHZXFZ00004ab7@hotmail.com>

Please, please, please come to Louisiana!  Excellent food, wild and crazy 
politics (we've jailed a recent governor and our two last insurance 
commissioners), and a severe shortage of teachers.  The longest-running 
desegregation lawsuit in the U.S. (47 years) just ended this week here in 
East Baton Rouge Parish, which should free up some money to hire some 
teachers who are actually qualified.  Plus, if you're into partying, Mardi 
Gras is a week-long holiday in some areas. :)

Terry LJ


>From: Melanie Black <princessmelabela at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Teacher shortage..Just a silly rant..could use 
>advice though
>Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 09:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Hi guys,
>
>I am a college senior majoring in Early Childhood/Elementary education (we 
>do not have elementary in Ohio anymore).  And I am graduating this December 
>(very excited about this) and I'm very frustrated with the facts that I am 
>living in the only state that really does not have a shortage in teachers.
>
>In fact, my best friend graduated last December and has applied to just 
>about every school in the area and has yet to get a job.  She has been 
>subbing in several districts but a full time job has not been available.  
>What she is finding is that there are approximately 300 applicants for 
>every teaching job that she has tried to apply for.  It is almost 
>impossible for her to find a job.  Does anyone have any ideas on what an 
>education major can do if she can't teacher?  Because at this point I'm 
>frustrated with teaching, I do still want to work with children in some 
>entity but I also want to have a chance at a job.
>
>I could do headstart I'm sure and graduate school (my ultimate goal is to 
>be a school counselor.  I have been inspired by things that have happened 
>in my own life.  As well as trying to get my social workers license 
>*graduate school will help me do that.*  But at the momment teaching is 
>looking like a pointless endeavor.
>
>What states have major shortages?  Are there any states with shortages in 
>the elementary school years?  I'm finding more and more that I should have 
>just gone into social work to begin with, but hindsight is always 20/20.
>
>~Melanie
>
>
>We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory!
>Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2
>
>
>
>
>
>Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup




From jmmears at comcast.net  Fri Aug 22 14:43:05 2003
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:43:05 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ali! (Belated)
In-Reply-To: <20030822114050.92410.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bi5a5p+vens@eGroups.com>


Hi Ali,

If anyone deserves a spectacular birthday, it's you!
Thanks for all your hard work on the lists, excellent posts, and the 
wonderful report from the set of PoA.

In fact, I'm giving you permission to take the rest of the week off 
to recover so have some more cake, relax, and put your feet up.


Jo Serenadust, who doesn't think hard-working elves can ever get too 
much pampering (especially Ali)





From terryljames at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 22 14:56:31 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:56:31 -0000
Subject: Missing messages!
Message-ID: <bi5auv+bjls@eGroups.com>

Is anyone else having trouble with Yahoomort?  I've only gotten four 
messages today from this list, and I went to webview to check and 
there are dozens from today and yesterday that I never got.  

What can I do about this?  Anything?

Thanks!

Terry LJ




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 22 15:52:30 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 15:52:30 -0000
Subject: British names: Torquil?!? and Diana Wynne Jones
Message-ID: <bi5e7u+6u3d@eGroups.com>

I was reading "The Edge" by Dick Francis last night, and the main 
character's name is Tor, short for Torquil.  A character in "Archer's 
Goon", by Diana Wynne Jones, a book I recommend for any age group, is 
also named Torquil.  Both of these are English writers, and it's a 
name I have never come across in the U.S.  Is it very common in the 
UK?  Where is it from?  How would you pronounce it?

There is a character in Charlotte Macleod's Peter Shandy mysteries 
named Thorkjeld, that I think is possibly pronounced in vaguely the 
same way.  He has Nordic roots, I think.  

BTW, now that I'm thinking of Torquil in "Archer's Goon", he reminds 
me of Sirius--his general attitude.  I guess that would make Howard 
Harry, and definitely Hathaway as Lupin.  Shine would be Umbridge, 
and I see either character played by Roseanne Barr.  The Goon (can't 
remember his real name, grrr) would have to be Hagrid.  

And, on the subject of Diana Wynne Jones, she has a book 
called "Dogsbody" which I haven't read all the way through yet 
(reading at Barnes & Noble in snatches).  The main character is the 
immortal Dog Star Sirius, who has been unjustly convicted of murder, 
transformed into the body of a big black dog and banished. There is a 
man named Harry and a cat named Remus, who starts out as an enemy but 
winds up as a friend.  Haven't got further than that, though.   

Terry LJ (wondering if there are any other DWJ nuts on the list)  




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Fri Aug 22 17:15:00 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:15:00 -0000
Subject: Dear Dr. Phil . . .
In-Reply-To: <bi2qes+dkqg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi5j2k+mq8u@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote:
> Dear Dr. Phil,
> 
> I am writing to you because of my three children.  They are on 
> summer break, and they are driving me wild!  The oldest fights with 
> the middle child, and as soon as I separate them, the middle child 
> fights with the youngest, and as soon as I separate them and apply 
> bandages to their wounds, the youngest has started up with the 
> oldest!  

Can't you find an Internet forum for them?  Sounds like they'd fit 
right in

David




From joym999 at aol.com  Fri Aug 22 17:15:52 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:15:52 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ali! (Belated)
In-Reply-To: <bi5a5p+vens@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi5j48+jsqk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" <jmmears at c...> 
wrote:
> 
> Hi Ali,
> 
> If anyone deserves a spectacular birthday, it's you!
> Thanks for all your hard work on the lists, excellent posts, and 
the 
> wonderful report from the set of PoA.
> 
> In fact, I'm giving you permission to take the rest of the week off 
> to recover so have some more cake, relax, and put your feet up.

I just want to second Jo's birthday wishes.  I've been a member of 
this list for a long time, and I've met about 30 or 40 members in 
person and of course gotten to know lots of others online, and if we 
had a contest for The Absolutely Most Nicest HPfGUer, Ali would win 
my vote.  Happy Belated Birthday, hon.

Joywitch




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Fri Aug 22 17:21:06 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:21:06 -0000
Subject: Public libraries on every street (was British names)
In-Reply-To: <bi5e7u+6u3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi5je2+g1it@eGroups.com>

Terry LJ wrote:

> And, on the subject of Diana Wynne Jones, she has a book 
> called "Dogsbody" which I haven't read all the way through yet 
> (reading at Barnes & Noble in snatches).  

Ah, yes, making good use of B&N.  I find this approach works well 
with 'Private Eye' at WH Smith.  Anyone else get their reading matter 
this way?

I like Diana Wynne Jones, but it's years since I've read many of them.

David, who has never met or heard of anyone called Torquil




From joym999 at aol.com  Fri Aug 22 17:32:06 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:32:06 -0000
Subject: Public libraries on every street (was British names)
In-Reply-To: <bi5je2+g1it@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi5k2m+84uq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> 
wrote:

> Ah, yes, making good use of B&N.  I find this approach works well 
> with 'Private Eye' at WH Smith.  Anyone else get their reading 
matter 
> this way?
> 

I do.  I've read the first few of Lemony Snicket's books that way (An 
Unfortunate Series of Events), as they are quite short and less than 
an hour's read for me.  I've also done quite a bit of research that 
way, without having to actually buy any books.  I go to B&N, or 
Borders, grab a book, find a chair in a corner and curl up for a nice 
read.  Much better than the public libraries, at least here in DC -- 
no waiting lists, no loud teenagers waiting for their turn at one of 
the few Internet connections, no smelly drunks looking for a place to 
nap, and you can even have a drink and a snack while you read.  In 
theory, I hate big corporate megastores that drive all the little 
stores out of business, but in practice I spend a lot of time in 
those big bookstores, although I try not to actually buy very many 
books there.

--Joywitch, being swallowed up by corporate America




From granaiogirl at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Aug 22 17:05:12 2003
From: granaiogirl at yahoo.co.uk (granaiogirl)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:05:12 -0000
Subject: British names: Torquil?!? and Diana Wynne Jones
In-Reply-To: <bi5e7u+6u3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi5ig8+3kls@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "terryljames76"
<terryljames at h...> wrote:
> I was reading "The Edge" by Dick Francis last night, and the main 
> character's name is Tor, short for Torquil.  A character in "Archer's 
> Goon", by Diana Wynne Jones, a book I recommend for any age group, is 
> also named Torquil.  Both of these are English writers, and it's a 
> name I have never come across in the U.S.  Is it very common in the 
> UK?  Where is it from?  How would you pronounce it?
> 
>
> Terry LJ 

It is not a 'common' name in the UK.
I can tell you that though I have lived in England all my life, the
only place I have ever met anyone called Torquil is in the pages of
bad novels. Are you writing a fic that requires a well-bred yet
ignorant toff, ahem, I mean young scion of a noble house, that has
fallen on poor times, perchance? In that case, Torquil is your man.
Especially if your fic is set in the early years of the 20th century.








From michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Aug 22 18:29:57 2003
From: michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:29:57 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: British names: Torquil?!? and Diana Wynne Jones
References: <bi5ig8+3kls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <025401c368db$7ecd0dc0$e35fc487@personal>


It is not a 'common' name in the UK.
I can tell you that though I have lived in England all my life, the
only place I have ever met anyone called Torquil is in the pages of
bad novels. Are you writing a fic that requires a well-bred yet
ignorant toff, ahem, I mean young scion of a noble house, that has
fallen on poor times, perchance? In that case, Torquil is your man.
Especially if your fic is set in the early years of the 20th century.

ME : 

I think it is an upperclass name which comes from Roman times. 

Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 19:19:00 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:19:00 -0000
Subject: British names: Torquil?!? and Diana Wynne Jones
In-Reply-To: <bi5ig8+3kls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi5qb4+413n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "granaiogirl"
<granaiogirl at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "terryljames76"
> <terryljames at h...> wrote:
> > I was reading "The Edge" by Dick Francis last night, and the main 
> > character's name is Tor, short for Torquil.  ....  How would you
> > pronounce it?
> > 
> >
> > Terry LJ 
> 
> It is not a 'common' name in the UK.
> I can tell you that though I have lived in England all my life, the
> only place I have ever met anyone called Torquil is in the pages of
> bad novels. ....

bboy_mn:

So is it...

Tore-Kill

or

Tore-qwill?

Just curious.

bboy_mn




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 22 19:21:34 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (Terry James)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:21:34 -0500
Subject: Fanfic rant
Message-ID: <BAY8-F61KzGZuNY1SWo0000739f@hotmail.com>

OK, somebody point me to the canon---CANON--where Hermione is referred to as 
"Mione".  Now, I'm the first to admit that my canon is not anywhere near 
perfect, and I may have forgotten it--unlike most, I haven't memorized the 
books (yet!)  But I just...don't...think...it's there.  If it is, it's a 
one-line reference where Ron is talking with his mouth full.

So why do all the little fanfic-ers feel *compelled* to use it!  Grrr.

Terry LJ (who will humbly beg pardon if it is proved that this is actually a 
common canon reference)

_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental




From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 19:35:01 2003
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (Jennifer Piersol)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:35:01 -0000
Subject: Fanfic rant
In-Reply-To: <BAY8-F61KzGZuNY1SWo0000739f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bi5r95+68q7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Terry James"
<terryljames at h...> wrote:

> OK, somebody point me to the canon---CANON--where 
> Hermione is referred to as "Mione".  Now, I'm the 
> first to admit that my canon is not anywhere near 
> perfect, and I may have forgotten it--unlike most, 
> I haven't memorized the books (yet!)  But I just...
> don't...think...it's there.  If it is, it's a one-
> line reference where Ron is talking with his mouth 
> full.

> So why do all the little fanfic-ers feel *compelled* 
> to use it!  Grrr.

> Terry LJ (who will humbly beg pardon if it is proved 
> that this is actually a common canon reference)

Now me:

No, you're not going to have to do anything as drastic 
as begging pardon.  It is just a one-off reference to 
Hermione when Ron's mouth is full.  Actually, I can't 
find the section right now, but I'm almost positive.  
I have a pretty good memory for those types of nit-
picky things.  I don't know why they're compelled (I 
had no idea they were, in fact - I've been staying 
away from fanfic for a couple of years)... it seems to 
me that in-character Hermione seems to dislike 
possible nicknames... seems almost pedantic, in fact, 
that people pronounce her entire name correctly.  Oh 
well.

Sorry I couldn't be more definite.  Hope it helps to 
make you feel like you have company, anyway.

-Jen





From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 19:41:29 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:41:29 -0000
Subject: Fanfic rant
In-Reply-To: <BAY8-F61KzGZuNY1SWo0000739f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bi5rl9+qlbg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Terry James" 
<terryljames at h...> wrote:
> OK, somebody point me to the canon---CANON--where Hermione is 
referred to as 
> "Mione".  Now, I'm the first to admit that my canon is not anywhere 
near 
> perfect, and I may have forgotten it--unlike most, I haven't 
memorized the 
> books (yet!)  But I just...don't...think...it's there.  If it is, 
it's a 
> one-line reference where Ron is talking with his mouth full.
> 
> So why do all the little fanfic-ers feel *compelled* to use it!  
Grrr.
> 
> Terry LJ (who will humbly beg pardon if it is proved that this is 
actually a 
> common canon reference)


Hmm...I don't remember any canon references to "Mione," either.  As 
you said, if there are any they're rare.  I haven't been reading much 
fan fiction at all lately but when I was that *always* bothered me.  
Sometimes I'd stop reading altogether because of it.  

Maybe these folks feel compelled to show that Harry and Ron have more 
affection for Hermione than JKR demonstrates, so they have to give 
her a cute--and I use that word loosely--little nickname.

Or maybe they're just too lazy to spell out her full name.  Let me 
see...Hermione, Hermione, Hermione, Hermione, Hermione, Hermione.  
Yep, those three extra letters are killer.  

What's worse are the ones that use "Herm."  That one's just painful 
to look at.

KathyK (joining in on the rant because she's cranky and hasn't had a 
good rant today)




From jmmears at comcast.net  Fri Aug 22 20:08:21 2003
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:08:21 -0000
Subject: Fanfic rant
In-Reply-To: <BAY8-F61KzGZuNY1SWo0000739f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bi5t7l+bs7g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Terry James" 
<terryljames at h...> wrote:
> OK, somebody point me to the canon---CANON--where Hermione is 
referred to as 
> "Mione".  Now, I'm the first to admit that my canon is not 
anywhere near 
> perfect, and I may have forgotten it--unlike most, I haven't 
memorized the 
> books (yet!)  But I just...don't...think...it's there.  If it is, 
it's a 
> one-line reference where Ron is talking with his mouth full.
> 
> So why do all the little fanfic-ers feel *compelled* to use it!  
Grrr.


Sorry, but the only thing resembling a nick-name for Hermione, I can 
remember is "Hermy" (for Grawp's benefit).

Anyway, I thought that the whole point of fanfic is that it *isn't* 
canon.  If the writers were satisfied with everything JKR has 
written, they wouldn't feel the need to write it and promote their 
own agendas as far as the Potterverse is concerned.  I used to read 
it for a while, long ago, and was consistently frustrated because I 
mistakenly thought that the writers were actually trying to write in 
JKR's style and stay faithful to the canon.  They weren't and they 
didn't.  The idea seems to be to "tweak" the characterization and 
the canon in a "what if" sort of way.  This way, the author gets the 
power to make the story go their way, rather than JKR's.

Anyway, I do agree with you about "'Mione" and I suspect that if 
anyone dared address JKR's Hermione in this manner, she'd hex them 
into next week (and rightly so, IMO).  If this sort of thing bugs 
you, then I recommend doing what I do, skipping the fanfic, and re-
reading canon over, and over, and over......

Jo Serenadust




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Fri Aug 22 22:09:52 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 22:09:52 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ali! (Belated)
In-Reply-To: <20030822114050.92410.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bi64bg+lvee@eGroups.com>

Yes, Happy (Belated) Birthday, Ali

Put your feet up. Insist DH brings you chocolate. Have a week-long 
celebration. ;-)

Best wishes

Pip!Squeak




From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Sat Aug 23 22:24:31 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 08:24:31 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: British names: Torquil?!? and Diana Wynne Jones
References: <bi5qb4+413n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005d01c369c5$540c9390$6a984cca@Monteith>

> > > I was reading "The Edge" by Dick Francis last night, and the main
> > > character's name is Tor, short for Torquil.  ....  How would you
pronounce it??

I'm unsure of the pronounciation of the name, but apparently (according to
my books) it comes from the Scottish Gaelic form of the Old Norse name
Thoreketill, probably meaning "Thor's Cauldron".

Nox
~ "You have the right to scream your head off. Should you give up the right
to scream your head off, someone who'll scream THEIR head off will be
provided for you"
- Grouch Cop "Elmo in Grouchland"




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Aug 23 01:29:52 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 01:29:52 -0000
Subject: British names: Torquil?!? 
In-Reply-To: <005d01c369c5$540c9390$6a984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bi6g2g+91vk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> Terry LJ wrote:
> > character's name is Tor, short for Torquil.  ....  How would 
> > you pronounce it??

I don't know the correct pronunciation, but my mind pronounces it 
like Torkle ... in my accent OR and AH sound quite different, but in 
accents in which they sound the same, I guess Torkle would sound 
like Tackle.
> 
> I'm unsure of the pronounciation of the name, but apparently 
> (according to my books) it comes from the Scottish Gaelic form of 
> the Old Norse name Thoreketill, probably meaning "Thor's Cauldron".

I thought the Norse name was Thorkil, so I checked and found that 
you are right: http://www.behindthename.com/ says:
>TORQUIL   m   Scottish
>Scottish form of TORKEL 
>TORKEL   m   Swedish
> From the Old Norse name ??rketill meaning "Thor's cauldron" from
> the name of the Norse god ??rr (see THOR) combined with ketill 
> "stone". 
("Stone" may be a typo, from Thorstein slightly lower on the same 
page, as ketill sure looks like "kettle". Thor's kettle.)




From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 03:05:22 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 03:05:22 -0000
Subject: Help needed for HP role-playing game
Message-ID: <bi6lli+gqp5@eGroups.com>

My daughter and I will be attending a "family weekend" sponsored by 
our church September 12-14. In an effort to provide a somewhat 
unusual activity, I (perhaps foolishly) offered to lead/coordinate 
a "Harry Poter role-playing game". I told the program chairperson 
that I would need only 1 hour for this game. My idea was that anyone 
of any age who had read or listened to the books could participate. I 
would write the names of characters on pieces of paper and put them 
in a hat (perhaps the Sorting Hat isn't busy that weekend??) and 
people would portray whoever they pulled out of the hat. I am 
guessing that we could have anywhere from 3 to 20 people involved in 
this.

Now, my big question is this. Has anyone done something like this 
before? Should I attempt to write out a skeletal plot for people to 
try to follow? Or perhaps a starting point and an end-point that we 
could try to reach in one hour, and let the participants figure out 
how to get there *in character*? HELP! HELP!!!

Muchas gracias,
Anne U
(who might need gillyweed if I get in over my head on this)





From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 03:16:17 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 03:16:17 -0000
Subject: Diana Wynne Jones
In-Reply-To: <bi5e7u+6u3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi6ma1+h29q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "terryljames76" 
<terryljames at h...> wrote:
> I was reading "The Edge" by Dick Francis last night, and the main 
> character's name is Tor, short for Torquil.  A character 
in "Archer's 
> Goon", by Diana Wynne Jones, a book I recommend for any age group, 
is 
> also named Torquil. 

> Terry LJ (wondering if there are any other DWJ nuts on the list)

I'm not a DWJ nut, but I did enjoy "Deep Secret" (1999). I tried to 
read Cart & Cwidder after that but couldn't get into it. I guess 
Harry Potter has spoiled me; now I seem to be more interested in 
stories like HP and Deep Secret (in which a magical universe/world 
coexists with or is parallel to the "regular" or Muggle world we 
know) than in trying to decipher and follow completely made-up 
worlds. Oh well, guess it's just more proof of my limited 
imagination...

Anne U
(who still has A.S. Byatt's snobbery sticking in her craw)





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Aug 23 03:15:10 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 13:15:10 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Help needed for HP role-playing game
In-Reply-To: <bi6lli+gqp5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F4768DE.1795.3E1EFF6@localhost>

On 23 Aug 2003 at 3:05, Anne wrote:

> My daughter and I will be attending a "family weekend" sponsored by 
> our church September 12-14. In an effort to provide a somewhat 
> unusual activity, I (perhaps foolishly) offered to lead/coordinate 
> a "Harry Poter role-playing game". I told the program chairperson 
> that I would need only 1 hour for this game. My idea was that anyone 
> of any age who had read or listened to the books could participate. I 
> would write the names of characters on pieces of paper and put them 
> in a hat (perhaps the Sorting Hat isn't busy that weekend??) and 
> people would portray whoever they pulled out of the hat. I am 
> guessing that we could have anywhere from 3 to 20 people involved in 
> this.
> 
> Now, my big question is this. Has anyone done something like this 
> before? Should I attempt to write out a skeletal plot for people to 
> try to follow? Or perhaps a starting point and an end-point that we 
> could try to reach in one hour, and let the participants figure out 
> how to get there *in character*? HELP! HELP!!!

I've run two Harry Potter games at roleplaying conventions over the last 
couple of years (and I run a Harry Potter campaign) and I'd be happy to 
help you - but my games have been three hours long - an hour really 
isn't that much time.

It's also awkward if you don't know how many people you will have.

I'm trying to think of some workable ideas now - I'll get back to you.



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Sat Aug 23 03:56:16 2003
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 03:56:16 -0000
Subject: British names: Torquil?!? and ? for Shaun Hately
In-Reply-To: <bi6g2g+91vk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi6ol0+hmp0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> > > I don't know the correct pronunciation, but my mind pronounces 
it 
> like Torkle ... in my accent OR and AH sound quite different, but 
in 
> accents in which they sound the same, I guess Torkle would sound 
> like Tackle.
>

> 
> I thought the Norse name was Thorkil, so I checked and found that 
> you are right: http://www.behindthename.com/ says:
> >TORQUIL   m   Scottish
> >Scottish form of TORKEL 
> >TORKEL   m   Swedish
> > From the Old Norse name ??rketill meaning "Thor's cauldron" from
> > the name of the Norse god ??rr (see THOR) combined with ketill 
> > "stone". 
> ("Stone" may be a typo, from Thorstein slightly lower on the same 
> page, as ketill sure looks like "kettle". Thor's kettle.)


Thanks to those who answered!  No fanfic plots involved, just 
wondering.  I was mentally pronouncing it Tor-quill, accents on each 
syllable equally, and it sounded awkward.  I would never have guessed 
it as Scottish.  It sounds like a cough medicine to me.  ("Torquil?  
Yeah, aisle seven, over by the Nyquil.") That also looks like a 
useful website, Catlady, thanks for including the link.

Now, a question for Shaun that I've wondered about every time I read 
your sig.  WHY are you without wax?  

Terry LJ (clueless; but thanks to Q-tips, also without wax!) 




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Aug 23 06:51:14 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 06:51:14 -0000
Subject: ? for Shaun Hately
In-Reply-To: <bi6ol0+hmp0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi72t2+kjq4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "terryljames76" 
<terryljames at h...> wrote:
> 
> Now, a question for Shaun that I've wondered about every time I read 
> your sig.  WHY are you without wax?  

I know you asked Shaun, but I happen to know the answer. But I'm 
going to lead you to it via dictionaries.

One-look dictionary http://www.onelook.com/index.html offers 2 
Websters: 1828 and 1913. 

This answer is in 1828: 
http://65.66.134.201/cgi-bin/webster/webster.exe?search_for_d:/inetpub
/wwwroot/cgi-bin/webster/web1828=sincere

<< SINCE'RE, a. [L. sincerus, which is said to be composed of sine, 
without, and cera, wax; as if applied originally to pure honey.] >> 
(Mind you, this one says the "without wax" refers to PURE HONEY. 
IIRC, the story I was told in school was that dishonest potters would 
rub wax into the cracks in their wares (to conceal the cracks) and 
the wax would quickly wear out and then the contents would leak out 
of the crockery, so potters would advertise SINE CERA "without 
wax".) 

This answer is in 1911: 
http://machaut.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/WEBSTER.sh?WORD=sincerehttp://mach
aut.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/WEBSTER.sh?WORD=sincere

<<  [L. sincerus, of uncertain origin; the first part perhaps akin to 
sin- in singuli (see Single), and the second to cernere to separate 
(cf. Discern): cf. F. sinc\'8are.]  >>

Another of the 18 listings that One-Look found for "sincere" is my 
beloved American Heritage Dictionary with the table of Proto-Indo- 
European root words: http://www.bartleby.com/61/23/S0422300.html
<< Latin sincrus. See ker-2 in Appendix I. >>
<<ENTRY: ker-2 DEFINITION: To grow. (snip) Compound *s-kro-, "of one 
growth" (*s-, same, one; see sem-1). sincere, from Latin sincrus, 
pure, clean. >>

I just *adore* how the three dictionaries have such different 
etymologies!




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Aug 23 06:57:41 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:57:41 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re:  ? for Shaun Hately
In-Reply-To: <bi72t2+kjq4@eGroups.com>
References: <bi6ol0+hmp0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F479D05.17060.4ADAD2A@localhost>

On 23 Aug 2003 at 6:51, Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "terryljames76" 
> <terryljames at h...> wrote:
> > 
> > Now, a question for Shaun that I've wondered about every time I read 
> > your sig.  WHY are you without wax?  
> 
> I know you asked Shaun, but I happen to know the answer. But I'm 
> going to lead you to it via dictionaries.

Yep, Rita has given the same answer I would have :)
 
> One-look dictionary http://www.onelook.com/index.html offers 2 
> Websters: 1828 and 1913. 
> 
> This answer is in 1828: 
> http://65.66.134.201/cgi-bin/webster/webster.exe?search_for_d:/inetpub
> /wwwroot/cgi-bin/webster/web1828=sincere
> 
> << SINCE'RE, a. [L. sincerus, which is said to be composed of sine, 
> without, and cera, wax; as if applied originally to pure honey.] >> 
> (Mind you, this one says the "without wax" refers to PURE HONEY. 
> IIRC, the story I was told in school was that dishonest potters would 
> rub wax into the cracks in their wares (to conceal the cracks) and 
> the wax would quickly wear out and then the contents would leak out 
> of the crockery, so potters would advertise SINE CERA "without 
> wax".) 

Yes, the story I was told in school (printed in 'The Approach to 
Eating'. Oh wait - it was 'The Approach to Latin' before we modified the 
front cover) is the pottery one.

I encountered that story in around 1988 - when I first started using e-
mail around 1990, I thought this technological medium full of smart 
people would be one to appreciate the useage - so it's always been part 
of my siglines.

Basically - "Yours Sincerely"

Ooh - here's a chance to do a nice plug. I think I've mentioned one 
reason why I liked Harry Potter is because it reminded me (to an extent) 
of my own school experiences - I've just put some pictures of my old 
school online at http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/xavpiccies.html

No school can be Hogwarts - but this one wasn't a bad fascimile for 
Australia (-8.  

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From kelleythompson at gbronline.com  Sat Aug 23 07:57:37 2003
From: kelleythompson at gbronline.com (Kelley)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 07:57:37 -0000
Subject: Fanfic FAQ update / OTC database
In-Reply-To: <bi4rlm+pgbq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi76ph+nsib@eGroups.com>

Heidi wrote:

> As the FAQ is set to include recommendations by HPfGU 
> listmembers, though, we need your help in compiling it. Please send 
> your fanfic recs to fantastic_posts at yahoogroups.com using this 
> template:
> 
> Fanfic Title:
> Author:
> URL: 
> Rating (if any): 
> Summary:
> 
> You can also discuss fanfics you like here on OTC, but it'll be 
> easier for us to compile the FAQ if people use the template above. 

What a coincidence!  I'd just revisited the plan I'd meant to 
implement oh so long ago by creating a database table here on OTC so 
that anyone and everyone can enter their fic recommendations.  Since 
this is such a recurring topic here, thought a table would be a good 
idea.  

The table is up, requests basically the same info Heidi asks for 
above, so please, everyone, go load it up!

--Kelley Elf




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug 23 08:27:07 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:27:07 -0000
Subject: Diana Wynne Jones
In-Reply-To: <bi6ma1+h29q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi78gr+vkrg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <anneu53714 at y...> 
<Snip>
> now I seem to be more interested in 
> stories like HP and Deep Secret (in which a magical universe/world 
> coexists with or is parallel to the "regular" or Muggle world we 
> know) than in trying to decipher and follow completely made-up 
> worlds. Oh well, guess it's just more proof of my limited 
> imagination...


Hmm... I rather doubt it. I think it takes more imagination (in the 
best sense) to believe that there may be a magical world beyond the 
mundane and the everyday, than to follow the exploits of a 
world 'long ago and far, far away'.

I always liked (and still like) the British SF stories of John 
Wyndham. Wyndham's technique in his most successful novels was to 
take the normal, everyday 1950's Britain, and then add something 
extra. Day of the Triffids, for example - one of the 'Cold War' 
1950's weapons went horribly wrong AND we had genetically engineered 
a new plant.

The new plant was a great boon to humanity. It provided cheap oil, 
cattle food and lots of other goodies. But when the system 
collapsed, this genetically engineered Super-plant proved to be a 
danger capable of destroying the survivors left after the weapons 
disaster.

Lemme see - humans accidently destroying their civilisation, and 
genetic engineering as potential disaster - SF and fantasy is *so* 
escapist, isn't it ;-)

Pip!Squeak




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Aug 23 09:48:35 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 09:48:35 -0000
Subject: HP Knitting patterns WAS Re: Harry's Sweaters
In-Reply-To: <bi3gon+h8rn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi7d9j+l9hp@eGroups.com>

"Donna" wrote:

<Snip>
> I don't know if this has been brought up 
> before, but I just love those sweaters that Dan Radcliffe wears in 
> the movies.  (Not the Weasly ones.)  Does anyone know where I can 
> obtain the patterns to knit them?


 http://knitting.about.com/library/weekly/aa062303.htm

Has instructions for a heraldic Gryffindor lion sweater, plus 
scarves and a knitted Golden Snitch.

I think there are some other possibilities for HP sweater patterns, 
but I can't find them. Anyone else know?

Pip!Squeak




From andie at knownet.net  Sat Aug 23 14:08:54 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:08:54 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
Message-ID: <bi7shm+4bdi@eGroups.com>

Did you guys see that website asking for everyone to write to the 
Nobel Prize Committee asking them to award it to JKR?  I guess that 
no one wrote to them... a few internet email, but no actual letters.  
I read about it from mugglenet.com... They don't really take letters 
into consideration anyway, do they???

Andrea




From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 16:06:56 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:06:56 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi7shm+4bdi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi83f0+lr0p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "grindieloe" <andie at k...> wrote:
> Did you guys see that website asking for everyone to write to the 
> Nobel Prize Committee asking them to award it to JKR?  I guess that 
> no one wrote to them... a few internet email, but no actual letters.  
> I read about it from mugglenet.com... They don't really take letters 
> into consideration anyway, do they???

Happily, no.

According to the Leaky Cauldron, the guy behind this is the same guy 
who in 2001 tried to get people all over the world to point laser pens 
at the moon in an attempt to change its color.

'Nuff said, I think.

Abigail




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Sat Aug 23 16:34:28 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:34:28 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi83f0+lr0p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi852k+9qa2@eGroups.com>

Abigail informed:
> According to the Leaky Cauldron, the guy behind this is the same guy 
> who in 2001 tried to get people all over the world to point laser pens 
> at the moon in an attempt to change its color.
> 
> 'Nuff said, I think.


I guess now he thinks that if JKR get it, she will grant him the favor
of asking Harry Potter (you know because he is a real person) to point
his wand at the moon and change it.

Got to love mankind though.  Never boring and always a bit mad.


Melody




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Aug 23 19:01:32 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:01:32 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
Message-ID: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Laura Ingalls Huntley" wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78224 :

<< P.S. If I ever have three daughters (which I won't, because I'm 
not ever having kids), I'm going to name them James, Tomas, and 
Mordecai.  In that order. >>

I'm not going to say "Oh, those poor kids! Going through childhood 
'teased' by all children and through life sorting out confused 
grown-ups."

And *I* am most certainly not going to tell you that not wanting to 
ever have kids is 'just a phase' you're going through. That's what 
people told me when I was your age ... and for years thereafter ... 
and now I am 45 (46 in November) and I never had children, never 
wanted to have children, never particularly liked children, still 
hate babies, and do not regret lack of children.

However, I do feel concerned about the gene pool: if all the most 
intelligent and talented women (such as you) refrain from 
childbearing, that works out the same as if some superhuman hobbyist 
human-fancier was breeding FOR stupidity.

(*I* feel noble rather than guilty for not inflicting MY genes for 
obesity, ugliness, social ineptness, depression, and generally being 
a loser on the gene pool.)

Drifting even further from my topic, I believe in *both* genetics 
*and* environment, causing me to have opinions which will offend 
EVERYONE. On such opinion: Women who hand their children over to be 
raised by a nanny are putting their child in the environment of the 
intelligence, education, mode of speech, table manners, religious 
beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who chose that line of work 
either because she obsessively adores being with children, or because 
she CAN'T get anything that pays better. (The same for men who turn 
their children over to be raised by wives, but at least the men are 
positioned to have some knowledge or their wives' behavior and 
opinions.) Result: double-bind. Women with good genes either withhold 
their good genes from the gene pool or submit themselves to a yucky 
life of childrearing.




From andie at knownet.net  Sat Aug 23 19:23:39 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:23:39 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi83f0+lr0p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi8evr+fnps@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" 
<abigailnus at y...> wrote:
> According to the Leaky Cauldron, the guy behind this is the same 
guy 
> who in 2001 tried to get people all over the world to point laser 
pens 
> at the moon in an attempt to change its color.
> 
> 'Nuff said, I think.
> 
> Abigail


Oh my... Thanks for the info... I haven't been to the Leaky Cauldron 
lately.  It goes to show that even our beloved Harry fans can be a 
bit, well... different. :)

Andrea 




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 20:16:17 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 13:16:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030823201617.13281.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>

Cathy wrote:  ( I think it was you right, anyways) 
 
Drifting even further from my topic, I believe in *both* genetics 
*and* environment, causing me to have opinions which will offend 
EVERYONE. On such opinion: Women who hand their children over to be 
raised by a nanny are putting their child in the environment of the 
intelligence, education, mode of speech, table manners, religious 
beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who chose that line of work 
either because she obsessively adores being with children, or because 
she CAN'T get anything that pays better. (The same for men who turn 
their children over to be raised by wives, but at least the men are 
positioned to have some knowledge or their wives' behavior and 
opinions.) Result: double-bind. Women with good genes either withhold 
their good genes from the gene pool or submit themselves to a yucky 
life of childrearing.

My reply:
 
I am a senior Early Childhood teacher with a 3.6 grade point average and I am considering a career as a nanny.  Why?  Because I do indeed love children.  And I personally believe that a daycare, where I have worked the last few years, is not a very good place to raise a child.  If the children are not getting one on one care from their parents (or another child) they do in the very least deserve some one on one care.  
 
I believe childrearing is possibly the most complicated and interesting careers for a person to partake in.  I love watching little children when they start to walk or watching a two year old start to talk back to you.  Yes, I adore watching that because I see it differently than most people, I see them as growing their own personality.  It makes me smile seeing how smart they are becoming.  
 
I also think that things such as manners, basic literacy skills, and self-matinence things such as tying your shoes and potty training are very important.  
 
I personally enjoy working with children.  I think that early childhood educators have some of the hardest jobs in the world.  They are raising the future of our world.
 
Of course, for some of you this might be a scary thought.  But there are plenty of competent and educated women who want to work with children and want to have them.  
 
~Melanie


We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory!  
Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2
 




Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black








---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sat Aug 23 20:18:35 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 13:18:35 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
References: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <16711345314.20030823131835@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Saturday, August 23, 2003, 12:01:32 PM, catlady at wicca.net wrote:

> Women with good genes either withhold 
> their good genes from the gene pool or submit themselves to a yucky 
> life of childrearing.

Women (and men) with good genes who see child rearing as
yucky will hopefully decide to not have children (the poor things might
have "good genes", but they'd certainly not feel very loved
and might turn out worse than children with "bad genes").

Fortunately I do think there are people with good genes out
there who also enjoy children and rearing them! :)

Rearing children does not mean the women or men who are
doing this can't use all that intelligence on other
pursuits, too ;)

And just in case you were kidding, forget I said anything...

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our pet rabbits: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 21:05:55 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 21:05:55 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi7shm+4bdi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi8kvj+5tc3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "grindieloe" <andie at k...> wrote:
> Did you guys see that website asking for everyone to write to the 
> Nobel Prize Committee asking them to award it to JKR? ... They don't 
> really take letters into consideration anyway, do they???
> 
> Andrea

bboy_mn:

The Noble Prize is not a popularity contest. It is decided by the
Noble Panel of experts who base there decision on the merits of the
work being considered. They give no consideration to outside opinions.

They do give Noble Prize for Liturature though, and it doesn't have to
be dramatic liturature. The book 'Confederacy of Dunces' by John
Kennedy Toole won a Noble Prize for Humorous Fiction.

If you like quirky odd funny stories with twisting plots and equally
twisted characters, I highly recommend it.

Just a thought.

bboY-mn





From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Aug 23 23:13:17 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 23:13:17 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi8kvj+5tc3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi8sed+c2ni@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:

> 
> The Noble Prize is not a popularity contest. It is decided by the
> Noble Panel of experts who base there decision on the merits of the
> work being considered. They give no consideration to outside 
opinions.
> 
> They do give Noble Prize for Liturature though, and it doesn't have 
to
> be dramatic liturature. The book 'Confederacy of Dunces' by John
> Kennedy Toole won a Noble Prize for Humorous Fiction.
> 
> If you like quirky odd funny stories with twisting plots and equally
> twisted characters, I highly recommend it.

I agree that "A Confederacy of Dunces" is an excellent book, but it 
did *not* win a Nobel Prize.  It did, however, win a Pulitzer Prize --
 which is still an accomplishment, but an easier one to obtain.  And, 
actually, I believe that the Nobel Prize for Literature is given only 
to dramatic, not humorous, novels.  

One interesting note, though -- the decisions of the Nobel committee 
are sometimes questionable.  For example, one year the Literature 
prize went to William Golding, the author of The Lord of the Flies, a 
decidedly second-rate literary work, IMO, and also in the opinion of 
many critics.  And don't even get me started complaining about some 
of the war-mongers who've received the Nobel Peace Prize.

Oh, and Toole's first book, "The Neon Bible," which he wrote when he 
was about 16, is also very good.

--Joywitch, who wrote very, very bad poetry when *she* was 16




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 00:00:04 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 00:00:04 -0000
Subject: Acronyms 
Message-ID: <bi8v64+agma@eGroups.com>


 Hi all!

       I need some help. I have been working on a theory and am 
planning to make my first foray into TBAY with it, but I have an  
issue that needs to be resolved first.

       I have found myself to be totally inept at coming up with 
acronyms. Some time in the last couple of months, someone on list 
mentioned a website that helps form acronyms once you plug in the 
key words. Yahoo search has gotten me nowhere. Does anybody have the 
URL?

      Thanks in advance for any help.

   -linlou




From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 00:23:07 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 00:23:07 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi8kvj+5tc3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi90hb+sufs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
>> The Noble Prize is not a popularity contest. It is decided by the
> Noble Panel of experts who base there decision on the merits of the
> work being considered. They give no consideration to outside 
opinions.
> 
> They do give Noble Prize for Liturature though, and it doesn't have 
to
> be dramatic liturature. The book 'Confederacy of Dunces' by John
> Kennedy Toole won a Noble Prize for Humorous Fiction.
> 
> If you like quirky odd funny stories with twisting plots and equally
> twisted characters, I highly recommend it.
> 
>

A Confederacy of Dunces is hysterical!! I read it because I grew up 
in New Orleans, and it's about a very messed up guy in New Orleans 
and his equally messed up family and friends. While reading it I 
realized that I had actually known people very much like these 
characters when I was growing up. It did make me homesick for Lucky 
Dogs and Big Chief Notebooks. It's too bad the author, John Kennedy 
Toole, didn't live to receive his Nobel Prize. Perhaps that might 
have helped lift him out of his terminal (literally) depression.

Anne U
(who thinks if CoD can win a Nobel Prize, why not HP? Just a thought.)




From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Aug 24 03:34:07 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 03:34:07 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bi8v64+agma@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi9bnf+equd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "linlou43" <linlou43 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
>  Hi all!
> 
>        I need some help. I have been working on a theory and am 
> planning to make my first foray into TBAY with it, but I have an  
> issue that needs to be resolved first.
> 
>        I have found myself to be totally inept at coming up with 
> acronyms. Some time in the last couple of months, someone on list 
> mentioned a website that helps form acronyms once you plug in the 
> key words. Yahoo search has gotten me nowhere. Does anybody have 
the 
> URL?

Try this:

http://www.oneacross.com/

It's mostly for finding crossword puzzle answers, but IIRC it also 
has an acronym maker.

--Joywitch




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 03:48:26 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 23:48:26 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday x 3!
Message-ID: <20030824034826.73290.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com>

*the Birthday Elf steps into the room to see how the
party is proceeding and stares in amazement at the
immaculate, empty room and the tables of untouched
food*

What could have gone wrong here? *scratches her head*
Oh my goodness, I forgot to unlock the door and let
everyone in!

Today's birthday honourees are ~Joy~, Mike
(Aberforth's Goat) and Abbie (starling 823). Birthday
owls can be sent care of this list or directly to: 
joyw at gwu.edu
mike at aberforthsgoat.net
starling823 at yahoo.com

I hope you've all enjoyed days filled with much fun
and the company of good friends.

Happy Birthday, Joy!
Happy Birthday, Mike!
Happy Birthday, Abbie!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf, getting this one in just
under the wire 

=====
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously." - Dave Barry

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 03:57:05 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 03:57:05 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bi9bnf+equd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi9d2h+4bqm@eGroups.com>



Joywitch wrote:

> Try this:
> 
> http://www.oneacross.com/
> 
> It's mostly for finding crossword puzzle answers, but IIRC it also 
> has an acronym maker.


   Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, it only has an anagram maker, 
not acronyms. I appreciate your answering me though.

   linlou




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 05:26:49 2003
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 05:26:49 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi9iap+10anf@eGroups.com>

Anna responds;

Oh, my! I think you've opened up a case of dung bombs!(or, should I 
say, stinky diaper pails instead?) Can't let this one go by! Must 
come out of lurkdom and give my two knuts!


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Laura Ingalls Huntley" wrote 
in 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78224 :
> 
> << P.S. If I ever have three daughters (which I won't, because I'm 
> not ever having kids), I'm going to name them James, Tomas, and 
> Mordecai.  In that order. >>
> 
> >snip<<
> 
> And *I* am most certainly not going to tell you that not wanting to 
> ever have kids is 'just a phase' you're going through. That's what 
> people told me when I was your age ... and for years thereafter ... 
> and now I am 45 (46 in November) and I never had children, never 
> wanted to have children, never particularly liked children, still 
> hate babies, and do not regret lack of children.


Good for you, Catlady, for recognizing this about yourself early in 
life.  The world certainly does not need children born of parents who 
do not want them. (Er, I see a "Pro Life" sign waving in the shadows: 
my intention is NOT to dispute abortion issues with this statement, 
but merely a 'pat on the back' to Catlady for being so honest.)  
Raising a child, I feel, is probably the most un-selfish thing you 
can do, and probably the most rewarding. 


> However, I do feel concerned about the gene pool: if all the most 
> intelligent and talented women (such as you) refrain from 
> childbearing, that works out the same as if some superhuman 
hobbyist 
> human-fancier was breeding FOR stupidity.
> 
> (*I* feel noble rather than guilty for not inflicting MY genes for 
> obesity, ugliness, social ineptness, depression, and generally 
being 
> a loser on the gene pool.)


Aw, now, Catlady, you can't possibly be that bad! Besides, I am also 
overweight, rather unattractive, clinically depressed, have irritable 
bowel syndrome, am extrememly nearsighted, and a klutz, but my 
children are absolutely BEAUTIFUL!!! (uh, no, I'm not biased.) No, 
really, they are! (lol)

So, basically, am I understanding that you don't think that people 
with faults should procreate??  (AAAAAHHHHH!!! visions of little 
cloned children all wearing the same thing dancing through my 
head!!!!!) I am hoping that you were only joking about your reasons 
for not contributing to the 'gene pool', as you say.  And, as I feel 
that you ARE one of those intelligent women, I say you are being 
rather hypocritical in your thinking, especially since I know a lot 
of people who are very intelligent but also pretty stupid to boot! 
(Uh, I don't mean you; I don't even know you!)


> Drifting even further from my topic, I believe in *both* genetics 
> *and* environment, causing me to have opinions which will offend 
> EVERYONE. On such opinion: Women who hand their children over to be 
> raised by a nanny are putting their child in the environment of the 
> intelligence, education, mode of speech, table manners, religious 
> beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who chose that line of work 
> either because she obsessively adores being with children, or 
because 
> she CAN'T get anything that pays better.

 

YES! And thank goodness for that!

First of all, have you ever thought that maybe some of these children 
are in such an awful family situation that they may be BETTER OFF 
with a caring, nurturing, well mannered person who is there to take 
care of them?? I can swear to you, from personal experience, that 
this is true; where the parents were just too busy with their 
professions to really give enough attention to the childrens' basic 
needs. (As I found my four year old daughter one day walking down our 
BUSY street with her friend; father oblivious to the fact that they 
had left the house!)  The children were actually better off with 
their babysitter/nanny while their parents were off discovering new 
solar systems.

  Now, should have these parents have been sterilized? Should they 
have not had children? I would not assume to make that decision for 
them, as there is no telling how you will be as a parent/caregiver 
until you are in that situation. But it is not fair of you to assume 
that all children in a daycare situation are worse off than being at 
home, and we, as parents, are somehow 'bad parents' (my description, 
not Catlady's) because we put our children in daycare. I have had the 
fortune of having my kids in daycare, and 
watched by babysitters (er, adult women, that is), and I ENVY the 
patience and understanding that they have with these children, day in 
and day out.  [And, if anything, they are certainly UNDERPAID!!] They 
are kind, considerate, teach manners, respect for others, social 
skills, art, music, literature, AND wipe bums, and come back and do 
it again the next day. As much as I HATED leaving my children, and I 
still do, I know that in many ways it has made them better persons.  


Yes, it is true.  There are "people" out there who only have children 
for status, or trophies, or whatever reasons, and do ship them off to 
daycare, and boarding school, and what have you, because they can't 
be bothered, or don't have the time, or whatever ridiculus reason.  
But then there's the rest of us, who, for other reasons, HAVE to work 
and have no choice but put our children in daycare, or with a 
babysitter/nanny, etc.  Do we like it? NO!! Do we feel guilty about 
it?? YES!!  But this is not Ozzie and Harriet's world anymore, and 
most people I know, have no choice but to work while raising 
children. And if it were a perfect world, there would always be a 
loving, caring, nurturing "family" member there to watch the child 
while the parent/parents work. 
But guess what: it isn't, and people have to try to make the best of 
their situations, whatever they may be.

 

(The same for men who turn 
> their children over to be raised by wives, but at least the men are 
> positioned to have some knowledge or their wives' behavior and 
> opinions.)

Oh, You think so??  Don't you watch Dr. Phil??


 Result: double-bind. Women with good genes either withhold 
> their good genes from the gene pool or submit themselves to a yucky 
> life of childrearing.

Gene pool.  That phrase again.  I didn't know that this was one, 
giant genetics class.  Drosophila melanogaster, anyone?

Anna  . . .(who hopes she can go to bed without having visions of 
different colored fruitflies in her head)




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 05:28:02 2003
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 05:28:02 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bi9id2+nh4v@eGroups.com>

Anna responds;

Oh, my! I think you've opened up a case of dung bombs!(or, should I 
say, stinky diaper pails instead?) Can't let this one go by! Must 
come out of lurkdom and give my two knuts!


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Laura Ingalls Huntley" wrote 
in 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78224 :
> 
> << P.S. If I ever have three daughters (which I won't, because I'm 
> not ever having kids), I'm going to name them James, Tomas, and 
> Mordecai.  In that order. >>
> 
> >snip<<
> 
> And *I* am most certainly not going to tell you that not wanting to 
> ever have kids is 'just a phase' you're going through. That's what 
> people told me when I was your age ... and for years thereafter ... 
> and now I am 45 (46 in November) and I never had children, never 
> wanted to have children, never particularly liked children, still 
> hate babies, and do not regret lack of children.


Good for you, Catlady, for recognizing this about yourself early in 
life.  The world certainly does not need children born of parents who 
do not want them. (Er, I see a "Pro Life" sign waving in the shadows: 
my intention is NOT to dispute abortion issues with this statement, 
but merely a 'pat on the back' to Catlady for being so honest.)  
Raising a child, I feel, is probably the most un-selfish thing you 
can do, and probably the most rewarding. 


> However, I do feel concerned about the gene pool: if all the most 
> intelligent and talented women (such as you) refrain from 
> childbearing, that works out the same as if some superhuman 
hobbyist 
> human-fancier was breeding FOR stupidity.
> 
> (*I* feel noble rather than guilty for not inflicting MY genes for 
> obesity, ugliness, social ineptness, depression, and generally 
being 
> a loser on the gene pool.)


Aw, now, Catlady, you can't possibly be that bad! Besides, I am also 
overweight, rather unattractive, clinically depressed, have irritable 
bowel syndrome, am extrememly nearsighted, and a klutz, but my 
children are absolutely BEAUTIFUL!!! (uh, no, I'm not biased.) No, 
really, they are! (lol)

So, basically, am I understanding that you don't think that people 
with faults should procreate??  (AAAAAHHHHH!!! visions of little 
cloned children all wearing the same thing dancing through my 
head!!!!!) I am hoping that you were only joking about your reasons 
for not contributing to the 'gene pool', as you say.  And, as I feel 
that you ARE one of those intelligent women, I say you are being 
rather hypocritical in your thinking, especially since I know a lot 
of people who are very intelligent but also pretty stupid to boot! 
(Uh, I don't mean you; I don't even know you).


> Drifting even further from my topic, I believe in *both* genetics 
> *and* environment, causing me to have opinions which will offend 
> EVERYONE. On such opinion: Women who hand their children over to be 
> raised by a nanny are putting their child in the environment of the 
> intelligence, education, mode of speech, table manners, religious 
> beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who chose that line of work 
> either because she obsessively adores being with children, or 
because 
> she CAN'T get anything that pays better.

 

YES! And thank goodness for that!

First of all, have you ever thought that maybe some of these children 
are in such an awful family situation that they may be BETTER OFF 
with a caring, nurturing, well mannered person who is there to take 
care of them?? I can swear to you, from personal experience, that 
this is true; where the parents were just too busy with their 
professions to really give enough attention to the childrens' basic 
needs. (As I found my four year old daughter one day walking down our 
BUSY street with her friend; father oblivious to the fact that they 
had left the house!)  The children were actually better off with 
their babysitter/nanny while their parents were off discovering new 
solar systems.

  Now, should have these parents have been sterilized? Should they 
have not had children? I would not assume to make that decision for 
them, as there is no telling how you will be as a parent/caregiver 
until you are in that situation. But it is not fair of you to assume 
that all children in a daycare situation are worse off than being at 
home, and we, as parents, are somehow 'bad parents' (my description, 
not Catlady's) because we put our children in daycare. I have had the 
fortune of having my kids in daycare, and 
watched by babysitters (er, adult women, that is), and I ENVY the 
patience and understanding that they have with these children, day in 
and day out.  [And, if anything, they are certainly UNDERPAID!!] They 
are kind, considerate, teach manners, respect for others, social 
skills, art, music, literature, AND wipe bums, and come back and do 
it again the next day. As much as I HATED leaving my children, and I 
still do, I know that in many ways it has made them better persons.  


Yes, it is true.  There are "people" out there who only have children 
for status, or trophies, or whatever reasons, and do ship them off to 
daycare, and boarding school, and what have you, because they can't 
be bothered, or don't have the time, or whatever ridiculus reason.  
But then there's the rest of us, who, for other reasons, HAVE to work 
and have no choice but put our children in daycare, or with a 
babysitter/nanny, etc.  Do we like it? NO!! Do we feel guilty about 
it?? YES!!  But this is not Ozzie and Harriet's world anymore, and 
most people I know, have no choice but to work while raising 
children. And if it were a perfect world, there would always be a 
loving, caring, nurturing "family" member there to watch the child 
while the parent/parents work.  \ 
But guess what:  the world aint perfect, and no one in it is.

(The same for men who turn 
> their children over to be raised by wives, but at least the men are 
> positioned to have some knowledge or their wives' behavior and 
> opinions.)

Oh, You think so??  Don't you watch Dr. Phil??


 Result: double-bind. Women with good genes either withhold 
> their good genes from the gene pool or submit themselves to a yucky 
> life of childrearing.

Gene pool.  That phrase again.  I didn't know that this was one, 
giant genetics class.  Drosophila melanogaster, anyone?

Anna  . . .(who hopes she can go to bed without having visions of 
different colored fruitflies in her head)




From tiggersong at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 06:00:31 2003
From: tiggersong at yahoo.com (tiggersong)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 06:00:31 -0000
Subject: Stephen Fry audio sample
Message-ID: <bi9k9v+gdd1@eGroups.com>

Hi all.  I'm new to the OT side of the HPforGUs.  How are all of you?

I have a question and favor to ask.  I hate the Jim Dale readings of 
the HP books on tape.  (Yes, I know many people love them.  I'm not 
trying to argue about his reading - I'm just saying that *I* hate 
them...)

I've heard amazing things about Stephen Fry's readings, but I can't 
find an audio sample online anywhere.  I just lost my job, so I can't 
really face buying a set of cd's from England without being Very Sure 
I'm going to like them better than what I already have.  If I do like 
them better, I'll ask my husband for them for a holiday present, or 
something...

So, if anyone out there knows where I can find an audio sample of 
Stephen Fry reading HP, I'd be very grateful.

Thanks in advance,

Stasia




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Sun Aug 24 10:47:18 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 10:47:18 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ali! (Belated)
In-Reply-To: <bi64bg+lvee@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bia53m+luun@eGroups.com>

Just a big thank you to everyone who has sent me birthday greetings! 
I wish I could share my large chocolate cake with you all, but I 
can't, so I'll just have to eat it myself and give the crumbs to my 
friends and family!

Also, birthday greetings to everyone who had a birthday yesterday. 
Do you count yourselves as Leos or Virgos or do you change depending 
on the year?

Ali

(failing to keep away from the computer altogether, but cutting down 
sensibly).




From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 24 15:02:35 2003
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 24 Aug 2003 15:02:35 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1061737355.36.34670.m19@yahoogroups.com>


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, August 24, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

Hi everyone! 

Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7
pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight
Saving/Summer Time.*  Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours,
but can last as long as people want it to last.

Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 
For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33

Hope to see you there! 

 





From neonsister at ameritech.net  Sun Aug 24 17:37:48 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 17:37:48 -0000
Subject: Another birthday
Message-ID: <biat5c+se66@eGroups.com>

I would like to announce the seventh birthday of Arlan, who is my own 
personal Padfoot...a big black dog who is not above the occasional 
prankish behavior!  If Arlan could type, he would request that all 
people reading this have a dessert (or a large chunk of rare steak) 
in his honor.
He also shares his birthday today with Rupert Grint. Interestingly 
enough, several years ago (before I read the HP books) I made Arlan a 
wizard costume for a Halloween contest.  It was destiny...lol

Tracy   




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Aug 24 19:58:50 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 19:58:50 -0000
Subject: Is There A Gymnast In The House?
Message-ID: <bib5dq+opbn@eGroups.com>

Hi,

When I'm not watching figure skating, I follow gymnastics.  The 
world championships are under way, and the women's team event was, 
well, kinda weird.

By way of background, it used to be that each country had a six-
person team.  Each gymnast on each team competed in each event, and 
the team discarded the low score (thereby counting only the top five 
scores).  Having someone fall was bad, but if everyone else did 
well, it didn't matter.

This has changed.  Now, each team gets six gymnasts, but only three 
gymnasts compete on each event.  All three scores count.  

Well, the American team was up on uneven parallel bars, ready for 
its three members to perform.  The third girl gets up, and suddenly 
realizes she has failed to pin her competitor number on her back!  
They announce her name, and the rules say she gets 30 seconds to go 
before they take a deduction.  If she competes without her number, 
she gets a deduction.  If she continues to stand around, they will 
award her a zero.

So there is this mad scramble to find her number ("I think I left it 
in my bag!" she called out).  They couldn't find it, but they found 
a scrap of paper, wrote "419" on it, and they found some stray 
safety pins and attached it to her uniform.  This took longer than 
30 seconds, BTW.  And she was so rattled that she fell of the bars 
anyway.

So here's my question:  how the heck does this happen?  Doesn't the 
team coach check for that sort of thing?

Anyway, what do the gymnastics experts in the house think of the 
rule change allowing only three gymnasts to perform but keeping all 
three scores?  It sure gave us some unusual results.  The U.S. won 
for the first time, the Australians won their first medal, and the 
Russians finished way back.  

Cindy -- who has watched her kids dive into the water during a swim 
meet without their goggles, and has never been successful in getting 
their attention before it is too late




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sun Aug 24 22:21:09 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 22:21:09 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bi8v64+agma@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bibdol+uvna@eGroups.com>

linlou wrote:
>        I need some help. I have been working on a theory and am 
> planning to make my first foray into TBAY with it, but I have an  
> issue that needs to be resolved first.
> 
>        I have found myself to be totally inept at coming up with 
> acronyms. 
>
>    -linlou

Traditionaly, in this list, you don't come up with the acronyms to your 
own theory, but ask for anyone that likes (or hates) your theory to 
come up with one. Some of the best acronyms in this list are in fact 
creation of people who were oposed to the theory itself - for example, 
MAGIC DISHWASHER. And there is a couple of people - me included - that 
used to come up with acronyms on request (the most famous is Tabouli). 
If you cannot come up with the acronym yourself just leave the theory 
unnamed, and someone will provide.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Aug 25 01:48:31 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 01:48:31 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bibdol+uvna@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bibptf+lqpl@eGroups.com>

Grey Wolf wrote:

> Traditionaly, in this list, you don't come up with the acronyms to 
>your own theory, but ask for anyone that likes (or hates) your 
>theory to come up with one. 


Oh, I don't know about that.  Lots of folks come up with their own 
acronyms, but you can do it either way.

Just to show you how it's done, I will toss an acronym your way:

<clears throat>

"Linlou Awaits Some Help with Her Inaugural Theory"

"LASH HIT"

See, Linlou?  Acronyms don't even have to be any good!  :-D

Cindy -- who doesn't know how Darrin, Grey Wolf and Tabouli do it





From ssk7882 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 05:37:06 2003
From: ssk7882 at yahoo.com (ssk7882)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:37:06 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bic7a2+jekp@eGroups.com>

Hey, all.  

Thanks so much for all the warm welcomes back!  I've just been 
catching up on that tiny, miniscule, insignificant handful of posts 
which have appeared on the list since I took my leave back in, er, 
April, and I just wanted to announce that I have now finally reached 
the June 21 release of OoP!  

Yay, me.

Only 20,000 posts left to go.

<buries head in hand and moans>

June 21 did seem like a pretty good time to stop and take a breather, 
though, so I thought I'd just hop in on this thread for a minute.

The Catlady wrote:

> And *I* am most certainly not going to tell you that not wanting to 
> ever have kids is 'just a phase' you're going through. That's what 
> people told me when I was your age ... and for years thereafter ... 
> and now I am 45 (46 in November) and I never had children, never 
> wanted to have children, never particularly liked children, still 
> hate babies, and do not regret lack of children.

Oh, ditto!  Ditto, ditto, ditto!  (Except that I'm only 37, but all 
the same is a big fat 'me too' from me.)

I think that raising children is a terrifically important and 
difficult job, and I admire people who can do it well.  But I've 
never felt any desire to be one of them. I don't relate very well to 
people under the age of 12 or 13 or so. I never have -- not even when 
I was *myself* under the age of 12 or 13 or so.  

And that supposed "biological clock?"  Haven't heard the faintest 
tick out of that sucker yet.  Why, if it weren't such an absolutely 
*subversive* suggestion, I might even think that thing to be nothing 
but a big, ugly, sexist *myth!*

But then, you know, I don't believe that there has ever been a single 
one of those "you'll feel differently about that when you're older" 
sentiments that ended up proving true for me?  And at this point, 
it's getting a bit late in the game for them to come true, methinks. 
So either I'm just remarkably immature, or the tendency of older 
people to use their seniority to dismiss younger people's opinions 
really *is* every bit as much of a bogus old *cheat* as I always 
suspected it to be.  

> (*I* feel noble rather than guilty for not inflicting MY genes for 
> obesity, ugliness, social ineptness, depression, and generally 
> being a loser on the gene pool.)

Aw, come on.  What about your own intelligence? Not to mention your 
kindness, your attentiveness to others, your enthusiasm, and your 
boundless stores of intellectual curiousity?

I mean, given a choice between a species of people who exhibit those 
traits and a species composed entirely of thin, pretty, *perky* 
people, I sure know which I'd choose.

Fortunately, I think that the luck of the genetic draw, as well as 
the role of nurture and choice, will likely ensure that there 
continue to be both types of people in the world -- as well as many 
others -- regardless of any of our individual decisions to breed or 
not to breed. 

> Drifting even further from my topic, I believe in *both* 
> genetics *and* environment, causing me to have opinions 
> which will offend EVERYONE. On such opinion: Women who 
> hand their children over to be raised by a nanny are 
> putting their child in the environment of the 
> intelligence, education, mode of speech, table manners, 
> religious beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who 
> chose that line of work either because she obsessively 
> adores being with children, or because she CAN'T get anything 
> that pays better. 

Boy! You really weren't joking when you said that you had opinions 
which would offend everyone!  I forgot to include "outspokenness," 
when I enumerated your virtues above. Is that nature or nurture, do 
you think?  

It seems to me that even leaving aside the rather, er...provocative? 
suggestion that smart women don't enjoy childcare (because I imagine 
you'll hear quite enough about *that* one!), I would like to point 
out that women with the economic freedom to pay others to handle the 
ickier aspects of child-rearing for them have been doing so 
throughout human history, and I don't see too much evidence that the 
children of privilege lean towards adopting the cultural mores of 
their caretakers, rather than those of their parents.

Rather, it seems to me that such children usually internalize the 
underlying class structure which leads to that division of labor 
*very* early on, and that they therefore tend to view their 
caretakers less as role models of an equally-viable alternative 
possibility for future adult life than they do as representatives of 
a particular class of Designated Other -- sometimes as 
representatives of a romanticized Designated Other (ie, the Mammy 
Syndrome), sometimes as representatives of a despised Designated 
Other ("Ew! You don't like *that* kind of music, do you? God, that's 
just the sort of stuff that my Nanny used to listen to!"), but very 
rarely as role models per se.  

More's the pity.


Elkins

(who believes that it is best for children to be exposed to as wide 
and diverse a variety of models of healthy adult behavior as possible 
while they are growing up, but who also thinks that the caregiver 
dynamic is, sadly, far too tainted with the poison of class to serve 
that function as it otherwise might do)





From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Mon Aug 25 08:04:21 2003
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (lunalovegoodrules)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:04:21 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
Message-ID: <bicfu5+duqb@eGroups.com>

Okay, so, do I have to withdrawn BIC LIGHTER? Since I came up with 
both the theory and the acronym?

And ANOTHER HARRY as well?

I mean, it's not like the majority of the list understand them or, 
even if they do, have much interest in them.

And WWF isn't even "official." (All the bouts I've written so far 
come across way too nasty to post, even when meant in fun. In fact, 
I'm starting to feel like I'm in a closet myself...)

dan




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 25 09:10:36 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:10:36 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bi8sed+c2ni@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bicjqc+fg5v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> 
wrote:

which is still an accomplishment, but an easier one to obtain.  And, 
> actually, I believe that the Nobel Prize for Literature is given 
only 
> to dramatic, not humorous, novels.  

Winston Churchill won Nobel prize for literature - mainly, I think, 
for his monumental seven volume history of WWII. So, I've never quite 
understood what types of literary works are eligible for the prize.

> 
> One interesting note, though -- the decisions of the Nobel 
committee 
> are sometimes questionable.  For example, one year the Literature 
> prize went to William Golding, the author of The Lord of the Flies, 
a 
> decidedly second-rate literary work, IMO, and also in the opinion 
of 
> many critics.  

Really? I thought it excellent. Hits you right in the solar plexus, 
no?


Naama






From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Aug 25 10:39:39 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:39:39 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bicfu5+duqb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bicp1b+pbk1@eGroups.com>

Dan wrote:
> Okay, so, do I have to withdrawn BIC LIGHTER? Since I came up with 
> both the theory and the acronym?
> 
> And ANOTHER HARRY as well?
> 

Nah. It's just that it's customary to accept an Acronym if someone 
else offers it to you. It's considered a compliment. 

Which is why my original theory became MAGIC DISHWASHER when I'd 
called it 'The Spying Game'. I woke up one morning and found that 
Marina had mutated it into a kitchen appliance [grin].

Admittedly I hadn't worked out an acronym for Spying Game, so I 
couldn't plead that one pre-existed. ;-)

But still, I got to keep the Safe House, so that's OK [even bigger 
grin].

Pip!Squeak




From mphunt at sprintmail.com  Mon Aug 25 12:59:02 2003
From: mphunt at sprintmail.com (tcyhunt)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:59:02 -0000
Subject: PLOTS:  ode to that dead sexy guy (the dead one)
Message-ID: <bid16m+g872@eGroups.com>

FYI, during the chat yesterday, limericks were begun and PLOTS 
(Potter Limericks Of The Series) was born....I humbly submit:


There once was a wizard named Black
Some argue common sense he did lack
He's finally free from his jail
But in battle he fell through the veil
Now we just want Sirius back!


Tcy




From tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 13:22:12 2003
From: tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com (tomatogrower88)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:22:12 -0000
Subject: Happy First Day of School
Message-ID: <bid2i4+7pcn@eGroups.com>

Hi All,

My computer was down for a week. I can't believe all I have missed. I 
am reading this in the early morning. Today is the first day of 
school and as I am a teacher it is an important day for me. I know 
that we have teachers on the list. Some of you may not start until 
September but as that is in one week away I want to wish all of you a 
happy first day of school. May we all remember why we wanted to do 
this in the first place. It keeps me young and it is the reason I 
first read Harry Potter. So with this in mind I go off to wake up my 
own son for school and get ready to face 28 10 year olds.

Myrth




From psychic_serpent at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 14:18:38 2003
From: psychic_serpent at yahoo.com (psychic_serpent)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:18:38 -0000
Subject: Nobel Prize for JKR?
In-Reply-To: <bicjqc+fg5v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bid5ru+7sjg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" 
<naama_gat at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
> <joym999 at a...> wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> 
> wrote:
> 
> which is still an accomplishment, but an easier one to obtain.  
> And, actually, I believe that the Nobel Prize for Literature is 
> given only to dramatic, not humorous, novels.  

While there is humor in the HP books, there is plenty of drama too.  
And many other dramatic novels contain large doses of humor, 
especially the writing of John Irving and Tom Robbins.  Classic 
works by Jane Austen are VERY humorous, and George Eliot's writing 
is full of biting wit.  And then there are plays, such as those by 
Tom Stoppard, which contain humor but whose literary merits are 
considerable.  Much "serious" literature may be humorless, but not 
all of it is.  (Although I could have used more humor in OotP.)  I 
doubt that the committee disregards anything with humor in it based 
just on that.
 
> Winston Churchill won Nobel prize for literature - mainly, I 
> think, for his monumental seven volume history of WWII. So, I've 
> never quite understood what types of literary works are eligible 
> for the prize.

Are there separate prizes for fiction and nonfiction?  If so, he may 
have received the prize for nonfiction.  Or there may be only one, 
for either type of work.  I've never looked into this closely, 
having never found that an author winning the Nobel Prize made me 
want to rush out and buy their work.  I've often been mystified by 
winners of the Pulitzer, too, even when I've read and enjoyed the 
winning work (**cough**JaneSmiley**cough**).  And then some winners, 
like Toni Morrison, just make me happy that more people will read 
their work because of the prize.  In the end, I guess it all 
balances out.  The Pulitzer for plays is another story, let alone 
classical music composition.  I can't figure out how those prizes 
are decided.  I've yet to see rhyme or reason there.

> > One interesting note, though -- the decisions of the Nobel 
> > committee are sometimes questionable.  For example, one year the 
> > Literature prize went to William Golding, the author of The Lord 
> > of the Flies, a decidedly second-rate literary work, IMO, and 
> > also in the opinion of many critics.  
> 
> Really? I thought it excellent. Hits you right in the solar 
> plexus, no?
>  
> Naama

Well, it's probably not the individual merits of a work that are 
being decided in a vacuum.  For instance, John Nash won the Nobel 
for economics many years after he wrote the thesis for which he won 
the prize.  It was given based on the impact his work had on the 
field (and other fields), and certainly, no one would have been able 
to predict that impact when it was first written.  The impact of a 
work like "Lord of the Flies" was probably considered in addition to 
any literary merit a critic might find in it.  

That's why I think it's premature for anyone to consider JKR for a 
Nobel Prize for literature, and it certainly should not be for one 
work (OotP).  When the entire series is completed, I think the 
impact of all seven books will be considerable, and that sometime in 
the future she will be a serious contender based upon all seven.  
However, I think that the impact of the full series will need to be 
felt first, and that the committee should not just immediately hand 
her a prize upon its completion.  That the HP phenomenon has already 
had a huge impact on the entire world is indisputable; whether the 
Nobel committee should or is likely to give JKR any recognition of 
that while the series is still being written is something with which 
I disagree, and it would be out of character for the committee 
anyway.  It's taken them forty plus years, after all, to recognize 
the scientific accomplishments of some very influential people.  I 
think that for JKR, the Nobel will be a long time coming--but will 
very likely eventually come.

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Aug 25 14:39:29 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:39:29 -0000
Subject: Children and Careers (WAS moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bic7a2+jekp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bid731+uath@eGroups.com>

Catlady:

> > Drifting even further from my topic, I believe in *both* 
> > genetics *and* environment, causing me to have opinions 
> > which will offend EVERYONE. On such opinion: Women who 
> > hand their children over to be raised by a nanny are 
> > putting their child in the environment of the 
> > intelligence, education, mode of speech, table manners, 
> > religious beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who 
> > chose that line of work either because she obsessively 
> > adores being with children, or because she CAN'T get anything 
> > that pays better. 
 
Elkins replied:

> It seems to me that even leaving aside the rather, 
>er...provocative? suggestion that smart women don't enjoy childcare 
>(because I imagine you'll hear quite enough about *that* one!), 

Heh, heh. 

Relax, Catlady.  I'm not gonna come after you or anything.  After 
all, women who stay home with their kids aren't clever enough to 
express their objections to this implication in an intelligent 
way.  :-D

::schnoogles Catlady::

Actually, I didn't even raise an eyebrow at this implication, and 
I'd say the reason is that it is quite common for folks to express 
that opinion to you if you choose to stay home.  Man, they will come 
*right* out with it at the slightest provocation, too -- "You're 
*wasting* your talents!*  You're not modeling appropriate behavior 
for your daughters!"

What can I say?  I went to law school with a very hard-charging 
group of women, and I can count seven of my friends off the top of 
my head who bailed out of the work force.  We all did it the same 
way, too.  A few years of enjoying a childless career.  Followed by 
a child or two or three.  Followed by less professional success due 
to the inability to put in the hours like before.  Followed by the 
realization that the money simply wasn't worth the *stress.*

Boy.  I gotta tell ya that I bought the whole "You can have it all" 
line.  I really thought that having kids was as simple as, well, 
having them, hiring the best nanny you could find, and getting back 
to work as soon as possible, preferably six weeks after birth.  Boy, 
was I wrong!  For me, it didn't work at all.  Emphasis on *For Me.*

Cindy -- happily at home 




From joyw at gwu.edu  Mon Aug 25 14:43:32 2003
From: joyw at gwu.edu (- Joy -)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:43:32 -0400
Subject: Birthdays / Gymnastics
References: <1061799639.554.30028.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <08ef01c36b17$41c47600$6401000a@Joy>

Ali asked:
<<Also, birthday greetings to everyone who had a birthday yesterday.
Do you count yourselves as Leos or Virgos or do you change depending
on the year?>>

Honestly?  I read both horoscopes, and go with whichever one I like better
that day.  : )

Cindy wrote:
<<When I'm not watching figure skating, I follow gymnastics.  The
world championships are under way, and the women's team event was,
well, kinda weird.>>

Are those being televised?  I love gymnastics, but I can never manage to
find it in the TV listings... Grrr, I can't believe I missed it.

~Joy~, figuring that if you combine two one-liners it's no longer a one
liner...




From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 15:44:19 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:44:19 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Fatastic Posts - Where Can We Find Them?
Message-ID: <bidasj+tm8g@eGroups.com>

Dear HPfGU Members, 

Hello from the FAQ team! We're in charge of writing the Fantastic 
Posts essays, which can be found at 

http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/ 

These essays collect posts on a variety of different subjects, 
ranging from The Weasley Family to Justice in the Wizarding World. 
They also provide summaries of important and popular theories 
such as LOLLIPOPS or George. The Fantastic Posts are a great 
asset to group members old and new, providing a coherent 
perspective on the ideas that came before us. They also allow us 
to save from Yahoo! oblivion those posts which are truly 
remarkable and worth remembering. 

We on the FAQ team are eager to get to work on updating the old 
FPs and writing new ones in the wake of OOP, but we'd like you 
all to help us. Have you read a post recently that really made you 
think? A well-written post, that offered a new perspective or 
submitted a new thoery? In short, have you read a Fantastic Post 
recently? If you have, we'd like to hear about it. 

Before you get going, a few words on what makes a post Fantastic. 
You might want to check out some of the posts referenced in the old 
FPs to get an idea of the kind of quality we're looking for. Also, 
bear in mind that a a Fantastic Post should: 

1. Be well written and coherent 
2. Present new ideas or offer a good overview of old ones 
3. Have good formatting - good grammar and spelling, capitalization 
and punctuation where appropriate, more then one paragraph, etc. 

There are three simple ways to let us know about a Fantastic Post: 

1. We've opened the FAQ archive group to posting by the general 
public. You can e-mail us at 

Fantastic_Posts at yahoogroups.com 

Please use the following template when sending us a 
recommendation e-mail 

Fantastic Post number: 
Author of Fantastic Post: 
Topic of Fantastic Post: 
Date of Fantastic Post: 

Not all fields have to be filled, but we *must* have the message 
number - finding a message in any other way is all but impossible. 

2. You can also reach the archive group homepage the same way 
you might go to the HPfGU homepage and post a message from 
there. The URL is 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fantastic_Posts/ 

Simply use the 'Post' link on the sidebar. Again, use the 
template above, and be sure to include the message number. 

Please note that you do not have to join the group in order 
to post. In fact, in order to keep the archives list manageable and 
nominations confidential, we are limiting membership to the 
Fantastic Posts team.

3. A database has been created on the HPfGU homepage. To get 
there, simply go to the homepage and click on the 'Database' link 
in the sidebar on the left-hand side of the screen. Scroll down the 
list until you find a database entitled 'Fantastic Posts'. Click on the 
title and you will be transferred to the database page. From there 
you can simply click on the 'add record' link at the top of the table 
to make your suggestion. You don't need to fill out all the fields, 
but you must include a message number. 

Important note: please do *not* forward a message to the archive 
group. A forwarded message will not contain a message number, 
and that will make it impossible for us to locate it. 

Finally, any post you send is only a suggestion. If you look at the 
old Fantastic Posts you might notice how few messages they actually 
reference. This isn't because these are the only good messages in 
over 70,000 posts, but because if we were to include all the fantastic 
posts ever made to the group we would drown, and the very purpose 
of the FPs is to provide brief and concise overviews of ideas on the list. 
We can't promise to use every post you send us, but we do promise 
to read and consider every one with all due gravity, no matter who the 
author is. 

Wishing you happy hunting, 

Abigail
For the FAQ team  




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 17:20:41 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:20:41 -0000
Subject: Children and Careers (WAS moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bid731+uath@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bidgh9+cirt@eGroups.com>

Cindy C.:
> 
> Relax, Catlady.  I'm not gonna come after you or anything.  After 
> all, women who stay home with their kids aren't clever enough to 
> express their objections to this implication in an intelligent 
> way.  :-D

Wha -- hey!  I are so!  -- Er, I is too!  -- Uhh --

Oh, damn!

Annemehr  O_o
                   o_o  o_o  o_o  





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Aug 25 20:57:16 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 20:57:16 -0000
Subject: Gymnastics
In-Reply-To: <08ef01c36b17$41c47600$6401000a@Joy>
Message-ID: <bidt7c+rj07@eGroups.com>

Joy wrote (about the Gymnastics World Championships)

> Are those being televised?  I love gymnastics, but I can never 
>manage to find it in the TV listings... Grrr, I can't believe I 
>missed it.

I don't think you missed it all.  They didn't show the mens' all-
around, and they didn't show the individual apparatus events for men 
or women.  My guess is that these will be broadcast this weekend.

Man, does that sport have a lot of weird rules or what?  China 
finished fourth, and the difference was a penalty they were 
assessed.  Apparently, you can stretch and warm up next to the 
apparatus when you're next up.  Well, two Chinese girls were kind of 
going through their routine instead of stretching -- just doing 
handstands and flips and going over things mentally.

This cost them .2 of a point, which threw the bronze medals to the 
Australians.  

Picky, picky, picky.

Cindy -- wondering why the vaulting horse is that weird flat shape 
now




From judi.eathorne-gould at stonebow.otago.ac.nz  Mon Aug 25 21:18:52 2003
From: judi.eathorne-gould at stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Judi Eathorne-Gould)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 09:18:52 +1200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Gymnastics
In-Reply-To: <bidt7c+rj07@eGroups.com>
References: <08ef01c36b17$41c47600$6401000a@Joy>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20030826090934.01c57050@brandywine.otago.ac.nz>


>Man, does that sport have a lot of weird rules or what?  China
>finished fourth, and the difference was a penalty they were
>assessed.  Apparently, you can stretch and warm up next to the
>apparatus when you're next up.  Well, two Chinese girls were kind of
>going through their routine instead of stretching -- just doing
>handstands and flips and going over things mentally.


You can also loose that for pulling at your leotard before leaving the 
floor (I say after my daughter's gymnastics competition this weekend - she 
knows not to tug at her leotard so who knows WHY she did it!!!). Oh you can 
also loose .2 (on each apparatus for having visible tatoos!) The going 
through the routine thing - each competitor gets time before the judged bit 
to practice - I think the problem [and this is just guessing cause stupid 
New Zealand television does not show ANY of the worlds - and my 8 year old 
twins who both do gymnastics would love to see some top class gymnasts. The 
twins are a boy and a girl so would like to see both genders. My son has 
had three coaching sessions with the NZ mens team coach but he has never 
seen any top male gymnasts - either on TV or in person so has no idea of 
what he could be capable of if he sticks with it] is it can be distracting 
to the competitor actually on the podium to see another person doing 
somersaults out of the corner of the eye - though they should be focused 
enough to put it out of their heads.

>Cindy -- wondering why the vaulting horse is that weird flat shape
>now


Safer. The padded bit extends down the front so those poor gymnasts who 
misjudge their run up or jump off the beep board have padding when they 
crash into the vault.




Judi Eathorne-Gould                     ph 479 8837 Fax 479 5070
University of Otago Law Library
Box 56
Dunedin
New Zealand

Alternative e-mail address  serials.law at library.otago.ac.nz

Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless
means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

-Paulo Freire, educator
(1921-1997) 




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug 25 21:50:18 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:50:18 -0000
Subject: Acronyms
In-Reply-To: <bi9bnf+equd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bie0aq+icvv@eGroups.com>

On the acronym topic, I'd be very grateful if anyone could come up 
with an acronym for my recent tangled web purporting to be a theory, 
because I'm too thick and lack inspiration. I sort of chucked it out 
there in the hope, but thought I'd be a bit obvious  just in case.
Kirstini





From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 22:05:39 2003
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (Jennifer Piersol)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:05:39 -0000
Subject: Gymnastics
In-Reply-To: <bidt7c+rj07@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bie17j+r12d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...>
wrote:

> I don't think you missed it all.  They didn't show 
> the mens' all-around, and they didn't show the 
> individual apparatus events for men or women.  My 
> guess is that these will be broadcast this weekend.

Actually, they showed the men's events on Saturday, 
and the women's individuals Sunday evening.  At least, 
they did on the west coast.  So while Joy may have a 
second chance to watch them, they're over for us poor 
lefties.

-Jen




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Aug 26 00:40:45 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 00:40:45 -0000
Subject: Gymnastics
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030826090934.01c57050@brandywine.otago.ac.nz>
Message-ID: <bieaad+a2qa@eGroups.com>

Judi wrote:

> You can also loose that for pulling at your leotard before leaving 
>the floor (I say after my daughter's gymnastics competition this 
>weekend - she knows not to tug at her leotard so who knows WHY she 
>did it!!!). 

Hang on a minute. . . 

There's a *wedgie* deduction in gymnastics?

You know, I always wondered how come those gymnasts never seem 
bothered by leotard creep.

That is amazing!  Are there any other rules governing a gymnast's 
appearance?  Is all the glitter on the face mandatory?  :-D

Cindy -- wondering why we don't see any thong leotards in gymnastics





From tabouli at unite.com.au  Tue Aug 26 03:13:33 2003
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (f-price)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 03:13:33 -0000
Subject: Lost emails, child-bearing
Message-ID: <biej8t+113ao@eGroups.com>

I've just got a new computer, and in the setup process I lost a 
batch of emails in the virtual grave of cyberspace.  If anyone has 
sent me a message in the last two or three days, could you resend 
it?  Thanks!

As for childbearing, I suspect the biological clock is related to 
the social circles people move in.  In circles where having a family 
is considered an important part of adulthood and self-fulfilment, 
women are more likely to suffer from biological clock crises, 
anguish about the lack of good men, etc. In circles where having a 
family is not considered to be essential to self-fulfilment (or 
indeed, seen as a means of obstructing it!), women are less likely 
to be thus afflicted!

Tabouli.





From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 07:13:09 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 07:13:09 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bic7a2+jekp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bif1a6+24et@eGroups.com>

Gimme an E!  Gimme an L!  Gimme a K!  Gimme an I!  etc.!  Great to 
have you back, Elkins.  Especially your subversive opinions.

> And that supposed "biological clock?"  Haven't heard the faintest 
> tick out of that sucker yet.  Why, if it weren't such an absolutely 
> *subversive* suggestion, I might even think that thing to be nothing 
> but a big, ugly, sexist *myth!*

Waaal, the pressure on women to find a Man by 20 so they can have 
Child Number One by 25 and Child Number Two Point Three by 30 is the 
stuff of big, ugly, sexist myths.  But the biological clock itself, 
complete with ominous tick, is not.  There *is* an age at which women 
can no longer bear children, unless menopause is another myth.  So 
them that wants 'em can't wait *indefinitely.*  That, surely, is a 
fact.

Future breeder though I am, but I have never been able to comprehend 
the accusation that a lack of desire to have children is selfish.  The 
way I use the word, it means putting one's desires ahead of others' to 
an unkind degree.  How on earth does that apply to the choice not to 
have children, unless one believes that each unborn child is a soul up 
in heaven looking longingly down at the earth and wishing someone 
would conceive it?  (Someone should tell the little angels that 
they're better off where they are.)  Or unless one honestly thinks 
that each and every woman owes it to her parents to make them 
grandparents?  I can see some selfishness in that situation, but it 
ain't the un-mom who's being selfish . . . 

No, the only interpretation I've been able to come up with is that 
some people think that doing what one wants to do is selfish, even if 
it doesn't hurt anyone or even interfere with anyone else's fun.  Or 
maybe they just think it's selfish for *women* to do what they want.

Amy Z
who just saw Whale Rider and is feeling 




From ssk7882 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 09:11:27 2003
From: ssk7882 at yahoo.com (ssk7882)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 09:11:27 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bif1a6+24et@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bif87v+jjag@eGroups.com>

Amy Z. (now in my time-zone!) wrote:

> Waaal, the pressure on women to find a Man by 20 so they can have 
> Child Number One by 25 and Child Number Two Point Three by 30 is 
> the stuff of big, ugly, sexist myths. But the biological clock 
> itself, complete with ominous tick, is not. There *is* an age at 
> which women can no longer bear children, unless menopause is 
> another myth. So them that wants 'em can't wait *indefinitely.* 
> That, surely, is a fact.

True 'nuff.  And I've now reached the age where a lot of my peers are 
beginning to feel that "OMG, I'm 35! If I want kids, I'd better get 
*cracking!*" pressure.  Medical technology and good nutrition have 
extended the period of fertility to quite a degree, but there's still 
a limit, and there's always the question of plain old *energy* to 
contend with.  Not everyone ages so gracefully that running around 
after a rambunctious 3-year-old is going to feel the same to them at 
age 40 as it would have at age 25.

It's not been my experience, though, that women who have never before 
had the slightest interest in children very often hit the age of 33 
only to find themselves suddenly cooing over prams and bemoaning 
their Youth Mispent Not Looking For A Good Provider, which is the 
scenario that some people seem to enjoy promoting as a kind of 
cautionary tale: "You'll be sorry later," they warn young 
women.  "You'll be soooo-rrrrry!"

Feh.  

> Future breeder though I am, but I have never been able to 
> comprehend the accusation that a lack of desire to have children is 
> selfish. The way I use the word, it means putting one's desires 
> ahead of others' to an unkind degree. 

It's the "to an unkind degree" that is key here, I think.

Certainly I am willing to acknowledge (quite cheerfully, too) that my 
lack of desire to have children *does* have a selfish element.  After 
all, children are *expensive.*  They require a lot of attention and a 
lot of sacrifices: sacrifices of time, sacrifices of energy, 
sacrifices of freedom and autonomy.  Sacrifices that I have 
absolutely no desire to make.

I can't feel too guilty about that, though.  After all, I haven't 
gone off to India to devote my life to labor in a leper colony 
either.  I'm no saint, and I'd be doing the lepers no favors if I 
tried to pretend to be one --  much as I'd be doing no child a favor 
by pretending to be well-suited to parenthood.  

> No, the only interpretation I've been able to come up with is that 
> some people think that doing what one wants to do is selfish, even 
> if it doesn't hurt anyone or even interfere with anyone else's fun.

Sadly, I think that many people do think that way. My own parents 
never minded much about the grandchildren, but they always insisted 
that my disinclination to pursue any form of high-powered career was 
unspeakably selfish. 

Just can't win with some people, can you?


Elkins (who has now reached July in her reading and is having weird 
flashbacks to her pre-delurk days)




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Aug 26 12:46:31 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:46:31 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bif1a6+24et@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifkr7+5i1e@eGroups.com>

Amy wrote:

> Future breeder though I am, but I have never been able to 
comprehend 
> the accusation that a lack of desire to have children is selfish.  
The 
> way I use the word, it means putting one's desires ahead of 
others' to 
> an unkind degree.  

Well, as I understand it, the idea is that in your unproductive old 
age you will be a burden on others instead of your children.  In 
societies where children do not directly support their parents, you 
are failing to do your bit to optimise the demographic profile to 
maintain a functioning economy.

Put at its most general, the decision to have children is clearly 
not a socially neutral one.  In most times and places, the benefit 
analysis would fairly clearly have tilted towards the production of 
new human beings (and of course, even today in conservative 
societies the state has impressed on women the duty of child-bearing 
to keep the army, or whatever, up to strength) and there was 
therefore a corresponding social pressure.  World overpopulation is 
now reversing that historical trend, so that in some socieites (eg 
China) there is now legally backed pressure *not* to have children.

In either case, I think that the idea that reproduction is a matter 
for individual choice will always be an elusive aspiration: the rest 
of us simply have too much riding on your choice for us not to 
interfere, whether you (or we) like it or not.  This applies just as 
much to men as to women.

David




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Aug 26 13:57:34 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:57:34 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bifkr7+5i1e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifp0e+flvr@eGroups.com>

I've been following this thread with interest, because I really envy 
women who manage to make either decision and stick to it with no 
regrets(not meaning to make urge/lack of to breed sound like giving 
up smoking or anything). I didn't think I had too much to bring to 
the discussion, as I'm still in my early twenties, and have no 
intention of getting myself sprogged up for a good ten + years yet, 
but Amy's description of herself as a "future breeder" encouraged me 
a little. There's never really been any choice for me. My biological 
workings dictate that I get kiddy-cravings on a monthly basis, 
completely beyond the comprehension of the intellectual part of me 
which has been told that, as I'm trying to make a career for myself 
as an academic, children would be career suicide until I have at 
least a senior lectureship. In fact, a recent article in the 
Education section of the Guardian suggested that women in academia 
should put off having children until approximately 45 in order to 
be "taken seriously" or some such nonsense. 

I also wonder if my mother and Elkins' would rather like to settle 
down with a nice cup of tea some time, as my mum, too, is far more 
interested in my having a sparkling career (in academia? Shurely some 
mishtake?) before I present her with any twinkly-eyed grandpuppies. 
Although I'm in no doubt that both are expected at some point. (I 
begin to feel that my brother, who has recently outed himself not 
only as gay, but as a resolute academic non-achiever and confirmed 
nursing assistant, may have got a slightly better deal out of all 
this. Also he earns more than I do...)

I was also interested in David's point - that society is likely to 
interfere in personal choices of this nature whether or not the 
individual cares to involve it. Starting out at the beginning just 
now, I rather feel as though there are various pre-prescribed "lines" 
to follow, and personal choice is therefore reduced to throwing 
allegiance in with one or the other. I was about to describe myself 
as "at the bottom of the career ladder" there, which I suppose proves 
my point to a certain degree. I have friends who are wandering off 
around the world, unsure when/if they'll return, or what they'll do 
if they do. I have friends who are settling down and marrying right 
now, with no money, no jobs, just lots of love and a shared kitten. 
I feel rather like a lab rat, set on a particular course to prove a 
point, and have a horrible picture of myself in fifteen years time, 
wearing a suit whilst breast-feeding screaming child and marking 
essays, with my hair all gone to pot and no money for shoes (hey, 
these things are important to me). But at the same time, I can't 
bring myself to consider not having children. Bah! Biology. 

That was a rather long-winded way of expressing my envy, I suppose. I 
wonder, does one reach a point where the choice becomes clear? or 
does everything simply muddy up further? I think I know the answer to 
this already.
I suppose reading over this, I didn't really have too much to 
contribute to the discussion after all. I just felt like a gossip. 
Feel a bit better now, oddly.

Kirstini





From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 26 13:58:31 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:58:31 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bifkr7+5i1e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifp27+fm1a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> 
wrote:
 
> Well, as I understand it, the idea is that in your unproductive old 
> age you will be a burden on others instead of your children.  In 
> societies where children do not directly support their parents, you 
> are failing to do your bit to optimise the demographic profile to 
> maintain a functioning economy.

I think that genenrally when people refer to not having children 
as "selfish", it's from a vague sense that the person in question 
simply does not want the bother and hassle. Having children entails 
an enormous investment - emotional, physical, financial - in a person 
other than yourself. So, not wanting to make that investment seems 
selfish. What these people do not take into account, apparantly, is 
that the most important thing a parent can do for her child is 
wanting her. 

> 
> Put at its most general, the decision to have children is clearly 
> not a socially neutral one.  In most times and places, the benefit 
> analysis would fairly clearly have tilted towards the production of 
> new human beings (and of course, even today in conservative 
> societies the state has impressed on women the duty of child-
bearing 
> to keep the army, or whatever, up to strength) and there was 
> therefore a corresponding social pressure.  <snip>

<nostalgic grin> This reminds me of the kind of attitude prevailing 
in Israel during the fifties and the sixties. The greatest fear then
(justified) was that the small Jewish state would be overcome by the 
millions of Arabs surrounding it, and all its inhabitants thrown into 
the sea (literally). The situation was seen as David vs. Goliath, the 
few facing the many. So, there was a lot of talk about numbers and 
demographics. In fact, Ben Gurion, the legendary prime minister, used 
to personally visit women who had born a tenth child and they even 
got reward money (!).



Naama




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Aug 26 13:59:34 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:59:34 -0000
Subject: "You're Just Selfish!" (WAS moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bif87v+jjag@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifp46+idkr@eGroups.com>

Elkins:

> It's not been my experience, though, that women who have never 
>before had the slightest interest in children very often hit the 
>age of 33 only to find themselves suddenly cooing over prams and 
>bemoaning their Youth Mispent Not Looking For A Good Provider, 

Welcome back, Elkins!

Now, let me disagree with you.  :-D

I've seen exactly that plenty of times.  In my world, you'll have 
ambitious, competitive, hard-charging female.  She's been groomed 
her whole life to accomplish Great Things.  She doesn't want or need 
a spouse or kids; she's always wanted to be in some profession and 
rising rapidly to the top of it.  

And she gets there.  And she looks around.  And she realizes that it 
isn't all it's cracked up to be.  It's kind of hollow, really -- 
just the TV and a pint of Ben and Jerry's.  I mean, how many of 
those great shrimp cocktail things can one person eat?  Plus, past 
accomplishments are just that -- in the past -- and people 
constantly want to know what wonderful and brilliant thing she has 
done *this* week.  The idea of gutting it out in the corporate 
jungle for the next 35 years starts to become less appealing.  So 
her priorites might shift a bit.  

I said "*Might.*"  I know women who experienced no shift at all, of 
course.  These women could buy and sell me.  I also know men who 
have experienced the same thing, of course.  But it does happen.


Amy:

> No, the only interpretation I've been able to come up with is that 
> some people think that doing what one wants to do is selfish, even 
> if it doesn't hurt anyone or even interfere with anyone else's fun.

Boy, some people really think that way, huh?  There's also the "You 
won't do what *I* want, so that makes *you* selfish!" variant.

This is such a weird way of thinking.  Most everyone is selfish -- 
this explains why none of us is emptying our bank accounts and 
handing the money over the nearest homeless person.  

So what's the difference between immoral selfishness and simply 
doing what one wants?  I dunno.  In my experience, though, the first 
person to level a charge of "selfishness" is often someone who has 
done the wrong thing themselves and then resents someone else's 
refusal to bail them out.  "You're so *selfish* because you won't 
let me borrow your car!"  "You're *selfish* because you won't cover 
for me!"  Pah!

Elkins:

 
>My own parents never minded much about the grandchildren, but they 
>always insisted that my disinclination to pursue any form of high-
>powered career was unspeakably selfish. 

I got a different, more guilt-inducing variant of that one:  "You're 
so *selfish* because you should use your skills on behalf of other 
people of color!  Everyone else is entitled to any career they want, 
but you're selfish unless you work for the NAACP!"

Yeah, well.  The NAACP probably wouldn't hire me anyway.  Which 
makes the NAACP *selfish!*  :-D


> Elkins (who has now reached July in her reading and is having 
>weird  flashbacks to her pre-delurk days)

Cindy -- patiently waiting for Elkins to finish her reading so 
Elkins can tell her what to think




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Aug 26 14:11:20 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:11:20 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bifp0e+flvr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifpq8+fbo2@eGroups.com>

Kirstini wrote (about whether to have kids):

> I wonder, does one reach a point where the choice becomes clear? 
>or does everything simply muddy up further? 

Well, I have a philosophy about this.

There is *never* a good time to have children.  Really.  It would be 
easier to manage it all if children were like a loaf of bread and 
appeared the instant you wished to have them.  No, you've got that 9-
month time lag to consider.

Professionally, there's not a good time, either.  If you are just 
starting out, it will be hard to get any traction and compete with 
your childless rivals.  If you wait until you have established 
yourself, then it is hard to give up what you have achieved (your 
client base, your caseload, etc.).  

So that led me to just figured I'd have kids on a timetable that 
made sense for us -- might as well just have as many as you want 
with the spacing you want and let the chips fall where they may.

And as for the decision to have children at all, I admit that this 
is a toughie.  It is certainly true that someone (like me) who 
doesn't like OPCs ("Other People's Children") can fall in love with 
their own, but you never know until you try.  

I guess it is like deciding whether to marry someone.  You just look 
around, grimace, and settle for the best you can get . . . .

No?  :-D

Long story short:  When you're ready, you just know.

Cindy





From neonsister at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 26 14:49:48 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:49:48 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bif1a6+24et@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifs2c+h15o@eGroups.com>

This is an interesting discussion.  I have also chosen not to have 
children, and I sometimes feel like I have to explain myself. There 
are always a handful of people who assume that I made this choice 
because I don't like children or babies.  Nothing could be further 
from the truth!  I think kids are wonderful, and I adore my nephew 
and nieces; but I just do not see myself as a parent.  

Tracy





From neonsister at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 26 14:52:28 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:52:28 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bif1a6+24et@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifs7c+g4pq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z" <lupinesque at y...> 
wrote:  "who just saw Whale Rider and is feeling"
 

I thought "Whale Rider" was a great movie.  The young actress (can't 
recall her name) did an excellent job.  

Tracy





From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 15:00:55 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:00:55 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bifpq8+fbo2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bifsn7+tpjr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...> 
wrote:
> Kirstini wrote (about whether to have kids):
> 
> > I wonder, does one reach a point where the choice becomes clear? 
> >or does everything simply muddy up further? 

Cindy replid: 

> And as for the decision to have children at all, I admit that this 
> is a toughie.  It is certainly true that someone (like me) who 
> doesn't like OPCs ("Other People's Children") can fall in love with 
> their own, but you never know until you try.  
> 
> I guess it is like deciding whether to marry someone.  You just 
look 
> around, grimace, and settle for the best you can get . . . .
> 
> No?  :-D
> 
> Long story short:  When you're ready, you just know.

 linlou:

     Just wanted to add my own perspective here. I was married and 
had my first child at nineteen. Had my second at twenty-one.(That's 
it, I'm done.) The comments I hear all the time are along the lines 
of "Why did you have kids so young? You missed out on enjoying being 
young." Comments like these, from the point of view of my personal 
choice, are absolute rubbish. I usually reply with something along 
the lines of "What did I miss out on, exactly, that I can't still 
do?" I'll only be forty when my youngest graduates from high school. 
I have plenty of time to enjoy my life and I'll even be young enough 
to really enjoy my grandkids once they come along. (Though that 
better not be for a while yet as my kids are only 13 and 10 
respectively :) ) I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the 
criticisms aren't reserved for the women who decide not to have 
children but for anyone who does not have kids with-in the age range 
that society has decided to dictate as well. It really is two sides 
of the same coin where the coin should really be melted down and made 
into nice shiny buttons or something.

      -linlou,who wishes she could think of something better to make 
than buttons




From starling823 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 16:47:05 2003
From: starling823 at yahoo.com (Sternel)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 16:47:05 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Ali! (Belated)
In-Reply-To: <bia53m+luun@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <big2u9+ihkp@eGroups.com>

Well, it's a few days late, but thanks to everyone who sent b-day 
greetings to us 23rders from me too!  =)

:;waves to Joy::  Joy, hon, we hung out at Nimbus tons and we never 
realised we shared a birthday!  wah!  I'd so have toasted to us 
during the Kimono's karyoke if I'd realised!

Ali then asked:
> Also, birthday greetings to everyone who had a birthday yesterday. 
> Do you count yourselves as Leos or Virgos or do you change 
depending 
> on the year?

Well, actually, I am technically Virgo.  My roomie from freshman year 
of college did up my whole chart (she's a wiz at that stuff.  it's 
really impressive), and thanks to the fact that I was born at 11.32 
pm, that puts me over the border by about two hours.  
However, being so close to the cusp, I have a lot of Leo tendancies 
too - I think that's where I get my drama-queen-nature.  =)

anyway, that's another year over and done with...next!  =)

Sternel, who is muchly looking forward to the upcoming year, as it 
brings both the final LOTR and the new HP movies.  yes, she knows 
she's addicted, and she's fine with it.  =)




From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Tue Aug 26 18:09:38 2003
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:09:38 -0000
Subject: The Return of Tom Swift
Message-ID: <big7p2+37b7@eGroups.com>

Now that Book Five is out, the time has come for more Tom Swifties.

The previous Tom's can be found in the Files section, under "Club 
Humor"

"I skipped my Occlumency lesson again," said Harry absent-mindedly

"This charm, which I learned from Prof. Lupin, will doubtless prove 
quite difficult for most of you," said Harry patronizingly.

"A week's detention, Potter," said Umbridge back-handedly.

"I need a draught of Relaxation," said Hannah Abbott testily.

"Tarantallegra!" said Dolohov standoffishly

"Not Potter's Army. Dumbledore's Army," said Dumbledore militantly. 

"I want to escort Harry to King's Cross," said Sirius doggedly. 

"I see you've met my mother," said Sirius picturesquely. 

"Doxies have got to be good for something," said Fred jokingly. 

"And look, Broderick, you've been sent a potted plant," said Miriam 
Strout devilishly

   - CMC




From pbarhug at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 26 19:08:51 2003
From: pbarhug at earthlink.net (Pam Hugonnet)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:08:51 -0400
Subject: Children Anyone? (WAS:on not having children)
References: <bif87v+jjag@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002801c36c05$7e53c000$3b9f8c45@DJZCB631>

Elkins wrote:

Certainly I am willing to acknowledge (quite cheerfully, too) that my 
lack of desire to have children *does* have a selfish element.  After 
all, children are *expensive.*  They require a lot of attention and a 
lot of sacrifices: sacrifices of time, sacrifices of energy, 
sacrifices of freedom and autonomy.  Sacrifices that I have absolutely no desire to make.


I say:

First, let me applaud you and Catlady and any others out there who make the reasoned and informed decision to not have children.  It is a good thing to know yourself and your capacities and to act accordingly.  Is it selfish?  That depends...many things people choose to do (including having children) are selfish but, as others have pointed out, being selfish is not always a bad thing.

Elkins adds:
It's not been my experience, though, that women who have never before 
had the slightest interest in children very often hit the age of 33 
only to find themselves suddenly cooing over prams and bemoaning 
their Youth Mispent Not Looking For A Good Provider, which is the 
scenario that some people seem to enjoy promoting as a kind of 
cautionary tale: "You'll be sorry later," they warn young 
women.  "You'll be soooo-rrrrry!"



Ah, but there's the rub.  There aren't many who have made the kind of rational decision that you have.   There are many women who adopt the position of not wanting children because--they believe-- those children would be inconvenient for or incongruent to the lifestyle they aspire to or fantasize having.  I know many women who think they are living a "Sex in the City" lifestyle--oh, the drama!  oh, the intrigue!--only to find that such a lifestyle doesn't really exist or isn't sustainable over the long term.  Or else there are the women whose spouse or significant other has declared himself opposed to children (for some reason or other); these women often echo the sentiments to sustain the relationship ("He loves me and he'll change his mind if I want him to" or "I'll do anything to keep him."   When the relationship fizzles or the woman can no longer continue to repress her own desires--bang!  You get the old baby crisis.

Listen to me, I sound like a shrink.


Cindy writes:

I've seen exactly that plenty of times.  In my world, you'll have 
ambitious, competitive, hard-charging female.  She's been groomed 
her whole life to accomplish Great Things.  She doesn't want or need 
a spouse or kids; she's always wanted to be in some profession and 
rising rapidly to the top of it.  

And she gets there.  And she looks around.  And she realizes that it 
isn't all it's cracked up to be.  It's kind of hollow, really -- 
just the TV and a pint of Ben and Jerry's.


Don't I know it.  I have a few friends who are dealing with that right now.  Women who looked down at me when I fell pregnant with my first.   One actually  said she was sorry; you'd have thought I said I was terminally ill or something.  Some who dropped me like a hot potato.  Now many of these same women are dealing with age-related fertility issues or loneliness from having put off developing intimate relationships in order to foster a career or an education.  That Ph.D. is nice to have, but it doesn't keep you warm at night.  Besides, I don't know that personal advancement and educational/career aspirations are mutually exclusive.   But that's another can of worms.


Cindy wrote in response to Kirstini:

There is *never* a good time to have children.  Really.  It would be 
easier to manage it all if children were like a loaf of bread and 
appeared the instant you wished to have them.  No, you've got that 9-
month time lag to consider.

Professionally, there's not a good time, either.  If you are just 
starting out, it will be hard to get any traction and compete with 
your childless rivals.  If you wait until you have established 
yourself, then it is hard to give up what you have achieved (your 
client base, your caseload, etc.).  


Yup.  I agree wholeheartedly.  Had my first when I was finishing up my residency.  Had my second when I was writing my dissertation.  Three was well timed--only had to buy a new car to accommodate the extra passenger; number four was a total shocker which necessitated my scuttling a part-time private practice that I was trying to put together, buying a new house, etc...  There's always something, but you just pick a time when most of the infrastructure is in place, be ready to make some sacrifices and hard choices and hope for the best.

BTW, Cindy,  I thought of you this morning as I was taking #1 and #2 to the bus stop.  There were many smiling moms and dads and several sad little faces.  Hope you had a quiet day.   Your Dr. Phil message made me laugh.  We just got back from taking the kids to Disney for week; can you believe they fought right in the middle of the Magic Kingdom?  Yes, you can...

drpam
singing, "It's the most wonderful time of the year..."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Tue Aug 26 21:30:41 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 21:30:41 -0000
Subject: Happy Belated Birthday Jo Serenadust
Message-ID: <bigji1+teg9@eGroups.com>

Just a little note to say Happy Birthday to Jo Serenadust who 
celebrated her birthday yesterday. 

I hope you had a really relaxing, pampered day!

Birthday greetings can be magicked to Jo at jmmears at comcast.net.

Ali, friend and stepping in as a temporary birthday elf
 




From eberte at vaeye.com  Tue Aug 26 23:31:14 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 23:31:14 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bi8dmc+pagj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bigqk2+pl62@eGroups.com>

Catlady wrote:
> Women who hand their children over to be raised by a nanny are 
> putting their child in the environment of the intelligence,
> education, mode of speech, table manners, religious 
> beliefs, political beliefs, of a person who chose that line of work 
> either because she obsessively adores being with children, or
> because she CAN'T get anything that pays better.


Ohhhh, Catlady!  Do you really mean that???  I think that you are 
over-stating something that is true to an extent.  I am a mother of 
three (ages 7, 5 and 3) and I also work 4 days a week.  I have about 
a gazillion years of medical training (med school, residency, 
fellowships and the lot) in my past that it is hard to just ditch for 
the child-rearing years and then pick up again later.  My kids have a 
wonderful nanny who has been with our family since my oldest was 2 
months old.  Yes, she does some things differently than me, and 
sometimes I think that I should quit and stay at home, but in reality 
my children are healthy, happy, and loved and the situation is 
working for us.  

The choice of the nanny is obviously important--you pick someone (if 
possible) with values and intelligence close to your own. To some 
extent, the exposure to different backgrounds and beliefs can be a 
positive experience to children.  My kids love their nanny and my son 
once observed that "Mattie (the nanny) is the only one in our family 
who does not have blue eyes."  

Elle (who needs to go home now to those three little blue-eyed dolls 
and their fabulous nanny)  




From erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 23:45:40 2003
From: erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com (Phyllis)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 23:45:40 -0000
Subject: Stephen Fry audio sample
In-Reply-To: <bi9k9v+gdd1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bigrf4+p380@eGroups.com>

Stasia wrote:

> I've heard amazing things about Stephen Fry's readings, but I can't 
> find an audio sample online anywhere.  I just lost my job, so I 
> can't really face buying a set of cd's from England without being 
> Very Sure I'm going to like them better than what I already have.  
> If I do like them better, I'll ask my husband for them for a 
> holiday present, or something... 

I don't know of anyplace you can actually hear a sample, but I 
ordered a tin of the first four books read by Fry from Amazon UK for 
about $100 US, which I thought was a terrific deal (you mentioned 
CDs - these are cassette tapes, there isn't a comparable deal for CDs 
unfortunately).  If you're interested, here's the link:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1855496542/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/
026-1575635-1870022

I have all of the Dale tapes as well, and like them, but I think Fry  
has absorbed the books better than Dale (although Dale's voices are 
more varied and interesting).

~Phyllis




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed Aug 27 00:17:01 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:17:01 -0000
Subject: The Return of Tom Swift
In-Reply-To: <big7p2+37b7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bigt9t+u26t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Caius Marcius" 
<coriolan at w...> wrote:
> Now that Book Five is out, the time has come for more Tom 
Swifties.
> 

"I'm monitoring the Floo Network," said Umbridge, gratingly.

"We are not animals," said the Centaur hoarsely.

"There's something I can't remember," said Snape, pensively.

"Come on, you can do better than that," said Sirius, finally.


~Pippin




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 00:48:01 2003
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:48:01 -0000
Subject: Children Anyone? (WAS:on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <002801c36c05$7e53c000$3b9f8c45@DJZCB631>
Message-ID: <bigv41+qkeb@eGroups.com>

Pam congratulated thusly:


> Ah, but there's the rub.  There aren't many who have made the kind 
of rational decision that you have.   There are many women who adopt 
the position of not wanting children because--they believe-- those 
children would be inconvenient for or incongruent to the lifestyle 
they aspire to or fantasize having. 

Another mid-30-something who's never experienced baby-longing 
here--the decision IS rational, BUT...just like the decision of most 
people who DO have children, it is based, fundamentally, on desire. 
I'm pretty sure if I really wanted a child, I'd come up with some way 
to have one, whether it was a "good idea" or not, and I'll bet the 
same is true of the other very determined and resourceful women who've 
expressed that lack of desire. There are many, many, many good reasons 
why I don't have a child--but reason Number One, which sets the stage 
for all the others, is that I don't want one. Both parents and 
non-parents are, I think, acting a little selfishly, in that they are 
going for what they _want_.

As for the "lifestyle" thing, which is a thinly veiled dig at those of 
us who are unmarried urban types quite devoted to our careers (mine is 
in arts journalism, which requires a lot of late nights out and 
travel, and doesn't bring in a great deal of cash--no Manolo Blahnik 
shoes for me!), well, there's no lifestyle choice out there that 
*guarantees* lack of regrets. Believe me, all my life I've known 
plenty of elderly folks who never see the children they trusted to 
take care of them, and are much lonelier than their peers who invested 
energy in a *larger* community, in a network of friends and colleagues 
and a web of _adult_ companionship.

 I know many women who think they are living a "Sex in the City" 
lifestyle--oh, the drama!  oh, the intrigue!--only to find that such a 
lifestyle doesn't really exist or isn't sustainable over the long 
term.  Or else there are the women whose spouse or significant other 
has declared himself opposed to children (for some reason or other); 
these women often echo the sentiments to sustain the relationship ("He 
loves me and he'll change his mind if I want him to" or "I'll do 
anything to keep him."   When the relationship fizzles or the woman 
can no longer continue to repress her own desires--bang!  You get the 
old baby crisis.

Well, I once had to let a man I loved very deeply go, because he 
wanted very much to be a father someday. I could not/would not deny 
him that experience--but I also could not give it to him (not without 
inflicting my own subsequent unhappiness on *two* people who don't 
deserve it). It wasn't easy to do, and it was hard on both of us. But 
I also think, if I say so myself, it was ultimatley rather *unselfish* 
of me.


> And she gets there.  And she looks around.  And she realizes that it 
> isn't all it's cracked up to be.  It's kind of hollow, really -- 
> just the TV and a pint of Ben and Jerry's.

Well, I'm nowhere near the top of my field yet, although I'm 
constantly working on it, and I do have a couple professional awards. 
But I can tell you I DO have a partner (not a husband--no need for him 
to be, really, but if he ever wants to be I reckon it'll be fine); I 
have a network of friends I've been very close to for a decade and a 
half who are seriously discussing buying land together for communal 
living in our old age; I'm very close to my parents and to my 
partner's; if I want to spoil some kids I have his adorable nieces; I 
love our cats; he's in three (3!) bands (one of them with a guy who's 
been his best friend since high school) and is working on his second 
solo album, and I have a fanfiction hobby and am doing research for an 
original novel and working on applying for a journo fellowship.

I haven't watched TV in weeks except the news. Who has time? 

I'm sorry if this sounds like bragging, but I know I am NOT a rare, 
special case. Most of the people I know are just like this (with 
obvious variations on the details of pursuit and circumstance. SOme of 
'em even do have kids--the happiest being the editor-in-chief of my 
paper, who can afford for her husband to stay home with them.)
 
> 
> Don't I know it.  I have a few friends who are dealing with that 
right now.  Women who looked down at me when I fell pregnant with my 
first.   One actually  said she was sorry; you'd have thought I said I 
was terminally ill or something.  Some who dropped me like a hot 
potato.  Now many of these same women are dealing with age-related 
fertility issues or loneliness from having put off developing intimate 
relationships in order to foster a career or an education.  That Ph.D. 
is nice to have, but it doesn't keep you warm at night.  Besides, I 
don't know that personal advancement and educational/career 
aspirations are mutually exclusive.   But that's another can of worms.

Well, that can of worms is the whole point, isn't it?

It's funny - someone else posted about being criticized for having her 
kids too young. But then there are others who will criticize women for 
having them too old. The point is, there will always be people around 
who feel free to criticize you for whatever reason. Women get the 
brunt of this in the "personal choices" department, because we're 
supposed to be the ones who "keep the home fires burning" while men do 
whatever they're going to do--and of course it's other women who seem 
to do the brunt of the criticizing lots of times. To hell with the 
criticisms, since there is NO path you can take that will avoid them 
entirely.

I might be able to be talked into feeling guilty for not reproducing 
if I were a California condor, or a Bengal tiger, or a northern 
spotted owl. But since _homo sapiens sapiens_ is by no stretch an 
endangered species (except perhaps by other means than numerical 
extinction), I'll leave it to the people who are suited for it and 
want to do it, the same way I left nuclear physics to people who are 
good at math and internal medicine to people who don't faint at the 
sight of blood.

And if I freak out and change my mind at 45? Adoption, adoption, 
adoption! Have never understood this fertility-treatment craze: give a 
loving home to a c




From eberte at vaeye.com  Wed Aug 27 00:51:58 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:51:58 -0000
Subject: Stephen Fry audio sample
In-Reply-To: <bigrf4+p380@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bigvbe+ddc6@eGroups.com>

Phyllis wrote:
> I have all of the Dale tapes as well, and like them, but I think
> Fry has absorbed the books better than Dale (although Dale's voices
> are more varied and interesting).
> 

I have to agree.  I love the Jim Dale tapes (they were playing in a 
constant loop in my car for *years*!) but I recently ordered the 
Stephen Fry versions of the first 4 books.  The two readings are 
different but both are delightful.  Fry's voices are less varied but 
the inflections of his readings are more rich (and he doesn't have 
that horrible voice for Hermione like Jim Dale.)  I feel as though I 
am getting to read the books all over again for the first time.  

Elle  (who has children who can also recite the HP series by heart 
due to life-long exposure to the audiotapes)  




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 00:56:03 2003
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:56:03 -0000
Subject: oopsy
In-Reply-To: <bigv41+qkeb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bigvj3+sd4i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "vulgarweed" <fluxed at e...> 
wrote:
terrible netiquette to reply to one's own post but I just had to 
clarify, 'cause the carat marks got dropped, that this...

>  I know many women who think they are living a "Sex in the City" 
> lifestyle--oh, the drama!  oh, the intrigue!--only to find that such 

is the graf I was responding to and this:
> 
> Well, I once had to let a man I loved very deeply go, because he 

is what I wrote.

Gah. Sorry!





From s_ings at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 01:09:10 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 21:09:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Belated Birthday Jo Serenadust
In-Reply-To: <bigji1+teg9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030827010910.43715.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- Ali <Ali at zymurgy.org> wrote: > Just a little note
to say Happy Birthday to Jo
> Serenadust who 
> celebrated her birthday yesterday. 
> 
> I hope you had a really relaxing, pampered day!
> 
> Birthday greetings can be magicked to Jo at
> jmmears at comcast.net.
> 
> Ali, friend and stepping in as a temporary birthday
> elf

I hope your day was magical and brought everything you
wished for!

Sheryll, thanking Ali for stepping in

=====
http://www.livejournal.com/community/conventionalley/

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From editor at texas.net  Wed Aug 27 02:23:55 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 21:23:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: moved from Main List: on not having children
References: <bif87v+jjag@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c36c42$74b27680$6c04a6d8@texas.net>

Elkins:

> Certainly I am willing to acknowledge (quite cheerfully, too) that my
> lack of desire to have children *does* have a selfish element.  After
> all, children are *expensive.*  They require a lot of attention and a
> lot of sacrifices: sacrifices of time, sacrifices of energy,
> sacrifices of freedom and autonomy.  Sacrifices that I have
> absolutely no desire to make.
>
> I can't feel too guilty about that, though.  After all, I haven't
> gone off to India to devote my life to labor in a leper colony
> either.  I'm no saint, and I'd be doing the lepers no favors if I
> tried to pretend to be one --  much as I'd be doing no child a favor
> by pretending to be well-suited to parenthood.

(cue cheesy Infomercial music, bright bad pseudo-actor onscreen)

Act now!

You, too, can be *completely* certain you've made the correct choice! Borrow
*Amanda's* children for a couple of weeks, rent-free! Experience that
parental frustration! That lack of any spare money whatsoever for things
like a personal wardrobe, shoes, haircuts, hobbies, or outside interests!
The amazing experience of articulately arguing a point and *still* having it
ignored totally! Don't miss this opportunity to say to the world, "Yes! I
tried it, and it *does* bite!"

..etc.

~VoldeMom






From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 04:05:46 2003
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 04:05:46 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <000c01c36c42$74b27680$6c04a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bihamq+cvbq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
>
> > 
> (cue cheesy Infomercial music, bright bad pseudo-actor onscreen)
> 
> Act now!
> 
> You, too, can be *completely* certain you've made the correct 
choice! Borrow
> *Amanda's* children for a couple of weeks, rent-free! Experience 
that
> parental frustration! That lack of any spare money whatsoever for 
things
> like a personal wardrobe, shoes, haircuts, hobbies, or outside 
interests!
> The amazing experience of articulately arguing a point and *still* 
having it
> ignored totally! Don't miss this opportunity to say to the 
world, "Yes! I
> tried it, and it *does* bite!"
> 
> ..etc.
> 
> ~VoldeMom

Amanda,

Can I sit in the audience, nod my head "Yes", "Oooo" and "Aaaaaa", 
and marval at precociousness of your children??

And, incase you get a lot of responses, I'd certainly offer up my own 
children for a week as well, and, as a bonus, you can take the four 
year old yellow lab too!!  (She'll find the kids' dirty socks and 
deposit them all over the place for you!)


Anna . . .(who LOVES  the  "VoldeMom" nome-de-plume; and who's 
looking forward to having ALL THREE IN SCHOOL ALL DAY LONG!!!)
er, sorry for the shouting, got a little overexcited




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 05:43:43 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 22:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: re-release of the LotR movies {was GoF one movie? @ HPFGU-Movie}
Message-ID: <20030827054343.20122.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>

Tim:
> Have you heard that on the day
> before the release of RotK that they 
> are going to play the extended
> versions of FotR & TT followed by 
> RotK??  You can sit and watch all
> 10+ hours of LotR with intermissions
> between each film.  Mark Dec 16th on
> your calendar's for this special event.

Tim, later:
> Those are the only details so far...
> and I found those at Yahoo Movies.  The
> plan is to release the extended version
> of FotR in mid November... followed by
> the extended version of TT in early 
> December... then the special event of
> all three films on the 16th... followed
> by the release of RotK on the 17th.

Here are some more details, which don't 
quite mesh with what you've got.  Do you 
have an URL for me?  :)

According to Variety.com:

"Just two weeks before the Dec. 17 release 
of 'The Lord of the Rings: The Return of 
the King' -- the final installment of the 
Peter Jackson-helmed epic trilogy -- the 
first two 'Ring' entries [this time with 
additional scenes and footage added] will 
be unspooling worldwide."

FotR (208 minutes) is for the week of 
Dec. 5 then TT (214 minutes) for the week 
of Dec. 12 - all this leading up to a 
worldwide Dec. 16 daylong marathon, 
during which all three films will be 
shown back-to-back.  A 3 p.m. showing of 
FotR followed by TT at 7 p.m. then an 
11 p.m. screening of "Return of the King" 
is suggested by New Line.

It sounds like the US cities are already 
set but not so outside the US.  If you 
won't be in the US in these weeks, you 
might want to urge your favorite theaters 
to join the festivities by contacting 
their New Line account rep. ASAP.

You can get the "rest of the story" at:

http://tinyurl.com/lbep

(which is http://www.variety.com/
story.asp?l=story&a=VR1117891287&c=13)

Don't be rebuffed by the fact that this 
is a subscription-based site: they offer 
FREE trials.  :)

Well, well, well...<g>...this is one 
helluva way to campaign for the Oscars!

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 06:40:03 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 06:40:03 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bifsn7+tpjr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bihjo3+60a8@eGroups.com>

Cindy and Elkins debated about the reality of the "I'm 33 and oh my 
god I suddenly realize I want kids" phenomenon.  I think Cindy's 
right, it does really happen; but in support of Elkins, I don't think 
it happens nearly as often as the myth claims.  Rather, many women 
(like Kirstini) know perfectly well that they want to have children, 
and that they really ought to do something about that by, say, their 
late thirties or risk its never happening.  But they're in graduate 
school, or they're in the early stages of a competitive career track, 
or they keep dating people who would make the world's worst parent, 
and so it doesn't happen.  And then they're over 30 and it still isn't 
a good time to take three years off work, and besides, their boyfriend 
just moved out, and they start to panic.

To digress, it's telling that while unwed motherhood has skyrocketed 
over the decades, *teenage* motherhood has not.  There have been times 
when there were more teenage mothers than there are now; but the 
teenagers used to be *married.*  My grandmother was married at 17, had 
her first child at 19.  Can you imagine the looks she'd get if she 
tried that in 2003?

>  linlou:
> 
>      Just wanted to add my own perspective here. I was married and 
> had my first child at nineteen. Had my second at twenty-one.(That's 
> it, I'm done.) The comments I hear all the time are along the lines 
> of "Why did you have kids so young? You missed out on enjoying being 
> young." Comments like these, from the point of view of my personal 
> choice, are absolute rubbish. I usually reply with something along 
> the lines of "What did I miss out on, exactly, that I can't still 
> do?" I'll only be forty when my youngest graduates from high school. 
> I have plenty of time to enjoy my life and I'll even be young enough 
> to really enjoy my grandkids once they come along. (Though that 
> better not be for a while yet as my kids are only 13 and 10 
> respectively :) ) I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the 
> criticisms aren't reserved for the women who decide not to have 
> children but for anyone who does not have kids with-in the age range 
> that society has decided to dictate as well.

Excellent point.  During some long-ago discussion of a similar topic 
somewhere around here (it might have been on the Mods' list--not to 
tell tales out of school, but it isn't all policymaking and message 
un-pending), someone pointed out that it seemed that the acceptable 
range of ages for a woman to get married was ridiculously narrow.  
Anything under, say, 24, was too young, while if one wasn't at least 
engaged by 30, relatives began to panic.  It's true!  (Adjust exact 
figures for your cultural norms.)

> It really is two sides 
> of the same coin where the coin should really be melted down and 
made 
> into nice shiny buttons or something.
> 
>       -linlou,who wishes she could think of something better to make 
> than buttons

Earrings?  Earrings are always nice.  ;-)

Re: David's point about the burden upon society, I dunno.  Of course 
the individual decision has an effect on everyone else.  But I don't 
think most of us think it through that way.  It may be true that by 
not having a child, one is effectively asking the government to 
support one in one's old age, but is that what goes through anyone's 
head when they say that it's selfish not to have kids?

And, after all, if I produce a child, that may help ease society's 
burden when I'm old and gray, but what happens forty years later when 
the *child* is old and gray?  Another senior mouth to feed.  In other 
words, do any of us pull our weight?  Do we produce enough revenue in 
the form of taxes and GDP to make the government think it's worthwhile 
to take care of us in our old age, or don't we?  And if we don't, then 
what good is it to have children?  The children will take on some of 
the burden of supporting us (or maybe they won't; there's no law 
requiring them to, at least in the US), but who will take care of 
those children?

One place the social effect of individual childbearing choices *is* 
given a lot of weight is in the different attitudes toward women of 
different classes.  *Parents* rich and poor alike may want their 
daughters to turn out grandkids, but the *government* is quite adamant 
that poor women shouldn't have kids and middle- and upper-class women 
should.  Since women have fewer children the more education they have, 
the government is beating its head against the wall on this one.  And 
yet there you have it.  Rich women should be staying home taking care 
of their children, because it's the right thing for women to do.  
(Never mind that after a few months of this unsalaried activity, the 
women are unlikely to still be rich.)  Poor women should be working, 
not staying home taking care of their children, since they're more 
likely to be on the dole if they do that.  

Basically, human beings are expensive.  There aren't too many of us 
who actually come up with every penny it takes to raise a child, all 
alone.  We have parents who look after them, employers who provide 
their health insurance, colleges who give them free tuition, or a 
government that gives them food stamps.  I sure as hell can't afford 
to raise and college-educate a child unless I have at least two of 
those four pitching in, and I'm a multi-degreed professional. 

One more thought on the selfishness issue.  I think perhaps what's 
meant by "it's selfish" is not so much "it's selfish to do what you 
want," but "it's selfish not to want to devote one's life to taking 
care of someone else."  Yes, I think that's it, because the point the 
argument flares up is often when a woman (always, always a woman--I 
never hear anyone say this to men) says, "I have other things I want 
to do.  I want to be an artist / I want to travel around the world / I 
want to win the Nobel Prize in chemistry / I want to make partner in a 
law firm.  Having children would make that very difficult."  People 
bristle when someone makes this true and obvious statement, as if 
preferring painting in oils over changing diapers is selfish instead 
of just a preference.  (The art museums wou




From ssk7882 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 09:12:55 2003
From: ssk7882 at yahoo.com (ssk7882)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:12:55 -0000
Subject: "You're Just Selfish!" (WAS moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bifp46+idkr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bihsmn+680l@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote of the ambitious career woman who reaches the 
proverbial "top" only to realize...

> And she gets there. And she looks around. And she 
> realizes that it isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's 
> kind of hollow, really -- just the TV and a pint of 
> Ben and Jerry's. 
 
Yeah, but people who devote their lives to child-rearing get exactly 
the same phenomenon. It's called "empty nest syndrome."  And people 
who dedicate their lives to things other than career or children get 
it as well.  Unsuccessful would-be artists past the age of 35 are 
what help to keep the bars in business.  

But when I questioned the whole "biological clock" notion, I wasn't 
talking about mid-life crises, and I wasn't talking about *Regrets.*  
Everybody gets Regrets, men and women, breeders and non-breeders 
alike.  

No, I was referring to this idea that it's commonplace for women who 
don't even particularly *like* children to suddenly start adoring and 
desiring them overnight due to some weird hormonal thing that happens 
to them when they get older.  You know, the whole "Oh, you may think 
that babies are gross and irritating now, but you just wait -- you'll 
just *love* them when turn 30 and your biological alarm clock goes 
off" thing?  That's the one that I find highly dubious.  Maybe it 
does happen to a few unfortunate souls, but then, you know, so does 
being struck by lightning. 

What you're talking about seems to me to be a shift in *priorities,* 
which is a very different animal than a shift in fundamental likes 
and dislikes.  I prioritize intimacy and commitment more highly now 
than I did when I was younger...but I never actually *disliked* 
intimacy and commitment.  I merely ranked it a bit lower in the queue 
at an earlier stage in my life.  That's not at all the same thing as 
undergoing an abrupt transition from a state of actively disliking 
something to a state of desperately liking it.


Elkins




From ssk7882 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 10:52:09 2003
From: ssk7882 at yahoo.com (ssk7882)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:52:09 -0000
Subject: "Socially Neutral" decisions (WAS: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bifkr7+5i1e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bii2gp+nqhb@eGroups.com>

David wrote:

> Put at its most general, the decision to have 
> children is clearly not a socially neutral one.

Well, very few personal decisions ever *are* considered "socially 
neutral," are they? Whom we live with, whom we love, whom we have sex 
with (and how, and when, and why, and how often), how we dress, how 
we wear our hair, whether we breed, what gods we believe in, how much 
money we earn...even how we choose to keep our lawns.  None of these 
decisions is socially neutral.

I think that often, though, people are not being quite honest with 
themselves when they cite social concerns as their reasons for 
wanting to exercise control over others in these arena.  Because we 
are social animals, we do indeed have much "riding on" others' 
decisions in these spheres, but the largest part of *what* we have 
riding on them is often nothing more than our own sense of comfort, 
the sense of assured personal validation that derives from 
conformity.  Difference is scary precisely because it denies assured 
validation, instead offering up the spectre of a potentially 
unlimited array of possible acceptable options.  And that's 
threatening.  After all, if one can choose, then the possibility 
exists that one might choose *incorrectly.*

I think it's that fear, rather than any genuine pragmatic social 
consideration, that drives people's tendency to want to interfere in 
others' decisions in this arena, to tell you the truth.  What you 
have riding on my decision to reproduce is mainly your own sense of 
validation. 

But of course, that is much.


Elkins




From ssk7882 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 11:25:11 2003
From: ssk7882 at yahoo.com (ssk7882)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:25:11 -0000
Subject: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bifp0e+flvr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bii4en+fcum@eGroups.com>

The inestimable Vulgarweed wrote:

> Well, that can of worms is the whole point, isn't it?

::rolls gleefully in pile of newly-liberated worms::

As a child, you know, I was rather often accused by my peers of 
secretly *eating* worms?

How right they were!  At least on the metaphoric level.  

Kirstini wrote:

> I've been following this thread with interest, because 
> I really envy women who manage to make either decision 
> and stick to it with no regrets.

Well, it's easy enough when neither option holds the slightest bit of 
appeal.  Life's a whole lot tougher when you want both than when you 
want neither, that's for sure.

> Starting out at the beginning just now, I rather 
> feel as though there are various pre-prescribed 
> "lines" to follow, and personal choice is therefore 
> reduced to throwing allegiance in with one or the 
> other. 

Yes. It's thoroughly depressing, isn't it?  Just look at how quickly 
this list polarized into "career vs. children" while discussing this 
topic.  It's like watching the Patriarchy In Action.

Linlou wrote:

> It really is two sides of the same coin where the coin 
> should really be melted down and made into nice shiny 
> buttons or something.

Absolutely! 

Anyone else here find themselves forcibly reminded of that Sorting 
Hat? (Which I am now feeling terribly guilty for once having 
lambasted as ESE, by the way.  Poor old Hat.  It's not its fault!)

Kirstini:

> I also wonder if my mother and Elkins' would rather 
> like to settle down with a nice cup of tea some 
> time, as my mum, too, is far more interested in my 
> having a sparkling career (in academia? Shurely some 
> mishtake?) before I present her with any 
> twinkly-eyed grandpuppies. 

Tea with the Crouches?  

<shudder>  

Oh, gah.  Better your mum than me!  ;-)

(By the way, just for the record?  The HP books are *Tough Reads* for 
black sheep. They really, really are.  They're just harsh.  And they 
keep getting worse, too.  I found parts of OoP literally painful to 
read.  Just wanted to get that off my chest, you know.  Since we were 
on the subject of family and all.)

Yes, my parents were exceptionally ambitious on my behalf. It 
interested me a great deal to read that you have an "under-achieving" 
(but well-paid!) brother, Kirstini. I always felt very much as if I 
were sort of playing the "son" in my own family dynamic, and 
sometimes wondered if things might have been a little bit different 
if only I had brothers.  But thinking about it, it probably wouldn't 
have made much difference.

> That was a rather long-winded way of expressing my 
> envy, I suppose. 

<sympathetic smile>

Yeah. Reading this thread is making me feel rather fortunate, really, 
that I've never wanted either a career *or* children.  (Or, for that 
matter, much in the way of shoes.)  

But you know, plenty of women do manage to have both, and I dare say 
that some of them even manage not to have to go barefoot while they 
do so.  The key, I suspect, is a support network of friends and 
partners who are willing and able to help shoulder the burden -- and 
that applies even to people who don't want children.

Then, I live in a communal arrangement.  So now you're just hearing 
*my* party line!  

> I suppose reading over this, I didn't really have too 
> much to contribute to the discussion after all. I just 
> felt like a gossip. 

Isn't that precisely what this list is for?

> Feel a bit better now, oddly.

Good!

-----------------------

"I also don't like all this sprogging at an early age."

-- Kirstini, on the main list, message #62884

-------------------

Offering Kirstini's Affective Fallacy a kindly pat on the neck and a 
nice big lump of sugar,

Elkins

(who has friends who referred to their child as "the sprog" so 
consistently while he was in utero that the nickname stuck even after 
his birth -- the boy is now school age, and proudly insists that both 
peers and teachers address him as "Sprog.")




From meboriqua at aol.com  Wed Aug 27 12:50:21 2003
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 12:50:21 -0000
Subject: "Socially Neutral" decisions (WAS: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bii2gp+nqhb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bii9ed+40va@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "ssk7882" <ssk7882 at y...> 
wrote:

> I think it's that fear, rather than any genuine pragmatic social 
> consideration, that drives people's tendency to want to interfere in 
> others' decisions in this arena, to tell you the truth.  What you 
> have riding on my decision to reproduce is mainly your own sense of 
> validation.>

I agree with you there, but I think it goes even further.  Fear seems 
to be not only a motivation for why people interfere with the lives of 
others, but fear often seems to play a part in why we make decisions 
for ourselves as well.  I know plenty of women who think they are 
*supposed* to be married with children by now (most of my friends and 
I are 33).  They think they are failures if they are single and 
childless.  I even know women who marry the wrong men because they 
fear a better one may never come along.  I'm sure there are men, too, 
who make decisions based on similar thinking. 

Speaking personally, I broke up with my boyfriend of 7 years just this 
summer and it was something I should have done several years ago, but 
my own fears of being alone, of hurting him, of possibly making a 
mistake, of facing the disappointment of family all prevented me from 
making that decision earlier.  There was a time when I thought "Yeah, 
he'll be a great dad and I love him so I guess can spend the rest of 
my life with him", but I realized that wasn't enough.  I also thought 
I wanted to have children but as soon as I walked out the door, the 
sheer terror of having them hit me once again, much to the 
disappointment, I'm sure, of my mother, who I think has had some very 
definite plans for my life.

--jenny from ravenclaw *******************************




From tammy at mauswerks.net  Wed Aug 27 12:57:09 2003
From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 08:57:09 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: moved from Main List: on not having children
In-Reply-To: <bii4en+fcum@eGroups.com>
References: <bifp0e+flvr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F4C7265.32385.81A7C07@localhost>

On 27 Aug 2003 at 11:25, ssk7882 wrote:

> Yeah. Reading this thread is making me feel rather fortunate, really,
> that I've never wanted either a career *or* children. (Or, for that
> matter, much in the way of shoes.) 
> 
> But you know, plenty of women do manage to have both, and I dare say
> that some of them even manage not to have to go barefoot while they do
> so. The key, I suspect, is a support network of friends and partners
> who are willing and able to help shoulder the burden -- and that
> applies even to people who don't want children.

I've been 'no-mail' since going on vacation, so I've missed out on a lot of apparently 
interesting discussions before turning this list back on last night.  I meant to just lurk 
for the next few weeks, and pick up the drift of the current dialogs before jumping in, 
but I feel that I need to say something here, about the 'choice' of having or not having 
children.

I'm a stay-at-home wife, married to the same guy for 18 years, never slept with 
anyone else but him, lived my whole youth expecting to have several kids, and in fact 
got pregnant only a few months after marrying him.  The baby died minutes after she 
was born, of a VERY serious birth defect of the central nervous system (yes, we'd 
been warned about it, but we determined to give her what life she could have, 
regardless).  Since that time, though, we have not been ABLE to have any further 
children.  People ask me when we're going to have more kids, like it's our CHOICE 
to be childless, or like we haven't finished greiving for our lost little girl, and having 
another baby would heal us, or something.  It's not always the couple's choice 
whether or not to have kids -- sometimes that choice is taken from us.  Fertility 
treatments are not always an option, especially for people who move frequently (the 
first ten years of our marriage, we moved forty times and across eight states, for my 
husband's work) and therefore have no credit or reliable health insurance.  Adoption, 
likewise, is not always available -- no adoption service in the country would let a 
couple who moved so often take one of THEIR kids!

I'm sorry -- this is not coming out as I had intended it to.  My point is that sometimes, 
childlessness is NOT a lifestyle choice, and it can really hurt that people assume that 
you don't WANT kids, just because you don't have them.

***
Tammy
tammy at mauswerks.net






From jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 27 13:56:30 2003
From: jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com (jenna_ash3)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:56:30 -0000
Subject: Newbie
Message-ID: <biidae+ql03@eGroups.com>

Hi guys,

Just hopped in from another HP forum and wanted to say hi. Like the 
idea of regional groups as well. I am from the UK. Just got this comp 
for my birthday so loving the new found freedom of netscape!

Jen






From joym999 at aol.com  Wed Aug 27 14:38:38 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 14:38:38 -0000
Subject: the whole kid thing
Message-ID: <biifpe+hke6@eGroups.com>

I'm finding the whole kid discussion very interesting, as these are 
questions I've thought about a lot.  I'm kind of in the same boat as 
my old buddy Catlady -- I'm in my mid-forties and have never really 
had much desire to have kids.

I spent most of my thirties in a relatively stable, relatively happy 
(although it didn't stay that way) relationship with a very nice man, 
who didn't want the responsibility of having kids but would have 
dealt with it if he had had to.  That's pretty much the way I felt, 
too.  Probably fortunately, no "accidents" occurred.

I kept waiting for that "baby need" that Elkins sneered (rightfully) 
at to happen.  All during my thirties, I waited for my biological 
clock to start screaming at me.  But, you know what?  As I got older, 
and more and more of my friends had kids, I found that I had less and 
less desire to have one of my own.  In particular, the thought of 
taking care of a baby, and in particular actually having to get 
pregnant and give birth to one, I find extremely unappealing.  I've 
taken care of my friends' babies.  It sucks -- it's boring and smelly 
and messy and tiring.  And yeh, yeh, yeh, I know it's supposed to be 
different when it's your own.  I don't buy it.

People around here who've known me for a while know that I frequently 
spout my curmudgeonly dislike of children, and talk about my witchly 
predilection for boiling children in my cauldron when they venture 
too close to the Joycave (I used to live in a gingerbread house, but 
then it rained.)

But, I'll make a true confession here.  I really love a lot of my 
friends' kids.  (Not all.)  I'm going to see my best friend this 
weekend, and I have to admit that my heart leaps at the thought of 
how her 2 year old daughter, who I adore, always comes running up to 
hug me when I visit.  (I admit it, we've bonded.)  There have even 
been one or two occasions when babies didn't seem so horrible.

But is that enough to make me want one of my own?  No, I don't think 
so.  I just don't have enough personal desire to reproduce for it to 
make sense.  Is there any societal need?  IMO, the last thing the 
world needs is more people in it.  However, there is a societal need 
to take care of the world's many neglected kids, and I've given a lot 
of serious consideration to adopting a kid.  I like the idea of 
adopting an older kid, to avoid the baby stage, and to rescue some 
unhappy soul from her cupboard under the stairway.

A lot of people I tell that to are really appalled by this. (Most are 
supportive, though.)  Some people just can't imagine raising "someone 
else's child."  They seem to have this idea that child-raising 
involves possession, and molding this little person in your own 
image.  IMO, this is a lot of the motivation for a lot of people who 
have kids, and it's one I don't share.  I don't even think it's 
healthy.  How many of us resent our parents' continuing efforts to 
mold our lives?  (I thought so.)  

That's why I want to adopt an older kid.  I don't want to raise a 
little duplicate Joybaby, I just want to provide a home to someone 
who needs it.  (And yes, I know there can be a lot of difficulties 
with a adopting neglected child, but that's another question 
altogether.)

And there's a million other ifs, ands and buts here.  If I had a 
partner who had kids, or wanted kids, it would probably change my 
feelings and would certainly change my options.  And, in the unlikely 
event that I accidently got pregnant, barring medical complications 
(somewhat likely, at my age) I would just go ahead and have a baby.

But to have kids, just because that's what you're "supposed" to do?  
Seems stupid, to me.

--Joywitch, still a Curmudgeon, I suppose.




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Wed Aug 27 15:34:17 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:34:17 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Virus Warning - moved from Main List
Message-ID: <200308271734.17936.silmariel@telefonica.net>



Anyone could be so nice to send me infected e-mails? I'd like to 
study what they do and the most common versions, so I'll use a 
Windows as a test box. Also, worms are spreading trough Kazaa, if 
you got one, I'd like it.

Thank you, this e-security war is like a jungle.

silmariel



From smiller at dslextreme.com  Wed Aug 27 17:25:09 2003
From: smiller at dslextreme.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:25:09 -0000
Subject: Stephen Fry audio sample
In-Reply-To: <bigrf4+p380@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biiphl+oruf@eGroups.com>

Phyllis wrote:

> I don't know of anyplace you can actually hear a sample, but I 
> ordered a tin of the first four books read by Fry from Amazon UK 
for 
> about $100 US, which I thought was a terrific deal (you mentioned 
> CDs - these are cassette tapes, there isn't a comparable deal for 
CDs 
> unfortunately).  If you're interested, here's the link:
> 
> 
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1855496542/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/
> 026-1575635-1870022

Actually, you can't. I ordered this set (tapes in a lunch box) from 
amazon.uk a few weeks ago and just got a message from them saying 
they were out of stock and out of print. They told me to check back 
later to see if there was a decision to reprint. Maybe e-bay?

Constance Vigilance




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Wed Aug 27 18:50:20 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:50:20 -0000
Subject: "You're Just Selfish!" (WAS moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bihsmn+680l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biiuhc+fsml@eGroups.com>

Gee!  So many excellent observations on this thread!  

Elkins wrote:

> No, I was referring to this idea that it's commonplace for women 
>who don't even particularly *like* children to suddenly start 
>adoring and desiring them overnight due to some weird hormonal 
>thing that happens to them when they get older.  


Ah, well, I see your point.

And I surely agree that some people know very early on that they 
don't want children.  

I think, however, those people are in the minority.  More 
specifically, I think it is quite common for someone in their early 
20s to say they do not want children and do not like children.  I 
said it myself.

What *can* happen is that people simply change their minds.  This 
can be due to Ben and Jerry's burn-out.  Or meeting someone who 
desperately wants kids so they decide to give it a go.  

Why do I say that?  Well . . . if someone in their early 20s wants 
to make darn sure they don't have kids, they can have themselves 
sterilized.  Not many do, though, because even people who dislike 
children and don't want any wish to leave open the possibility that 
they may feel differently someday.

Now, my guess would be that most people who believed in their early 
20s that they don't want children wind up wanting them or having 
them later.  Is that true?  Are there people here who once swore off 
the whole breeding thing but who changed their minds?


> What you're talking about seems to me to be a shift in 
>*priorities,* which is a very different animal than a shift in 
>fundamental likes and dislikes.  

You know, I'm not sure I can agree.  I would call it a fundamental 
shift in *values.*  Our hypothetical career woman once valued the 
monetary rewards and prestige of career, and now she values them 
less.  I do think values can shift mightily as one matures.

Elkins:

>What you have riding on my decision to reproduce is mainly your own 
>sense of validation. 

There's no arguing with that.  

After all, if I absolutely love cheesecake and claim my life has 
been transformed by eating this cheesecake, I would expect you to 
take my word for it and have a bite of cheesecake.  So when those 
who are childless by choice *and* in a financial and social position 
to have children decline a bite of parenthood, it does come as a 
surprise to those of us who only wish we could afford *more*, erm,  
cheesecake.  

Anyway, I actually do understand the decision to be childless by 
choice.  I respect it, myself, as I think it is easier to just 
buckle under the societal pressure and breed because others expect 
it.  That said, being a parent is *way* more fun than I expected it 
to be, but I can certainly see why others would feel differently. 

Cindy -- wondering if we should start up "HPfGU -- Oprah"





From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 18:51:48 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Stephen Fry audio sample
In-Reply-To: <biiphl+oruf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030827185148.95274.qmail@web21109.mail.yahoo.com>

Phyllis:
> I don't know of anyplace you can
> actually hear a sample, but I 
> ordered a tin of the first four
> books read by Fry from Amazon UK for 
> about $100 US, which I thought was
> a terrific deal (you mentioned 
> CDs - these are cassette tapes,
> there isn't a comparable deal for CDs 
> unfortunately).  If you're
> interested, here's the link:
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/
> ASIN/1855496542/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/
> 026-1575635-1870022

Susan Miller: 
> Actually, you can't. I ordered this
> set (tapes in a lunch box) from 
> amazon.uk a few weeks ago and just
> got a message from them saying 
> they were out of stock and out of
> print. They told me to check back 
> later to see if there was a
> decision to reprint. Maybe e-bay?

To find out if reprints are in the 
works, you might want to try the 
publishers at

http://www.covertocover.co.uk/

and/or email them at 

info @ covertocover . co . uk 
(minus the extra spaces, of course)

Come to think of it, they'd know where 
online you can sample their product.
It looks like you may be able to order 
it from them directly (off the site 
above) but it's GB99.99, which is 
considerably more than US$100.

BTW, who here is getting Fry's OotP 
when it comes out in a month?  I was 
wondering if you would share where and 
how much money - I need to find a 
great deal 'cause I can't afford it 
otherwise.  Thanks in advance!

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From pbarhug at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 18:08:08 2003
From: pbarhug at earthlink.net (Pam Hugonnet)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 14:08:08 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Children Anyone? (WAS:on not having children)
References: <bigv41+qkeb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001401c36cc6$2b8b9c00$3b9f8c45@DJZCB631>

Vulgarweed writes:

As for the "lifestyle" thing, which is a thinly veiled dig at those of 
us who are unmarried urban types quite devoted to our careers (mine is 
in arts journalism, which requires a lot of late nights out and 
travel, and doesn't bring in a great deal of cash--no Manolo Blahnik 
shoes for me!), well, there's no lifestyle choice out there that 
*guarantees* lack of regrets. Believe me, all my life I've known 
plenty of elderly folks who never see the children they trusted to 
take care of them, and are much lonelier than their peers who invested 
energy in a *larger* community, in a network of friends and colleagues 
and a web of _adult_ companionship.


I think you've misunderstood me here; there was no intent to have a dig, but rather to point out that there are many women who are out there chasing a lifestyle which may be unrealistic, unattainable, unsustainable or all three and who are basing their decisions on those fantasies.  That's much different from those who are following a particular career path.  And I don't think I implied that it is a better choice to have children; it is a most personal decision, to be made by the particular individual involved and to be respected by all others who are not personally involved.  


Besides, had I ever thought that my children would take care of me in my old age, they have thoroughly disabused me of that notion by now.  I shudder to think of how they would exact their revenge on me ; )

Certainly it is important to have a network of friends, colleagues and an investment in the larger community; being a parent doesn't preclude that, it demands it if you are to have some hope of coming out of the other side as relatively sane and whole.  Some new parents do find that sort of network hard to create or maintain.  When I had my first and quit working, I found myself feeling very adrift and isolated.  It felt as if I had joined this whole new secret shadow world I had never known to exist.  Who were those people lined  up at stores waiting for them to open at 9:30?   Those hollow-eyed men and women in Giant late at night?  I became one of them.  It was hard to adapt to a whole new identity; I wasn't a doctor anymore...I didn't have any special skill that set me apaprt from the crowds.  Sometimes it was hard to feel as though I had something in common (besides children) with the other people I met.  I think it took about two years to redefine myself and to create a network of friends.  It is interesting to me that since I have been home, I have met a wider group of people and probably get a better quality of adult companionship than I did before.  (Although, the fact that I worked in prisons and facilities for the criminally insane probably had some impact on the quality of the adult companionship I had at the time.)

drpam

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pbarhug at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 18:25:15 2003
From: pbarhug at earthlink.net (Pam Hugonnet)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 14:25:15 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: moved from Main List: on not having children
References: <bif87v+jjag@eGroups.com> <000c01c36c42$74b27680$6c04a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <002c01c36cc8$8fb8fc70$3b9f8c45@DJZCB631>

Amanda's infomercial proclaims:

Act now!

You, too, can be *completely* certain you've made the correct choice! Borrow
*Amanda's* children for a couple of weeks, rent-free! Experience that
parental frustration! That lack of any spare money whatsoever for things
like a personal wardrobe, shoes, haircuts, hobbies, or outside interests!
The amazing experience of articulately arguing a point and *still* having it
ignored totally! Don't miss this opportunity to say to the world, "Yes! I
tried it, and it *does* bite!"

Can I throw mine in, too.    


Don't forget these exciting bonuses:
  a..  Industrial sized piles of laundry with unremovable stains
  b.. Newly painted walls with big black handprints
  c.. "Mom, I think the baby pooped again!"
  d.. A naked toddler to greet your friends and neighbors
 drpam
    

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Aug 27 19:13:52 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:13:52 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: moved from Main List: on not having children
References: <002c01c36cc8$8fb8fc70$3b9f8c45@DJZCB631>
Message-ID: <3F4D02F0.000001.09325@monica>

 
  lmao. See now this is why I like other people's kids. You can take them
out, regress to your own childhood in their company, spoil them rotten and
then when they're full of sugar, tired, whingy and generally about to turn
into the hellspawn their parents assure you they are 99% of the time - you
*give them back*.

I love being an auntie - if you ask the kids I'm great at it! (yes I am the
sort of relative who enjoys the idea of giving their nephews/nieces/cousins
a drum kit for Christmas  *shrugs* they live several hours drive away from
me, it's not *my* problem)

K
*evil smirk*
 



From Ali at zymurgy.org  Wed Aug 27 20:11:17 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:11:17 -0000
Subject: The demographic timebomb was Re: the whole kid thing
Message-ID: <bij395+ped4@eGroups.com>

 Joywitch, the Curmudgeon wrote:-
 
<<< But is that enough to make me want one of my own?  No, I don't 
think so.  I just don't have enough personal desire to reproduce for 
it to make sense.  Is there any societal need?  IMO, the last thing 
the world needs is more people in it.  However, there is a societal 
need to take care of the world's many neglected kids, and I've given 
a lot of serious consideration to adopting a kid.  I like the idea 
of adopting an older kid, to avoid the baby stage, and to rescue 
some unhappy soul from her cupboard under the stairway>>>

Like many, I'm fascinated by the kid discussion here. I'm interested 
to learn why people have made the decisions they have, and I suppose 
I have a desire to share *my story* with you. Fortunately, I haven't 
got time to do that right now, but I did want to question Joy's 
concept of "society".

Whilst I personally like the idea of the world as one family, one 
society, on balance I'd have to say that that's a little idealistic. 
There are too many people in the world, and some like my husband 
have an absolute horror of over producing. Thus, as a couple we were 
allowed to have 2 children, but he honestly believes that having 
more than 2 would be greedy - we should not produce more than 
ourselves. However, it is also a fact that in many Western cultures 
we are facing a demographic timebomb.

Quite simply, the ratio between the working population and 
the "economically inactive" population has changed drastically in 
the last century and is set to change still further. What does this 
mean? It means that each worker is effectively supporting a higher 
and higher number of non-workers. I won't bore you with statistics 
(unless you ask), but our societies are ageing, people are opting 
for smaller families, later and more children are staying on in 
further education. Older people are dependant on those working to 
ensure that there are sufficient funds going into their pension 
funds to give them an allowance, sufficient taxes going into the 
treasury to pay the higher welfare bills.

In the UK we are already seeing changes to the way that pensions are 
calculated, we will possibly see the end to our official retirement 
age in a few years time, both different approaches to deflect some 
of the problems of our ageing population. However, real and 
permanent solutions are difficult and unpalatable to Western 
countries. 

If those living in the Western World don't reproduce in sufficient 
numbers, there are arguments that the only way many countries will 
be able to look after their ageing population is by mass 
immigration. Immigration is already a political hot potato, and I 
won't start a flame war here by discussing its rights and wrongs. 
All I can say is that the xenophobia which is often a factor in 
immigration discussions, disgusts me.

IMO immigration will become a necessity unless the demographic 
situation changes, although the effects of this will not necessarily 
be felt in my lifetime. Meanwhile, the issue about why so many women 
are choosing not to have children must be investigated. 

The concept of the "Work/Life balance" is growing in popularity with 
the novel but simple idea being that we can work and have a life. In 
Europe a whole new raft of legislation has been passed in recent 
years to protect workers, and women's rights have increased 
considerably. For example, if I were to have another baby now, I 
would be entitled to a year off work (about half of which would be 
unpaid and the majority of the rest paid for at about ?100 per week) 
and still return to my old job (well if I was working). We have 
child benefit, family credit, limited nursery places from the age of 
3.5 and if our incomes are low enough (mine wasn't - quite) 
subsidised childcare. There are many other rights that we now have. 

It is hoped that these increased rights and payments will help women 
both to have children and stay in the workplace. what it doesn't do 
is take away the stress of trying to have it all. I did have a 
career that I tried to keep going by working full time with my first 
child. For me, the stress wasn't worth it. My daughter was sick for 
seven weeks of her first year at nursery. My work was acomodating, 
but not *that* accomodating, plus the nursery failed 2 social 
services inspections. By the time you factor in my husband being 
away alot, and not having any family nearby, I couldn't see many 
benefits of working. The childcare costs of having my second 
daughter would have wiped out the rest of my income. I didn't see 
any inducements in trying to have a "career" and children. 

I have never regretted having children and I don't think I ever 
will, but it is a big sacrifice. Many of my friends have yet 
to "produce", and I dislike the way some now think the only subject 
I can talk about is kids. I often feel like a pariah in the child-
free zones I used to inhabit.

I certainly wouldn't cast aspertions on anybody who has decided not 
to have children, but I do get annoyed when *friends* try and 
categorise me. A few months ago when I was deciding whether to 
continue with my HR course, a good friend suggested that I tried to 
get a job in a call-centre. The rational was that they paid ok 
money. The implication was that that was the only thing that should 
really matter to me now, not doing something I might actually enjoy 
or get pleasure from. Grrrrr. 

Ali




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 20:18:08 2003
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:18:08 -0000
Subject: "You're Just Selfish!" (WAS moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <biiuhc+fsml@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bij3m0+jfko@eGroups.com>

Cindy: 
> 
> You know, I'm not sure I can agree.  I would call it a fundamental 
> shift in *values.*  Our hypothetical career woman once valued the 
> monetary rewards and prestige of career, and now she values them 
> less.  I do think values can shift mightily as one matures.

I'm still having a problem here with the idea that "career women" are 
primarily invested in prestige and money. There are plenty of us in 
fields that don't necessarily provide much of either, but we do it 
because *the work fulfills us.* Because even when we're hating it, we 
love it. Because the perfect _fill in the blank_ falls into place, and 
it is really IS "all worth it," as parents are so fond of saying. 
Because we can't imagine ourselves filling our days with anything 
else.

It's possible I may regret my decision not to have children someday 
(and the adoption agencies will still be around even when the last of 
my eggs is gone), but I _know for a fact_ that I would regret it if I 
didn't pursue the passions I do have.

It is not, of course, an either/or choice,meaningful career or 
parenthood. I know plenty of people who have both. I hope I could find 
a way to, if it was important to me. But it just isn't.

Cindy:

> After all, if I absolutely love cheesecake and claim my life has 
> been transformed by eating this cheesecake, I would expect you to 
> take my word for it and have a bite of cheesecake.  So when those 
> who are childless by choice *and* in a financial and social position 
> to have children decline a bite of parenthood, it does come as a 
> surprise to those of us who only wish we could afford *more*, erm,  
> cheesecake.  

This is starting to sound like religious proselytizing. Or political 
campaigning. Or at the very least, Avon salesmanship. :)

The problem with the cheesecake analogy is that one can always _try_ 
the cheesecake to see if one likes it, and send it back if one 
doesn't. (I guess there's always babysitting, but I already know I 
don't like that.)

AV
(who knew from early childhood--strongly disliked baby dolls. Much 
preferred stuffed animals, Star Wars figures and spaces




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 20:50:33 2003
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:50:33 -0000
Subject: the whole kid thing
In-Reply-To: <biifpe+hke6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bij5ip+g2f8@eGroups.com>

Joywitch spaketh, curmudegonly:


> But is that enough to make me want one of my own?  No, I don't think 
> so.  I just don't have enough personal desire to reproduce for it to 
> make sense.  Is there any societal need?  IMO, the last thing the 
> world needs is more people in it.  However, there is a societal need 
> to take care of the world's many neglected kids, and I've given a 
lot 
> of serious consideration to adopting a kid.  I like the idea of 
> adopting an older kid, to avoid the baby stage, and to rescue some 
> unhappy soul from her cupboard under the stairway.

Thank you! Thank you! Yes!
If it's going to happen for me, later in life, I must admit I'd prefer 
one already housebroken. Have never seen the appeal of babies per se, 
but older kids can be really cool. (Pre-existing Harry Potter fandom 
would of course be a massive plus. :) )
 
> A lot of people I tell that to are really appalled by this. (Most 
are 
> supportive, though.)  Some people just can't imagine raising 
"someone 
> else's child."  

!!!!!!!!!
It doesn't get much more "selfish" than that, IMO.


YOu know, one of the daily newspapers in my city has a little feature 
every few days called "A Family For Me" or something like that. It's 
like "Pet of the Week", only for children. There's a picture and a 
little bit about the child's interests and how much they would love a 
mommy and daddy to take care of them, etc. They're all older children. 
I imagine some of them might have 'special needs' and/or abuse and/or 
abandonment in their pasts and be a handful to raise. Lots of them 
have spent most of their lives as wards of the state. It's friggin' 
heartbreaking. 

Me, I always figured that if genetic/cultural continuity was 
important, I could adopt from the depressed, orphan-ridden South 
American country my mother comes from, or from the depressed, 
orphan-ridden Eastern European country my partner's family comes from. 
No guarantee of getting the "perfect child," for sure, but there's no 
guarantee of that when you "roll your own" either. There are so many 
who need homes, I don't see the point of going crazy trying to make 
more.


They seem to have this idea that child-raising 
> involves possession, and molding this little person in your own 
> image.  IMO, this is a lot of the motivation for a lot of people who 
> have kids, and it's one I don't share.  I don't even think it's 
> healthy.  How many of us resent our parents' continuing efforts to 
> mold our lives?  (I thought so.)  

These are the same people who spazz and make the kid's life a living 
hell when s/he votes the wrong party/converts to another 
religion/comes out of the closet/drops out of college/runs off to join 
the circus/gets a nose piercing/joins the army/you name it, that 
doesn't follow the family party line. People who don't get that their 
child is _a whole other person entirely_. 
 
> That's why I want to adopt an older kid.  I don't want to raise a 
> little duplicate Joybaby, I just want to provide a home to someone 
> who needs it.  (And yes, I know there can be a lot of difficulties 
> with a adopting neglected child, but that's another question 
> altogether.)
> 

Thanks again for saying this!

AV
who is inserting blather here because Yahoomort has been cutting off 
the ends of her posts and is tired of it




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 27 21:24:39 2003
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:24:39 -0000
Subject: Children Anyone? (WAS:on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <001401c36cc6$2b8b9c00$3b9f8c45@DJZCB631>
Message-ID: <bij7in+finv@eGroups.com>

Pam:
> I think you've misunderstood me here; there was no intent to have a 
dig, but rather to point out that there are many women who are out 
there chasing a lifestyle which may be unrealistic, unattainable, 
unsustainable or all three and who are basing their decisions on those 
fantasies.  That's much different from those who are following a 
particular career path. 

Well, certainly. And many men who do this also (all women in this 
discussion, I see, and why are WE the only ones whose 'unrealistic 
fantasies' are an issue? My partner has fantasies about being a Jedi 
Knight, but at least he has games for that). Both of them might well 
be disappointed--or they might be happy! (I would point out there are 
possibly even more women pursuing a fantasy of the perfect nuclear 
family life, who find themselves _divorced_ and watching lots of TV 
and eating ice cream and being disappointed by their 30s and 40s too.) 
Most of us don't get our fantasies realized exactly the way we want 
'em--but our fantasies always play a role in our *aspirations,* don't 
they?


> Besides, had I ever thought that my children would take care of me 
in my old age, they have thoroughly disabused me of that notion by 
now.  I shudder to think of how they would exact their revenge on me 

They might come around. I'm certainly nowadays getting 
mentally/emotionally prepared to take care of mine if they ever need 
it! (Which I don't think I would've felt 15 years ago)

 It was hard to adapt to a whole new identity; I wasn't a doctor 
anymore...I didn't have any special skill that set me apaprt from the 
crowds.  Sometimes it was hard to feel as though I had something in 
common (besides children) with the other people I met.  I think it 
took about two years to redefine myself and to create a network of 
friends.  It is interesting to me that since I have been home, I have 
met a wider group of people and probably get a better quality of adult 
companionship than I did before.  (Although, the fact that I worked in 
prisons and facilities for the criminally insane probably had some 
impact on the quality of the adult companionship I had at the time.)


Ya think? :)

I've been on the other side of the isolation thing for some new-parent 
friends, I'm afraid.....the problem from the childless side of the 
fence is that new parents, it seems, can talk about nothing else, and 
the subject is just not something I'm capable of keeping my attention 
on for very long, and it's exhausting to try to keep them from 
noticing how far afield my mind is wandering while they ramble 
maniacally about tiny fingers and poo. (So, how 'bout dem Cubs? Not a 
sports fan either, at all, but I've caught myself thinking about the 
big game instead.) I usually try to stay in touch (if not as closely 
as before) and wait for the most intense of it to be over. Letting 
them know I'd like to still be around for them even if we don't share 
this particu




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Aug 27 21:46:52 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:46:52 -0000
Subject: HPforWho? (was moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <000c01c36c42$74b27680$6c04a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bij8sc+arpc@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:

> The amazing experience of articulately arguing a point and *still* 
having it
> ignored totally! 

and you come here to get away from that?  Shurely shome mishtake

David, wondering if Kirstini is a Private Eye reader




From editor at texas.net  Wed Aug 27 22:12:41 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:12:41 -0000
Subject: HPforWho? (was moved from Main List: on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bij8sc+arpc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bijacp+7h4n@eGroups.com>

> Amanda wrote:
> 
> > The amazing experience of articulately arguing a point and 
*still* 
> having it
> > ignored totally! 

David wondered:

> and you come here to get away from that?


No, no. It's that I'm already *used* to it.

~Amanda
also inserting blather and wondering what the heck is up with Yahoo 
cutting off the ends of stuff, la la la la oh, say can you 
seeeee...etc.





From ssk7882 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 22:11:47 2003
From: ssk7882 at yahoo.com (ssk7882)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:11:47 -0000
Subject: Children Anyone? (WAS:on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bij7in+finv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bijab3+lmu4@eGroups.com>

Much thanks to Tammy, for reminding us most eloquently that whether 
or not one has children is very often not a matter of "choice" at 
all.  To be granted the choice in the first place is a luxury of 
sorts, and perhaps we might all do well to remember that while we're 
busy bristling at each other for our biased perceptions of their 
biased perceptions of our "choices." ;-)

Vulgarweed wrote:

> Well, certainly. And many men who do this also (all 
> women in this discussion, I see, and why are WE the 
> only ones whose 'unrealistic fantasies' are an issue? 

Yeah, gruesome isn't it?  Sadly, that's unlikely to change, so long 
as it is accepted that men are not expected to shoulder at least 50% 
of the burden of child-rearing.  And that, in turn, is unlikely to 
change so long as women continue to earn significantly less than 
their male partners.  And that in turn is unlikely to change so long 
as it is accepted that men are not expected to shoulder at least 50% 
of the burden of child-rearing.  And that in turn is unlikely to 
change...

Hey.  Just trying to cheer y'all up, you know.  Carry on. ;-)

> I've been on the other side of the isolation thing for 
> some new-parent friends, I'm afraid.....the problem from 
> the childless side of the fence is that new parents, it 
> seems, can talk about nothing else, and the subject is 
> just not something I'm capable of keeping my attention 
> on for very long, and it's exhausting to try to keep 
> them from noticing how far afield my mind is wandering 
> while they ramble maniacally about tiny fingers and poo. 

Yeah, that really does happen to some people.  But you know, it's 
hardly a phenomenon limited to people with children.  It's all too 
easy for people engaged in something that they find utterly exciting 
and absorbing, and which occupies a great deal of their time and 
mental energy, to find themselves turning into terrible bores.  I 
have a friend who talks a lot about her job.  And I do mean a *lot.*
It's nice that she finds her work so engaging, and sometimes it's 
interesting to hear about, but then there are other times when it, 
well, simply isn't.  I can't deny that some part of me has started 
inwardly groaning whenever she brings the topic up when we're 
together.  

For that matter, when I first joined this list, my friends started 
complaining that I talked about it too much, that it had become my 
sole topic of conversation, and that I was boring them senseless.  
I'm sure that I was, too. ;-)

I think that what makes the phenomenon seem worse when it's, say, 
kids, rather than HPfGU <g> is that because child-rearing is an 
activity which people of the same age range are often undertaking at 
roughly the same time in their lives, it is very often the case that 
an entire circle of friends suddenly *all* want to talk about 
their children, which leaves you the odd man out if it is not a topic 
in which you are yourself invested.

A few years ago, an inordinate number of my friends seemed to be 
buying houses, all at the same time.  Social gatherings became 
absolutely unbearable for a while there. They would talk about 
*shingles,* for Christ's sake!  They would talk about *sewer lines!*  
They would talk about *floor sanding!*  I mean, how unspeakably 
*dull,* how absolutely *banal,* how thoroughly and disgustingly 
MUNDANE can you *GET?*

Yeah, well.  My household is now in the process of buying a house.

And God help us, it has become our one topic of conversation.


Elkins




From ja9shahinian at comcast.net  Wed Aug 27 22:56:08 2003
From: ja9shahinian at comcast.net (Janine R. Shahinian)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:56:08 -0400
Subject: Seeking HP ring tone
Message-ID: <BB72AF48.2277%ja9shahinian@comcast.net>

Is there anybody out there who can point me to where I can get a HP-theme
ring tone for my *American* Motorola call phone? (Supports EMS messages.)
I'd be much obliged. :)

Janine
ja9shahinian at comcast.net




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Thu Aug 28 00:09:28 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:09:28 -0000
Subject: The value of children; selfishness
In-Reply-To: <bihjo3+60a8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bijh7o+cvgo@eGroups.com>

Amy Z wrote:
 
> And, after all, if I produce a child, that may help ease society's 
> burden when I'm old and gray, but what happens forty years later 
when 
> the *child* is old and gray?  Another senior mouth to feed.  In 
other 
> words, do any of us pull our weight?  Do we produce enough revenue 
in 
> the form of taxes and GDP to make the government think it's 
worthwhile 
> to take care of us in our old age, or don't we?  And if we don't, 
then 
> what good is it to have children?  The children will take on some 
of 
> the burden of supporting us (or maybe they won't; there's no law 
> requiring them to, at least in the US), but who will take care of 
> those children?

Ooh, *economics*!  I just love economics.  A fantasy world full of 
wacky ideas, perverse logic, and strange acronyms.  In which people 
who act altruistically are made out to be Ever So Evil, while those 
who are selfish are publicly praised.  A world, in short, utterly 
alien to the HPFGU member.

If *some* of us weren't pulling our weight, wouldn't we all starve 
to death, or something?  Or do you mean we'd all be richer (in the 
narrow GDP sense) if we had compulsory euthanasia at 60?

Seriously, I'd say it's impossible to evaluate economically the 
effects of having more or fewer human beings.  Sure, people do sums 
on the total production and consumption of a typical individual.  
But if these sums have any foundation at all (and, yes, people *try* 
to give them a rigorous logical and mathematical foundation), it is 
that you can compare a person's preferences for one thing with their 
preferences for another, and compare one person's preferences with 
another's.  That then all maybe works fine for trading in Mars bars, 
and even possibly for building roads or rationing (some) healthcare, 
but when it comes to the economic decision to bring another human 
being into the world?  That person is a brand-new scale of 
preferences, and so changes the very model that is trying to measure 
its value.  Heisenberg, eat your heart out.

How could one tell if the world would be a better place if it had a 
population of ten million?  Can one assign a number that would 
enable such a comparison?

> One more thought on the selfishness issue.  I think perhaps what's 
> meant by "it's selfish" is not so much "it's selfish to do what 
you 
> want," but "it's selfish not to want to devote one's life to 
taking 
> care of someone else."  Yes, I think that's it, because the point 
the 
> argument flares up is often when a woman (always, always a woman--
I 
> never hear anyone say this to men) says, "I have other things I 
want 
> to do.  I want to be an artist / I want to travel around the 
world / I 
> want to win the Nobel Prize in chemistry / I want to make partner 
in a 
> law firm.  Having children would make that very difficult."  
People 
> bristle when someone makes this true and obvious statement, as if 
> preferring painting in oils over changing diapers is selfish 
instead 
> of just a preference.  

Interesting.  I *would* have characterised the above statements as 
selfish, in the pejorative sense, whether uttered by a man or a 
woman.  As also the statement 'I want to have children.'  In fact, 
thinking about it, I'm pretty sure that as a child I was led to 
believe that the use of the phrase 'I want' in any connection at all 
is wrong.

David




From joym999 at aol.com  Thu Aug 28 02:29:59 2003
From: joym999 at aol.com (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 02:29:59 -0000
Subject: Children Anyone? (WAS:on not having children)
In-Reply-To: <bij7in+finv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bijpf7+qch9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "vulgarweed" <fluxed at e...> 
wrote:
> (all women in this 
> discussion, I see, and why are WE the only ones whose 'unrealistic 
> fantasies' are an issue? My partner has fantasies about being a 
Jedi 
> Knight, but at least he has games for that

I don't know about you, but my fantasies are NOT unrealistic, nor or 
they an issue.  I *am* a Jedi knight.  And a witch, and a 
dragonrider, and a Star Fleet officer, too.  No kids, though, and not 
much of a career -- I don't have time for them.

--Joywitch




From Erthena at aol.com  Thu Aug 28 03:01:43 2003
From: Erthena at aol.com (werebearloony)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 03:01:43 -0000
Subject: re-release of the LotR movies {was GoF one movie? @ HPFGU-Movie}
In-Reply-To: <20030827054343.20122.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bijran+ppbc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan <ms_petra_pan at y...> 
wrote:
> Tim:
> > Have you heard that on the day
> > before the release of RotK that they 
> > are going to play the extended
> > versions of FotR & TT followed by 
> > RotK??  You can sit and watch all
> > 10+ hours of LotR with intermissions
> > between each film.  Mark Dec 16th on
> > your calendar's for this special event.
 
I was so planning on going too, even though I'd be in school the next 
day.  A friend and I were going to be there, until we heard this.

> According to Variety.com:
> 
> "Just two weeks before the Dec. 17 release 
> of 'The Lord of the Rings: The Return of 
> the King' -- the final installment of the 
> Peter Jackson-helmed epic trilogy -- the 
> first two 'Ring' entries [this time with 
> additional scenes and footage added] will 
> be unspooling worldwide."
> 
> FotR (208 minutes) is for the week of 
> Dec. 5 then TT (214 minutes) for the week 
> of Dec. 12 - all this leading up to a 
> worldwide Dec. 16 daylong marathon, 
> during which all three films will be 
> shown back-to-back.  A 3 p.m. showing of 
> FotR followed by TT at 7 p.m. then an 
> 11 p.m. screening of "Return of the King" 
> is suggested by New Line.
> <SNIP>
> Petra
> a
> n  :)

3 pm, I thought it'd be at 4 (I did the math because I knew that ROTK 
was going on at 11 and the other two combined would be 7 hours).  I'm 
still in school at three! :-(  all you folks that go to FOTR will 
hahve to tell me how awesoume it is!  Bad news for me.

~~loony who is wondering how in the world she is going to talk her 
parents into letting her leave early (it's a good thing I have three 
and a half months)




From catlady at wicca.net  Thu Aug 28 03:37:57 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 03:37:57 -0000
Subject: The demographic timebomb was Re: the whole kid thing
In-Reply-To: <bij395+ped4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bijtel+ovvj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
 
> Quite simply, the ratio between the working population and 
> the "economically inactive" population has changed drastically in 
> the last century and is set to change still further. What does this 
> mean? It means that each worker is effectively supporting a higher 
> and higher number of non-workers.

Well, I've read in a reliable journal which I'm too lazy to look up 
right now that, if one counts children as well as retirees when 
counting non-workers, there were more non-workers per worker in the 
USA in the 1950s than in the 1990s. When you're comparing 100 years 
back instead of 40 years back, you have to reckon how much of the 
higher ratio of workers to non-workers in those days was that 
children (except in the upper classes) joined the workforce at age 6 
or 7, compared to how much was that adults died instead of retiring.

> I won't bore you with statistics  unless you ask), but our 
> societies are ageing, people are opting for smaller families,
> later and more children are staying on in further education.

Here in USA, it is widely believed that children staying on for 
further education is *good* for the economy, as it is widely 
believed that the average lifetime earnings of a college graduate are 
higher than the average lifetime earnings of a high school graduate, 
despite the high school graduate being in the workforce for four or 
five more years than the college graduate.

> Older people are dependant on those working to ensure that there
> are sufficient funds going into their pension funds to give them
> an allowance, sufficient taxes going into the treasury to pay the 
> higher welfare bills.

How much money goes into the pyramid scheme funds (ours is named 
Social Security) doesn't depend as much on how many people are 
*in the workforce* as on how many people *have jobs* and *how much* 
they make. Between automation, computerization, efficiency, and 
globalization, there are already more people than there are jobs
for. Not enough jobs for all the people who need them, not even all 
the qualified people who need them. I was strongly tempted to reply 
to David's post yesterday, that having children is just as likely to 
swell the 'reserve army of the unemployed' as to provide workers to 
earn money to support retired people: the unemployed don't pay into 
retirement funds. (And the competition among job seekers drives wages 
down, which reduces how much the employed pay into Social Security.) 
Now, if the robots and the automated machinery paid taxes .... 

In 40 minutes I haven't been able to write this in a way I find 
acceptable, so I will write it in a snide and probably offensive way 
instead: One of the many ways in which cats are better than children 
is that I don't have to worry whether my cats will be able to find 
jobs to support themselves.

> The concept of the "Work/Life balance" is growing in popularity
> with  the novel but simple idea being that we can work and have a 
> life. 

Not in USA, where the average number of hours in the work week gets 
longer and longer each year. (I'm doing my bit to keep that average 
down!) And the number of vacation days taken each year gets less and 
less. Many people who are entitled to two weeks of vacation per year 
take only half those days, scattered for personal business like 
waiting for repairmen, because they want 
or need to cash in the other half. I myself don't like taking my 
vacation because I don't trust what my company will do while my back 
is turned.

> In Europe a whole new raft of legislation has been passed in recent 
> years to protect workers, and women's rights have increased 
> considerably. For example, if I were to have another baby now, I 
> would be entitled to a year off work (about half of which would be 
> unpaid and the majority of the rest paid for at about ?100 per 
> week) and still return to my old job (well if I was working). We 
> have child benefit, family credit, limited nursery places from the 
> age of 3.5 and if our incomes are low enough (mine wasn't - quite) 
> subsidised childcare. There are many other rights that we now have. 

Due to the Family and Medical Care Leave Act passed under Clinton, a 
woman who bears or adopts a baby is entitled to take off four months 
without pay and still get her job back, IF she works for a company 
with more than 50 employees, IF she was classified as full-time 
year-round, IF the company doesn't finagle its paperwork to show that 
her job was abolished in her absence. Here in California, women on 
maternity leave can get paid from Disability Insurance. While I 
understand that having a baby is a terrible burden, I am less than 
thrilled with having to do both my own work AND that of a colleague 
on maternity leave (but not getting her salary in addition to mine). 
As for those other benefits, if I recall correctly, now half the 
homeless are women and their dependent children.




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 28 07:01:50 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: re-release of the LotR movies
In-Reply-To: <bijran+ppbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030828070150.9481.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>

Yours truly:
> FotR (208 minutes) is for the week of 
> Dec. 5 then TT (214 minutes) for the
> week of Dec. 12 - all this leading up
> to a worldwide Dec. 16 daylong marathon, 
> during which all three films will be 
> shown back-to-back.  A 3 p.m. showing of 
> FotR followed by TT at 7 p.m. then an 
> 11 p.m. screening of "Return of the King" 
> is suggested by New Line.

loony:
> 3 pm, I thought it'd be at 4 (I did the
> math because I knew that ROTK was going
> on at 11 and the other two combined would
> be 7 hours).  I'm still in school at
> three! :-(  all you folks that go to FOTR
> will hahve to tell me how awesoume it is! 
> Bad news for me.

Aww!  <pat-pat-pat>  You don't have to take 
anyone else's word for it - go see FotR 
during the week of the 5th.  You just won't 
get to see all three films in the same 
sitting on the 16th/17th, is all.  It's 
also possible that a theater near you will 
disregard New Line's recommendation - ask 
around.

Petra, wondering how much $ this'll be
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Thu Aug 28 08:03:58 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:03:58 -0000
Subject: The Return of Tom Swift
In-Reply-To: <bigt9t+u26t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bikd1e+dav2@eGroups.com>

Caius wrote, markedly:
> > Now that Book Five is out, the time has come for more Tom 
> Swifties.

> "A week's detention, Potter," said Umbridge back-handedly.

Pippin added, merrily:

> "Come on, you can do better than that," said Sirius, finally.

David, frankly:

I'm not sure I'm any good at this, but

"This light isn't real," said Arthur, sunnily.

"Detention, Potter," said Umbridge, cuttingly.

"Oh, and fifty to Ravenclaw for Miss Lovegood," said McGonagall, 
pointedly.

"Thank you, Mum" said Neville, sweetly.

"Come on, you can do better than that," said Sirius, archly.

Do you need speech?

Snape studied his exam paper, owlishly.

Fudge gaped at the statue, brainlessly.

David




From jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 28 10:26:25 2003
From: jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com (jenna_ash3)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:26:25 -0000
Subject: anyone going to AU?
Message-ID: <biklch+pb8r@eGroups.com>

Thanks for the link to my regional HP group. Great idea. Trying to 
find some more HP fans going to events this year. Is anyone going to 
AU from this list? Are there any other HP events in the UK?

Jen




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Thu Aug 28 11:18:10 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:18:10 -0000
Subject: The demographic timebomb was Re: the whole kid thing
In-Reply-To: <bijtel+ovvj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bikodi+bvrf@eGroups.com>

Catlady wrote:
> Due to the Family and Medical Care Leave Act passed under Clinton, 
> a woman who bears or adopts a baby is entitled to take off four 
> months without pay and still get her job back, IF she works for a 
> company with more than 50 employees, IF she was classified as full-
> time year-round, IF the company doesn't finagle its paperwork to  
> show that 
> her job was abolished in her absence. Here in California, women on 
> maternity leave can get paid from Disability Insurance. While I 
> understand that having a baby is a terrible burden, I am less than 
> thrilled with having to do both my own work AND that of a 
> colleague on maternity leave (but not getting her salary in       
> addition to mine). 


Doesn't work like that in the UK, Cat. The company can claim about 
80% of the maternity pay back on its taxes (or as a straight refund 
if it hasn't paid enough tax). They're also allowed to hire a 
replacement to cover provided it's clear in the advert that this 
is 'maternity leave cover'. 

That way the replacement knows that they're hired for a fixed term 
contract.

And any company who abolishes a job while the mother is on maternity 
leave had better be prepared to have its ass sued for 'sex 
discrimination.' Only women can get pregnant - so companies had 
better show that there were *mass* redundancies during the period of 
maternity leave. 

Equally, case law shows that if decide you prefer the maternity 
leave replacement, you need to find them *another* job, not just 
tell the woman on leave that you've found someone better. 

The case law argument is that you would never have *hired* the 
replacement unless the woman had gotten pregnant, only women can get 
pregnant, so you are discriminating against women ...

And again, the company gets its ass sued.

If you want both women in the workforce *and* little replacement 
workers, you have to be prepared to pay for them. ;-)

Pip

{who will now do the blah, blah, blah that seems to be required as 
Yahoo strips the last couple of lines of a post, hum ho.}





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Thu Aug 28 13:35:16 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:35:16 -0000
Subject: The demographic timebomb 
In-Reply-To: <bijtel+ovvj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bil0ek+hcnk@eGroups.com>

Catlady:

> Due to the Family and Medical Care Leave Act passed under Clinton, 
>a woman who bears or adopts a baby is entitled to take off four 
>months without pay and still get her job back, 

Well . . . 

I'm not a labor lawyer or anything, but I think the law applies to 
men and women.  It also applies to family members who must take time 
off to care for a sick relative.  Seems humane to me.


>Here in California, women on 
> maternity leave can get paid from Disability Insurance. While I 
> understand that having a baby is a terrible burden, I am less than 
> thrilled with having to do both my own work AND that of a 
>colleague on maternity leave (but not getting her salary in 
>addition to mine). 

Well . . . 

In California, disabled workers are entitled to benefits.  People 
can become disabled in any number of ways, as you might imagine.  
Pregnant women *are* disabled for a time, so they receive the same 
benefits any other disabled worker would receive.  When I lived in 
California, the disability benefit was a fraction of the worker's 
salary and was extended for six weeks, IIRC.

As for whether one should be annoyed at having to cover for a 
disabled worker . . . if one wouldn't object to benefits for someone 
recovering from -- oh, I dunno -- surgery to donate a kidney, then I 
don't see why one would object to benefits for someone recovering 
from childbirth.  A disability is a disability is a disability in my 
book.

Cindy 




From neonsister at ameritech.net  Thu Aug 28 14:10:06 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:10:06 -0000
Subject: Great double bill
Message-ID: <bil2fu+39cq@eGroups.com>

I was reading the arts and entertainment calendar in my local paper 
and found these two bands scheduled - Bad Wizard, and The Figgs!  

Tracy
Coming soon to your town...the Hogwarts-palooza tour!   :-)




From anneu53714 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 28 19:42:03 2003
From: anneu53714 at yahoo.com (Anne Urbanski)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Great double bill
Message-ID: <20030828194203.2608.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Tracy" <neonsister at a...> wrote:
> I was reading the arts and entertainment calendar in my local paper 
> and found these two bands scheduled - Bad Wizard, and The Figgs!  
> 
> Tracy
> Coming soon to your town...the Hogwarts-palooza tour!   :-)

I will attend ONLY if tickets cost less than 2 galleons, AND if Celestina
Warbeck is the headliner. Otherwise, I'll be too busy knitting hats for
the house-elves;-)

Anne U
(whose favorite musician is often called a guitar wizard")


=====
And now here is my secret, a very simple secret: it is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye. - Antoine de Ste. Exupery, The Little Prince
"Anyone could be the one to change your life" - Monte Montgomery, http://www.montemontgomery.com
Visit my Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/anneu53714



From staceypfan78 at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 28 22:45:06 2003
From: staceypfan78 at hotmail.com (Stacey)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:45:06 -0000
Subject: Good Draco/Bad Draco
Message-ID: <bim0li+m9q1@eGroups.com>

In reading some fanfics, I notice some people write Draco as turning 
over to the good side.  I personally don't think that would ever 
happen and I don't enjoy reading them.  He's just TOO evil and 
spoiled to ever go good.  He's been raised with and exposed to Dark 
Wizards all his life and prejudices are not easy to get rid of, 
especially if you hear about them your whole life.  I just don't 
think it's realistic to have him be in a good role and to fall in 
love with Ginny, Hermoine, etc.  Any thoughts?




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 28 23:40:32 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 23:40:32 -0000
Subject: Good Draco/Bad Draco
In-Reply-To: <bim0li+m9q1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bim3tg+s234@eGroups.com>

<<<"Stacey" <staceypfan78 at h...> wrote:...In reading some fanfics, I 
notice some people write Draco as turning over to the good side.  I 
personally don't think that would ever happen and I don't enjoy 
reading them...I just don't think it's realistic to have him be in a 
good role and to fall in love with Ginny, Hermoine, etc.  Any 
thoughts?>>>

The Sergeant Majorette (delurking momentarily) says

While I agree that Good!Draco is a boring concept, OoP Evil!Draco was 
pretty shrill and tedious in his own right. (JKR has said that Harry 
and Draco will never side together.)

Draco and Hermione -- speaking as a former hermione, I'd say, Never! 
Draco and Ginny, maybe, but only if Ginny gets to keep her OoP 
personality.

Finally, well, I don't want to start a fistfight, but I just can't 
see Draco as straight. Some of the fanfiction that has Harry and 
Draco, as the two most damaged psyches, getting together, come across 
as the most natural.

--JDR 




From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Aug 29 02:31:04 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 02:31:04 -0000
Subject: The demographic timebomb was Re: the whole kid thing
In-Reply-To: <bikodi+bvrf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bimdt8+h324@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:

> They're also allowed to hire a replacement to cover provided it's 
> clear in the advert that this is 'maternity leave cover'. 

Employers here are allowed to hire a replacement to cover for an 
employee on maternity leave (or any other kind of leave). It's just 
that many of them are too miserly to do so.

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at c...> 
wrote:

> As for whether one should be annoyed at having to cover for a 
> disabled worker . . . if one wouldn't object to benefits for
> someone recovering from -- oh, I dunno -- surgery to donate a 
> kidney, then I don't see why one would object to benefits for 
> someone recovering from childbirth.  A disability is a disability
> is a disability in my book.

How long is the kidney donor out for? At my current level of 
tiredness, I think they should hire a temp to cover for anyone who's 
out longer than a *week*, but probably a month is less unrealistic. 
It would probably *take* a month (of heavy paperwork) to get 
*permission* to hire a temp at my shop.




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Aug 29 10:21:40 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 11:21:40 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] anyone going to AU?
In-Reply-To: <1062144174.505.73409.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030829102140.98141.qmail@web21512.mail.yahoo.com>

Message: 2
   Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:26:25 -0000
   From: "jenna_ash3" <jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com>


Thanks for the link to my regional HP group. Great idea. Trying to 
find some more HP fans going to events this year. Is anyone going to 
AU from this list? Are there any other HP events in the UK?

Jen


Hi Jen,

I just happen to be in Adelaide in January so I'm certainly going to enrol
for the Conference at Flinders University.

Hans in Holland

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/



From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 29 12:11:46 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:11:46 -0000
Subject: Prefects, Headboys and Headgirls in Real Life
Message-ID: <binfu2+j0fd@eGroups.com>

None of the schools where I studied had anything similar to Prefects, 
Headboys or Headgirls. So I read the HP books and have no idea why 
they exist, what they're supposed to do, or why would anyone want to 
wear those badges. 

All I see them doing in the books is leading the first-years to the 
dorms and repressing the rule-breakers. Now, in my experience, 
telling on your schoolmates doesn't make you very popular among them. 
A student with the power to take points from the others? Sounds even 
worse. I'd expect Prefects, Headboys and Headgirls to be seen with 
mistrust and maybe even hostility by their schoolmates, possibly 
losing some friends. So unless you're a natural rules-MUST-be-obeyed 
freak (Percy, Hermione), it doesn't sound like a job anyone would 
welcome. So there must be something in it to make it appealing to the 
students. 

So, my question for anyone here who studied or teach in schools with 
hierarchical systems similar to Hogwarts': what do those selected 
students do? what is their range of authority? what are their tasks 
and how are they rewarded? how does the selection affect the chosen 
ones' relationship with the teachers and the others students? is the 
selection a refusable honour? do students refuse it sometimes?

Thanks,

Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Aug 29 13:00:53 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:00:53 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Prefects, Headboys and Headgirls in Real Life
In-Reply-To: <binfu2+j0fd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F4FDB25.10617.15934E4@localhost>

On 29 Aug 2003 at 12:11, Morgan D. wrote:

> So, my question for anyone here who studied or teach in schools with 
> hierarchical systems similar to Hogwarts': what do those selected 
> students do? what is their range of authority? what are their tasks 
> and how are they rewarded? how does the selection affect the chosen 
> ones' relationship with the teachers and the others students? is the 
> selection a refusable honour? do students refuse it sometimes?

I was a prefect at school, so I'm happy to answer these questions.

First of all bear in mind that schools differ, as does the office of 
prefect. My own schooling was in a school which came from a similar 
tradition to the one Hogwarts seems to be based on.

So I'll talk about what I did.

My duties as a prefect were both explicit and implicit. Explicitly, I 
was expected to support the staff of the school in matters of 
discipline, and also to act as a liaison between the staff and my fellow 
students. I was expected to keep an eye on younger pupils, and to help 
them deal with minor problems (on the principle that they'd be more 
likely to talk to another student about many problems than they would a 
teacher) and direct them to support for more major ones. I was sometimes 
called on to represent another student when they felt an injustice had 
been done. I dealt with kids who were homesick. I mediated disputes. I 
supervised students. There was a lot involved.

Authority - well, we had some disciplinary powers. We could hand out 
lines, and we could sign disciplinary cards (everybody had to carry one 
of these cards, and if you managed to get 10 signatures in a term, you 
had to see the headmaster - something to be seriously feared. As a 
prefect, I was able to give up to three signatures at once - in theory. 
In practice, I was informed that I'd better have a *very* good reason if 
I ever gave more than two, and I should also avoid if possible, ever 
giving a tenth signature to a student). 90% of the time, we simply gave 
warnings.

How are they rewarded? Rewarded?!?!? (-8 Seriously, it was an honour, 
and not something you sought reward for. We did have some privileges - a 
small (and I mean *very* small) personal office - it was about the size 
of a phone booth (and I am not joking about that). We could go to the 
head of lines in the library, or the school canteen (this was because we 
were assumed to have other duties to perform and so our time was at a 
premium - it was very bad form to jump a queue unless you were actually 
having to hurry off on duty). Longer term, it did look good when 
applying for university.

How did it effect your relationships with other students? Well, the fact 
is, *most* people respected the position provided you didn't abuse your 
powers, and provided you weren't arrogant about it. At least that's how 
it worked for us. Younger students tended to respect the position 
reasonably well. Students of your own age tended to know that you 
actually had a lot of extra work to do because you were a prefect - and 
respected that effort. They rarely gave you a hard time.

Relationship with teachers? Not a lot of change in my experience. By the 
time you became a prefect they already knew you, and either respected 
you or didn't. The only time there was much of a difference was if you 
explicitly approached them as a prefect - for example, if you were 
acting as an intermediary for a student who felt they'd been unfairly 
given a detention - in such cases, they would act quite professionally 
towards you as a prefect - quite differently from the way they 
interacted with you as a student.

Could a person refuse the honour? Yes - but at my school, that would 
have been seen as bad form - you'd benefited from the school and it's 
traditions, and then you'd refused the chance to do your bit to 
perpetuate them. Refusals at my school were very rare - but I know they 
had happened.  

Resentment was rare - at least long term resentment was. People might 
object to a particular action - but generally long term problems 
wouldn't develop. Only time I remember any significant problem was when 
there'd been a fight between some students from my school and a rival 
school on a train station one night, and for the rest of the week I 
found myself dispatched there each evening to keep a look out on things. 
That was resented by some students - but not because I was supervising 
them - rather it was because the other school had sent prefects there as 
well, and all the prefects from both schools were cooperating - this was 
seen as somewhat disloyal (-8 Cooperating with the enemy. The other 
school's prefects got the same treatment from their boys.

Some of the purposes of a prefect is (in theory - it doesn't always work 
in practice) to serve as an Ambassador for their school, a role model to 
their fellow students, a connection between the staff and the students, 
and a support to their fellows.

It's a tradition.

"Another ingredient in the process, besides games, was the prefectorial 
system... Prefects ran house activities and helped legislate rules; they 
kept order, judged offences and often did the punishing themselves."

"Despite the lack of formal checks on their power, prefects generally 
acted with self-restraint."

"Like the institution of Games, the prefectorial system channelled 
rather than suppressed aggressive impulses. The senior boy, accorded 
official status by the community, put his energies into tasks of social 
leadership; he didn't have to prove his authority by bullying, fighting, 
or other forms of anti-social behaviour."

"This tradition, acting as an internalized check on the ruler, had two 
aspects. First, the community conferred high office only as a quid pro 
quo, offering prefectorial privileges - special living comforts, freedom 
from certain rules and so on - in return for duty. Memory assisted the 
quid pro quo obligation, since each prefect could remember what it was 
like to be on the receiving end of prefectorial commands before he came 
to office."

The above quotes are from 'The Prefects: British Leadership and the 
Public School Tradtion: A Comparative Study in the making of Rulers' by 
Rupert Wilkinson, published by Oxford University Press, in London in 
1964.

I just included them for the sake of interest (-8

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 29 14:59:14 2003
From: tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com (tomatogrower88)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 14:59:14 -0000
Subject: the whole kid thing
In-Reply-To: <biifpe+hke6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <binpo2+r937@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at a...> wrote:




> 
> But is that enough to make me want one of my own?  No, I don't think 
> so.  I just don't have enough personal desire to reproduce for it to 
> make sense.  Is there any societal need?  IMO, the last thing the 
> world needs is more people in it.  However, there is a societal need 
> to take care of the world's many neglected kids, and I've given a 
lot 
> of serious consideration to adopting a kid.  I like the idea of 
> adopting an older kid, to avoid the baby stage, and to rescue some 
> unhappy soul from her cupboard under the stairway.
> 
> A lot of people I tell that to are really appalled by this. (Most 
are 
> supportive, though.)  Some people just can't imagine raising 
"someone 
> else's child."  They seem to have this idea that child-raising 
> involves possession, and molding this little person in your own 
> image.  IMO, this is a lot of the motivation for a lot of people who 
> have kids, and it's one I don't share.  I don't even think it's 
> healthy.  How many of us resent our parents' continuing efforts to 
> mold our lives?  (I thought so.)  
> 
> That's why I want to adopt an older kid.  I don't want to raise a 
> little duplicate Joybaby, I just want to provide a home to someone 
> who needs it.  (And yes, I know there can be a lot of difficulties 
> with a adopting neglected child, but that's another question 
> altogether.)
> 
> And there's a million other ifs, ands and buts here.  If I had a 
> partner who had kids, or wanted kids, it would probably change my 
> feelings and would certainly change my options.  And, in the 
unlikely 
> event that I accidently got pregnant, barring medical complications 
> (somewhat likely, at my age) I would just go ahead and have a baby.
> 
> But to have kids, just because that's what you're "supposed" to do? 
 
> Seems stupid, to me.
> 
> --Joywitch, still a Curmudgeon, I suppose.



I feel so strongly on the issue of adoption. I have seen so many 
childern who need to be offered  a chance. I think adopting a child is 
a wonderful thing. Many children are unable to be adopted because they 
are older and do have problems due to the abuse or neglect they have 
suffered. I think that if you have the time, love and willingness to 
deal with the problems an older child might have you should do it. I  
enjoy reading you posts Joywitch, so stay a cumudgeon please.

Myrth, whoses tomatos are finally doing well.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Fri Aug 29 16:55:32 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:55:32 -0000
Subject: The Lights Are Going Out... was Re: Blackout 
In-Reply-To: <bhhei7+n90l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bio0i4+5l3t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Tracy" 
<neonsister at a...> wrote:
> On the count of three, everyone yell "Lumos!" and we'll see if 
the 
> lights go on again in New York and vicinity.  ;-)
> 
> To those of you affected by the blackout  (who will obviously be 
> reading this after the fact), I hope things are back to normal 
> working order quickly.  
> 
> Tracy
> *one....two.....three!*

What she said...only this time it's the UK

Pippin




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 29 16:58:27 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:58:27 -0000
Subject: Mars is bright tonight
Message-ID: <bio0nj+oala@eGroups.com>

Mars is bright indeed in RL.  It has been closer to the Earth all 
week than it has been for the past sixty thousand years.

Haggridd (with a confirmation from Prof. Sinistra)




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 29 17:53:27 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 17:53:27 -0000
Subject: Mars is bright tonight
In-Reply-To: <bio0nj+oala@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bio3un+ghqr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd" 
<jkusalavagemd at y...> wrote:
> Mars is bright indeed in RL.  It has been closer to the Earth all 
> week than it has been for the past sixty thousand years.

Thanks for the reminder!  I'll find a good dark place to skywatch 
tonight, before Mars goes away again.

Amy Z. **************************************************************
********************************************************************




From jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 29 18:06:46 2003
From: jenna_ash3 at hotmail.com (jenna_ash3)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 18:06:46 -0000
Subject: anyone going to AU?
In-Reply-To: <20030829102140.98141.qmail@web21512.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bio4nm+jjc7@eGroups.com>

 
> Hi Jen,
> 
> I just happen to be in Adelaide in January so I'm certainly going 
to enrol
> for the Conference at Flinders University.
> 
> Hans in Holland
> 

Adelaide? LOL. Cool. But a bit far for me to go! Thanks for the info 
though. And please, if anyone does get a ticket, please let me know 
as I would love to meet up with some HP fans in the UK that are event 
goers and if anyone has any news of any other HP events in the UK, 
please email me or post it here to let me know.

Thanks a bunch!

Jen




From heidit at netbox.com  Sat Aug 30 02:01:27 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 22:01:27 -0400
Subject: On Draco
References: <20030830000150.29EC362D78@home.netbox.com>
Message-ID: <1062208895.32E31C22@w5.dngr.org>


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Stacey" <staceypfan78 at h...>
wrote:
>  In reading some fanfics, I notice some people write Draco as
turning
>  over to the good side.  I personally don't think that would ever
>  happen and I don't enjoy reading them.  He's just TOO evil and
>  spoiled to ever go good.  He's been raised with and exposed to Dark
>  Wizards all his life and prejudices are not easy to get rid of,
>  especially if you hear about them your whole life.  I just don't
>  think it's realistic to have him be in a good role and to fall in
>  love with Ginny, Hermoine, etc.  Any thoughts?

Well, yes, there's been a number of thoughts about this, and I think
the discussion should probably go over to the main list, as this
isn't a fanfiction discussion, but rather a discussion of the
character of Draco - a main list subject if there ever was one.

Over the past three plus years, HPfGU and other sites have had many
discussions of Draco's character - parallels to Snape, and now
parallels to Sirius seem to abound! The most comprehensive post on
this on HPfGU was by Elkins about a year ago - you can read it here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39083

You can also read what I consider to be a good sum-up of the
Draco/Hermione ship arguments in a dialogue I had onlist with Elkins
back in January - you can read it here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/50638.

Many of us who write about a Draco who isn't a happy little Death
Eater came to those conclusions and arguments based on analysis of
his character which draws entirely from canon and from extrapolations
of JKR's intent regarding the books - you know, choice and all that.
It's always felt to me that Draco hasn't really been given any
realistic demonstration of choices - and we don't know yet what made
Sirius turn away from the Dark Arts leanings of his family, or what
made Snape shun the Dark Arts that he likely practised or at least
saw as a Death Eater. Personally, I think it's important that JKR
show someone from the current generation make that choice - and no,
Seamus deciding to turn aside from his mother's entreaties isn't
quite the same kind of parallel - and Draco is the most logical
choice to do it, purely from a storytelling perspective.


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...>
wrote:

>  While I agree that Good!Draco is a boring concept, OoP Evil!Draco
was
>  pretty shrill and tedious in his own right. (JKR has said that
Harry
>  and Draco will never side together.)

Actually, she didn't. In a chat about 3 years ago, someone asked if
Draco and Harry would *join together* to *fight evil* - and she said
that was a rumor. Given her 'red-herring' creation and the spins she
puts on comments about the books' future plots, I don't think that
can be redefined as "will never side together."
>

>  Finally, well, I don't want to start a fistfight, but I just can't
>  see Draco as straight. Some of the fanfiction that has Harry and
>  Draco, as the two most damaged psyches, getting together, come
across
>  as the most natural.

Agreed.


Heidi
http://www.fictionalley.org



From s_ings at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 30 03:22:37 2003
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:22:37 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Dee!
Message-ID: <20030830032237.32525.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com>

*sneaks in just under the wire to decorate the room
quickly and lay out an abundance of food*

Today's birthday honouree is Dee (gypsycaine).
Birthday owls can be sent care of this list or
directly to: gypsycaine at neo.rr.com

I hope your day has been wonderful, filled with much
celebrating in the company of good friends.

Happy Birthday, Dee!

Sheryll the Birthday Elf

=====
http://www.livejournal.com/community/conventionalley/

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From bettedavisgreen at aol.com  Sun Aug 31 20:04:16 2003
From: bettedavisgreen at aol.com (bettedavisgreen at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 16:04:16 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Thank you!
Message-ID: <36.4715c497.2c83aec0@aol.com>

Dans un e-mail dat? du 31/08/2003 19:25:53 Paris, Madrid, 
arodonn at earthlink.net a ?crit :

> Please see the attached file for details.
> 
> 
> 

Well... I was kinf od worrying... usually so many messages... and today it 
seemed Yahoo was only sending me the virus-here ones... but no... everybody 
seemed to be enjoying a nice non-HP Sunday :)

Have boldly decided to go back to individual emails on the Main List... Wish 
me luck...

Cristina (who, after the killer heat wave here in France, is starting to wear 
socks again. Mismatched :)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From andie at knownet.net  Sun Aug 31 22:32:42 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:32:42 -0000
Subject: Very OT -  Single HP Fans
Message-ID: <bitt2a+32i5@eGroups.com>

I was thinking today that I really wished that there was a 
matchmaking system for us single HP fans to meet other single HP 
fans.  It's so hard to meet quality people in general!  Am I right??? 
Wishful thinking, I know to think that I would meet a wonderful 
person AND they would be a fan of HP! 

I was thinking about starting a HP discussion group at the local 
bookstore to see if that would spark some romantic connections 
between members, but unfortunately, I don't think that there are 
enough adult fans interested in this area.  

Anyway, and I know that this is way OT, but for those people whose 
husbands/wives are HP fans as well... How did you meet each other?  
Or were you already married when HP was born?

Curious to hear your stories...
Andrea :)




From michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Aug 31 22:36:26 2003
From: michelleapostolides at yahoo.co.uk (Pinguthegreek)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 23:36:26 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Very OT -  Single HP Fans
References: <bitt2a+32i5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <013b01c37010$6bf0d9c0$e35fc487@personal>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: grindieloe 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 11:32 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Very OT - Single HP Fans


  I was thinking today that I really wished that there was a 
  matchmaking system for us single HP fans to meet other single HP 
  fans.  It's so hard to meet quality people in general!  Am I right??? 
  Wishful thinking, I know to think that I would meet a wonderful 
  person AND they would be a fan of HP! 

  ME :
  I agree about a dearth of single HP fans ! But I am not so sure you can lok for a partner purely based on one or two interests. I think it has to do with an outlook on life, mixed with a bit of sexual chemistry and a desire to make a relationship work. But if anyone wanted to get some kind of singles network going, I 'm not going to complain. But I am in the UK.....

  Michelle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 31 20:39:25 2003
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 31 Aug 2003 20:39:25 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1062362365.27.79959.m12@yahoogroups.com>


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, August 31, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

Hi everyone! 

Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7
pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight
Saving/Summer Time.*  Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours,
but can last as long as people want it to last.

Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 
For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33

Hope to see you there! 

 





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 31 22:57:50 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:57:50 -0000
Subject: OT: Long Delay Before Post Appears - Anyone else?
Message-ID: <bituhe+m46u@eGroups.com>

Just curious, has anyone else been experiencing extra long delays in
their posts appearing in the Main group?

I posted one, and waited for 2 hours and it hadn't appeared yet, so I
posted it again. About a half hour later the first post appeared, but
the second post didn't appear in the group for nearly EIGHT HOURS.

I know I'm not on moderated status, because I can't think of any
reason why I would be and haven't received a notice from the Mods.

I'm in Minnesota, so it could be a regional thing. Yahoo has servers
spread all over the world. 

Just curious, but 8 hours seems extreme and unnaturally long.

Maybe the CIA is monitoring my Harry Potter for Grownups posts, to see
if I am sending secret coded messages to terroist groups or something.

Just curious if other in the central USA are having similar problems.

bboy_mn