From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #89 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/89 Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------" To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain blakes7-d Digest Volume 00 : Issue 89 Today's Topics: Open Letter to JMR on the Subject of Netnames (was Re: [B7L] Horizon) [B7L] Re: Horizon [B7L] Horizon discussion Re: [B7L] Horizon 2.0/*Wild* accusations! Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) Re: [B7L] Room at the Top RE: [B7L] horizon Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) Re: Open Letter to JMR on the Subject of Netnames (was Re: [B7L] Horizon) Re: [B7L] Re: Horizon Re: [B7L] Horizon 2.0a Re: [B7L] Re:Horizon Re: [B7L] Volcano question Re: [B7L] Horizon discussion Re: Open Letter to JMR on the Subject of Netnames (was Re:[B7L] Horizon) Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) Re: [B7L] Room at the Top [B7L] Avon's skills Re: [B7L] Avon's skills ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 22:46:03 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Open Letter to JMR on the Subject of Netnames (was Re: [B7L] Horizon) Message-ID: <38E1A6A9.F1196F7F@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of Horizon. It is unlikely although not impossible that I ever shall be. Nor have I ever, as far as I know, met either another Lystian or a member of Horizon. JMR wrote: > I, if you remember, entered this debate by merely pointing out that despite > the claims made, the names given were not names of "Horizon" members or > "Deliverance" attendees. It wasn't until I was attacked for making this > (true) observation that I suggested that perhaps people should have the > courage to correctly identify themselves rather than continue sniping from > the shadows. Perhaps you might consider that you were attacked because, however much you might like to pretend otherwise, your comments were in the nature of an attack themselves. Your original post contributed exactly zero to the discussion at hand, and was instead an absolutely transparent attempt to disparage individuals who were raising questions and discussing issues which are in fact appropriate to this forum. I am not in favour of personal attacks on anybody, including Diane Gies. However, the responsiveness of Horizon and its officers to members are a legitimate topic for discussion here. If DG has used her poor health as an excuse for nonresponsiveness to members, then she is the one who has introduced it to the public debate. Having reviewed the discussion, I saw one comment prior to your original post which I'd have viewed as being in slightly poor taste, and easily ignored; but it seems to me you are the one who deteriorated the discussion into a slanging match. > I'm glad you remember Diva from discussions that took place a couple of > years ago on this list, I too remember Diva--I wasn't a Lystian then, but I was reading the archives. I also remember that she was discussing issues, and that instead of responding to those issues, you attacked her for using a netname. I considered it about as appropriate and mature then as I do now--which is to say, not at all. > Of course, if they are bona fide members/attendees choosing to hide behind > anonymous Hotmail/Yahoo accounts, then one simply wonders why they feel the > need to conceal their identities. Surely everyone should be prepared to > acknowledge and stand by what they say, write or do? Or perhaps I should > have used a Hotmail account to make the observation, rather than posting > under my real name and email address? <shrug> It makes not one whit of difference to me whether you or anyone else uses their real name or not. Why should it? Why does it to you? If you changed your name to Quasimodo tomorrow, I would endeavour to remember to call you Quasimodo; I respect your right to define your personal identity insofar as it is practical for you to do so. A name is just a label. The constant is the person behind that label--their feelings and ideas. You say you are using your real name as if it gives you some moral superiority over those of us who use netnames; in fact, although I've had nothing to do with the Horizon discussion whatsoever prior to this, you have accused me of cowardice and discourtesy. Do you really believe that is appropriate? How do I know you are using your real name? Because you tell me? Whereas you apparently felt the need to go and check up on Emily and Mat in order to attack them; I'd say that is more than enough reason to use a netname. Perhaps I should check up on you? But I don't have the resources to do so directly; perhaps I should have one of my British e-friends check--oh, but I forgot, I don't know that they are who they say they are either. Dear me... I'd hate to think that any of my personal e-friends has been expressing false affection to me simply because I haven't verified their name... or that they think I'm expressing false affection to them because I'm using a netname... Where does the paranoia STOP??? There are are a great many reasons (and long internet tradition) for using netnames, most of which have nothing to do with trying to defraud anybody. Personal security, for example--netstalkers are rare but they do exist. People who have been harrassed by net acquaintances to the point they have to change their e-mail addresses. People who have enough difficulties with dangerous or annoying ex-spouses and lovers in the real world and don't want said exes to find them online. People who are famous and want a 'normal' life online. People who are simply timid and shy and find a way to relate from the safety of a net connection. People who need for personal reasons to separate their business life from their personal life, or their family life from their social life. Unless you know the person IRL, or have at least discussed with them *why* they're using a netname, you have no background at all to evaluate the legitimacy of their need--and if you have discussed it with them, it strikes me as bad form to call it into question in public. What about fanfic writers who use a pseudonym? What about pro writers who use a pseudonym? Lots of people use a different name for business than they do in private. In some families, the first name is used in public, the middle name by the family. And some people are called almost exclusively by nicknames, and their legal names used rarely if ever. Would you really walk up to Paul Darrow at a con and insult him because that's not his 'real' name? I don't think so. If you want to continue to insult me for using a netname, please feel absolutely free to do so. I promise you it won't hurt me any the less simply because my return address says 'Mistral'. When I'm here, that IS my name. Mistral (not my legal name but just as REAL to me as your name is to you.) -- "A rose by any other name..."--WS ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 23:18:35 -0800 From: "Sarah Thompson" <sthompson162@mindspring.com> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: [B7L] Re: Horizon Message-ID: <000801bf994f$2c3685a0$30aecdcf@y1i7s9> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David F., I believe that "Diva" is in fact Diane Gies's sister, Sharon Eckman. That is why she sounds like Diane (same upbringing), and why she knows the intimate details of Diane's personal life. According to the back issues of the Horizon newsletter that I have been rereading lately, Sharon is in RL a professional singer-- a "diva," at least in her own estimation. She is actually being remarkably polite by her own standards in recent posts. Since you are new to the list, you will not have seen her in action before; but check the Lysator archives for the period shortly after the Deliverance convention, two years ago. There you will see "Diva" responding to criticism of the convention not only with an amazingly nasty personal attack on one of the critics-- equal to, if not worse than, anything that has been said in these parts about Diane-- but also completely unfounded attacks on people she happens not to like, even though they had had nothing but good things to say about the con! I thought she had slunk off in shame after that episode, and I'm a bit surprised to see that she is still hanging around and even using the same pseud. Sarah Thompson (also my real name, also a Horizon member) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:34:24 +0200 From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: [B7L] Horizon discussion Message-ID: <005701bf9951$35117340$f6ee72c3@marian-de-haan.multiweb.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Am I the only one who's getting thoroughly fed up with the Horizon discussion? Can't we turn to something more entertaining, like Avon's wardrobe? :-) Now, my favourite outfits are... No, I'll spare you that. <eg> Marian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:05:21 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon 2.0/*Wild* accusations! Message-ID: <007701bf9956$0dd281c0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 'Diva' wrote: <Oh, and btw Neil, when I said start the revolution, I wasn't meaning people should take over Horizon, but that if they had criticisms then they should turn them into practical action. Before anyone asks, I wasn't advocating Dana-style bomb-throwing either!> Whilst I might simply be betraying my own lack of imagination, I find it hard to envisage any level of 'practical action' that might work. Diane has shown, over the years, that her control of Horizon is not something she is prepared to see compromised, and with the club being run by a committee hired and fired at her own personal whim, the prospect of change from within would appear to be remote in the extreme. Nor do I see any prospective benefit in launching a rival club. Horizon has had something like two decades to establish itself as a unique source of a wide range of merchandise which no other club could come close to rivalling. It has close contacts with many of the actors, contacts that are of enormous benefit to fandom (in arranging guest-signings, con appearances, and general cast news). Any rival club, even if it could establish itself, would not be in fandom's interest, since as a blatant rival to Horizon it would polarise fandom and divert the energies of both parties into competition with the other. B7, IMO, is not a big enough fandom to accomodate this level of factionalisation. One bit of practical action I did undertake - along with Judith Proctor, I launched AltaZine. This was a direct response to what I perceived as the shortcomings of the Horizon Letterzine (editorship of which I had just resigned from, in utter disgust at the way a covert editorial policy - Diane's, largely made up as she went along - was being imposed on the contributors, people who were being silenced without even being told *why* they were being silenced). AltaZine ran for seven issues, with at most 40-something subscribers, before I decided to fold it. Not because the Horizon competition was too great (in fact the HLZ was in a state of decay around the same time), but because this Lyst had turned into the main forum of B7 discussion and was essentially doing the job I had envisaged for AltaZine, and more efficiently with a wider contributor base. As editor of the HLZ, I don't deny that I deliberately set out to stamp it with my own editorial imprint. Some people liked the way I handled it, and said so. Some didn't, but didn't say so, at least not to me. They complained to Diane instead. Now, I don't know exactly what goes on in her head, but I'm tempted to speculate that just as complainants who Diane disagrees with are ignored, so those who she does agree with are accomodated. Any attempt to resolve the issue through debate was eschewed in favour of a directive from on high. The issue in question was that hoary old chestnut called slash. I had allowed discussion of slash to enter the pages of the HLZ, and several people - I think it was four in all - cancelled their subscriptions as a result. Or so Diane told me after they had cancelled, and I see no reason to disbelieve her. Anyway, from now on - said she - no mention of slash was to be made in the HLZ. This directive was coupled with the way Judith Proctor had used her LOC in HLZ #14 to advertise - quite legitimately, IMO - a number of zines she had acquired from the States. Unfortunately, some of these were Ashton Press publications. There is an unwritten rule in Horizon that you do not advertise Ashton zines. You do not even acknowledge their existence. Even though Ashton produce some highly regarded publications - including the marvellous Hellhound series - Horizon is not the place to find about them. That part of Judith's letter had to be replaced by an editorial paragraph of mine, which was naturally not allowed to mention Diane's belief that Judith was deliberately shit-stirring by discussing slash and advertising proscribed zines. If you have a copy of HLZ #14, you will notice that some pages are barely legible. This is because my printer ribbon was worn out with reprinting the 'offending' passages, not once but twice, since most failed to meet with Diane's approval first time around. She objected, for instance, to the fact that I not only chose to indicate which letters had been cut, but that I had dared to mention that censorship was in operation at all. This, to my mind, is rank dishonesty. (She later backtracked a little, in her enditorial page at the end of #14, and admitted that cuts had in fact been made, but she was utterly livid that I had dared to do so without seeking her approval first.) Not all of the cuts I objected to. One, for instance, was an off-hand reference to Garry 'Shakedown' Leigh, which could not be included because of the out-of-court settlement Horizon had recently reached with him. However, as a member of the Horizon committee, you might think Diane could have informed me beforehand that there had been a legal case and that there were repercussions of the settlement that might directly affect me in my role as Letterzine editor. You might think that, but you'd be wrong because I wasn't told anything until it was felt necessary to tell me. Along with all the other rules that I didn't find out until I broke them. The message seemed clear enough - members of the Horizon committee have next to no say in club policy, since formulation of that resides entirely with Diane Gies, and anyone who contradicts her gets slung out if they don't resign first. (A bit of prodding on my part during a telephone conversation with Sue Cowley brought to light the fact that even Jackie Ophir had dropped out, apparently in the wake of the Shakedown debacle.) Practical action? *What* practical action? Neil "I am not a man, I am a free number." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 07:50:55 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) Message-ID: <007601bf9956$0cef26a0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David F / Dorian: Knock it off. I am more than adequately convinced that Diva is *not* Diane. Judith Rolls says so, and that is good enough for me. I've met Judith, albeit briefly, and nothing I have heard about her calls her own personal integrity into question. The way Horizon operates (or fails to operate) is an important issue that requires sensible and informed discussion. Reducing it to infantile accusations of 'Stalinist dictatorships' is no way to clarify the issues and determine what is and is not true. Clinging to pathetically insubstantiable convictions about the supposed identities and/or allegiances of particular individuals only serves to obscure the truth, when the only legitimate object of discussing this topic is to reveal said truth. I have made it clear in the past that I do not like Diane Gies, not one bit. But there is no way I can condone the level of puerile mudslinging that this thread is degenerating into. If you have facts, or at least accusations that you believe to be founded in fact, then offer them, with substantiating evidence where possible. If you have nothing but speculations, then at least make it clear that you are merely speculating. Otherwise shut up or fuck off. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:15:44 +0200 From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Room at the Top Message-ID: <005e01bf9956$fb95d100$f6ee72c3@marian-de-haan.multiweb.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dana Shilling wrote: >I feel impelled to disagree with the implied underlying analysis of the >class struggle on the Liberator. Canonically, Blake is an Alpha, and Vila >passes himself off as a Delta but is something else (presumably, a Beta). >It's simply assumed that Avon is an Alpha because of his not-inconsiderable >opinion of himself. >But he seems to me to be exactly the kind of person formerly referred to as >a "grammar-school oik," and I think much of his initial hostility to Blake >comes from the conflict between a public school/Oxbridge type and a >scholarship boy with a double first from the direst red brick university in >the entire Federation. Funny, I always see Avon as the born aristocrat. To me his demeanour indicates someone being reared on the notion that he/his family is better than everyone else around. [And in that case his family would not have been happy with his gift for technology as they'd rather see him go into something like politics. :-)] I can picture Blake as the scholarship boy, but never Avon. And, providing the Federation class system is based on birth rather than testing and thus no indication of someone's intelligence, I've no trouble accepting Vila as a Delta grade. In Shadow he states that he grew up among the Delta service grades, so that's presumably where he belongs. (I regard his statement in Volcano that he could have been a Space Captain as mere bragging.) Note, this is not Vila bashing. I love the bloke and I admire his skill to cope with a life that can't have been easy at any time. Marian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:58:30 +0100 From: "Helm, Troy" <thelm@csw.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: RE: [B7L] horizon Message-Id: <200003290908.DAA05308@interlock.csw.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" It all lies with Priorities. The web is a tool, to access it at home you need to make an investment. People can't afford a TV or a video but still they buy them. And I wasn't aware of 'your' position in the Netherlands. Here in the UK we have far too many companies pushing 'free' web access on us. I know this procedure is replicated in all the European countries I've visited. Maybe in a year or so you guys will be in the same position. Roll on free local calls.... Troy -----Original Message----- From: Marian de Haan [mailto:maya@multiweb.nl] Sent: 28 March 2000 17:58 To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] horizon Troy: >Connection is now free and with games consoles, digital TV, set top boxes, >Web Terminals etc offering cheap alternative to PC's cost now really isnt >that much of an issue an issue. I don't know about the rest of the world but my connection is not free and here in the Netherlands PC's are quite expensive. I know more than a few people who can't afford to buy one. Marian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:53:51 +0100 From: JMR <jager@clara.net> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) Message-Id: <E12aFCc-0007qT-00@oracle.clara.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:50 29/03/00 , Neil Faulkner wrote: >David F / Dorian: > >Knock it off. I am more than adequately convinced that Diva is *not* Diane. >Judith Rolls says so, and that is good enough for me. I've met Judith, >albeit briefly, and nothing I have heard about her calls her own personal >integrity into question. > >The way Horizon operates (or fails to operate) is an important issue that >requires sensible and informed discussion. Reducing it to infantile >accusations of 'Stalinist dictatorships' is no way to clarify the issues and >determine what is and is not true. Clinging to pathetically insubstantiable >convictions about the supposed identities and/or allegiances of particular >individuals only serves to obscure the truth, when the only legitimate >object of discussing this topic is to reveal said truth. > >I have made it clear in the past that I do not like Diane Gies, not one bit. >But there is no way I can condone the level of puerile mudslinging that this >thread is degenerating into. If you have facts, or at least accusations >that you believe to be founded in fact, then offer them, with substantiating >evidence where possible. If you have nothing but speculations, then at >least make it clear that you are merely speculating. > >Otherwise shut up or fuck off. > >Neil > Couldn't have said it better myself. Judith http://home.clara.net/jager ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:48:22 +0100 From: JMR <jager@clara.net> To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: Open Letter to JMR on the Subject of Netnames (was Re: [B7L] Horizon) Message-Id: <E12aFCa-0007qT-00@oracle.clara.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:46 29/03/00 , mistral@ptinet.net wrote: >I too remember Diva--I wasn't a Lystian then, but I was reading >the archives. I also remember that she was discussing issues, and >that instead of responding to those issues, you attacked her for using >a netname. I considered it about as appropriate and mature then as >I do now--which is to say, not at all. I would check those archives again, for I suspect you are confusing your Judiths, or attributing comments to me that were actually snipped quotes from someone else. Diva is a personal (ie, "real life") friend of mine, and has been for several years, and in the discussion you are doubtless referring to, we were very much "on the same side" - it's ludicrous to suggest that I "attacked" her. As for the rest, you are entitled to your own opinions, just as I am entitled to mine. Judith http://home.clara.net/jager ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:52:17 +0100 From: JMR <jager@clara.net> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Horizon Message-Id: <E12aFCb-0007qT-00@oracle.clara.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 08:18 29/03/00 , Sarah Thompson wrote: >David F., I believe that "Diva" is in fact Diane Gies's sister, >Sharon Eckman. That is why she sounds like Diane (same >upbringing), and why she knows the intimate details of Diane's >personal life. According to the back issues of the Horizon >newsletter that I have been rereading lately, Sharon is in RL a >professional singer-- a "diva," at least in her own estimation. > >She is actually being remarkably polite by her own standards in >recent posts. Since you are new to the list, you will not have >seen her in action before; but check the Lysator archives for the >period shortly after the Deliverance convention, two years ago. >There you will see "Diva" responding to criticism of the convention >not only with an amazingly nasty personal attack on one of the >critics-- equal to, if not worse than, anything that has been said >in these parts about Diane-- but also completely unfounded attacks >on people she happens not to like, even though they had had nothing >but good things to say about the con! > >I thought she had slunk off in shame after that episode, and I'm a >bit surprised to see that she is still hanging around and even >using the same pseud. > >Sarah Thompson (also my real name, also a Horizon member) > Oh, dear. Another misapprehension. Diva isn't Sharon, either. In fact, she's not any relation by blood, marriage or association to any of the Gies/Eckman clan. But obviously the truth will get shouted down. Again. Judith http://home.clara.net/jager ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:00:37 GMT From: "Mat Shayde" <dorian17@hotmail.com> To: dixonm@pobox.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon 2.0a Message-ID: <20000329100037.56881.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:21:56 GMT, David Fielding wrote: > > >Here’s some supporting proof to show that Diane desires “Total control” > >In case anyone has forgotten. > >It was a violation of netiquette to repost that bit of private >mail when it was first posted, as I said at the time, and IMO >it's still a violation of netiquette. At least this time the >listowner didn't do it. > >-- >Meredith Dixon <dixonm@pobox.com> It may be/have been a violation of netiquette, however it does prove the point *and* makes for rather disturbing reading, then and now. Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 11:18:47 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:Horizon Message-ID: <00fd01bf9968$4f416ec0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrew Ellis wrote... ... a sensible contribution to the debate. > Neil. > >The fact that so many people have publicly voiced their dissatisfaction > with > >Horizon (David, Mat, Emily, Una, Calle and I readily add myself) suggests > >that there is something wrong with the way the club operates. > > and I would like to know the reasons. But I would also like them to > acknowledge that other people may have different views. My own reasons I have already listed, if only partially. Other points of view are, naturally, welcome, provided they are based on experience and fact (that includes your own:)) > So whilst it is > valuable to let us know why you have left Horizon so remaining members can > review thier membership in an informed fashion, please don't try and bring > the whole thing down with insubstantiated accusations, personal attacks and > general bitching. Something I have been endeavouring to avoid. Whilst I will freely use an opportunity, if it suits me, to criticise Diane's management of Horizon, I don't want to attack her personally. There are a lot of words I could use to describe Diane Gies, but I have no intention of using them except as they pertain directly to her management of the club. > Mat > > he has never been a Horizon member and has read someone else's magazines. > Emily > > Does it matter ? > > Yes it does. Whether he's a member or not, he still uses Horizon as a source of information. There is no alternative he can turn to. So his opinion does matter, even if his mode of expressing it leaves a lot to be desired. > Diva, > >As I understand it, Andy Hopkinson and Alan Stevens were given > >responsibility for some or all of the production of Horizon 40. > > and so the health problems should not be an issue at all, because deputies > were appointed. But it is an issue, because the aforementioned deputies appear to have lost or been deprived of their powers of deputisation. Exactly why and how remains unclarified. Obviously it is for them to decide whether or not they do or do not make such information known, though personally I think they should in order to quell the level of wild (and quite possibly unfounded) speculation that is emerging from some quarters. > Neil > > I agree with those who > >assert that Diane attempts to exert a more or less total control over > >Horizon and especially the content of its publications. > > This is worrying, if it is true. It remains my impression that it is true, and I do find it worrying. > Neil > >- not > >that Horizon's publications made any mention of these legal wranglings, > >though I believe such silence was part of the settlement). > > So we should not have mentioned it in public really then ! I am no longer on the club committee, and even when I was nobody saw fit to inform me of the outcome of the case, or indeed that there had been a case at all. I refer to the conditions of the settlement to make it clear that Horizon's blanket of silence was imposed upon them, regardless of their own preferences. I suspect, however, that even without such conditions they - that is, the committee acting under Diane's orders - would have endeavoured to stifle awareness of the situation. > Mat > >A lot of the comment has been criticism of the way the Horizon performs and > >what it produces. Are you suggesting that it should be immune from > >criticism? That it's members should just pay their money and accept any old > >tat that the club produces? > > It should not be immune from critis, but the first port of call should be > the club itself, not this list. I see little point in sending criticism to the club, since such criticisms seem more than likely to be ignored. The essential point of the criticism levelled on this Lyst is that the Horizon committee are not accountable to the opinions and wishes of the membership. Thus Horizon cannot genuinely be a club *for* the members, it can only be the club that Diane wants it to be. > Some members may just think that the "old tat" is actually quite good value, > and are happy to pay for it. Vive la difference. Horizon merchandise is variable in quality, but on the whole it's pretty good. Diane does believe in striving for quality and value and seeks to supply both. That's not to say that she always succeeds, but the intention is there. Even with the newsletters - indeed, one of my carps about them is the over-emphasis on quality of presentation (which is indeed high) to the detriment of the content (generally lacklustre). > Neil, > >Basically, my own experience of Horizon and Diane leads me to believe that > >all the accusations of her dictatorialism re Horizon are well founded, that > >criticism of the way the club operates is equally well founded and > perfectly > >legitimate, > > Is this a recent thing ? Mat suggests it might be. Nope, it's been going on for years. > We were warmly welcomed > into the fold a few years ago when I had more time, Fresh minions to do Diane's bidding are always welcome. So long as they do it her way. Now, if her way also happens to be your way, no problem. But if you stray beyond the boundaries she arbitrarily sets (without informing you that they are there in the first place), big problem. > Diane has had health problems, and arranged for somebody to take over > producing the magazine. Indeed a new team put out NL-39, people seemed to > like that. I met the guys responsible on a Theatre trip, and everything > seemed fine. I've not (knowingly) met Andy. I have met Alan, and for whatever reason I took an instant dislike to the guy. But *that doesn't matter*. (I don't care if he doesn't like me, either. I certainly don't hate him, bear any vituperative animosity towards him etc. I just didn't like him very much from one brief meeting.) The personal is irrelevant here. What *does* matter is that his contributions to the Horizon Newsletter were some of the best I've ever read in its pages. They were witty, irreverent, and entertaining in the extreme. The memory of Mr Johnson's Gravel Path will make me chuckle to my dying day, however apocryphal the story may be. I suspect that Alan, like me, likes to rock the boat - not to sink it, or even to throw anyone overboard, but simply because The Boat Is There and an exhilirating voyage is infinitely preferable to sitting on a stagnant pond. Diane seems to prefer the pond. The tone she seeks to stamp on Horizon publications reeks of an ultra-conservative (small c, I'm not playing party politics here) attitude that values reticence and artificial solidarity for the sake of equally artificial harmony. Horizon reeks of this defensive false accord, this refusal to acknowledge that differences of opinion and attitude within the body of fandom are what makes fandom come alive. And I'm not talking about opinions re the best episode, or points of canonicity or indeed anything relating directly to the series itself (bar slash [again <groan>]) - these are trivia. These are safe. I'm talking about the somewhat less safe (though still far from genuinely dangerous) differences of perspective and approach that underlie not just one's attitude to the series, but to life as a whole. The difference, for example, between a middle class reactionary and a working class radical. (And I'm still trying not to play party politics here.) Between the resolutely bland and the deliberately - and playfully - provocative. Between the timorous and the daring. We have these and other differences here on this Lyst, and they are what makes the Lyst such a vibrant and stimulating forum for discussion. Sure, it goes off the rails from time to time, but it always picks itself up and carries on. There's always the risk of things temporarily going awry, but far better - IMO - to take that risk and all the benefits that go with it, than to atrophy in an atmosphere of a false and enforced notion of decency. > Now we have wild speculation about personality clashes, editorial > interference, work commitments or whatever. Unless the people involved speak > up, thats all it is, speculation. I at least have spoken up, and I don't think I'm speculating. What grounds other people have for their assertions is open to question. Neil "I am not a man, I am a free number." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 100 12:18:24 +0200 (CEST) From: "Jeroen J. Kwast" <jeroenkw@gns.getronics.nl> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Volcano question Message-Id: <200003291018.MAA17726@pampus.gns.getronics.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, > <What is wrong with Rescue and Power?????? I used the Rescue/Power tape a > few times to get some people hooked for good!!!> > > <grin> Rescue, though almost endearingly blatant in its unoriginality, is > the best of the three (one has to give Our Heroes some points for keeping a > straight face through Dorian's mugging), but is rather difficult for me to > sit through after Terminal. Stardrive I just hate and loathe and detest and > despise and abominate. And don't like BTW. > Ok you are right about this but if you look at it like this: (Rescue! not Stardrive) Turn on tv, see Resque, WOW this looks interesting. Then comes Power; the two people I showed this liked it so much they wanted to see the rest. Now when you look at is again ..... :) (So I meant first time viewing) > Then there's Power...weeelll, apart from the excrutiating plot, ghastly > sexist script, appalling guest stars, risible costumes and quite sick-making > depiction of My Darling...nothing at all wrong, I suppose. > > Tsssss, I realllllly liked the plot after the" where's ZEN!?!" question marks disappeared. Anyway for a first time viewing it would be okay to get to know the crew. Better than Animals. JMHO Jeroen PS: This means Stardrive tooooooo!!! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:24:51 GMT From: "Mat Shayde" <dorian17@hotmail.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon discussion Message-ID: <20000329102451.90668.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl> >To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> >Subject: [B7L] Horizon discussion >Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:34:24 +0200 > >Am I the only one who's getting thoroughly fed up with the Horizon >discussion? > >Can't we turn to something more entertaining, like Avon's wardrobe? :-) >Now, my favourite outfits are... No, I'll spare you that. <eg> > >Marian I can imagine - only too vividly! :) As long as it doesn't include that really nasty one from Time Squad. (Actually, I'm more concerned about some of the awful costumes that Vil awas lumbered with. What *did* Michael do to upset the costume designer!?) Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 02:40:24 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: Open Letter to JMR on the Subject of Netnames (was Re:[B7L] Horizon) Message-ID: <38E1DD97.3042E35E@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit JMR wrote: > At 07:46 29/03/00 , mistral@ptinet.net wrote: > >I too remember Diva--I wasn't a Lystian then, but I was reading > >the archives. I also remember that she was discussing issues, and > >that instead of responding to those issues, you attacked her for using > >a netname. I considered it about as appropriate and mature then as > >I do now--which is to say, not at all. > > I would check those archives again, for I suspect you are confusing your > Judiths, or attributing comments to me that were actually snipped quotes > from someone else. > Diva is a personal (ie, "real life") friend of mine, and has been for > several years, and in the discussion you are doubtless referring to, we > were very much "on the same side" - it's ludicrous to suggest that I > "attacked" her. You are absolutely correct. I made a factual error which in my distress I neglected to check. I am completely wrong, and I sincerely apologize for my error. > As for the rest, you are entitled to your own opinions, just as I am > entitled to mine. True. However, if you genuinely believe that people are only entitled to express their opinions when their true names are known, why don't you encourage your friend 'Diva' to name herself instead of saying 'no, Diva is not so-and-so'? It seems you only despise netnames when their users say things you find unpleasant; however I support Diva's right to be Diva as fully as I support anyone else's right to use a netname. You'll also notice that when I accidentally hurt or misrepresent people, I like to apologize, rather than hiding behind trite aphorisms. Mistral -- "Consider it an adventure."--Galen, 'Crusade' ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:32:11 GMT From: "Mat Shayde" <dorian17@hotmail.com> To: N.Faulkner@tesco.net, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) Message-ID: <20000329103211.46716.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> >To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> >Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon (flame) >Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 07:50:55 +0100 > >David F / Dorian: > >Knock it off. I am more than adequately convinced that Diva is *not* >Diane. >Judith Rolls says so, and that is good enough for me. Excuse me Mr Faulkner - I have never accused Diva of being Diane. I don't care who he/she/it is and respect her right to use a pseudonym as much as I wopuld hope she resepcts mine. I've met Judith, >albeit briefly, and nothing I have heard about her calls her own personal >integrity into question. Except for the important issue of scanning membership lists that she no longer has any right to view. Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 11:15:54 GMT From: "Mat Shayde" <dorian17@hotmail.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Room at the Top Message-ID: <20000329111554.60560.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl> >To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> >Subject: Re: [B7L] Room at the Top >Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:15:44 +0200 > >Dana Shilling wrote: > >I feel impelled to disagree with the implied underlying analysis of the > >class struggle on the Liberator. Canonically, Blake is an Alpha, and Vila > >passes himself off as a Delta but is something else (presumably, a Beta). > >It's simply assumed that Avon is an Alpha because of his >not-inconsiderable > >opinion of himself. > >But he seems to me to be exactly the kind of person formerly referred to >as > >a "grammar-school oik," and I think much of his initial hostility to >Blake > >comes from the conflict between a public school/Oxbridge type and a > >scholarship boy with a double first from the direst red brick university >in > >the entire Federation. > >Funny, I always see Avon as the born aristocrat. To me his demeanour >indicates someone being reared on the notion that he/his family is better >than everyone else around. [And in that case his family would not have >been >happy with his gift for technology as they'd rather see him go into >something like politics. :-)] I can picture Blake as the scholarship boy, >but never Avon. Thank you Marian, you've said exactly what I felt when I read Dana's post and saved me the trouble of having to write it. :) (So I'm writing this instead to tell you how I haven't had to write it.... Hhhm, the things one will do to waste time at work!) Avon has that innate aristocratic superiority that Blake lacks. Besides how many artistocrats do you know who want to help the common man/women/being? >And, providing the Federation class system is based on birth rather than >testing and thus no indication of someone's intelligence, I've no trouble >accepting Vila as a Delta grade. In Shadow he states that he grew up among >the Delta service grades, so that's presumably where he belongs. (I regard >his statement in Volcano that he could have been a Space Captain as mere >bragging.) I think the system is probably based on a bit of both background and intelligence thus providing some (limited) scope for advancement. I would imagine that Vila pretended to be more stupid than he was (something he seems to have been doing ever since) to avoid being moved out of the environment where he felt 'safe'. >Note, this is not Vila bashing. I love the bloke and I admire his skill to >cope with a life that can't have been easy at any time. > >Marian True. As much as I love the other characters and would love to have Avon's icy calm, Soolin's wry humour, Cally's telepathy etc, etc, I think that Vila is the most 'normal' (for want of a better word) and behaves in the way that I probably would if suddenly catapulted into a dangerous life of rebellion: keep your head down, never volunteer, get people to underestimate you in the hope that they'll leave you alone and take your pleasures when you can as you'll never know if it'll be your last chance. Sensible bloke. :) Dorian - "You mean you're here by choice?" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 14:27:08 +0200 From: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: [B7L] Avon's skills Message-ID: <000d01bf997a$1ba4aca0$f6ee72c3@marian-de-haan.multiweb.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The discussion about Avon's many talents made me ponder on how, considering the use the Federation could have made of his skills, it seems very wasteful to ship him off to Cygnus Alpha instead of forcing him to work for them. Even if they are not aware of the scope of his expertise, his hacking into the Banking System is proof of his genius with computers. Why didn't they force him to work for them instead of deporting him? Of course it is possible that they were planning to get him back later, although they could not be certain that he would survive the harsh circumstances on C.A. As Blake said: being a civilised man is not a survival characteristic on a penal colony. But possibly the Federation's officials knew Avon better than Blake did at that stage. :-) Marian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:48:49 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon's skills Message-ID: <38E1FBB0.FDFA29AB@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Marian de Haan wrote: > The discussion about Avon's many talents made me ponder on how, considering > the use the Federation could have made of his skills, it seems very wasteful > to ship him off to Cygnus Alpha instead of forcing him to work for them. > > Even if they are not aware of the scope of his expertise, his hacking into > the Banking System is proof of his genius with computers. Why didn't they > force him to work for them instead of deporting him? We had a discussion on this about a year ago (I intend no disrespect to you by mentioning this, we discuss many things repeatedly, and this is certainly an interesting topic); my interpretation then and now is that his acquaintance with Anna Grant imperilled her function as Bartholomew should he remain on Earth in a position to run into her accidentally. Her expertise would obviously be more valuable than his. New thought: while it's true that he's remarkable with computers, it's also true that his hacking into the *banking* system may have been less than expert; there are a great many different specialities among computer professionals even now. Mistral -- "Consider it an adventure."--Galen, 'Crusade' -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #89 *************************************