Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Fantasy » alt.fan.pratchett » [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk
[I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281093] Fr, 09 Juni 2006 18:00
Julia Jones  
This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of the
writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's published). More
details at the URL. Note that this is *not* an erotica anthology, but
they will accept stories with erotic content.

http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/G/Transfolk.htm

Title: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk
Edited by JoSelle Vanderhooft
Publisher: Lethe Press
Payment: 1 cent per word, minimum 25.00 per story

Deadline: October 1, 2006
Story Length: 2,000-8,000 words. Shorter or longer works may be
considered on a case-by-case basis; please query first.

What We Want: Speculative fiction featuring transgender characters
prominently, as protagonists or antagonists. These can be retellings of
myth and legends that feature transgender characters, retellings which
put a transgender spin on old stories, or original myths and legends
featuring transgender characters. These can be from any culture or time
period, from Ancient Greece to the Urban Legends of 21st Century
America. We want a diverse collection of stories featuring male to
female and female to male transgenders, and forms of gender
identification that fall outside these labels.


--
Julia Jones
Spindrift -- EPPIE 2006 finalist, 5 stars from JERR
Richard finds the truth in legend, when he finds a silkie bereft of
his skin and in need of a home... http://www.loose-id.net/detail.aspx?ID=138
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281189 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 00:02
Arthur Hagen  
Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
> published). More details at the URL. Note that this is *not* an
> erotica anthology, but they will accept stories with erotic content.
>
> http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/G/Transfolk.htm
>
> Title: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk
> Edited by JoSelle Vanderhooft
> Publisher: Lethe Press
> Payment: 1 cent per word, minimum 25.00 per story
>
> Deadline: October 1, 2006
> Story Length: 2,000-8,000 words. Shorter or longer works may be
> considered on a case-by-case basis; please query first.

Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.

--
*Art
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281209 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 01:01
Diane L  
Arthur Hagen wrote:
> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
>> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
>> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
>> published).

<snip>
> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.

What definition of spam are you using?

Diane L.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281225 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 01:29
Arthur Hagen  
Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
>>> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
>>> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
>>> published).
>
> <snip>
>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>
> What definition of spam are you using?

Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was in the part you
snipped.

Regards,
--
*Art
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281232 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 01:52
Julia Jones  
In article <4eucuoF1fmdpeU1 [at] individual.net>, Diane L
<dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> writes
>Arthur Hagen wrote:
>> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
>>> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
>>> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
>>> published).
>
><snip>
>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>
>What definition of spam are you using?

A very strange one. But then he's a troll, so he doesn't really need it
to look much like actual spam if he's looking for something to pick a
fight about.

--
Julia Jones
Spindrift -- EPPIE 2006 finalist, 5 stars from JERR
Richard finds the truth in legend, when he finds a silkie bereft of
his skin and in need of a home... http://www.loose-id.net/detail.aspx?ID=138
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281248 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 03:49
Gid Holyoake  
In article <e6cr56$pac$1 [at] tree.broomstick.com>, Arthur Hagen generously
decided to share with us..

> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> > This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
> > guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
> > the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
> > published). More details at the URL. Note that this is *not* an
> > erotica anthology, but they will accept stories with erotic content.
> >
> > http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/G/Transfolk.htm
> >
> > Title: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk
> > Edited by JoSelle Vanderhooft
> > Publisher: Lethe Press
> > Payment: 1 cent per word, minimum 25.00 per story
> >
> > Deadline: October 1, 2006
> > Story Length: 2,000-8,000 words. Shorter or longer works may be
> > considered on a case-by-case basis; please query first.
>
> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.

Spam?.. more like a heads-up to those on the froup that might be
interested in contributing I would have said.. of which there are quite
a few..

Gid
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281265 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 08:40
Eric Jarvis  
Gid Holyoake abuse [at] brynamman.org.uk wrote in
<MPG.1ef435681b95d783989708 [at] news.btinternet.com>:
> In article <e6cr56$pac$1 [at] tree.broomstick.com>, Arthur Hagen generously
> decided to share with us..
>
> > Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
> > > guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
> > > the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
> > > published). More details at the URL. Note that this is *not* an
> > > erotica anthology, but they will accept stories with erotic content.
> > >
> > > http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/G/Transfolk.htm
> > >
> > > Title: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk
> > > Edited by JoSelle Vanderhooft
> > > Publisher: Lethe Press
> > > Payment: 1 cent per word, minimum 25.00 per story
> > >
> > > Deadline: October 1, 2006
> > > Story Length: 2,000-8,000 words. Shorter or longer works may be
> > > considered on a case-by-case basis; please query first.
> >
> > Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>
> Spam?.. more like a heads-up to those on the froup that might be
> interested in contributing I would have said.. of which there are quite
> a few..
>

I'm one. It may be precisely the place for my completely gender neutral
creation myth. It's definitely an interesting concept.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281266 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 08:43
Eric Jarvis  
Eric Jarvis eric [at] ericjarvis.co.uk wrote in
<MPG.1ef479bd68dc272e989cc0 [at] cenote.gkhs.net>:
> Gid Holyoake abuse [at] brynamman.org.uk wrote in
> <MPG.1ef435681b95d783989708 [at] news.btinternet.com>:
> > In article <e6cr56$pac$1 [at] tree.broomstick.com>, Arthur Hagen generously
> > decided to share with us..
> >
> > > Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
> > > > guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
> > > > the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
> > > > published). More details at the URL. Note that this is *not* an
> > > > erotica anthology, but they will accept stories with erotic content.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/G/Transfolk.htm
> > > >
> > > > Title: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk
> > > > Edited by JoSelle Vanderhooft
> > > > Publisher: Lethe Press
> > > > Payment: 1 cent per word, minimum 25.00 per story
> > > >
> > > > Deadline: October 1, 2006
> > > > Story Length: 2,000-8,000 words. Shorter or longer works may be
> > > > considered on a case-by-case basis; please query first.
> > >
> > > Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
> >
> > Spam?.. more like a heads-up to those on the froup that might be
> > interested in contributing I would have said.. of which there are quite
> > a few..
>
> I'm one. It may be precisely the place for my completely gender neutral
> creation myth. It's definitely an interesting concept.
>

The last sentence applies to the anthology by the way. I really shouldn't
post before my second cup of coffee.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281269 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 11:17
Diane L  
Arthur Hagen wrote:
> Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
>>>> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
>>>> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
>>>> published).
>>
>> <snip>
>>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>>
>> What definition of spam are you using?
>
> Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was in the
> part you snipped.

Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.

Diane L.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281270 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 11:20
Peter Ellis  
Diane L wrote:
> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>
>> Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was in the
>> part you snipped.
>
> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
> something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
> Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
> me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.

I think the topicality has to be key. Otherwise we'd only need a couple of
insecure blokes with small willies reading afp to legitimise all the Viagra
spam.

Peter
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281273 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 11:36
jester  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L
<dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
>Arthur Hagen wrote:
>> Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
>>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>>> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
>>>>> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
>>>>> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
>>>>> published).
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>>>
>>> What definition of spam are you using?
>>
>> Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was in the
>> part you snipped.
>
>Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
>something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
>Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
>me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.

And Arthur's missed the most important part of the definition of spam:
BULK

Not to mention the commercial aspect is normally trying to get people to
give the spammer money, not trying to find people to give money to.

--
Andy Brown
There is no substitute for good manners, except, perhaps, fast reflexes.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281281 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 12:11
raltbos  
"Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com> wrote:

> Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
> > Arthur Hagen wrote:
> >> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica market
> >>> guidelines turned up something that might be of interest to some of
> >>> the writers around here (and some of the readers, once it's
> >>> published).
> >
> > <snip>
> >> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
> >
> > What definition of spam are you using?
>
> Commercial unsolicited postings.

Then you're using the wrong definition of spam.

Any series of posts, no matter the content, which has a Breidbart index
larger than <whatever it has gone down to by now>. That's spam.

Richard
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281285 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 12:31
Daibhid Ceannaideach  
The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: "Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com>

> Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica
>>>> market guidelines turned up something that might be of
>>>> interest to some of the writers around here (and some of
>>>> the readers, once it's published).
>>
>> <snip>
>>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>>
>> What definition of spam are you using?
>
> Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was
> in the part you snipped.

In which case I would like to apologise to the group for the
fact that, on several occasions, I have posted (without being
solicited to do so) that a new Discworld novel is available in
my local bookshop ahead of schedule. I have also started
threads praising new authors/TV series/foodstuffs that I have
discovered, and the group was once spammed on my behalf when I
had a cartoon printed on a website.

I hope the group can forgive me since I am clearly an
inveterate spammer.

--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
Suggs against sexism. It's Madness gone
politically correct.
Jon Holmes, The Now Show 26/5/06
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281288 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 12:49
Daibhid Ceannaideach  
The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Daibhid Ceanaideach <daibhidchenedelh [at] aol.com>

> The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: "Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com>
>
>> Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
>>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>>> Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica
>>>>> market guidelines turned up something that might be of
>>>>> interest to some of the writers around here (and some
>>>>> of the readers, once it's published).
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>>>
>>> What definition of spam are you using?
>>
>> Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect
>> was in the part you snipped.
>
> In which case I would like to apologise to the group for
> the fact that, on several occasions, I have posted (without
> being solicited to do so) that a new Discworld novel is
> available in my local bookshop ahead of schedule. I have
> also started threads praising new authors/TV
> series/foodstuffs that I have discovered, and the group was
> once spammed on my behalf when I had a cartoon printed on a
> website.
>
> I hope the group can forgive me since I am clearly an
> inveterate spammer.

Oh, and a couple of days ago I used a discussion of the word
"dob" to direct people to a story I'd translated into Scots.
Sorry again.



--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
Suggs against sexism. It's Madness gone
politically correct.
Jon Holmes, The Now Show 26/5/06
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281291 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 13:06
CeltiKaos  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L wrote:

> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
> something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group. Julia's
> post was of interest to some people on the group (including me) and was
> therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
>
> Diane L.

The official name for spam is UCE/UBE - Unsolicited Commercial/Bulk Email.

Technically Usenet is not email, therefore it falls over at that point.

Also everyone here has 'opted in' to this group to receive content from
it, therefore the content is not unsolicited.

The only point where the posting could be deemed wrong is where Diane has
mentioned 'off-topic'. It is considered good netiquette to preface a
posting with 'OT:' if you feel your posting might not fit within the
boundaries of the main discusion theme.

Commercial is a moot point, see next comment.

Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach the FAQ?'

Kind regards,

Julian
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281297 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 13:31
Daibhid Ceannaideach  
The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: CeltiKaos
<lists [at] pratchett.removethatbit.kaotic.co.uk>

> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L wrote:
>
>> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam
>> include something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest
>> to the group. Julia's post was of interest to some people
>> on the group (including me) and was therefore wanted *and*
>> on-topic.
>>
>> Diane L.
>
> The official name for spam is UCE/UBE - Unsolicited
> Commercial/Bulk Email.
>
> Technically Usenet is not email, therefore it falls over at
> that point.
>
> Also everyone here has 'opted in' to this group to receive
> content from it, therefore the content is not unsolicited.
>
> The only point where the posting could be deemed wrong is
> where Diane has mentioned 'off-topic'. It is considered
> good netiquette to preface a posting with 'OT:' if you feel
> your posting might not fit within the boundaries of the
> main discusion theme.

afp has it's own special version of that (since *most* of the
posts are "off-topic", in the sense of "aren't about
Pratchett") which is the [I] tag.

Or as someone, probably ppint, put it "off-topic on afp is an
oxymoron".

> Commercial is a moot point, see next comment.
>
> Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach
> the FAQ?'

Doesn't seem to.

--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
Suggs against sexism. It's Madness gone
politically correct.
Jon Holmes, The Now Show 26/5/06
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281311 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 16:08
Philippa Cowderoy  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, CeltiKaos wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L wrote:
>
> > Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
> > something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group. Julia's
> > post was of interest to some people on the group (including me) and was
> > therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
> >
> > Diane L.
>
> The official name for spam is UCE/UBE - Unsolicited Commercial/Bulk Email.
>

No. The official-in-some-specific-places name for *email* spam is...

Spam itself is a generic term, and nobody has the right to give it an
official name.

> Also everyone here has 'opted in' to this group to receive content from
> it, therefore the content is not unsolicited.
>

I suspect it's less simple than that when the content is not something
that would be expected on the group.

--
flippa [at] flippac.org

"My religion says so" explains your beliefs. But it doesn't explain
why I should hold them as well, let alone be restricted by them.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281312 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 16:28
Arthur Hagen  
Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <4eucuoF1fmdpeU1 [at] individual.net>, Diane L
> <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> writes
>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>
>>> Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>>
>> What definition of spam are you using?
>
> A very strange one. But then he's a troll, so he doesn't really need
> it to look much like actual spam if he's looking for something to
> pick a fight about.

Having strong opinions doesn't make one a troll.
And being a friend of other posters doesn't preclude one from being a shill.

*plonk*
--
*Art
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281313 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 16:36
Arthur Hagen  
CeltiKaos <lists [at] pratchett.removethatbit.kaotic.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L wrote:
>
>> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
>> something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
>> Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
>> me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
>
> The official name for spam is UCE/UBE - Unsolicited Commercial/Bulk
> Email.
>
> Technically Usenet is not email, therefore it falls over at that
> point.

Bullshit. Spam *originated* on Usenet. Look it up.

> Also everyone here has 'opted in' to this group to receive content
> from it, therefore the content is not unsolicited.

No, that's not how Usenet works. You don't opt in to a group, no matter how
your client program phrases it. It's not push technology, like a mailing
list.
Also, we did not solicit advertisements, no. Or do you really think it's
acceptable if people started using this group for selling stuff, including
but not limited to viagra, cialis, fake rolex watches, porn stories, breast
enlargement creams, penis enlargement creams, and mail order university
degrees?

> Commercial is a moot point, see next comment.

No -- it's commercial whether it's buing or selling. The shill (who happens
to be a regular) has a vested interest in the enterprise, as she's making
money out of it.

> Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach the FAQ?'

And indeed it does. But people get upset when this is pointed out, not
because of *what* it is, but because of *who* it is. That's rather
hypocritical.

--
*Art
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281316 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 17:00
Lister  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:36:46 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
<art [at] broomstick.com> wrote:

>CeltiKaos <lists [at] pratchett.removethatbit.kaotic.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
>>> something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
>>> Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
>>> me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
>>
>> The official name for spam is UCE/UBE - Unsolicited Commercial/Bulk
>> Email.

Arthur's so old, he was there when it happened :)
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281317 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 17:07
Daibhid Ceannaideach  
The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: "Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com>


> Also, we did not solicit advertisements, no. Or do you
> really think it's acceptable if people started using this
> group for selling stuff, including but not limited to
> viagra, cialis, fake rolex watches, porn stories, breast
> enlargement creams, penis enlargement creams, and mail
> order university degrees?
>
>> Commercial is a moot point, see next comment.
>
> No -- it's commercial whether it's buing or selling. The
> shill (who happens to be a regular) has a vested interest
> in the enterprise, as she's making money out of it.

Irrelevent. Or is it okay if I post adverts for viagra etc.,
as long as I'm doing it without being paid (as I do when I'm
"shilling" stuff I think the group would be interested in)?

>> Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach
>> the FAQ?'
>
> And indeed it does. But people get upset when this is
> pointed out, not because of *what* it is, but because of
> *who* it is. That's rather hypocritical.

Would you like to quote the relevent section of the FAQ for
us?

--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
Suggs against sexism. It's Madness gone
politically correct.
Jon Holmes, The Now Show 26/5/06
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281318 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 17:38
Philippa Cowderoy  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Arthur Hagen wrote:

> And indeed it does. But people get upset when this is pointed out, not
> because of *what* it is, but because of *who* it is. That's rather
> hypocritical.
>

Actually I think it would've been entirely appropriate from someone less
well-known, so long as they were posting it to this particular group for
the same reasons Julia did. This isn't in the "we have insecure men so
viagra spam's OK" camp.

--
flippa [at] flippac.org

'In Ankh-Morpork even the shit have a street to itself...
Truly this is a land of opportunity.' - Detritus, Men at Arms
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281320 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 17:48
David Chapman  
From the Collected Witterings of Peter Ellis, volume 23:

> I think the topicality has to be key. Otherwise we'd only need a couple
> of insecure blokes with small willies reading afp to legitimise all the
> Viagra spam.

Well, there's Art...

--
If life gives you lemmings, jump off a cliff.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281322 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 18:13
Matthew Seaman  
Lister <fache [at] SPAMclara.net> writes:

> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:36:46 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
> <art [at] broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> >CeltiKaos <lists [at] pratchett.removethatbit.kaotic.co.uk> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:17:56 +0100, Diane L wrote:
> >>
> >>> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
> >>> something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
> >>> Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
> >>> me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
> >>
> >> The official name for spam is UCE/UBE - Unsolicited Commercial/Bulk
> >> Email.
>
> Arthur's so old, he was there when it happened :)

Hell. This froup is so old, it was there when it happened. Even I
was safely out of short trousers when it happened.

Canter and Siegel seem such small beer nowadays. But they
weren't quite the first. By about 4 months. Although they
were the first to put the 'C' into UCE.

Matthew


--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281324 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 18:19
Stacie Hanes  
Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote:

<snip>

> In which case I would like to apologise to the group for the
> fact that, on several occasions, I have posted (without being
> solicited to do so) that a new Discworld novel is available in
> my local bookshop ahead of schedule. I have also started
> threads praising new authors/TV series/foodstuffs that I have
> discovered, and the group was once spammed on my behalf when I
> had a cartoon printed on a website.

I've told the group about my chapters and articles.[1]

But I've mentioned other projects, I'm sure. Gah. I'm not awake yet, but I
know I've done it a time or two when I thought this particular group might
be interested.


[1] Although so far, <wince> those have all been Discworld stuff.

--
4th swordswoman of the afpocalypse, AFPMinister of Flexible Weapons,
Bondage-happy predator, Speaker-To-Students, SadoMangoist,
AFPMistress to peachy, 8'FED's AFPDeliciousSnack, AFPFiance to A.
Nevill , Graycat's Guttersnipe
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281327 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 18:30
exquisite witch peach  
Peter Ellis wrote:
> Diane L wrote:
>
>>Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>
>>>Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was in the
>>>part you snipped.
>>
>>Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
>>something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
>>Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
>>me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
>
>
> I think the topicality has to be key. Otherwise we'd only need a couple of
> insecure blokes with small willies reading afp to legitimise all the Viagra
> spam.
>
> Peter
>
>

But what on earth counts as off topic here?
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281331 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 18:42
Torak  
Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote:
> The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: Daibhid Ceanaideach <daibhidchenedelh [at] aol.com>
>
>
>>The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
>>speaker: "Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com>
>>
>>
>>>Diane L <dianenews [at] lindquist.plus.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>This week's trawling through the various sf and erotica
>>>>>>market guidelines turned up something that might be of
>>>>>>interest to some of the writers around here (and some
>>>>>>of the readers, once it's published).
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>>Spam is spam, even when it's posted by regulars.
>>>>
>>>>What definition of spam are you using?
>>>
>>>Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect
>>>was in the part you snipped.
>>
>>In which case I would like to apologise to the group for
>>the fact that, on several occasions, I have posted (without
>>being solicited to do so) that a new Discworld novel is
>>available in my local bookshop ahead of schedule. I have
>>also started threads praising new authors/TV
>>series/foodstuffs that I have discovered, and the group was
>>once spammed on my behalf when I had a cartoon printed on a
>>website.
>>
>>I hope the group can forgive me since I am clearly an
>>inveterate spammer.
>
> Oh, and a couple of days ago I used a discussion of the word
> "dob" to direct people to a story I'd translated into Scots.
> Sorry again.

And don't forget when CCA finished Family Bites. Or The Tale. Both of
those were "advertised" on AFP.

Like so many others, I really can't see what the fuss is about... but,
OTOH, I would argue that this humungous waste of bandwidth arguing that
it's spam... is in itself spam. Sort of.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281339 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 19:01
Rocky Frisco  
Arthur Hagen wrote:

> Also, we did not solicit advertisements, no. Or do you really think
> it's acceptable if people started using this group for selling stuff,
> including but not limited to viagra, cialis, fake rolex watches, porn
> stories, breast enlargement creams, penis enlargement creams, and mail
> order university degrees?

I like all of that except the fake Rolex watches and the Uni degrees.

-Rocky
--
O'Toole's Corollary: Murphy was a sex freak.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281341 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 19:07
Rocky Frisco  
peachy ashie passion wrote:

> Peter Ellis wrote:
>
>> Diane L wrote:
>>
>>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Commercial unsolicited postings. The commercial aspect was in the
>>>> part you snipped.
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting. All the definitions I know for newsgroup spam include
>>> something about off-topic, unwanted or no interest to the group.
>>> Julia's post was of interest to some people on the group (including
>>> me) and was therefore wanted *and* on-topic.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the topicality has to be key. Otherwise we'd only need a
>> couple of insecure blokes with small willies reading afp to legitimise
>> all the Viagra spam.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>
> But what on earth counts as off topic here?

Bible stories, apparently.

-Rocky
--
O'Toole's Corollary: Murphy was an optimist.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281342 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 19:08
steelcat  
In article <e6eldu$fkd$1 [at] tree.broomstick.com>,
"Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com> wrote:

>CeltiKaos <lists [at] pratchett.removethatbit.kaotic.co.uk> wrote:
>> Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach the FAQ?'
>
>And indeed it does.

In what specific respect? It can't be the commercial aspect - Julia's post
was no more commercial than an academic journal's call for papers.

>But people get upset when this is pointed out, not
>because of *what* it is, but because of *who* it is. That's rather
>hypocritical.

Why? If you're in a pub and some stranger comes up and says, "I read a
great book the other day," you're quite likely to tell them to sod off, but
if you're in that same pub with a group of friends and one of them says the
same thing you're more likely to be interested. Same thing here.

Cat.
--
Jazz-Loving Soul Mate and Tolerable Frog to CCA
"I've got this terrible headache..."
"Have you considered amputation?"
Re: [M] was {I}anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281343 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 15:08
Diane L  
CeltiKaos wrote:

<Tag changed to [M]. I *really* don't want to start another monster
[M] thread, but if I'm talking about tags I should probably use the
right one.>

<snip>
> The only point where the posting could be deemed wrong is where Diane
> has mentioned 'off-topic'. It is considered good netiquette to
> preface a posting with 'OT:' if you feel your posting might not fit
> within the boundaries of the main discusion theme.

'OT' isn't used here, we have [I] for irrelevant (to Pratchett) instead.
But alt.*fan*.pratchett is for the discussion of anything of interest
to Pratchett fans. It's hard to find anything that isn't of interest to
Pratchett fans, so OT isn't really a concept that comes up often.

>
> Commercial is a moot point, see next comment.
>
> Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach the FAQ?'

Not in any way that I could see.

Diane L.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281345 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 19:24
jester  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:36:46 -0400, Arthur Hagen
<art [at] broomstick.com> wrote:
<snip>
>Also, we did not solicit advertisements, no.

So, you'd be OK with it if somebody (say a regular) had asked for it?

--
Andy Brown
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs
30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh
only 1 1/2 tons. ---Popular Mechanics, March 1949
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281346 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 19:51
Rocky Frisco  
Torak wrote:

> Like so many others, I really can't see what the fuss is about... but,
> OTOH, I would argue that this humungous waste of bandwidth arguing that
> it's spam... is in itself spam. Sort of.

Since nobody else has mentioned it, may I suggest that real SPAM is a
kind of mystery meat in a tin.

-Rocky
--
O'Toole's Corollary: Murphy was an optimist.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281347 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 19:58
Andrew Nevill  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:28:43 -0400, "Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com>
wrote:

>Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>> A very strange one. But then he's a troll, so he doesn't really need
>> it to look much like actual spam if he's looking for something to
>> pick a fight about.
>
>Having strong opinions doesn't make one a troll.
>And being a friend of other posters doesn't preclude one from being a shill.
>
>*plonk*

I usually leave these threads well alone but this time I can't.

I had to look shill up as it's a slang expression that I couldn't recall.
Dictionary.com says it's someone who poses as a satisfied customer to dupe
others into being taken in by a swindle

Arthur, I object to your use of the term. As I can see no justification for
it.

I see nothing in the original post to make me think it's a swindle. Or are
you saying that the editors of this anthology will publish people's stories
without paying for them?. If so, what evidence have you got?

Julia has found a request for stories of a certain type. She knows that
there a number of people who consider themselves writers (I'm one of them)
on the group who might be interested in contributing a story. Others may
well be interested in the subject matter of the anthology so would be
interested in buying it when published.

The headers show it was only posted to one group. This one. It's not selling
anything - in fact it seems to be offering to pay people. Finally, it
concerns a subject that members of this group would be interested in. I know
definitions of spam vary between people but this doesn't look like Spam to
me.

Nor has Julia anywhere in the post expressed an opinion on whether they are
genuine or not or about any previous experiences -positive or negative - in
dealing with the publisher. She has just quoted the guidelines from their
website. If she was a shill, surely she' have said, "C'mon guys, you really
need to do this!" or similar.

Lastly, before you say I'm defending a friend - actually no I ain't. I've
never met Julia, I don't believe. I've even seen a photo. I have no afp
relationship with her and I can't even recall replying to one of her posts.

She probably shouldn't have called you a troll - I don't believe you are.
But I do know from her posts that Julia is not a shill.

And two wrongs as they say...
--
Andrew Nevill B.F. D.W. FdV. Reply address: anevill [at] btopenworld.com
AFPWorshipper to Spooky, AFPfiance to Sarah (Nanny Ogg) & A********.
AFPUncle to James Vaughan. You cannot value friends as pennies,
nor can you replace them as easily (Spooky in email, Aug 2001.)
Discworld Convention 2006. 18 - 26 Aug 2006 Hinckley Island Hotel
Hinckley, UK www.dwcon.org
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281350 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 20:42
Julia Jones  
In article <nj0m82hoc7drmd69sgdusija61207noh9j [at] 4ax.com>, Andrew Nevill
<spookystwerp [at] hotmail.com> writes
>
>Nor has Julia anywhere in the post expressed an opinion on whether they are
>genuine or not or about any previous experiences -positive or negative - in
>dealing with the publisher. She has just quoted the guidelines from their
>website. If she was a shill, surely she' have said, "C'mon guys, you really
>need to do this!" or similar.

Not even directly from their website. I found the guidelines on one of
the listings websites I check regularly for new anthologies that might
be of interest to me or the people who read my LJ. ERA does do a
preliminary screening for obvious crooks, and although I've never had
any contact with Lethe myself, I do know their name from just general
hanging around the sf/erotica small press and I'm not aware of any
health warnings attached to the name. (Other than the usual small press
issues of being small press.)

I have long since killfiled Art for his trolling and abusive posting
style, so I haven't actually read any of his posts. But I'm getting the
impression that he's claiming that I am posting this on behalf of the
editor or press. I'm not. I'm posting it because unlike the various
other interesting markets I've seen and not posted about, *this* one is
on a rarely covered topic likely to be of particular interest to a group
of people on afp, I have not yet seen it on any of the sf market
listings (although I've pinged Ralan about it) and I think that even
those who do scan the market listings might miss it.

(And thank you, Andrew, for pointing out the various things you pointed
out.)
--
Julia Jones
"The Syndicate" - because geeks have sex lives too. Now in both ebook and
print. http://www.loose-id.net/detail.aspx?ID=183
Sample chapters at http://www.julesjones.com/fiction/syndicate/syndicate.htm
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales forTransfolk [message #281352 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 21:00
Torak  
Rocky Frisco wrote:
> Torak wrote:
>
>> Like so many others, I really can't see what the fuss is about... but,
>> OTOH, I would argue that this humungous waste of bandwidth arguing
>> that it's spam... is in itself spam. Sort of.
>
>
> Since nobody else has mentioned it, may I suggest that real SPAM is a
> kind of mystery meat in a tin.

Chased by little old women who are really men, which kinda brings us
right back to the top of the thread.
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281354 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 21:24
Andrew Nevill  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:58:41 +0100, Andrew Nevill <spookystwerp [at] hotmail.com>
wrote:


>Lastly, before you say I'm defending a friend - actually no I ain't. I've
>never met Julia, I don't believe. I've even seen a photo. I have no afp
>relationship with her and I can't even recall replying to one of her posts.
>
Sorry, to follow up to myself but my punctuation has let me down and changed
the meaning of my post.

The above quoted paragraph should read:

Lastly, before you say I'm defending a friend - actually no I ain't. I've
never met Julia; I don't believe I've even seen a photo. I have no afp
relationship with her and I can't even recall replying to one of her posts.

My apologies for any misunderstandings
--
Andrew Nevill B.F. D.W. FdV. Reply address: anevill [at] btopenworld.com
AFPWorshipper to Spooky, AFPfiance to Sarah (Nanny Ogg) & A********.
AFPUncle to James Vaughan. You cannot value friends as pennies,
nor can you replace them as easily (Spooky in email, Aug 2001.)
Discworld Convention 2006. 18 - 26 Aug 2006 Hinckley Island Hotel
Hinckley, UK www.dwcon.org
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281356 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 21:38
Andrew Nevill  
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:42:10 -0700, Julia Jones <julia.jones [at] gmail.com>
wrote:

[snip]
>. But I'm getting the
>impression that he's claiming that I am posting this on behalf of the
>editor or press.

He hasn't specifically said that. But I believe the implication is there as
Arthur has said your post was commercial as well as using the word 'shill'
which prompted my objection.
>
>(And thank you, Andrew, for pointing out the various things you pointed
>out.)

You're welcome. I thought his accusing you of being part of a swindle was
wrong and it irritated me. So I called him on it.
--
Andrew Nevill B.F. D.W. FdV. Reply address: anevill [at] btopenworld.com
AFPWorshipper to Spooky, AFPfiance to Sarah (Nanny Ogg) & A********.
AFPUncle to James Vaughan. You cannot value friends as pennies,
nor can you replace them as easily (Spooky in email, Aug 2001.)
Discworld Convention 2006. 18 - 26 Aug 2006 Hinckley Island Hotel
Hinckley, UK www.dwcon.org
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281358 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 21:40
Daibhid Ceannaideach  
The time: 10 Jun 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Andrew Nevill <spookystwerp [at] hotmail.com>

> On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:42:10 -0700, Julia Jones
> <julia.jones [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>>. But I'm getting the
>>impression that he's claiming that I am posting this on
>>behalf of the editor or press.
>
> He hasn't specifically said that. But I believe the
> implication is there as Arthur has said your post was
> commercial as well as using the word 'shill' which prompted
> my objection.

Oh, he has. He said "The shill (who happens to be a regular)
has a vested interest in the enterprise, as she's making
money out of it".

--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/sesoc
Suggs against sexism. It's Madness gone
politically correct.
Jon Holmes, The Now Show 26/5/06
Re: [I] anthology guidelines: Tiresias Revisited: Magical Tales for Transfolk [message #281359 ] Sa, 10 Juni 2006 21:41
Stacie Hanes  
The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:
> In article <e6eldu$fkd$1 [at] tree.broomstick.com>,
> "Arthur Hagen" <art [at] broomstick.com> wrote:
>
>> CeltiKaos <lists [at] pratchett.removethatbit.kaotic.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Having said all that, the main question is 'Does it breach the
>>> FAQ?'
>>
>> And indeed it does.
>
> In what specific respect? It can't be the commercial aspect -
> Julia's post was no more commercial than an academic journal's call
> for papers.

Something I have either done, or will do, for the reasons Cat describes.


--
4th swordswoman of the afpocalypse, AFPMinister of Flexible Weapons,
Bondage-happy predator, Speaker-To-Students, SadoMangoist,
AFPMistress to peachy, 8'FED's AFPDeliciousSnack, AFPFiance to A.
Nevill , Graycat's Guttersnipe
Vorheriges Thema:Reminder - production of Terry Pratchett's Lords and Ladies on in Merseyside next week!
Nächstes Thema:[I] Well, dang
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 26 07:18:39 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,08586 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered