On 30 Apr, 17:30, "Mark Wallace" <mwall...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "FCS" <sipston_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:1177896820.432331.218040@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 28, 10:36 pm, "Mark Wallace" <mwall...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> "Blue Sow" <b...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> >>news:463139f4$0$21850$db0fefd9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> > Mark Wallace wrote:
> >> >> "FCS" <sipston_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >> >>news:1177209648.396636.171160@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >>> It occurred to me that having seen the list of
> >> >>> people who seconded the original newsgroup
> >> >>> request there are very few of them taking any
> >> >>> kind of active interest in it these days.
>
> >> >> Being one of the "earlier incarnation", from when such initiatives
> >> >> were,
> >> >> if not commonplace, then at least not unusual: I'm in.
>
> >> >> I'd contest your word limit, though. If what needs to be said can
be
> >> >> said in 25 words, then let it be so.
>
> >> > Then let it be your move next (-:
>
> >> Fine. Start things off (but let's avoid the Sigismund thing, eh?
It's
> >> way
> >> too silly).
>
> >> It's your show, so hand out either a title or a 25-word-or-less
kick-off.
>
> >> The trickier the better.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > So what you're saying Mark is that most exam questions are too wordy
> > to be worth answering?
>
> What exactly have you been sniffing? Knickers?
I don't know, iyt would depend what was
encasing your poor bugger bugger bum.
> > Most of the poetry on your site contains more than 25 words per
> > stanza.
>
> Any idea what the price of tea in China is?
Nope. Lapsang Souchong?
> Besides, my site is currently "hidden", because my new server screwed up
the
> DNS, so I very much doubt you've seen it.
"Oh, bugger bugger bum"
such gems as some
for all their flames and misgrasped
meanings
blame the world for retentive leanings?
You mean that site? which I saw from
the URL you posted? Erm, either last
weekend or the weekend before?
Doubt away.
> > Thus none of it was worth writing.
>
> How about the price of beef in Bolton?
Now, either you're trying to trap me into
using the word "rhetorical" or it's one you
may benefit from looking up, particularly
in its context of The Rhetorical Question.
As, however, you appear to have answered
the question which didn't need one and in
a way which suggests that, actually, I may
have over-rated your efforts.
> That is: What the Hell are you talking about? Come back when you're
sober.
I'm talking about your poetry, and what seems
to be a fetish for hanging around groups about
writing whilst trying to cunningly dissuade people
from actually doing any.
Typing is a skill in the writers' canon. If 1500
words at a time is too much for you then I do
wonder why you bother considering you're a
writer rather than someone who just tries to
put words which sound alike into infantile
frameworks and calls it poetry.
There was something about cats too I recall.
I shall have to google "cats" sometime. I had
not unil now considered it was a particularly
original subject matter.
But, far from you taking the initiative and trying
to discuss what it is that constitutes effective
wrtitng, it seems you're happier to rely on
cheap jibes and childish taunts.
Now, OK, on consideration I was up for the
exercise of sticking chunks, which I presume
should be self-contained, of no more than 25
words together.
But to propose it as an absolute ceiling above
which all communication becomes meaningless
really is silly. I agree with your sentiment that
if something can be said in 25 words then why
use more; it does not, however, follow either
that writing is about saying one thing and one
thing alone.
I am familiar enough with the medium of the
book to have noticed that whilst significant
pieces of action can take a few pages to run
through, very many do indeed have shorter
sections.
Only I can't think of many that only have 25
words in their shorter sections.
Then there's the whole genre of serialised stories,
not something on which there's a whole load of
literature for the novice writer but which have been
a defining form in the culture of writing in the UK.
I was considering making posts of varying
length depending what it was I wanted to add
and how much time that week and suchlike.
But now I shall simply announce that no longer
do I have a mental picture of you as a kind of
Nick-Park-created yuppie coding away in Den
Haag, but it's more like the artist guy in that
The Comic Strip Presents... comparatively recent
thing about swinging parties.
I am of course aware there are various people
who for a variety of reasons really struggle to
do more than 25 words. Either they pick out
each letter, labouriously, with a head-mounted
stylus, or work against some other disadvantage
biology has saddled them with. Don't go thinking
I have no sympathy for them.
Join in if you want, please don't misunderstand,
but if you don't actually want to add more than
25 words at a time I'm not convinced you'd really
enjoy it.
> > G DAEB
>
> > COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON
>
> Well worth copyrighting. I imagine people are queuing up to steal such
> material.- Hide quoted text -
At least you aren't a stalker. If you were you'd know
this had been done to death several times over already
and wasted your 13 words--remember that's over half
your quota for this post, Mark, in some other form of
impotent abuse.
As I have tried to say a few times, you could maybe
actually use your writing skills to benefit others by
making the [Alt]-[F4] key combination more widely
known about on your website as, the way it relies
on pop-ups, the back button you instruct visitors to
make use of, erm, doesn't actually work.
> - Show quoted text -
G DAEB
COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON
--
|
