Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.RUTGERS.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!BARD
From: BARD@MIT-XX.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest   V10 #350
Message-ID: <3570@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Sat, 7-Sep-85 03:37:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.3570
Posted: Sat Sep  7 03:37:18 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Sep-85 13:43:12 EDT
Sender: daemon@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 36

From: Bard Bloom <BARD@MIT-XX.ARPA>


> >the other side.  It can't be intended personally, for we are all of
> >us honorable men.
> 
> You obviously haven't seen the nasty mail messages I've occasionally
> received. :-)
> 

You studied some form of literature somewhat formally, no?  Surely that
quotation doesn't need to be :-)'ed. :-)

> Those of you with long memories will recall
> that my first posting on quality and fiction predated the whole
> Davis Tucker series that seems to have upset so many people in this
> group, and was a reaction to Steve Brust's claim that most good
> writing today is issuing from the pens (word processors?) of SF
> writers. Since then, I've seen great hostility on both sides of the
> fence. So please don't mislead newcomers to this controversy by
> claiming that the initial extremity was perpetrated by an "Art
> Snob." My OWN first impressions were that the "Good-Read Snobs"
> started it; c'mon, fight like a mensch. :-)
> 

That did seem to be the start of the 1985 season on this network.  It didn't
seem too offensive to me; it wasn't like the antipersonal and antigroup
attacks that followed it.  I don't know who started flaming offensively
first; but I imagine that the person who did didn't think she or he was
flaming offensively.  For you, it may have been Steve Brust.

And I'm trying to fight like a penguin.

Pax VAXque vobiscum, (with emphasis on the `Pax')
  Bard
-------