[B5JMS] Anon and on

Tue Mar 24 04:33:53 EDT 2009

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Josh Hill <usereplyto at gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 10:03:19 -0400
Lines: 29

On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:26:16 -0700 (PDT), Ron <aparthon at gmail.com>
wrote:

>Those big production companies seem odd to me.  These are the same
>people that told Roddenberry to get rid of the 'pointy earred guy'.
>And when they were considering a superman remake, one exec didn't want
>him to have a cape.
>
>I read a post somewhere that a man was trying to sell TNT a script
>about Jesus Christ, TNT wanted to have the Lord flying around shooting
>lightning bolts at people. That's not even in the biblcal text.  In
>fact when two of his disciples asked him if he wanted them to call
>down fire on a village he told them no and said they didn't know what
>spirit they were from.
>
>I guess at some point when you're in that industry, you just become an
>idiot.  It's like a bug, or virus that you catch.

It's not that everyone in the industry is an idiot, far from it. It's
just that as in every business you have good people working alongside
bad ones, the whole gamut of abilities, and that as in other American
industries today the path to the executive suite doesn't always run
through the Fields of Knowledge and Experience.

-- 
Josh

"What is it exactly that the V.P. does every day?" - Sarah Palin

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Joseph DeMartino <jdemarti at bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 06:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
Lines: 18

On Mar 21, 5:01=A0am, "jmsa... at aol.com" <jmsa... at aol.com> wrote:

> I want to bring back the word "anon." =A0As in, "I'll call you anon," or
> "See you anon."

I see two possibilities here:

1)  You've finally caught up on all your writing and have way too much
time on your hands now.  (Which hardly seems possible.)

2)  The work pressure has finally driven you totally around the bend.
(Which, given how close to that particular bend you've been for years,
seems more plausible.)

We'll speak of this anon,

Joe

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Jan <janmschroeder at aol.com>
Date: 21 Mar 2009 06:52:29 -0700
Lines: 39

In article <243492ed-3523-4675-a381-2a3822a6ef08 at j39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
Joseph DeMartino says...
>
>On Mar 21, 5:01=A0am, "jmsa... at aol.com" <jmsa... at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I want to bring back the word "anon." =A0As in, "I'll call you anon," or
>> "See you anon."
>
>I see two possibilities here:
>
>1)  You've finally caught up on all your writing and have way too much
>time on your hands now.  (Which hardly seems possible.)
>
>2)  The work pressure has finally driven you totally around the bend.
>(Which, given how close to that particular bend you've been for years,
>seems more plausible.)
>
>We'll speak of this anon,
>
>Joe
>

Now, Joe, I think "anon" is a perfectly nice word.  In fact, my first thought
was to pair it with another of my favorite words, "alas" in my next conversation
with my boss:  "Alas, I haven't got the statements for you yet.  You'll have
them  anon."

This is a conspiracy I'll happily join. Unfortunately I'm not generally among a
crowd with sparkling vocabularies so I'm sure to garner more blank looks than
usual.

Jan 

-- 
Here, gathered together in common cause, we agree to recognize
this singular truth: that we are one; and this singular rule: that
we must be kind to one another.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Joseph DeMartino <jdemarti at bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
Lines: 22

On Mar 21, 9:52=A0am, Jan <janmschroe... at aol.com> wrote:

> Now, Joe, I think "anon" is a perfectly nice word. =A0In fact, my first t=
hought
> was to pair it with another of my favorite words, "alas" in my next conve=
rsation
> with my boss: =A0"Alas, I haven't got the statements for you yet. =A0You'=
ll have
> them =A0anon."

 Oh, I have nothing against "anon".  It is a perfectly nice word.  It
is the campaign to revive a nearly-dead word itself that suggests to
me that either Joe is bored or Joe is losing his grip on reality.
<g>

And I use "alas" all the time.  E.g., "Alas! Alas!  My kingdom for a
lass!"

Anon,

Joe

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Kathryn Huxtable <kathryn at kathrynhuxtable.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 00:38:35 -0500
Lines: 20

Joseph DeMartino <jdemarti at bellsouth.net> writes:

> On Mar 21, 9:52=C2=A0am, Jan <janmschroe... at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Now, Joe, I think "anon" is a perfectly nice word. =C2=A0In fact, my
>> first thought was to pair it with another of my favorite words,
>> "alas" in my next conversation with my boss: =C2=A0"Alas, I haven't go=
t
>> the statements for you yet. =C2=A0You'll have them =C2=A0anon."
>
>  Oh, I have nothing against "anon".  It is a perfectly nice word.  It
> is the campaign to revive a nearly-dead word itself that suggests to
> me that either Joe is bored or Joe is losing his grip on reality.
> <g>

I always thought that Doc Smith was trying to bring back "yclept". If
so, he failed. (Type gremlin said "failded".)

-K

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Gregory Weston <uce at splook.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:53:16 -0400
Lines: 30

In article <873ad6t8v8.fsf at server-a.kathrynhuxtable.name>,
 Kathryn Huxtable <kathryn at kathrynhuxtable.org> wrote:

> Joseph DeMartino <jdemarti at bellsouth.net> writes:
> 
> > On Mar 21, 9:52Â am, Jan <janmschroe... at aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Now, Joe, I think "anon" is a perfectly nice word. Â In fact, my
> >> first thought was to pair it with another of my favorite words,
> >> "alas" in my next conversation with my boss: Â "Alas, I haven't got
> >> the statements for you yet. Â You'll have them Â anon."
> >
> >  Oh, I have nothing against "anon".  It is a perfectly nice word.  It
> > is the campaign to revive a nearly-dead word itself that suggests to
> > me that either Joe is bored or Joe is losing his grip on reality.
> > <g>
> 
> I always thought that Doc Smith was trying to bring back "yclept". If
> so, he failed. (Type gremlin said "failded".)

Bring back? I guess it depends on venue, because I was seeing that word 
used in relatively mainstream media - national distribution, non 
"counter-culture" periodicals - into the early 70s. Also, "bespoke." 
*That's* a word that needs to come back.

-- 
I saw a truck today that had "AAA Batteries / Delivered and Installed" on the
side. My first thought was: That's a really weird business model. How many
inept people have urgent need of skinny little battery cells?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Kathryn Huxtable <kathryn at kathrynhuxtable.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:39:20 -0500
Lines: 41

Gregory Weston <uce at splook.com> writes:

> In article <873ad6t8v8.fsf at server-a.kathrynhuxtable.name>,
>  Kathryn Huxtable <kathryn at kathrynhuxtable.org> wrote:
>
>> Joseph DeMartino <jdemarti at bellsouth.net> writes:
>>=20
>> > On Mar 21, 9:52=C3=82=C2=A0am, Jan <janmschroe... at aol.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Now, Joe, I think "anon" is a perfectly nice word. =C3=82=C2=A0In f=
act, my
>> >> first thought was to pair it with another of my favorite words,
>> >> "alas" in my next conversation with my boss: =C3=82=C2=A0"Alas, I h=
aven't got
>> >> the statements for you yet. =C3=82=C2=A0You'll have them =C3=82=C2=A0=
anon."
>> >
>> >  Oh, I have nothing against "anon".  It is a perfectly nice word.  I=
t
>> > is the campaign to revive a nearly-dead word itself that suggests to
>> > me that either Joe is bored or Joe is losing his grip on reality.
>> > <g>
>>=20
>> I always thought that Doc Smith was trying to bring back "yclept". If
>> so, he failed. (Type gremlin said "failded".)
>
> Bring back? I guess it depends on venue, because I was seeing that word=
=20
> used in relatively mainstream media - national distribution, non=20
> "counter-culture" periodicals - into the early 70s. Also, "bespoke."=20
> *That's* a word that needs to come back.

Most dictionaries list it as "obsolete", or at least they did back in
the 1970s when I was purchasing dictionaries.

Sure, I've seen it used occasionally, and I'm aware it's the perfect
passive participle of "clepe", but we don't use any other derivations
of clepe, so I consider its use an affectation.

-K

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Josh Hill <usereplyto at gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:15:13 -0400
Lines: 18

On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:39:20 -0500, Kathryn Huxtable
<kathryn at kathrynhuxtable.org> wrote:

>Most dictionaries list it as "obsolete", or at least they did back in
>the 1970s when I was purchasing dictionaries.
>
>Sure, I've seen it used occasionally, and I'm aware it's the perfect
>passive participle of "clepe", but we don't use any other derivations
>of clepe, so I consider its use an affectation.

It's often used when people want to poke fun at affectedly archaic
writing -- in this case, reams of mediocre poetry.

-- 
Josh

"What is it exactly that the V.P. does every day?" - Sarah Palin

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "jmsatb5 at aol.com" <jmsatb5 at aol.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
Lines: 15

No, no, no, no, no, no, no...you're missing the point.

Egads is too twee, Fortnight is still in common use in the UK,
forsooth is silly, ye is a version of you which is also in use,
gadzooks just gets laughs...there's a simple poetry about "anon," it's
kind of self explanatory, there isn't a direct corrolary, and it won't
get laughs.

Focus, people, focus...how can a conspiracy work if everybody's off
running in different directions.

Will write anon.

jms