On Monday, 13 February 2023 at 16:20:50 UTC, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 09:52:41 -0700, Joe Pfeiffer
> <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes:
> >
> >> On Thursday, 9 February 2023 at 04:58:21 UTC, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> >>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>> > On Wednesday, 8 February 2023 at 17:31:35 UTC, mcdow...@sky.com wrote:
> >>> >> On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 1:14:33 AM UTC, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> >>> >> > sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > I've been reading through the Lord Peter Whimsey stories. They
> >>> >> > > give the reader a view of 1920's England (from the upper classes,
> >>> >> > > mainly). The overt and blatent racism and classism is offputting to modern
> >>> >> > > readers (at least this one). I still enjoy the mysteries and
> >>> >> > > from a amateur historian perspective, the depictions of daily
> >>> >> > > life.
> >>> >> > The earlier stories are also very interesting for their gripping
> >>> >> > description of PTSD long before the term was coined.
> >>> >
> >>> > "Shell shock" was known, of course. Lord Peter's mother
> >>> > is rather dismissive of it, I recall.
> >>> >
> >>> >> I see that "Whose Body" is available at
> >>> >> https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/45867 and does indeed
> >>> >> contain references to what we would now call PTSD. I quite liked
> >>> >> it. The good guys, at worst, are guilty of flaunting their
> >>> >> non-racism and non-classism.
> >>> >
> >>> > An early scene in it comes to mind where Lord Peter
> >>> > makes fun of Bunter, his war comrade and personal
> >>> > servant, abusing his power over Bunter - service was
> >>> > poorly paid and precarious, and being servile is a
> >>> > job skill.
> >>> My recollection may be faulty, so I need to reread (what a fun duty!),
> >>> but I recall that while Bunter was Lord Peter's manservant, he might
> >>> better be described as his caretaker in the early stories. The teasing
> >>> was less bullying a social inferior than good-natured teasing between
> >>> men with a very fluid power structure.
> >>>
> >>> <snip>
> >>> > John Creasey's "The Toff" is yet another suave upper-class
> >>> > detective with a personal manservant for a partner in
> >>> > adventures, but Wikipedia relates him to "The Saint",
> >>> > whom I understand as a self-made man and semi-ethical
> >>> > criminal, and not to Wimsey and Bunter or even Holmes
> >>> > and Watson. And... Creasey wrote faster. I expect it
> >>> > to show.
> >>> I don't remember us ever really getting Simon Templar's background.
> >>> He's certainly wealthy, and he certainly is able to mix with the upper
> >>> classes, but he is a con man after all...
> >>>
> >>> He has various accomplices who come and go over the years; there's one
> >>> whose name I don't recall at the moment from Chicago who is stupid to
> >>> the point of disability. Templar's tolerance for him is all too clearly
> >>> "tolerance".
> >>
> >> Hoppy Uniatz. Now I look, there's also a valet in early
> >> stories. <https://saint.fandom.com/wiki/Simon_Templar>
> >>
> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Saint_(1997_film)>
> >> describes a scene from his childhood, without explaining
> >> any connection to the rest of the story, except that he
> >> is at what I take to be a Roman Catholic orphanage, and
> >> in this version, he goes on to use names of "saints" as
> >> criminal aliases, with "Simon Templar" also being such
> >> an alias. And a girl dies. The page says that in a draft
> >> before the film was actually made, his later love interest is
> >> murdered by a bad guy and Simon is very angry about that.
> >> So maybe the point was meant to be that that early tragedy
> >> formed his character to be an avenger of women But they
> >> took the part out where he did that?
> >
> >And of course that movie was decades after anything written Leslie
> >Charteris, to it seems to me like it doesn't really count.
> It would surely have been based, to the extent it had anything to do
> with what had gone before, on the TV show.
>
> It is an echo of an adaptation.
>
> I enjoy watching it, BTW, every time it comes up in rotation. I never
> really "got" the TV show. Same for /The A-Team/; well, where else can
> you see guys flying a tank?

<https://saint.fandom.com/wiki/The_Saint_in_Films>
in fact starts in 1938. Not recorded there is a "TV movie"
of 2017, which user reviews on IMDB describe as a pilot
for a TV series revival.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Saint_(radio_program)>
meanwhile overlooks the fan site's claim that "Radio Athlone",
the one in Ireland presumably, had a "Saint" show in 1940.

The Saint on the page sometime complains about
Leslie Charteris's writing, but it often is /not/
Leslie Charteris writing - I gather - when his name
is on the cover.

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 10:08:32 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Monday, 13 February 2023 at 16:20:50 UTC, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 09:52:41 -0700, Joe Pfeiffer
>> <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> >Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes:
>> >
>> >> On Thursday, 9 February 2023 at 04:58:21 UTC, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> >>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes:
>> >>>
>> >>> > On Wednesday, 8 February 2023 at 17:31:35 UTC, mcdow...@sky.com wrote:
>> >>> >> On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 1:14:33 AM UTC, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> >>> >> > sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >> > > I've been reading through the Lord Peter Whimsey stories. They
>> >>> >> > > give the reader a view of 1920's England (from the upper classes,
>> >>> >> > > mainly). The overt and blatent racism and classism is offputting to modern
>> >>> >> > > readers (at least this one). I still enjoy the mysteries and
>> >>> >> > > from a amateur historian perspective, the depictions of daily
>> >>> >> > > life.
>> >>> >> > The earlier stories are also very interesting for their gripping
>> >>> >> > description of PTSD long before the term was coined.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > "Shell shock" was known, of course. Lord Peter's mother
>> >>> > is rather dismissive of it, I recall.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> I see that "Whose Body" is available at
>> >>> >> https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/45867 and does indeed
>> >>> >> contain references to what we would now call PTSD. I quite liked
>> >>> >> it. The good guys, at worst, are guilty of flaunting their
>> >>> >> non-racism and non-classism.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > An early scene in it comes to mind where Lord Peter
>> >>> > makes fun of Bunter, his war comrade and personal
>> >>> > servant, abusing his power over Bunter - service was
>> >>> > poorly paid and precarious, and being servile is a
>> >>> > job skill.
>> >>> My recollection may be faulty, so I need to reread (what a fun duty!),
>> >>> but I recall that while Bunter was Lord Peter's manservant, he might
>> >>> better be described as his caretaker in the early stories. The teasing
>> >>> was less bullying a social inferior than good-natured teasing between
>> >>> men with a very fluid power structure.
>> >>>
>> >>> <snip>
>> >>> > John Creasey's "The Toff" is yet another suave upper-class
>> >>> > detective with a personal manservant for a partner in
>> >>> > adventures, but Wikipedia relates him to "The Saint",
>> >>> > whom I understand as a self-made man and semi-ethical
>> >>> > criminal, and not to Wimsey and Bunter or even Holmes
>> >>> > and Watson. And... Creasey wrote faster. I expect it
>> >>> > to show.
>> >>> I don't remember us ever really getting Simon Templar's background.
>> >>> He's certainly wealthy, and he certainly is able to mix with the upper
>> >>> classes, but he is a con man after all...
>> >>>
>> >>> He has various accomplices who come and go over the years; there's one
>> >>> whose name I don't recall at the moment from Chicago who is stupid to
>> >>> the point of disability. Templar's tolerance for him is all too clearly
>> >>> "tolerance".
>> >>
>> >> Hoppy Uniatz. Now I look, there's also a valet in early
>> >> stories. <https://saint.fandom.com/wiki/Simon_Templar>
>> >>
>> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Saint_(1997_film)>
>> >> describes a scene from his childhood, without explaining
>> >> any connection to the rest of the story, except that he
>> >> is at what I take to be a Roman Catholic orphanage, and
>> >> in this version, he goes on to use names of "saints" as
>> >> criminal aliases, with "Simon Templar" also being such
>> >> an alias. And a girl dies. The page says that in a draft
>> >> before the film was actually made, his later love interest is
>> >> murdered by a bad guy and Simon is very angry about that.
>> >> So maybe the point was meant to be that that early tragedy
>> >> formed his character to be an avenger of women But they
>> >> took the part out where he did that?
>> >
>> >And of course that movie was decades after anything written Leslie
>> >Charteris, to it seems to me like it doesn't really count.
>> It would surely have been based, to the extent it had anything to do
>> with what had gone before, on the TV show.
>>
>> It is an echo of an adaptation.
>>
>> I enjoy watching it, BTW, every time it comes up in rotation. I never
>> really "got" the TV show. Same for /The A-Team/; well, where else can
>> you see guys flying a tank?
>
><https://saint.fandom.com/wiki/The_Saint_in_Films>
>in fact starts in 1938. Not recorded there is a "TV movie"
>of 2017, which user reviews on IMDB describe as a pilot
>for a TV series revival.
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Saint_(radio_program)>
>meanwhile overlooks the fan site's claim that "Radio Athlone",
>the one in Ireland presumably, had a "Saint" show in 1940.
>
>The Saint on the page sometime complains about
>Leslie Charteris's writing, but it often is /not/
>Leslie Charteris writing - I gather - when his name
>is on the cover.

That's nice.

My mom was a big fan of the TV series. She was ecstatic when Roger
Moore became James Bond.

And it gives me a chance to add /The Fugitive/ as a movie I enjoy
every time I see it based on a series I didn't much care for.

As opposed to /Mission: Impossible/, which produced a surprising
amount of nostalgia for a series that really let me down in its third
season at the start, but then degenerated into a common (very common)
technothriller. Well, the "thriller" part was missing, but the
"techno" was there and the intent was clear.

Which, of course, leads to the fourth Lisbeth Salander film, which
starts with a scene stolen from an earlier film and then becomes a
common technothriller (also not particularly thrilling) which changes
her backstory. But that's a reboot pretending to be a sequel, not a
film echoing a TV series.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:08:09 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> “When You Should Ban Someone From Your Convention” by Michael Z. Williamson
> https://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/cms/index.php/22-writing/516-462
>
> “Here's the scenario. You're running an event, and on TWITter or
> Fecesbook, someone calls out a guest and states, "I wouldn't feel safe
> with this person at the con!""
>
> “You must immediately ban this person from the convention.”
>
> "No, not the guest. The person making the public scene.”"
>
Yeah, it's not like there's ever been any convention guests that have ever done anything wrong...

On Feb 10, 2023, Kevrob wrote
(in article<245fc356-d974-409f-b8b2-1cf6f447a9een@googlegroups.com>):

> On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 11:47:04 PM UTC-5, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> > jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) writes:
> >
> > > In article<a25c1581-fc4c-4c94...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > Andrew McDowell <mcdow...@sky.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > big snip: for some reason, quoted material is getting more and
> > > more unreadable here.
> > >
> > > > and classism and racism would also as make it more difficult
> > > > to obtain information from those inferiors.
> > >
> > > A recurring detail in the old Avenger pulp is that Josh and Rosabel
> > > Newton, being African American, are frequently dismissed as mere
> > > servants, basically furniture, by the bad guys. This rarely works
> > > out well for the crooks. Their boss, Richard Benson, of course
> > > immediately spotted them as university graduates when he met them.
> > I'd forgotten that! If I'm dredging up those old memories correctly,
> > they also did a great job of doing Steppin Fetchit impersonations when
> > needed for the situation.
>
> In the adaptation by DC Comics, the Newtons wore Phi Beta Kappa keys.
>
> https://readcomiconline.li/Comic/Justice-Inc-1975/Issue-2?id=171290&quality=hq
> #11

Warning: site has drive-by malware downloads (including a Flash and a fake
Chrome installer) (who still has Flash?) and porno popups (‘adult friend
finder’ and lots more.)
>
>
> Jack Kirby art from issue 2 on.
>
> https://www.comics.org/series/2220/

On 15 Feb 2023 at 07:01:35 GMT, "Hamish Laws" <hamish.laws@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:08:09 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> “When You Should Ban Someone From Your Convention” by Michael Z. Williamson
>> https://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/cms/index.php/22-writing/516-462
>>
>> “Here's the scenario. You're running an event, and on TWITter or
>> Fecesbook, someone calls out a guest and states, "I wouldn't feel safe
>> with this person at the con!""
>>
>> “You must immediately ban this person from the convention.”
>>
>> "No, not the guest. The person making the public scene.”"
>>
> Yeah, it's not like there's ever been any convention guests that have ever done anything wrong...

Indeed. It's the "nazi pub" story. You've got to kick the nazi's out
immediately even if they seem to be inoffensive when they first sit
down, otherwise your pub becomes a nazi pub. The pub is the con, in this
case. The nazi is the guest who makes people unsafe.

Blaming the messenger is such a shitty thing to do, and hallmark of a
con that has incompetent management.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
A mind stretched by an idea can never go back to its original dimensions.
- Conan Doyle

On Feb 15, 2023, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote
(in article <k53siuFfrqqU1@mid.individual.net>):

> On 15 Feb 2023 at 07:01:35 GMT, "Hamish Laws"<hamish.laws@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:08:09 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> > > “When You Should Ban Someone From Your Convention” by Michael Z.
> > > Williamson
> > > https://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/cms/index.php/22-writing/516-462
> > >
> > > “Here's the scenario. You're running an event, and on TWITter or
> > > Fecesbook, someone calls out a guest and states, "I wouldn't feel safe
> > > with this person at the con!""
> > >
> > > “You must immediately ban this person from the convention.”
> > >
> > > "No, not the guest. The person making the public scene.”"
> > Yeah, it's not like there's ever been any convention guests that have ever
> > done anything wrong...
>
> Indeed. It's the "nazi pub" story. You've got to kick the nazi's out
> immediately even if they seem to be inoffensive when they first sit
> down, otherwise your pub becomes a nazi pub. The pub is the con, in this
> case. The nazi is the guest who makes people unsafe.

How, exactly, is the guest making the idiot unsafe? The quote was that the
idiot _felt_ unsafe, not that the idiot _was_ unsafe. The solution to the
idiot’s problem was one of the following:

1. Don’t go to the con. If enough idiots don’t go to the con because of
the guest, con management will get the message.

2. Go to the con, but stay away from the guest. Unless the guest actively
stalks the idiot, they’ll be fine... and if the guest does that, THEN toss
him. And call the cops.
>
>
> Blaming the messenger is such a shitty thing to do, and hallmark of a
> con that has incompetent management.

Nah. Listening to idiots having the vapors is the hallmark of a con that has
incompetent management. Tossing the guest BEFORE s/he does anything is an act
of extremely shitty management.

And having one, or even a dozen, nazis in the pub doesn’t make it a nazi
pub. Having one, or a dozen nazis in the pub singing the Horst Wessel or
otherwise being obnoxious is grounds for heaving the lot out... or becoming a
nazi pub. They’ll lose the business of almost all non-nazis, so out go the
fascist scum. Unless they just sit quietly over in one corner, having a
drink.
>
>
> Cheers - Jaimie

On Monday, 13 February 2023 at 18:08:35 UTC, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> <https://saint.fandom.com/wiki/The_Saint_in_Films>
> in fact starts in 1938. Not recorded there is a "TV movie"
> of 2017, which user reviews on IMDB describe as a pilot
> for a TV series revival.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Saint_(radio_program)>
> meanwhile overlooks the fan site's claim that "Radio Athlone",
> the one in Ireland presumably, had a "Saint" show in 1940.

I mean, there's not much to say that this involves
Simon Templar and not simply a great misunderstanding.
Or, perhaps that's how it got onto Irish radio, someone
thought it was going to be lives of the saints?
If indeed it wasn't.

On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 1:30:48 AM UTC+11, WolfFan wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2023, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote
> (in article <k53siu...@mid.individual.net>):
> > On 15 Feb 2023 at 07:01:35 GMT, "Hamish Laws"<hamis...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:08:09 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> > > > “When You Should Ban Someone From Your Convention” by Michael Z.
> > > > Williamson
> > > > https://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/cms/index.php/22-writing/516-462
> > > >
> > > > “Here's the scenario. You're running an event, and on TWITter or
> > > > Fecesbook, someone calls out a guest and states, "I wouldn't feel safe
> > > > with this person at the con!""
> > > >
> > > > “You must immediately ban this person from the convention.”
> > > >
> > > > "No, not the guest. The person making the public scene.”"
> > > Yeah, it's not like there's ever been any convention guests that have ever
> > > done anything wrong...
> >
> > Indeed. It's the "nazi pub" story. You've got to kick the nazi's out
> > immediately even if they seem to be inoffensive when they first sit
> > down, otherwise your pub becomes a nazi pub. The pub is the con, in this
> > case. The nazi is the guest who makes people unsafe.
> How, exactly, is the guest making the idiot unsafe? The quote was that the
> idiot _felt_ unsafe, not that the idiot _was_ unsafe.

Dunno, maybe sexual harassment like Asimov and Ellison
maybe it's Vox Doy, a white supremacist, misogynist who called N. K. Jemisin, "an ignorant. half savage", and who says women shouldn't have the vote?
Maybe it was David Eddings who spend time in jail for abusing his adopted children
Maybe it's somebody who's called for violence against a minority

'An informal 2014 survey found that 13 percent of fans and professionals had been on the receiving end of “unwanted comments of a sexual nature” at conventions. And a horrifying eight percent said they had been “groped, assaulted, or raped at a comic convention.”'

The point is that there are options other than immediately
1) ban the guest based on a complaint
2) ban the complainant

the idea that the correct reaction to every complaint is to ban the complainant is as ludicrous as the idea that the correct response is to ban the guest in all cases.
Complaints need to be investigated

>The solution to the idiot’s problem was one of the following:
>
> 1. Don’t go to the con. If enough idiots don’t go to the con because of
> the guest, con management will get the message.

a) Don't you normally rant about that being cancel culture?
b) so people who were harassed by Asimov or groped by Ellison should have just stayed away until they died?
>
> 2. Go to the con, but stay away from the guest. Unless the guest actively
> stalks the idiot, they’ll be fine... and if the guest does that, THEN toss
> him. And call the cops.

Again, Asimov did it for decades.

> >
> >
> > Blaming the messenger is such a shitty thing to do, and hallmark of a
> > con that has incompetent management.
> Nah. Listening to idiots having the vapors is the hallmark of a con that has
> incompetent management.

Until you actually investigate you don't know whether it's an idiot with the vapors or a real issue

> Tossing the guest BEFORE s/he does anything is an act
> of extremely shitty management.

Yeah, it's not like it's possible that the guest has done things before that the complainant is aware of but the con management isn't

On Feb 17, 2023, Hamish Laws wrote
(in article<5565da9f-6c84-4dbd-8408-f2877a698b85n@googlegroups.com>):

> On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 1:30:48 AM UTC+11, WolfFan wrote:
> > On Feb 15, 2023, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote
> > (in article <k53siu...@mid.individual.net>):
> > > On 15 Feb 2023 at 07:01:35 GMT, "Hamish Laws"<hamis...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 9:08:09 AM UTC+11, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> > > > > “When You Should Ban Someone From Your Convention” by Michael Z.
> > > > > Williamson
> > > > > https://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/cms/index.php/22-writing/516-462
> > > > >
> > > > > “Here's the scenario. You're running an event, and on TWITter or
> > > > > Fecesbook, someone calls out a guest and states, "I wouldn't feel safe
> > > > > with this person at the con!""
> > > > >
> > > > > “You must immediately ban this person from the convention.”
> > > > >
> > > > > "No, not the guest. The person making the public scene.”"
> > > > Yeah, it's not like there's ever been any convention guests that have ever
> > > > done anything wrong...
> > >
> > > Indeed. It's the "nazi pub" story. You've got to kick the nazi's out
> > > immediately even if they seem to be inoffensive when they first sit
> > > down, otherwise your pub becomes a nazi pub. The pub is the con, in this
> > > case. The nazi is the guest who makes people unsafe.
> > How, exactly, is the guest making the idiot unsafe? The quote was that the
> > idiot _felt_ unsafe, not that the idiot _was_ unsafe.
>
> Dunno, maybe sexual harassment like Asimov and Ellison

Heave their asses out the instant they go touchy-feely.
>
> maybe it's Vox Doy, a white supremacist, misogynist who called N. K. Jemisin,
> "an ignorant. half savage", and who says women shouldn't have the vote?

If he says this at the con, heave his ass out.
>
> Maybe it was David Eddings who spend time in jail for abusing his adopted
> children

Was it at a con? If at a con, heave his ass out. If not... not the con’s
business.
>
> Maybe it's somebody who's called for violence against a minority

If at a con, heave him out. If not, don’t.
>
>
> 'An informal 2014 survey found that 13 percent of fans and professionals had
> been on the receiving end of “unwanted comments of a sexual nature” at
> conventions. And a horrifying eight percent said they had been “groped,
> assaulted, or raped at a comic convention.”'

There’s a wide spectrum from ‘groped’ to ‘assaulted’ to
‘raped’, and for groped, heave his ass out, for the other two, have
security (if the con has it, or hotel security if not) sit on him until the
cops arrive and send his ass out in handcuffs.

>
>
> The point is that there are options other than immediately
> 1) ban the guest based on a complaint
> 2) ban the complainant

I wouldn’t have done either. The idiot was proposing to bank the guest
before the guest had done anything to the idiot. If the idiot feels that
strongly, stay away.
>
>
> the idea that the correct reaction to every complaint is to ban the
> complainant is as ludicrous as the idea that the correct response is to ban
> the guest in all cases.
> Complaints need to be investigated
>
> > The solution to the idiot’s problem was one of the following:
> >
> > 1. Don’t go to the con. If enough idiots don’t go to the con because of
> > the guest, con management will get the message.
>
> a) Don't you normally rant about that being cancel culture?

[citation needed]

>
> b) so people who were harassed by Asimov or groped by Ellison should have
> just stayed away until they died?

Nope. Asimov and Ellison should have been heaved out until they promised to
behave. And, if they broke their promise and did it again one being let back
in, banned for life. I don’t give a shit who they are.

But... that’s for an actual offense, not one that exists only in the
imagination of an idiot.
>
> >
> > 2. Go to the con, but stay away from the guest. Unless the guest actively
> > stalks the idiot, they’ll be fine... and if the guest does that, THEN toss
> > him. And call the cops.
>
> Again, Asimov did it for decades.

He should have been tossed.
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > Blaming the messenger is such a shitty thing to do, and hallmark of a
> > > con that has incompetent management.
> > Nah. Listening to idiots having the vapors is the hallmark of a con that has
> > incompetent management.
>
> Until you actually investigate you don't know whether it's an idiot with the
> vapors or a real issue

I bloody know it’s vapors as THE DAMN CON HASN’T HAPPENED YET AND THERE
LITERALLY COULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OFFENSE YET.
>
>
> > Tossing the guest BEFORE s/he does anything is an act
> > of extremely shitty management.
>
> Yeah, it's not like it's possible that the guest has done things before that
> the complainant is aware of but the con management isn't

Cool. So inform the management of prior bad acts. Management can then look
and see. If there’s anything to it, warn the guest to be on best behavior
and keep an eye out. If the guest has been banned elsewhere for repeated bad
acts, _then_ consider heaving him. If there isn’t anything, or if bad acts
weren’t repeated, tell the idiot that no action will be taken.

On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 09:30:40 -0500, WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com>
wrote:

>And having one, or even a dozen, nazis in the pub doesn’t make it a nazi
>pub. Having one, or a dozen nazis in the pub singing the Horst Wessel or
>otherwise being obnoxious is grounds for heaving the lot out... or becoming a
>nazi pub. They’ll lose the business of almost all non-nazis, so out go the
>fascist scum. Unless they just sit quietly over in one corner, having a
>drink.

Given this is presumably an English speaking pub Tomorrow Belongs to
Me (which has been covered by several neo-Nazi bands - I found out the
hard way in Youtube one night....sigh) as it's both in English and in
Cabaret, Spitting Image and The Man in the High Castle. (The Spitting
Image version was done the week before a UK election - 1987? - in the
Thatcher era and is quite funny)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mjrT3N4hNo

PARTICULARLY if they end the song as they did in Cabaret + TMitHC
(e.g. with the entire audience doing the Hitler raised arm salute)

On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 5:46:29 AM UTC-7, Hamish Laws wrote:

> The point is that there are options other than immediately
> 1) ban the guest based on a complaint
> 2) ban the complainant
>
> the idea that the correct reaction to every complaint is to ban the complainant is as ludicrous as the idea that the correct response is to ban the guest in all cases.
> Complaints need to be investigated
>
Congratulations for countering ideology with
common sense.

John Savard

On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 6:53:23 AM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2023, Hamish Laws wrote
> (in article<5565da9f-6c84-4dbd...@googlegroups.com>):

> > maybe it's Vox Doy, a white supremacist, misogynist who called N. K. Jemisin,
> > "an ignorant. half savage", and who says women shouldn't have the vote?
>
> If he says this at the con, heave his ass out.
>
> > Maybe it was David Eddings who spend time in jail for abusing his adopted
> > children
>
> Was it at a con? If at a con, heave his ass out. If not... not the con’s
> business.
>
> > Maybe it's somebody who's called for violence against a minority
>
> If at a con, heave him out. If not, don’t.
>
If the management of a convention is at all worried about their
reputation, I don't think that is a reasonable standard to apply.

Is it really "cancel culture" to want to avoid the appearence of
condoning wrongdoing anywhere?

John Savard

On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 8:11:12 PM UTC-5, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 09:30:40 -0500, WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com>
> wrote:
> >And having one, or even a dozen, nazis in the pub doesn’t make it a nazi
> >pub. Having one, or a dozen nazis in the pub singing the Horst Wessel or
> >otherwise being obnoxious is grounds for heaving the lot out... or becoming a
> >nazi pub. They’ll lose the business of almost all non-nazis, so out go the
> >fascist scum. Unless they just sit quietly over in one corner, having a
> >drink.
> Given this is presumably an English speaking pub Tomorrow Belongs to
> Me (which has been covered by several neo-Nazi bands - I found out the
> hard way in Youtube one night....sigh) as it's both in English and in
> Cabaret, Spitting Image and The Man in the High Castle. (The Spitting
> Image version was done the week before a UK election - 1987? - in the
> Thatcher era and is quite funny)
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mjrT3N4hNo
>
> PARTICULARLY if they end the song as they did in Cabaret + TMitHC
> (e.g. with the entire audience doing the Hitler raised arm salute)

TBTM was written in 1966 by two Jewish musicians, John Kander and
Fred Ebb, for the original Broadway musical version of 'Cabaret'. It is not
from the Nazi era. In the stage version, its sung by two waiters. The
movie version is far more chilling.

If you listen to the song without context, its inspiring and uplifting, with
just a hint of menace. From Wikipedia:

"Others seemed to embrace its lyrics at face value, without political
context; a Jewish youth group requested permission to use it in their
summer camp show. In 1973, concerned parents at a largely Jewish
school in New York State raised a petition against the song being
included in a school performance; school administrators determined
that it would go ahead as planned."

I know that for the camp use, it was flat out refused by the writers.

As others note, its been covered by a number of neo Nazi groups. The
only one I've heard was by the Swedish singer 'Saga', and is very good,
if you're not aware of her other work, or the history of the song. If you
do, its creepy AF.

pt

On the other hand, Charlie Byrd quite innocently did an instrumental version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO7pRmg8cTk

John Savard

On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 10:21:25 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:

> On the other hand, Charlie Byrd quite innocently did an instrumental version:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO7pRmg8cTk

And speaking of being completely innocent of the context of this song...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJWqsF2HnOI

here is it apparently being used in the 2020 election campaign of Tsai
Ing-Wen. (Leader of the Democratic People's Party (DPP) in Taiwan
(Republic of China) and current President of that country.)

John Savard

On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 10:27:52 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:

> And speaking of being completely innocent of the context of this song...
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJWqsF2HnOI
>
> here is it apparently being used in the 2020 election campaign of Tsai
> Ing-Wen. (Leader of the Democratic People's Party (DPP) in Taiwan
> (Republic of China) and current President of that country.)

The use is apparent, and not real; the music came from a recorded
performance by a musical group with no connection to Taiwan.

John Savard

On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 10:21:25 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
> On the other hand, Charlie Byrd quite innocently did an instrumental version:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO7pRmg8cTk

And here's one of many satirical versions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeaWZmr_VmE

John Savard

On Feb 27, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
(in article<f0400116-228a-49ab-84ef-bb546073cc4fn@googlegroups.com>):

> On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 6:53:23 AM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
> > On Feb 17, 2023, Hamish Laws wrote
> > (in article<5565da9f-6c84-4dbd...@googlegroups.com>):
>
> > > maybe it's Vox Doy, a white supremacist, misogynist who called N. K.
> > > Jemisin,
> > > "an ignorant. half savage", and who says women shouldn't have the vote?
> >
> > If he says this at the con, heave his ass out.
> >
> > > Maybe it was David Eddings who spend time in jail for abusing his adopted
> > > children
> >
> > Was it at a con? If at a con, heave his ass out. If not... not the con’s
> > business.
> >
> > > Maybe it's somebody who's called for violence against a minority
> >
> > If at a con, heave him out. If not, don’t.
> If the management of a convention is at all worried about their
> reputation,

The reputation that they shouldn’t want to have is being the sort of twits
who overreact to one idiot’s complaint despite not having an actual event
to complain about.
> I don't think that is a reasonable standard to apply.

You don’t think.
>
>
> Is it really "cancel culture" to want to avoid the appearence of
> condoning wrongdoing anywhere?

It’s none of their damn business.
>
>
> John Savard

On Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 10:11:11 PM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2023, Quadibloc wrote

> > Is it really "cancel culture" to want to avoid the appearence of
> > condoning wrongdoing anywhere?
>
> It’s none of their damn business.
>
Harm to humans, wherever and whenever it occurs, is always
everyone's business.

John Savard

On Mar 1, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
(in article<bdaac29f-eb58-4e93-88f2-cd74f5b38bd2n@googlegroups.com>):

> On Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 10:11:11 PM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
> > On Feb 27, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
>
> > > Is it really "cancel culture" to want to avoid the appearence of
> > > condoning wrongdoing anywhere?
> >
> > It’s none of their damn business.
> Harm to humans, wherever and whenever it occurs, is always
> everyone's business.

Really? Without limit to time and space? Interesting. And idiotic.
>
>
> John Savard

On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 7:34:46 PM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2023, Quadibloc wrote

> > Harm to humans, wherever and whenever it occurs, is always
> > everyone's business.

> Really? Without limit to time and space? Interesting. And idiotic.

You have indeed pointed out an ambiguity in my phrasing
which gave it a sense which was more expansive than I
intended.

I meant that it is, always will be, and always was, the case that
harm to humans anywhere is the business of everyone who is
contemporary with that harm.
So I was not saying we needed to concern ourselves with harm
to humans in ancient history or the distant future, nor was I
presupposing the existence of time travel.

Also, given the absence of FTL travel and First Contact as of yet,
by "wherever" I was still limiting myself to the planet Earth, and
so I did not need to note how the Prime Directive would limit our
response to harm to non-human rational beings who we don't
understand well enough yet to permit safe intervention.

John Savard

On 3/1/2023 6:34 PM, WolfFan wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
> (in article<bdaac29f-eb58-4e93-88f2-cd74f5b38bd2n@googlegroups.com>):
>
>> On Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 10:11:11 PM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
>>> On Feb 27, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
>>
>>>> Is it really "cancel culture" to want to avoid the appearence of
>>>> condoning wrongdoing anywhere?
>>>
>>> It’s none of their damn business.
>> Harm to humans, wherever and whenever it occurs, is always
>> everyone's business.
>
> Really? Without limit to time and space? Interesting. And idiotic.

Its _QUADDIE_, what do you expect?

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Mar 2, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
(in article<fe1b32cc-dfad-41c9-9b63-15f36b0381e2n@googlegroups.com>):

> On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 7:34:46 PM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 2023, Quadibloc wrote
>
> > > Harm to humans, wherever and whenever it occurs, is always
> > > everyone's business.
>
> > Really? Without limit to time and space? Interesting. And idiotic.
>
> You have indeed pointed out an ambiguity in my phrasing
> which gave it a sense which was more expansive than I
> intended.

I doubt that.
>
>
> I meant that it is, always will be, and always was, the case that
> harm to humans anywhere is the business of everyone who is
> contemporary with that harm.

That’s just as stupid.
>
> So I was not saying we needed to concern ourselves with harm
> to humans in ancient history or the distant future, nor was I
> presupposing the existence of time travel.
>
> Also, given the absence of FTL travel and First Contact as of yet,
> by "wherever" I was still limiting myself to the planet Earth, and
> so I did not need to note how the Prime Directive would limit our
> response to harm to non-human rational beings who we don't
> understand well enough yet to permit safe intervention.
>
> John Savard

I think that Canada has to be condemned for allowing John Savard to roam
loose, given his attitude towards vatgirls. Canada can redeem itself by
sending Savardists to Baffin Island, so long as precautions are taken to
prevent poor innocent polar bears ingesting parts of said Savardists. We
don’t want to poison the poor things, after all.

On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:07:42 AM UTC-5, WolfFan wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2023, Kevrob wrote
> (in article<245fc356-d974-409f...@googlegroups.com>):
> > On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 11:47:04 PM UTC-5, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) writes:
> > >
> > > > In article<a25c1581-fc4c-4c94...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > > Andrew McDowell <mcdow...@sky.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > big snip: for some reason, quoted material is getting more and
> > > > more unreadable here.
> > > >
> > > > > and classism and racism would also as make it more difficult
> > > > > to obtain information from those inferiors.
> > > >
> > > > A recurring detail in the old Avenger pulp is that Josh and Rosabel
> > > > Newton, being African American, are frequently dismissed as mere
> > > > servants, basically furniture, by the bad guys. This rarely works
> > > > out well for the crooks. Their boss, Richard Benson, of course
> > > > immediately spotted them as university graduates when he met them.
> > > I'd forgotten that! If I'm dredging up those old memories correctly,
> > > they also did a great job of doing Steppin Fetchit impersonations when
> > > needed for the situation.
> >
> > In the adaptation by DC Comics, the Newtons wore Phi Beta Kappa keys.
> >
> > https://readcomiconline.li/Comic/Justice-Inc-1975/Issue-2?id=171290&quality=hq
> > #11
> Warning: site has drive-by malware downloads (including a Flash and a fake
> Chrome installer) (who still has Flash?) and porno popups (‘adult friend
> finder’ and lots more.)
> >

Oops. Sorry. I visit that site using NoScript and AdBlock, so never see that stuff.

> >
> > Jack Kirby art from issue 2 on.
> >
> > https://www.comics.org/series/2220/

--
Kevin R