Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 7, No. 0391. Wednesday, 29 May 1996.
(1) From: Keith Richards <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 17 May 1996 11:01:30 -0700
Subj: Re: criminal revolutionary academic riffraff
(2) From: W. L. Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 17 May 1996 21:04:42 -0400
Subj: Cakes and Ale
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Keith Richards <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 17 May 1996 11:01:30 -0700
Subject: Re: criminal revolutionary academic riffraff
Dear Jeff Myers,
I would respond to your last post off the list, as I don't think that the
debate we're having is of interest to all the members, but since you want to
make your points here, I'll make the counterpoint. I really do think that you
are overstating your case.
If you'll recall my first post on the subject, you'll remember that I did not
say that an argument could not be made against some of F. Amit's points. Nor
did I call P. Groves' riposte an "assault" (certainly you're stretching it by
implying that I equated it with "a brutal physical attack on a defenseless
victim"). What I did say was that I have been guilty of firing off poorly
thought out responses to list members (comments which, compared to P. Groves',
were "assaults").
What I did say was that P. Groves' response, figuring F. Amit's contribution to
the list as a "joke", was inappropriate. I assume that you, like him, take
issue with the points she has raised. Of course, _that_ is what the list is all
about. I would like to see one of you make the case, rather than continuing to
treat the subject as a joke.
Perhaps if we want to continue with this e-pistle duel, we should do it off the
list henceforth.
Yours,
Keith Richards | This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: W. L. Godshalk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 17 May 1996 21:04:42 -0400
Subject: Cakes and Ale
>In the interests of those who pay for internet messages by the bit--it is
>pointless to repost in order to correct minor grammatical slippages. Whether
>he uses the proper "I" or the common "me" we still know him to be W. Godshalk
>of biblioholic fame--the meaning, unobscure, emerges despite grammar. Therefore
>save the bandwidth--
>Thomas E. "TR" Ruddick
Is this a joke? Isn't your communication -- sent to everyone, when addressed
to me -- a waste of money for those who pay? If you want to fight with me,
simply write to me directly -- and spare everyone else -- if you are in to
saving money.
Yours, Bill