(urth) Resurrections

Ryan Dunn ryan at liftingfaces.com
Mon Aug 2 08:00:39 PDT 2010


I don't mind the added color to the discussion. However, I also don't know the interpersonal constructs between the various members, but I feel like I'm beginning to.

Is Josh's theory that all the JW's are the same his alone? Whether true or not, it's sort of a genius, and ironic idea given the subject matter of this list.

I also don't mind Rated-R replies, as long as they have some substance to them. Meaning, on-topic is preferred, but off-topic can be insightful if there's something I can quote later on.

...ryan

P.S. If the Urth emails collect in my mailbox, I will often times read the emails that have brunians at brunians.org first, for the record. I don't know where that puts me in the demographic, but there it is.



On Aug 1, 2010, at 9:14 PM, brunians at brunians.org wrote:

> There's only one opinion that counts.
> 
> But who knows?
> 
> Maybe you can get a democratic movement going.
> 
> I imagine if the masses become clamorous Dr Bhatnagar might respond.
> 
> How many people are on the Gene Wolfe list?
> 
> Meanwhile, why don't you answer some of the questions you don't want to
> answer, you weasel you.
> 
> .
> 
>> I second John. That's 2.
>> 
>> brunians at brunians.org wrote:
>>> The feeling is quiet mutual.
>>> 
>>> Most of us == who? Most of the voices in your head?
>>> 
>>> How do you know that most of the list is just putting up with me?
>>> 
>>> You have taken a survey?
>>> 
>>> Might you publish your results here?
>>> 
>>> There are several noninnumerates here, one or more of whom may comment
>>> upon your statistics: I may myself.
>>> 
>>> In the meantime, if you wish to affect my involuntary removal from this
>>> list, I suggest that you apply to the owner of the list, and not to me,
>>> who - I am not sure if you get this - does not respect you and will not
>>> do
>>> what you want me to do.
>>> 
>>> Do you have any questions?
>>> 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> You are an unpleasant aspect of this list that most of us are just
>>>> putting
>>>> up with.  I wish you would refrain from personal insults or
>>>> intentionally
>>>> enigmatic digressions.  We'd all be better off.
>>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 7:47 PM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> And a society that is physically deteriorating due to climate change,
>>>>> that
>>>>> is also in the middle of a huge war, tends not support sports such as
>>>>> recreational mountain climbing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Why do you always presume, Stockhoff?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Don't you ever know?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do you believe that folks don't notice you saying nasty things
>>>>> whenever
>>>>> I
>>>>> ask a question you don't wish to answer?
>>>>> 
>>>>> How stupid are you, exactly?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I keep going back and forth between you and the JW's in my perennial
>>>>> urth
>>>>> list dumbest monkey test.
>>>>> 
>>>>> .
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Presumably it was far from where anyone would normally go.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> António Pedro Marques wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And isn't Typhon supposed to be *2* thousand years before Severian?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (Never mind that Typhon was up there in his mountain all the time.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> Did
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> no one think of going there?)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> David Stockhoff wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 200 autarchs could rule an average of 5 years each over 1000 years.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> If
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 20 of these autarchs ruled an average of 20 years, the remaining
>>>>>>>> 180
>>>>>>>> would each have to rule for about 3+1/3 years to maintain the
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> average.
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It's possible. In such a system, the individuality of each autarch,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> all
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> but the greatest, would be inconsequential and utterly lost. Which
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> is
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> exactly what has happened in imperial dynasties. England's monarch,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> by
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> contrast, was much more robust even at its weakest.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If we know only 3 names from the past 1000 years, perhaps that is
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> why.
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If only these 3 ruled for 50 each and the remainder for still only
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> 4 years on average, that makes 200 in total. It's then slightly
>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> plausible.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> But is this important?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Jeff Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 8/1/2010 1:36 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Some autarchs may have ruled for only a week.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> That's not unusual for popes or kings either. John-Paul I reigned
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> month, Jane Grey for 9 days, and IIRC the Hawaiian Kamehameha
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> dynasty
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> ended with the last couple of heirs reigning for less than a day
>>>>>>>>> apiece. These rates can't be sustained with anything like
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> stability,
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> and are more than compensated for by the Victorias and Henrys, who
>>>>>>>>> come to the throne young and live on into vigorous old age.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Appian-Severian-Valeria cover a minimum of eight decades, I'd say,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> and
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ymar could easily have been one of the child-Autarchs as well as
>>>>>>>>> reigning long enough to be credited with his various deeds and
>>>>>>>>> commands, even if he didn't actually do or complete all of them.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> This
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> leaves about nine hundred years for all but one of the hundreds
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> Old Autarch spoke of, surely they can do better than that? In the
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 900
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> years following the Norman Conquest there were only 45 English
>>>>>>>>> monarchs.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Urth Mailing List
>>>>>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>>>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Urth Mailing List
>>>>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
>>>>>>> Virus Database (VPS): 100801-0, 08/01/2010
>>>>>>> Tested on: 8/1/2010 6:30:23 PM
>>>>>>> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 ALWIL Software.
>>>>>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Urth Mailing List
>>>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Urth Mailing List
>>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Urth Mailing List
>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Urth Mailing List
>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
>>> Virus Database (VPS): 100801-0, 08/01/2010
>>> Tested on: 8/1/2010 8:45:25 PM
>>> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 ALWIL Software.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net




More information about the Urth mailing list