Hi,
People can quite easily get in to a situation where they haven't read it.
If say they join in from a different series as commonly happens. And are
hooked straight away and want more than just the books, I am sure I have
seen posts from people who have only read a couple of the books and are
hooked already.
Cheers,
Nick
On 2012-04-05 3:35 AM, "Jason Green" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I understand how easy it is. I'm simply stating that it's a bit silly.
>
> Do we REALLY need spoiler spaces when we're discussing a book that
>
> A) was published 30 years ago
>
> And
>
> B) was written by an author who is the focus of this list.
>
> My point is that this is a dedicated Feist email list, visited by
> dedicated fans. I make the assumption that they are dedicated because who
> the heck looks up, joins, and reads an email list about an author they
> don't already have a deep appreciation of? I would guess that is a tiny
> minority of the readers of this list.
>
> "ahhhh!!!! Spoilers please! Not everyone has read Hamlet yet!"
>
> "but, this is an advanced class about Shakeapeare's most famous works"
>
> I'm not stating that I am rebelling against spoiler spaces. I'm simply
> pointing out that it's silly.
>
> And it IS silly.
>
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2012, at 6:44 AM, LAR <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > You can REVEAL whatever you like, we just ask as a courtesy you hit
> > return about 10 - 12 times so that people who DON'T want to see a
> > spoiler can avoid it. It's not that difficult
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Jason Green <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Have to say I sort of agree with Parks. It's hard to have a discussion
> about Ray's books if we can't reveal spoilers about any books.
> >>
> >> Magician has been out for about 30 years now. Maybe we need to have a
> list rule for new joiners that maybe they shouldn't read the list until
> they've ready at least the first series?
> >>
> >> Seriously, of you haven't read at least Magician, why are you reading
> the Feist list instead of Ray's actual books?
> >>
> >> I'd be shocked of the vast majority of this list hadn't read everything
> but he most recent book or two.
> >>
> >> Sometimes this list makes me want to go back to my English lit classes
> and tell "spoilers!" every time the prof tries to discuss Shakespeare.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 4, 2012, at 1:19 AM, Parks White <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all
> >>>
> >>> My auto correct error typo "pro army" instead of "primary" and
> subsequent clarification to Johns pedantic question authorizes "Shells" to
> ramp up the discussion to "defend " the many veterans and active duty
> service personnel "fans" (as if real warriors need defending) moves the
> discussion into the political too. A clear breach of the rules as
> well....Which I have now read...( I'm a newbie here)... the rules prohibits
> humor, satire, sarcasm, politics, race and religion.........perhaps we
> should write a new rule to eliminate the banal, trivial, stupid, pedantic,
> irritating, entertaining and tasteless contributions too.. There really is
> not much interesting or literary in the contributions I have read over the
> last 6 weeks..drinking shots in Newark Rhode Island included... perhaps
> the publishing gaff and that fans in the USA have had to wait 6 or more
> weeks for a book launch over the rest of the world should be discussed. A
> sign of a declining Empire?.. Is the Kingdom (sic) under threat?.Could it
> be a good reason for deploying more US troops?..also maybe too political
> and in such a sycophantic forum ....another reason to curb your First
> amendment Rights!.... Oh I forgot, the military have severely curtailed
> freedom of speech rights for the troops anyway..... And keep politics out
> of Sports too!...yeah right! ...Clearly the fan list was set up and managed
> by grey (regardless of age) bureaucrats...where is your passion , energy
> and creativity...I see none....Pathetic " spoilers" and other protocols
> restrict real discussions about plot and character...I have seen no
> interesting questions or contributions recently that add much value beyond
> vague error ridden snippets...I can only assume there is none here.... I
> will go and wait for the annual publication... I Hope it is better
> proofread and I will stick to blogs and forums that have something to say
> in future......
> >>>
> >>> cheers
> >>>
> >>> Parks3
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>
> >>> On 4/04/2012, at 1:22 PM, "James Young" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Seconded.
> >>>>
> >>>> -James
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]>
> >>>> To: "feistfans-l" <[email protected]>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 7:52 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: New book replacement thread response.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This email is exactly why politics is not discussed here on the
> List. Here it is about Ray's work, past and present, his likes and
> dislikes, and whatever else he'd like to discuss.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There are many Veterans here, and active duty service members, of
> many countries whom love Rays work, which is why we are here. If you want
> to talk about politics there are plenty of places you can go to speak your
> mind on such matters, which is your right.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is a section on Crydee.com that speaks to the List rules if
> you are interested.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Shells
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Parks White <[email protected]>
> >>>>> Sender: [email protected]
> >>>>> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 12:35:54
> >>>>> To: feistfans-l<[email protected]>
> >>>>> Reply-To: "feistfans-l" <[email protected]>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: New book replacement thread response.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi John
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It suddenly also occurred to me that you might be serious.....if so,
> I hope the following clarifies your query.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. It was an auto correct error...I found it humorous after i had
> sent the email and wanted to correct the typo quickly ( lesson here
> somewhere)
> >>>>> 2. It was mild political commentary on my part, an indulgence.....I
> deplore militarism, military dictatorships, military
> spending......definitely not Pro Army, air force, marines... Sorry for
> laboring the point.....
> >>>>> 3. I never say "oops" in an email unless repeating someone else's
> "oops" ...my 7 year old says oops (rarely)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Good to see you comment on the most salient points made in my email.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Parks3
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 4/04/2012, at 7:47 AM, John Buttimer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Why would you add that you aren't pro army? Why not just say oops
> meant primary?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > If you want to take the island, then burn your boats. With absolute
> > commitment come the insights that create real victory.
> > -Tony Robbins
> >
> >
>
>
>
