Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA29073; Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:37:11 -0700 Return-Path: <luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU-DeleteThis> Received: from paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU by hplms26.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP ($Revision: 1.36.108.11 $/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1S) id AA290961094; Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:38:14 -0700 Received: from paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (localhost.Berkeley.EDU [127.0.0.1]) by paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA14053 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:33:22 -0700 From: Luigi Semenzato <luigi@CS.Berkeley.EDU-DeleteThis> Message-Id: <199508212133.OAA14053@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU-DeleteThis> To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: fake news and the SFBA newsletter In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 21 Aug 1995 12:03:12 PDT." <Chameleon.950821115622.hoagland@DaveH.sfgate.com-DeleteThis> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:33:21 -0700
Dave Hoagland writes:
> has done a LOT of work on our behalf at Crissy, has great parties
> etc., all on a very low budget. I am very appreciative of their work and
> took exception to his referring to them as 'doofuses'.
That is correct. I need to apologize a little better: my previous
apology should not have contained the word `doofuses' (or is it
`doofi'? ;-). It was completely gratuitous and was due to an
ill-placed attempt at further humor (and also because I was a little
upset at them for falling for it). I suspect that some of the most
irate postings are due to this attempt, which I in fact regret even
more than the original fake article.
I did not want people to believe the article was genuine---or rather,
not for more than a few minutes. I expected people to read it and
then think: `But... wait a minute... this is impossible!' and laugh.
I was aiming that kind of effect at but I obviously misjudged.
I have been privately accused of wasting people's time and enjoying
the thought that they would be driving a lot of miles looking for
the site. I find no pleasure in either of the above and I hope this
has not happened.
I owe two things to the SFBA:
1. a better phrasing for a joint apology. (I will take the full blame
if they wish so, but I don't think that would be correct). For
instance: `We are sorry. The article `blah blah' in our August issue
is a fake. We copied it from a local mailing list, where it was
posted as a joke, including the false attribution. The original
author, Luigi Semenzato [name may be omitted], wishes to apologize to
all readers for any inconvenience this may have caused.'
2. some more meaningful contribution to their newsletter. If there is
any event they'd like me to cover and write about, please let me know.
I don't think they would be interested in any of my diaries, which, by
the way, are truthful reports, in spite of what Jay Runge seems to
think (hi, Jay). I have a couple of unpublished short windsurfing
stories (fiction) which I am volunteering, but I don't think those are
appropriate either.
So let me know ---Luigi
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:29:57 PST