Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:15:26 -0400
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>, WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Minutes
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

At 11:26 PM 10/27/2005 -0400, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>> The Boulder Pledge:  "Under no circumstances will I ever purchase
>> anything offered to me as the result of an unsolicited email
>> message. ...
>
>That will work well at wiping out spam if 100% of the people on the
>net follow it.  Unfortunately, only a mere 99.99999% do, so it's
>pretty much useless.

I don't think it's useless.  It states my position publicly (this isn't the
only forum I use that tagline in) and might give others the idea to join me
in that stance (I got it from someone else who was doing that), and it
might be seen by some business person who was considering trying that
method of advertising out, but who decides that if there's some sort of
movement against it, maybe it's not worth the risk.  At the very least I'm
not making the problem any worse, and I'm counter-advertising which *might*
move things in the right direction a little.  A snowflake isn't very
powerful either, but look what they accomplish when they stick together. ;-)

>Mike Bartman wrote:

>> "No vote having taken place, the next meeting will be at the
>> Gillilands', as usual."
>
>I felt I should put that in there to conclude that section, so that
>it doesn't just trail off, leaving the reader wondering.

Perhaps something like, "After a discussion of the issue it was decided by
the chair that the next meeting will be at the Gillilands', as usual.
There was no objection to this." might accomplish your goal, without being
misleading about there having been a motion?  Just a suggestion, you're
still the secretary.

>> There wasn't an attack by Velociraptors either, and no mention of
>> that lack was made.
>
>If at the meeting there had been discussion of hungry velociraptors
>trying to get in the door, I think a mention that they hadn't actually
>attacked would be appropriate.

Agreed, but since there wasn't any discussion of a vote to change the
meeting location either...

>> If you could add somewhere that during the con it was noted that
>> Future Washington had climbed to about 4700 on the Amazon sales
>> list, which is a fairly astronomical figure, though the short term
>> result of publicity by its authors, it would be appreciated.
>
>I'll take your word for it that that's good.  Being in 4700th place
>doesn't sound all that impressive to me.

Since it was in 45,000th place a short while before that, 4,700th isn't
bad. ;-)

>There aren't all that many books published, after all.

You might be surprised.  Amazon sells not only fiction from major
publishers, but also non-fiction, vanity press stuff (my brother's book,
"The Pax-Am Solution" is available that way for example), really small
specialty publishers (want a book on how to paint your motorcycle?), and
even out of print stuff through used book sellers ("The Rape of the A.P.E."
for instance...I really wish that one would get re-printed, it's got a lot
of good stuff in it.  Current used price on Amazon is $150...for a
paperback!).

-- Mike B.
--
An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.