Hello?

[davemarc]

RedBug asks:
 
> Was I the only one who had a problem with:
> 
> >Compare this attitude, then, to the foul-mouthed, smug-as-ice, and
> >ultimately meaningless screeds of Diane York Blaine (a teacher who
> >disgustinglyt demeans her own students in order to project herself
[snip]
> >as bringing feminist Enlightenment to the befuddled populace of N.
Texas,
> >whose latest maliced missive is a perfect metonymy for the elitist orb
of
> her so-called disciple. [&c. &c.]
> 
No, RedBug isn't the only one who has a problem with flaming.  I don't
subscribe to this list to flame anyone or read anyone else's flames.  I
subscribe to this list to learn more about things Pynchon and converse
about them, too.  I'd never want to censor anyone's speech, but I would
appreciate it if participants would think twice before hauling out their
flamethrowers, and I'd appreciate it even more if they rarely if ever
employed them.  As I think I've mentioned before, I don't think it's the
format (mailing list vs. newsgroup) that determines the quality of Internet
communications as much as the richness of the communiques themselves. 
Sure, flames can add some excitement to a conversation, but so do examples
of genuine wit and inventiveness.  How about less of the former and more of
the latter?

To give Steely St. C. his due, I'd like to recognize that he at least has
the good sense to admit his factual errors, as he did during the
Schindler's List brouhaha.  

Cheers,

davemarc