What "Roger.Jo.Dole boy.Zero. Sydenhams" had to say back in 12/2003

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Ozzie Gontang, Jul 20, 2004.

  1. A connection? I don't know. A return of "Roger.Jo.Dole boy.Zero, Sydenhams?" I don't know. Just wondering as I looked over some of the musings of np426z.

    Ozzie Gontang
    Maintainer FAQ rec.running


    Path: newssvr27.news.prodigy.com!newssvr25.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm01!newsdbm01.news.prodigy.com!newscon07.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!217.137.252.45!not-for-mail
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Path: newssvr27.news.prodigy.com!newssvr25.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm01!newsdbm01.news.prodigy.com!newscon07.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!217.137.252.45!not-for-mail
    From: "sydenhams chorea" <[email protected]>
    Newsgroups: rec.running,alt.support.childfree
    Subject: To my friends in r.r and asc, and to newcomer 'ass'.
    Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:46:21 +0100
    Organization: wriggly worms
    Lines: 105
    Message-ID: <[email protected]>
    NNTP-Posting-Host: 217.137.252.45
    X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1061549199 5331759 217.137.252.45 (16 [163600])
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
    Xref: newsmst01.news.prodigy.com rec.running:367539 alt.support.childfree:624158

    The time has come, the Walrus said, to speak of many things...

    So, what have I been doing on asc and rec.running since '02 apart from
    making a thorough nuisance of myself? Well, I have, my dears, been toying
    with you, but not in the way that you've always imagined. The real reason
    is so blindingly obvious that I'm stunned, but immensely gratified, that
    no-one deduced the answer before now - though I'm firmly convinced that both
    Oz Gontang from r.r and 'ass' from the Happy Lobster World have, hence this
    post. I'm writing a book. About you and me. Citizen Ted, how could you
    not have seen the possibilities?

    Why r.r AND asc? Well, I thought initially that rec.running would provide
    sufficient material on it's own, but frankly it was rather lacking in
    'public interest' controversy. A quick skim through Usenet discovered a
    group that was both very active and highly controversial - hello, asc.
    Hence my book not only
    examines the characters and interactions within each newsgroup, it compares
    and contrasts their reaction to an interloper (yours truly) who fails to
    observe group norms. Add to the mix some wonderfully controversial opinions
    from asc regulars, and the amazingly funny exchanges I've had with many of
    you, and the great difficulty has been in deciding what to leave out. My
    editor is earning her money.

    Usenet is a strange part of the rainbow nation that comprises the 'net.
    It's not well known by the general public, it's not as popular a means of
    interaction as chatrooms or email, yet it combines elements of both. It
    has intimacy, but on a global scale. In other words, some of your writing
    is deeply personal, yet it's up on the glowing screen for the world to see.
    Only a certain type of person is comfortable in this medium, and you are
    uniquely interesting people about whom I've found it remarkably easy to
    write.

    'Tis a pity you wouldn't invite me to CFBP4; I tried to organise a similar
    event in rec.running, but my poor credibility and a production companies
    schedule worked against me. Shame, because the publicity I could have
    wrung from a genuine Real Life encounter would have been significant. And
    on the subject of Real Life, I should note that my current legal advice
    suggests that none of the emails I've received or exchanged relating to r.r
    or asc should be incorporated into my book. That should cause some of you
    to breathe a huge sigh of relief, no?

    Please don't squeal 'but I x-no-archived'. YOU placed all of your material
    in the public domain when you hit send. As far as my legal advisors are
    concerned, I'm free to reprint it verbatim - but not out of context - as I
    see fit. If the book is a success and the media chooses to track *you* down
    to find out exactly who *you* are, then sorry, that's the nature of the
    beast. If the book fails and is pulped, then you have the last laugh - two
    years of my life will have been so much wasted typing. God, the thought is
    too horrible to contemplate. However, I'll add this caveat; if you
    genuinely feel that exposure in my book would compromise your physical,
    mental, emotional or financial wellbeing, or that of those you love, then
    please contact me NOW stating clearly why you believe this to be the case..
    Whatever opinion you have of me, understand that my aim is to make money,
    not to damage lives. Most of the m/s is with my editor and, although we're
    working towards an early '04 print deadline, deletions or revisions can
    still be made if (I, you, we) consider it appropriate. Post-publication,
    it will be too late and we'll have to let the courts decide.

    I will, no doubt, be subject to fierce literary criticism that I've
    engineered encounters within asc and r.r (and also that I have a horrible
    tendency to split infinitives and an out-of-control penchant for run-on
    sentences). That's true in the sense that I prodded and provoked. But I
    had NO control over your reactions to the prodding and provoking, which have
    ranged from wry amusement to death threats - yes, all safely archived,
    complete with all header details, time stamps, etc. You'll be gratified to
    know, 'ass', that your post timed 23:41:53 on the 21st August is already
    penned in as my very last page. It encapsulates everything I wanted to say
    regarding emotion on Usenet because, in truth, it presents neither of us in
    a very favourable light. I'm confident that you, of all people, will
    appreciate the irony implicit in our sharing a moment together in the
    spotlight. As a result, you may find that people are trying to find *you*
    too :)

    Usenet is a strange place. I won't try to pretend that I wasn't sucked
    deeply into this world, there is too much evidence to the contrary. Did I
    really make over 40 posts in one day? Jeeze! I freely concede that some
    of my posts went far beyond that which was necessary to achieve my original
    aims, and for that I must offer my humble apologies.. The really
    disturbing thing is, I can't explain why. Am I the Patty Hearst of Usenet?
    Is it hostage syndrome? Instead of writing about you I swiftly became one
    of you - maybe even worse than most - and I will actually miss posting on
    asc and r.r terribly. Work that one out if you can.

    Anyway, I can still be contacted via [email protected] although
    the logistics of answering your correspondence now that *I'm* not actually
    there means that some delay may occur before you receive a reply. I should
    note that if you continue mail bombing this account you're effectively
    denying access to those people who may have good reason not to appear in my
    book - currently I've left instructions to delete all email, unless the
    posting address matches the posting address currently or previously used by
    an asc or .r r poster between 12.04.02 and 21.08.03. Yes, it's quite a big
    database.

    I'll close this odd episode in our lives by saying 'thanks for your time,
    your words, and your emotions.' If this book turns out to be a twisted
    '84, Charing Cross Road' for the Usenet generation, I'll see you at the book
    signings. If it disappears into the mire, then I hope you had some laughs
    at / with me. Stay happy.

    Roger.Jo.Dole boy.Zero. <buy the book and read the 'author' credits if
    you're still curious>
     
    Tags:


  2. np426z

    np426z Guest

    "Ozzie Gontang" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:200720042153147846%[email protected]

    > A connection? I don't know.


    Numptie. You should by now.

    > A return of "Roger.Jo.Dole boy.Zero, Sydenhams?"


    Oui.

    >Just wondering as I looked over some of the musings of np426z.


    Ah, you've been peeking into the dark, duplicitous, world of trolls, haven't
    you? You shouldn't. Remember how queasy it made you feel the last time
    you tried?
     
Loading...
Loading...