From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

THE MT VOID
08/14/26 -- Vol. 45, No. 7, Whole Number 2445

Editor: Evelyn Leeper, evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
All material is the opinion of the author and is copyrighted by
the author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
The latest issue is at <http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm>.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at <http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm>.

Topics:
Mini Reviews, Part 23 (GOSFORD PARK; CLOUD; THE BIG
LEBOWSKI (1998); O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU?)
(film reviews by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Harry Potter Fans, Dobby's 'Grave', and the Undersea Cable
(pointer and comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
LA CAGE AUX FOLLES and SOME LIKE IT HOT (letter of comment
by Jo Paltin)
This Week's Reading (Federalist Papers) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)

===================================================================

TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 23 (film reviews by Evelyn C. Leeper)

GOSFORD PARK (2001): The first scene is a gem. It shows not only
how little the upper class thought of the comfort of their
servants, but also how little the supposedly more egalitarian
Americans did as well. Not only does Lady Constance Trentham make
her maid Mary Maceachran get out in the pouring rain to unscrew a
thermos, she then keeps her standing there when another car pulls
up and she has a conversation with its occupant. And no one in the
other car, including the American, seems concerned that Mary is
still kept standing there unnecessarily.

And then we find out that the servants don't even have their own
names. While they are visiting, below stairs they are referred to
by their employers' names rather than their own. (And Mary is
doubly renamed: Lady Constance can't be bothered to call her by
her last name, as a lady's maid should be, but calls her "Mary".)

And then she tells Mary she wants to wear the same blouse the next
day, knowing that means Mary will have to stay up and wash and
iron it. But then in the morning, after Mary has stayed up late to
get the blouse ready, Lady Constance decides to wear something
else.

What is well done (script-wise) is that there are a lot of things
Lady Constance does and says in which she is intentionally cruel,
but in these cases (and others) she is not intentionally
cruel--she is just totally oblivious to other people's feelings.


CLOUD (2024): I have been a fan of Kiyoshi Kurosawa since back
when he made CURE and PULSE. His second-to-latest is CLOUD, a
psychological horror thriller about eBay. (His latest, THE SAMURAI
AND THE PRISONER, is just being released to theaters now.)

Well, it's not called eBay--it's some unnamed online marketplace.
Yoshii is a reseller, but definitely on the shaky side. He starts
by buying some goods at a fraction of their value by taking
advantage of their current owner. Then he acquires some fake
designer handbags, Then he's back to fast-talking a supplier. And
so it goes.

But all this shady dealing has created some enemies, and his
assistant may be one of them.

One complaint I have is that a lot is being conveyed by screen
shots of computers, sometimes scrolling, and most of it is not
subtitled.

Full disclosure: I sell (and re-sell) on eBay, but in an entirely
honest way. (My reselling consists of buying bags of DVDs and
books on Bag Days at book sales, and hoping to find something
valuable. And Yoshii has a much cooler camera set-up than my
little Android phone.)


THE BIG LEBOWSKI (1998) and O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU? (2000):

I watched these two basically back-to-back, which reminded how
much the Coen Brothers must like the old Busby Berkeley routines,
with their aerial shots of dancers in synchronized patterns. For
those of you slightly younger with memories of 1960s television,
these may remind you more of the June Taylor dancers on "The
Jackie Gleason Show". (I always wondered what the studio audience
made of the dancing, given that they were looking at it
horizontally rather than from above.)

I watched these when I ended up watching a string of John Goodman
movies: KONG SKULL ISLAND, THE BIG LEBOWSKI, O BROTHER WHERE ART
THOU?, and MATINEE (which I keep thinking of as MANT!). I am
considering watching TRUMBO (the 2015 narrative film, not the 2007 documentary), although possibly just the Goodman scenes. And of
course there's ARGO...


[-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Harry Potter Fans, Dobby's 'Grave', and the Undersea Cable
(pointer and comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

The Guardian reports:

"Harry Potter fans have forced a new multimillion-pound power
cable between the UK and Ireland to be relocated after complaining
it would desecrate the 'grave' of Dobby, a fictional elf.

"The character was laid to rest on Freshwater West beach in
Pembrokeshire, Wales, in the film HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY
HALLOWS. Fans of the wizard series come to leave stones reading
'Here Lies Dobby' despite being asked not to by the land owner,
the National Trust, because the beach is an ecologically sensitive
site."

After getting "hundreds of calls", the firm found a new route. "In
the end, [Simon Ludlam] said, 'we went quite close to some real
Bronze Age remains, but we avoided Dobby's grave'. The Bronze Age
remains include urns associated with human burial.

Full article at

<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/10/harry-potter- fans-force-relocation-of-430m-undersea-cable-to-avoid-dobbys-grave>

However, a comment by John Mark Ockerbloom in FILE 770 (<https://file770.com/pixel-scroll-8-10-26-abandon-scrolls/>)
says, "Dan Davies calls into question the story about 'Dobby's
grave' being the cause of a cable diversion in Wales, not finding
evidence of such outcry or change in routing in any of the various
planning documents and petitions created before the cable was laid
last year. 'It seems most likely to me that what we've got here is
a pub anecdote that's grown in the telling.' I'm not familiar
enough with the situation to say he's definitely right, but folks
responding to the story might want to take a look:

<https://backofmind.substack.com/p/chortle-on-a-chortle>

[-jmo]

[-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: LA CAGE AUX FOLLES and SOME LIKE IT HOT (letter of comment
by Jo Paltin)

In response to Evelyn's comments on LA CAGE AUX FOLLES and SOME
LIKE IT HOT in the08/07/26 issue of the MT VOID, Jo Paltin writes:

LA CAGE AUX FOLLES the original movie and SOME LIKE IT HOT are two
all-time favorites. I saw LA CAGE AUX FOLLES in NYC when it first
came out, when I used to keep up with new releases and there were
lots of art theaters in Manhattan to find them; and stumbled
across SOME LIKE IT HOT on TV. Both are LOL funny regardless of
the subtext, except for the very drunk Marilyn, sad to say. [-jp]

===================================================================

TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

I am watching the Teaching Company/Great Courses "Origins and
Ideologies of the American Revolution" with Professor Peter C.
Mancall. In a couple of lectures he talks about how when the
Constitution was being written, the anti-Federalists raised a lot
of objections, some of which the Federalists (in what are known as
"The Federalist Papers") attempted to counter. (Some, such as the
omission of a Bill of Rights, they conceded.)

As Mancall says, "Many of the anti-Federalists in particular
singled out the powers given to the President in Article II.
Without a council to advise him, they argued, he would surround
himself with sycophants who might shield him from information he
needed to know. They believed that the pardoning power in Article
II would allow the President himself by exonerating individuals
with whom he had committed a crime."

Sound familiar?

(They also feared factionalism, which the Federalists addressed in
Federalist Paper #10, which I discussed in the 04/10/26 issue of
the MT VOID.)

[Note: Some of the anti-Federalist arguments were published as
essays or pamphlets; other were reconstructed from the notes on
the debates of the Constitutional Convention written up by James
Madison, though probably not as the debates were happening, and
not published until after his death.]

Of the power to pardon, in his opposition to the New Jersey Plan
(June 19, 1787) James Madison pointed out that in their respective constitutions, many of the states already give their executives
the right of pardon.

In a general opposition to the Constitution in September 1787,
Edmund Randolph decried the "unqualified power of the President to
pardon treasons".

In "Centinel" (Number 1, October 5, 1787) Samuel Bryan worried,
"And from his power of granting pardons, [the President] might
skreen [sic] from punishment the most treasonable attempts on the
liberties of the people, when instigated by the Senate."

The author of "The Address and Reasons of Dissent of the Minority
of the Convention of Pennsylvania to Their Constituents" (December
18, 1787) (believed to also be Samuel Bryan) wrote of the
President, "having the power of pardoning without the concurrence
of a council, he may screen from punishment the most treasonable
attempts that may be made on the liberties of the people when
instigated by his coadjutors in the senate."

Hamilton's response to all this (in Federalist #69: To the People
of the State of New York) is to claim that because the New York
governor can pardon even in cases of impeachment, while the
President cannot, this is protection enough. He writes, "A
President of the Union, on the other hand, though he may even
pardon treason, when prosecuted in the ordinary course of law,
could shelter no offender, in any degree, from the effects of
impeachment and conviction." Hamilton seems to assume that the
only people who would perform treasonous acts are those who are
susceptible to impeachment. He also seems to assume that because
the governor of New York can pardon people, that is a the target
to aim for, without asking whether this unlimited pardoning power
is really a good thing to start with.

He returns to this in Federalist #74: The Command of the Military
and Naval Forces, and the Pardoning Power of the Executive (From
the New York Packet. Tuesday, March 25, 1788) saying, "Humanity
and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative
of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or
embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much
of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions
in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance
too sanguinary and cruel. As the sense of responsibility is always
strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred
that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of
those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of
the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were
calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance. ... The
reflection that the fate of a fellow-creature depended on his sole
fiat, would naturally inspire scrupulousness and caution; the
dread of being accused of weakness or connivance, would beget
equal circumspection, though of a different kind." I think we've
clearly seen recently that Hamilton had a far too optimistic view
of humanity, shown further by his claim that "a single man of
prudence and good sense is better fitted, in delicate
conjunctures, to balance the motives which may plead for and
against the remission of the punishment, than any numerous body
whatever." Clearly Hamilton assumes the single man will be a man
of prudence and good sense.

The anti-Federalists also objected to the lack of a Privy Council
for the President. We ended up with the Cabinet, which Madison
compared to the Privy Council. Though initially the Cabinet had an
advisory and administrative function, it has gradually acquired
the ability to issue legal orders in the same way as the Privy
Council in Britain. But this article is long enough already, so I
will say that the Federalist arguments about the lack of a privy
council can be found in Federalist Papers 38, 69, 70, 77, and 85.
[-ecl]

===================================================================

Evelyn C. Leeper
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com


I have made mistakes but I have never made the mistake
of claiming that I have never made one.
--James Gordon Bennett

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/16/26 5:44 AM, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

Hamilton's response to all this (in Federalist #69: To the People
of the State of New York) is to claim that because the New York
governor can pardon even in cases of impeachment, while the
President cannot, this is protection enough. He writes, "A
President of the Union, on the other hand, though he may even
pardon treason, when prosecuted in the ordinary course of law,
could shelter no offender, in any degree, from the effects of
impeachment and conviction." Hamilton seems to assume that the
only people who would perform treasonous acts are those who are
susceptible to impeachment. He also seems to assume that because
the governor of New York can pardon people, that is a the target
to aim for, without asking whether this unlimited pardoning power
is really a good thing to start with.

That leads to a paradoxical thought: Perhaps the advocates of the
pardoning power supported it partly because George III had set a good
example. The Declaration of Independence blames him for a lot of things
that weren't under his control, and there were real things to criticize
him for, but he rarely abused his powers. The Founders knew this, even
if they found it useful to pile accusations on a single villain rather
than a more nebulous Parliament. They were inclined by the examples of
him and George Washington to put too much trust in a single person with executive power.
--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 06:29:30 -0400, Gary McGath wrote:

The [Efc|Efc+] Founders ... were inclined by the examples of [King George III] and George Washington to put too much trust in a single person
with executive power.

Have you noticed that Parliamentary systems seem to have less need of
term limits? And they have no concept of rCLimpeachmentrCY; instead,
Parliament just needs to pass a vote of no confidence in the
Government and its Prime Minister, and down they come.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 05:44:15 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

One complaint I have is that a lot is being conveyed by screen shots
of computers, sometimes scrolling, and most of it is not subtitled.

Some people seem to prefer dubbing to subtitles, I donrCOt know why ...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D\377Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Have you noticed that Parliamentary systems seem to have
less need of term limits? And they have no concept of \342\200\234impeachment\342\200\235; instead, Parliament just
needs to pass a vote of no confidence in the Government and
its Prime Minister, and down they come.

What I've noticed is that Britain's PM's have often had
non-consecutive terms. 305 years of PMs vs. 237 years of US
presidents, just 28% more time. That's 59 unique PMs serving 81
terms, vs. 45 unique US presidents serving 47 terms. (Not counting
immediately consecutive terms.)

Presidents Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump served (or are currently
serving) non-consecutive terms. PMs who have served non-consecutive
terms inslude Winston Churchill, William Pitt the Younger, William
Lamb, William Cavendish-Bentinck, Thomas Pelham-Holles, Robert Peel,
Ramsay MacDonald, John Russell, Henry John Temple, Harold Wilson,
Charles Watson-Wentworth, Benjamin Disraeli, and Arthur Wellesley
(2 non-consecutive terms each), Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, Edward
Smith-Stanley William, and Stanley Baldwin (3 non-consecutive terms
each), and William Gladstone (4 non-consecutive terms).

But there have been no repeats PMs in the last half century.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <115tec1$hgk7$7@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid (Lawrence
D_Oliveiro) wrote:

erm limits? And they have no concept of _impeachment_; instead,
Parliament just needs to pass a vote of no confidence in the
Government and its Prime Minister, and down they come.

Impeachment did exist in the UK and was last used as recently as 1805,
but has been superseded by other processes.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <115tec1$hgk7$7@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid
(Lawrence D_Oliveiro) wrote:

And they have no concept of impeachment; instead,
Parliament just needs to pass a vote of no confidence in the
Government and its Prime Minister, and down they come.

Impeachment did exist in the UK and was last used as recently
as 1805,

but has been superseded by other processes

The USA has 'other processes' for removing Presidents from
office too...

Bang, Bang!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <xn0ptqtmy4zhlm007@post.eweka.nl>, blueshirt@indigo.news
(Blueshirt) wrote:

The USA has 'other processes' for removing Presidents from
office too...

Bang, Bang!

Who was the only UK prime minister to be assassinated? (Standard trivia question.)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

blueshirt@indigo.news (Blueshirt) wrote:

The USA has 'other processes' for removing Presidents from
office too...

Bang, Bang!

But not recently. It has now been longer since JFK was assassinated
than JFK was after McKinley was, setting a new record.

Who was the only UK prime minister to be assassinated? (Standard
trivia question.)

Spencer Perceval, in 1812. Though a child hit Harold Wilson in the
face with a stink bomb in 1966.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

blueshirt@indigo.news (Blueshirt) wrote:

The USA has 'other processes' for removing Presidents
from office too...

Bang, Bang!

But not recently. It has now been longer since JFK was
assassinated than JFK was after McKinley was, setting a
new record.

Well... they do say records are made to be broken.

Who was the only UK prime minister to be assassinated?
(Standard trivia question.)

Spencer Perceval, in 1812.

I wouldn't have known that without looking it up.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Paul Dormer wrote:

but has been superseded by other processes

The USA has 'other processes' for removing Presidents from
office too...

Bang, Bang!

We have a system in the US where the president and vice president are
elected on the same ticket, which means that presumably they espouse the
same policies. This helps prevents people from assassinating the president
for his policies, because they know that they'll just get a replacement
who won't be much different.

If you look at the assassinations and attempts, they have been over things
like getting the attention of Jodie Foster, a general hatred of rulers and government, and whatever it is what that Oswald thought.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

We have a system in the US where the president and vice president
are elected on the same ticket, which means that presumably they
espouse the same policies. This helps prevents people from
assassinating the president for his policies, because they know
that they'll just get a replacement who won't be much different.

Indeed. Assassinate Supreme Court justices instead. Not that I would
ever suggest such a thing, of course.

ObSF: What was the story about a planet where assassination was made
trivially easy, making it difficult to get anyone to agree to be
president?

It's been pointed out that anonymous digital cash, combined with
prediction markets, would make assassinations all but inevitable.
People who want someone dead can pool their money by anonymously
betting on when he will die. The actually killer can fund the
killing by successfully "predicting" when it will happen.

Who was the last British (or English, or Scottish) monarch to be
assassinated?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/20/2026 9:05 AM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Indeed. Assassinate Supreme Court justices instead. Not that I would
ever suggest such a thing, of course.

ObSF: What was the story about a planet where assassination was made trivially easy, making it difficult to get anyone to agree to be
president?

First one that spring to mind is H Beam Piper's "Six Gun Planet".

It's been pointed out that anonymous digital cash, combined with
prediction markets, would make assassinations all but inevitable.
People who want someone dead can pool their money by anonymously
betting on when he will die. The actually killer can fund the
killing by successfully "predicting" when it will happen.

Who was the last British (or English, or Scottish) monarch to be assassinated?

Best candidate I can find is James I of Scotland.

William Rufus, Richard II, Henry VI, Edward V and George V are all
candidates.

Tim

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <xn0ptqvoy7tfog000@post.eweka.nl>, blueshirt@indigo.news
(Blueshirt) wrote:

Spencer Perceval, in 1812.

I wouldn't have known that without looking it up.

As I said, it's a standard trivia question.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <1166p75$90r$1@panix2.panix.com>, kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

If you look at the assassinations and attempts, they have been over
things
like getting the attention of Jodie Foster, a general hatred of
rulers and
government, and whatever it is what that Oswald thought.
--scott

Stephen Sondheim should have written a musical about that. :-)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:

Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Who was the last British (or English, or Scottish) monarch to be assassinated?

Best candidate I can find is James I of Scotland.

There have been plenty of others since then.

William Rufus, Richard II, Henry VI, Edward V and George V are all candidates.

You missed Edward "red-hot poker" II, Charles I, and of course Mary,
Queen of Scots.

George V was my intended answer. He is the most recent. When he was
dying, his doctor made sure he died at a time of day when it would be
reported first by the respectible newspapers.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/20/26 7:42 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Paul Dormer wrote:

but has been superseded by other processes

The USA has 'other processes' for removing Presidents from
office too...

Bang, Bang!

We have a system in the US where the president and vice president are
elected on the same ticket, which means that presumably they espouse the
same policies. This helps prevents people from assassinating the president for his policies, because they know that they'll just get a replacement
who won't be much different.

Under the original Constitution, the winner of the election became
president and the runner-up became vice president. This system quickly
broke when all the electors for a party voted for the same two
candidates. If it had stayed around, it could well have provide an
incentive for assassinations.
--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:26:51 -0400, Gary McGath wrote:

Under the original Constitution, the winner of the election became
president and the runner-up became vice president. This system
quickly broke when all the electors for a party voted for the same
two candidates.

Perhaps if it was conducted a bit more democratically (i.e. voting by
actual voters, not by this rCLElectoral CollegerCY fa|oade), it might have
done better.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D\377Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Perhaps if it was conducted a bit more democratically (i.e.
voting by actual voters, not by this \342\200\234Electoral College\342\200\235 fa\303\247ade), it might have done better.

It's a compromise between the majority of the *voters* and the
majority of the *states*.

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US citizens
who are simply forbidden from voting at all. For nearly 40 years, I
was forbidden from voting because I had been falsely convicted of a
non-violent crime nearly half a century ago.

My voting rights were unexpectedly restored in 2016, not for any
virtue on my part, but because Virginia's governor restored everyone's
voting rights in a failed attempt to get his gang's thug elected
rather than the rival gang's thug.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

In article <1166p75$90r$1@panix2.panix.com>, kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

If you look at the assassinations and attempts, they have been over
things
like getting the attention of Jodie Foster, a general hatred of
rulers and
government, and whatever it is what that Oswald thought.

Stephen Sondheim should have written a musical about that. :-)

There are already plenty of great songs. "From Buffalo To Washington"
is catchy and would make a good centerpiece of a Broadway show about assassination.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

George V was my intended answer. He is the most recent. When he was
dying, his doctor made sure he died at a time of day when it would be >reported first by the respectible newspapers.

Sure, but doctors have killed plenty of British kings. Charles II might
have lived if it wasn't for all the medical treatment he received.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

Sure, but doctors have killed plenty of British kings. Charles II
might have lived if it wasn't for all the medical treatment he
received.

There's a big difference between accidental killing out of ignorance
and killing deliberately.

Similarly, George VI probably would have lived a few more decades if
doctors had known enough to warn him to quit smoking. Especially
given how wretchedly bad the air of London was in 1952.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/20/26 7:38 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:26:51 -0400, Gary McGath wrote:

Under the original Constitution, the winner of the election became
president and the runner-up became vice president. This system
quickly broke when all the electors for a party voted for the same
two candidates.

Perhaps if it was conducted a bit more democratically (i.e. voting by
actual voters, not by this rCLElectoral CollegerCY fa|oade), it might have done better.

It would have been the same issue, at least if ballots were done the way
they are today, with candidates appearing on a party ticket.

Presidential elections amount to an elaborate pretense. Legally, we
elect electors, who choose the president. We do not, as far as election
law is concerned, vote for presidential candidates. In most cases,
though, the names of the electors aren't even on the ballot. We see the candidates' names, but they're actually collective pseudonyms for slates
of electors. In some states, the electors are required to vote for the candidate they're named after. In other states, they've said they will
but can change their minds.

In 1972, this led to the first woman in US history getting an electoral
vote, as one of the electors bolted to the Libertarian Party slate,
voting for Tonie Nathan for VP. It didn't change the winner, but it
created a trivia question.
--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 21:02:44 -0400, Gary McGath wrote:

Presidential elections amount to an elaborate pretense. Legally, we
elect electors, who choose the president. We do not, as far as
election law is concerned, vote for presidential candidates.

The whole apparatus is a hangover from the Efc|Efc+ slavery era <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise>. It should
have been taken out a century ago.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <1168463$clq$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US citizens
who are simply forbidden from voting at all. For nearly 40 years, I
was forbidden from voting because I had been falsely convicted of a non-violent crime nearly half a century ago.

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a recommendation by
the ECHR that people in prison should be allowed to vote was not picked
up by the UK.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

In article <1168463$clq$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. >Lynch) wrote:

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US citizens
who are simply forbidden from voting at all. For nearly 40 years, I
was forbidden from voting because I had been falsely convicted of a
non-violent crime nearly half a century ago.

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a recommendation by
the ECHR that people in prison should be allowed to vote was not picked
up by the UK.

Can they run for office from prison and/or hold office while in prison like they can in Louisiana?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <1168463$clq$1@reader1.panix.com>,
kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US
citizens who are simply forbidden from voting at all. For
nearly 40 years, I was forbidden from voting because I had
been falsely convicted of a non-violent crime nearly half a
century ago.

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a
recommendation by the ECHR that people in prison should be
allowed to vote was not picked up by the UK.

Rightly so. Why should imprisoned murderers, terrorists, rapists
and child molesters be allowed to vote in an election? That's
just liberal nonsense.

Although I doubt many candidates or their political parties want
to canvass the high-security wings of prisons for an X anyway.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/20/26 11:00 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 21:02:44 -0400, Gary McGath wrote:

Presidential elections amount to an elaborate pretense. Legally, we
elect electors, who choose the president. We do not, as far as
election law is concerned, vote for presidential candidates.

The whole apparatus is a hangover from the Efc|Efc+ slavery era <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise>. It should
have been taken out a century ago.

In a sense it was, but it was broader than that. In the early days of
the US, people thought of themselves primarily as citizens of their
state, not of the USA. Each state, especially the small ones, didn't
want to be overwhelmed by the more populous states. The strongest manifestation of this was the slave states vs. the non-slave states.

But it was also a logistical issue. A national election, with all the
votes added together, would have been difficult to count up with the technology of the day. Each state could have counted its own votes, but
then they'd all have an incentive to overcount.

Aside from that, I don't think the choice of the majority of the
population has any inherent moral superiority. Democracy is a means to
an end; a larger number of people imposing its will on a smaller number
isn't made right by the numbers. Electing the president purely by
majority vote today would give the cities control, with the rural
population having little say. A system that gives some weight to
geography (which the Senate also does) helps to avoid giving the east
and west coasts complete control.
--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/21/2026 7:21 AM, Blueshirt wrote:

Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <1168463$clq$1@reader1.panix.com>,
kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US
citizens who are simply forbidden from voting at all. For
nearly 40 years, I was forbidden from voting because I had
been falsely convicted of a non-violent crime nearly half a
century ago.

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a
recommendation by the ECHR that people in prison should be
allowed to vote was not picked up by the UK.

Rightly so. Why should imprisoned murderers, terrorists, rapists
and child molesters be allowed to vote in an election? That's
just liberal nonsense.

Although I doubt many candidates or their political parties want
to canvass the high-security wings of prisons for an X anyway.

There are a lot of convicts who aren't murderers, terrorists, rapists,
and child molesters, even leaving leaving aside false convictions.

P.S. Why are child molesters on that list, when rapists already are?
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/21/2026 9:40 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

In article <1168463$clq$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. >> Lynch) wrote:

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US citizens
who are simply forbidden from voting at all. For nearly 40 years, I
was forbidden from voting because I had been falsely convicted of a
non-violent crime nearly half a century ago.

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a recommendation by
the ECHR that people in prison should be allowed to vote was not picked
up by the UK.

Can they run for office from prison and/or hold office while in prison like they can in Louisiana?

As non obvious as it sounds, I think that's an important protection. It
that a president can't eliminate an election opponent by simply
throwing them in jail for a trumped up charge.

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/21/26 16:31, Cryptoengineer wrote:

On 8/21/2026 9:40 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

In article <1168463$clq$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net
(Keith F.
Lynch) wrote:

I'm less concerned with that than with adult tax-paying US citizens
who are simply forbidden from voting at all.-a For nearly 40 years, I
was forbidden from voting because I had been falsely convicted of a
non-violent crime nearly half a century ago.

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a recommendation by
the ECHR that people in prison should be allowed to vote was not picked
up by the UK.

Can they run for office from prison and/or hold office while in prison
like
they can in Louisiana?

As non obvious as it sounds, I think that's an important protection. It
that a president can't eliminate an election opponent by simply
throwing them in jail for a trumped up charge.

And never was a phrase so aptly applied.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 12:27:01 -0400, Gary McGath wrote:

Aside from that, I don't think the choice of the majority of the
population has any inherent moral superiority. Democracy is a means
to an end; a larger number of people imposing its will on a smaller
number isn't made right by the numbers.

IsnrCOt it said in one of your founding documents that all people are
created equal? If so, why shouldnrCOt their votes count equally?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Tim Merrigan <tppm@ca.rr.com> wrote:

Blueshirt wrote:

Paul Dormer wrote:

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK, although a recommendation
by the ECHR that people in prison should be allowed to vote was not
picked up by the UK.

Rightly so. Why should imprisoned murderers, terrorists, rapists
and child molesters be allowed to vote in an election? That's just
liberal nonsense.

There are a lot of convicts who aren't murderers, terrorists,
rapists, and child molesters, even leaving leaving aside false
convictions.

Indeed. Anyhow, my argument is not that people currently in prison
should be allowed to vote (in which district?), but that people who
were formerly in prison should be.

Also, anyone who has not been locked up or charged with any crime in
the past seven years is either reformed or was innocent in the first
place, so their record should automatically be cleared.

Americans are taught in school that politically legitimacy follows
from universal suffrage. As such, after I learned that I had
"permanently" lost my right to vote, if I had learned of a plot to
assassinate a politician, I would not have informed anyone. I would
have considered it to be none of my business.

Similarly, since Russians have lost the option to vote for an anti-war candidate, I would support any Russian who assassinates Putin, since
that is the only way they can convey their disapproval of the war.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Tim Merrigan wrote:

On 8/21/2026 7:21 AM, Blueshirt wrote:

Paul Dormer wrote:

I believe ex-prisoners can vote in the UK,

although a recommendation by the ECHR that people
in prison should be allowed to vote was not picked
up by the UK.

Rightly so. Why should imprisoned murderers, terrorists,
rapists and child molesters be allowed to vote in an
election? That's just liberal nonsense.

Although I doubt many candidates or their political parties
want to canvass the high-security wings of prisons for an X
anyway.

There are a lot of convicts who aren't murderers, terrorists,
rapists, and child molesters, even leaving leaving aside false
convictions.

My view... if you choose to commit a crime, are convicted and
sent to prison, then you have surrendered your right to have the
same liberties and freedoms of people who are not in jail.

As for false convictions; I would assume that the amount of
people who really are wrongly convicted makes up a very small
percentage of the people that populate prisons.

And I think they would probably be concentrating more on
clearing their name than who to vote for at the next election.

P.S. Why are child molesters on that list, when rapists
already are?

They are not the same thing.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

My view... if you choose to commit a crime, are convicted and sent
to prison, then you have surrendered your right to have the same
liberties and freedoms of people who are not in jail.

Again, we're not talking about people who are currently locked up,
but about those who formerly were. Should we *permanently* lose
all rights? Why?

As for false convictions; I would assume that the amount of
people who really are wrongly convicted makes up a very small
percentage of the people that populate prisons.

You assume wrongly. It's extremely common in the US, thanks to bogus
forensic science, "prisoner's dilemma" in which prosecutors reward
people for testifying how they want them to and punish people for
testifying for the defense, "reverse prisoner's dilemma" in which
prosecutors say, "Nice loved one you have there. It would be a shame
if something happened to her. Something like her being convicted of
your crime if you don't confess," and mistaken eyewitness testimony.

Everyone has the right to a trial, but most can't afford the
resources. "Public pretenders" arrange plea bargains. Those who
insist on their right to a trial are likely to end up like North
Carolina's Bob Kelly, who refused to plead guilty to a misdemeanor,
so he ended up sentenced to twelve consecutive life sentences instead.

It's also extremely common in the UK. For instance look up the
British post office scandal.

And I think they would probably be concentrating more on clearing
their name than who to vote for at the next election.

And how would one go about doing so? I *did* prove my innocence, to
the satisfaction of the crime victim -- who hired me sight unseen
directly out of prison -- and to the satisfaction of the part of the
federal government which grants security clearances. But not to the satisfaction of the Commonwealth of Virginia, due to its infamous "21
day rule." I missed the deadline to prove my innocence, regardless
of evidence.

The criminal justice system totally lacks both the religious/humanist
virtue of humility and the scientific virtue of falsifiability. For
both it substitutes the bogus virtues of closure and finality.

Similarly, the State of Texas is preparing to execute Robert Roberson,
even though he was eventually proven innocent. In Texas, unlike most
US states, the governor does *not* have the power to pardon a convict, regardless of evidence.

Mine isn't even the worst miscarriage of justice in fandom. Gary
and I both know the filker Bill Wells, who is currently living as a
fugitive. He was falsely convicted of kidnapping. He agree to plead
guilty in return for not being placed on the sex offender list. After
he did so, and spent a decade in federal prison, they reneged on the
deal, and said he would be required to register for life, and to
submit to "treatment" that involves confessing to sex crimes. If he
refused to submit to this treatment he would be locked up for life.
So he became a fugitive.

I'm not just taking his word for what happened. I've read all his
legal papers. He's only guilty of saving a suicidal young woman's
life. He's a better man than me. Had it been me in that chat room,
I wouldn't have offered to let her move in with me, out of fear of
just such a false accusation as she later made.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

My view... if you choose to commit a crime, are convicted
and sent to prison, then you have surrendered your right to
have the same liberties and freedoms of people who are not
in jail.

Again, we're not talking about people who are currently locked
up, but about those who formerly were. Should we permanently
lose all rights? Why?

No, of course not. Once you serve your time that's it, you
sentence is done. If you are free to rejoin society, why
shouldn't you be allowed to vote? If you got a job you'd be
allowed to pay income tax wouldn't you?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

No, of course not. Once you serve your time that's it, you sentence
is done. If you are free to rejoin society, why shouldn't you be
allowed to vote?

That's not how it works here in Virginia.

If you got a job you'd be allowed to pay income tax wouldn't you?

Not just allowed, but required. Even though this nation was founded
on the principle of no taxation without representation.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

As for false convictions; I would assume that the amount of
people who really are wrongly convicted makes up a very small
percentage of the people that populate prisons.

Depends where you are. There are some areas where the percentage of
wrongful convictions are shockingly high, but there are plenty of others
where it's pretty low.

Then, we also have plenty of people who were convicted of a crime
either because of a mental disease or effects of a drug, and those
people should be held responsible for their actions and punished,
but they also should be permitted to participate in society when they
are not undergoing those particular problems.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

Similarly, George VI probably would have lived a few more decades if
doctors had known enough to warn him to quit smoking. Especially
given how wretchedly bad the air of London was in 1952.

Ironic, given that the first major anti-smoking tract was written by
his ancestor James VI & I. "A Counterblaste to Tobacco," in 1604.
You can read it online.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <11685qc$knl$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

Similarly, George VI probably would have lived a few more decades if
doctors had known enough to warn him to quit smoking. Especially
given how wretchedly bad the air of London was in 1952.

I would have been in the womb at the time of the Great Smog of 1952 -
born July 1953. The Wikipedia article on the smog reckons foetuses
during that period went on to have lower intelligence. I could have been
a genius if it wasn't for the smog!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

I would have been in the womb at the time of the Great Smog of
1952 - born July 1953. The Wikipedia article on the smog reckons
foetuses during that period went on to have lower intelligence.
I could have been a genius if it wasn't for the smog!

Here's a mini-IQ test: How many farthings were in a guinea?

Fortunately, I had the foresight to be born much later and in a
different nation, one that always had decimal currency. However,
my generation was still exposed to lead in paint, lead in gasoline
(petrol), and beads of mercury as a fun toy. It's a wonder that
any of us survived.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In <116epto$hq3$1@reader1.panix.com> "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@KeithLynch.net> writes:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

I would have been in the womb at the time of the Great Smog of
1952 - born July 1953. The Wikipedia article on the smog reckons
foetuses during that period went on to have lower intelligence.
I could have been a genius if it wasn't for the smog!

Here's a mini-IQ test: How many farthings were in a guinea?

Fortunately, I had the foresight to be born much later and in a
different nation, one that always had decimal currency. However,
my generation was still exposed to lead in paint, lead in gasoline
(petrol), and beads of mercury as a fun toy. It's a wonder that
any of us survived.

don't forget drinking from garden hoses!
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

don't forget drinking from garden hoses!

I had no idea drinking from garden hoses was a bad thing. I did it just
this morning.

I thought it was the lawn darts that were going to kill us.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In <116eve0$mvi$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

don't forget drinking from garden hoses!

I had no idea drinking from garden hoses was a bad thing. I did it just
this morning.

I thought it was the lawn darts that were going to kill us.

Henry Winkler (yes, him..) has been hosting a great series about
these childhood risks from the oldyne daize:

https://www.history.com/shows/hazardous-history-with-henry-winkler
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/23/2026 8:43 AM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

I would have been in the womb at the time of the Great Smog of
1952 - born July 1953. The Wikipedia article on the smog reckons
foetuses during that period went on to have lower intelligence.
I could have been a genius if it wasn't for the smog!

Here's a mini-IQ test: How many farthings were in a guinea?

Fortunately, I had the foresight to be born much later and in a
different nation, one that always had decimal currency. However,
my generation was still exposed to lead in paint, lead in gasoline
(petrol), and beads of mercury as a fun toy. It's a wonder that
any of us survived.

1009

Guinea = 21 shillings
Shilling = 12 d
Farthing = 1/4 d

4x12x21 = 1008

I moved to Britain in 1968, and
lived with L/S/D for a few years.

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116epto$hq3$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

Here's a mini-IQ test: How many farthings were in a guinea?

1008

21 shillings in a guinea, 12 pennies in a shilling, four farthings in a
penny.

The farthing was last minted in 1956, apparently, and was no longer legal tender in 1961, when I was 7.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116f7bt$22lls$1@dont-email.me>, petertrei@gmail.com (Cryptoengineer) wrote:

1009

Typo.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/23/2026 12:38 PM, Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <116f7bt$22lls$1@dont-email.me>, petertrei@gmail.com (Cryptoengineer) wrote:

1009

Typo.

Yup, Thanks!

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

Here's a mini-IQ test: How many farthings were in a guinea?

1008

Correct. You pass. I think the explanation is that you weren't
actually breathing the polluted air in 1952. I guess you should be
thankful that we are placental mammals.

21 shillings in a guinea, 12 pennies in a shilling, four farthings
in a penny.

The farthing was last minted in 1956, apparently, and was no longer
legal tender in 1961, when I was 7.

To America's credit, everything that was ever legal tender still is.
Of course much of it is of more numismatic value than face value, so
nobody would try to actually spend it. But, in theory, I could still
make change using half cents.

And there are plenty of stupid people. Every year a few retailers
call the cops on a customer for trying to spend a $2 bill. And the
cops generally go ahead and arrest the innocent customer. There seems
to be a requirement that cops be especially stupid and violent.

Peel's 1829 Principles of Policing appear impossibly progressive and
utopian to Americans.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116fg19$54g$1@reader1.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:

To America's credit, everything that was ever legal tender still is.
Of course much of it is of more numismatic value than face value, so
nobody would try to actually spend it. But, in theory, I could still
make change using half cents.

Of course, we totally changed our currency in 1971. And the original 5p
and 10p coins were identical in size to the shilling and the florin, but
they later made them smaller.

And there are plenty of stupid people. Every year a few retailers
call the cops on a customer for trying to spend a $2 bill. And the
cops generally go ahead and arrest the innocent customer. There seems
to be a requirement that cops be especially stupid and violent.

And there are plenty of stupid people. Every year a few retailers
call the cops on a customer for trying to spend a $2 bill. And the
cops generally go ahead and arrest the innocent customer. There seems
to be a requirement that cops be especially stupid and violent.

Seem to be a load of videos on YouTube of Americans complaining that shopkeepers, etc. in Europe, don't accept payments in dollars.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/23/2026 2:04 PM, Paul Dormer wrote:

Seem to be a load of videos on YouTube of Americans complaining that shopkeepers, etc. in Europe, don't accept payments in dollars.

I don't know why they'd be complaining, as far as I know American shops
don't accept payments in Euros.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/23/26 18:09, Tim Merrigan wrote:

On 8/23/2026 2:04 PM, Paul Dormer wrote:

Seem to be a load of videos on YouTube of Americans complaining that
shopkeepers, etc. in Europe, don't accept payments in dollars.

I don't know why they'd be complaining, as far as I know American shops don't accept payments in Euros.

I may have posted this in another thread about buying books from another country, but back in the early 1990s, I bought a book from a dealer in Amsterdam. This was before PayPal or even payment online by credit
cards, so I paid Helene-Hanff-style, by mailing them a $10 bill. The
total was $8, but it would have put the weight of the envelope over a
half ounce to send four bills, so I sent them an extra $2 rather than
pay it to the USPS. I figured they could always take it to a bank to
exchange it, and the extra $2 should cover any fees.

Older Americans (like me) remember when US and Canadian dollars were
equal in value and not only could you spend bills relatively freely back
and forth (at least when you were close to the border), you could spend
coins the same way.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 19:00:57 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

And there are plenty of stupid people. Every year a few retailers
call the cops on a customer for trying to spend a $2 bill. And the
cops generally go ahead and arrest the innocent customer.

Steve Wozniak (one of the co-founders of Apple Computer, now Apple
Inc) is/was a long-standing practical joker. One of his fun little
games was to go around shops paying for things in cash with $2 notes.
And just to amp up the suspicion factor to 11, herCOd separate them off,
in front of the shopkeeper, from whole sheets obtained fresh from the
bank.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 12:43:36 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

However, my generation was still exposed to lead in paint, lead in
gasoline (petrol), and beads of mercury as a fun toy. It's a wonder
that any of us survived.

I think both of those are more cumulative poisons rather than instant
killers.

This guy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.>
popularized both tetraethyl lead in petrol, and chorofluorocarbons for air-conditioning/refrigeration. He managed to live a prosperous and
successful life and die before the harm from either of these
inventions became widely known.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence D\377Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

This guy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.>
popularized both tetraethyl lead in petrol, and chorofluorocarbons
for air-conditioning/refrigeration. He managed to live a prosperous
and successful life and die before the harm from either of these
inventions became widely known.

To be fair, chorofluorocarbons are not toxic.

I'm more impressed with Richard Feynman, who handled a block of pure
plutonium with his bare hands, and commented on how warm it felt.
He lived for another 43 years after that.

Imagine how much longer he might have lived if he hadn't handled it.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/23/2026 10:23 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 12:43:36 -0000 (UTC), Keith F. Lynch wrote:

However, my generation was still exposed to lead in paint, lead in
gasoline (petrol), and beads of mercury as a fun toy. It's a wonder
that any of us survived.

I think both of those are more cumulative poisons rather than instant killers.

This guy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.>
popularized both tetraethyl lead in petrol, and chorofluorocarbons for air-conditioning/refrigeration. He managed to live a prosperous and successful life and die before the harm from either of these
inventions became widely known.

However, the manner in which he did die was both (unintentionally) self-inflicted, and bizarre.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley_Jr.#Death

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

Seem to be a load of videos on YouTube of Americans complaining that >shopkeepers, etc. in Europe, don't accept payments in dollars.

It's like they have their own country over there!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer wrote:

Seem to be a load of videos on YouTube of Americans
complaining that shopkeepers, etc. in Europe, don't
accept payments in dollars.

In fairness, there's a heck of a lot of videos on YouTube
of people acting dumb and saying stupid things - it's not
something reserved for Americans.

But, as we ARE talking about Americans, here's what a fellow
Irishman thinks of the way some of them make tea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khzIcrQEgA0


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116fssh$28ndq$1@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

I may have posted this in another thread about buying books from
another country, but back in the early 1990s, I bought a book from a
dealer in Amsterdam. This was before PayPal or even payment online by
credit cards, so I paid Helene-Hanff-style, by mailing them a $10
bill. The total was $8, but it would have put the weight of the
envelope over a half ounce to send four bills, so I sent them an
extra $2 rather than pay it to the USPS. I figured they could always
take it to a bank to exchange it, and the extra $2 should cover any
fees.

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we still get
a number of cheques in US dollars. Our bank does not have a branch in my
town. I can pay sterling cheques in at my local post office. Dollar
cheques I have to post to the bank's offices in Glasgow, about 400 miles
away. Americans should learn about easy e-banking.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116fr2c$29db1$1@dont-email.me>, tppm@ca.rr.com (Tim Merrigan) wrote:

I don't know why they'd be complaining, as far as I know American
shops don't accept payments in Euros.

Never seen it myself but a friend told me about buying a tube ticket at Heathrow and the American in front of him tried paying in dollars. "Do
you have any real money, sir?"

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 11:49, Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <116fssh$28ndq$1@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

I may have posted this in another thread about buying books from
another country, but back in the early 1990s, I bought a book from a
dealer in Amsterdam. This was before PayPal or even payment online by
credit cards, so I paid Helene-Hanff-style, by mailing them a $10
bill. The total was $8, but it would have put the weight of the
envelope over a half ounce to send four bills, so I sent them an
extra $2 rather than pay it to the USPS. I figured they could always
take it to a bank to exchange it, and the extra $2 should cover any
fees.

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we still get
a number of cheques in US dollars. Our bank does not have a branch in my town. I can pay sterling cheques in at my local post office. Dollar
cheques I have to post to the bank's offices in Glasgow, about 400 miles away. Americans should learn about easy e-banking.

Guess what--back in the 1990s, we didn't have easy e-banking. Heck, I
don't think we had e-banking at all. And I would never send a dollar
cheque to another country. I assume that if tourists have some way to
change actual cash money, residents will also.

When I had to pay the deposit on a rental flat in Edinburgh in 1995, I
was lucky--we had someone in our department from England who (of course)
still had a UK bank account, so I paid him the equivalent amount, and he
wrote the cheque in pounds to the agency. (And crossed it--I guess
that's a British thing.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 11:49, Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <116fr2c$29db1$1@dont-email.me>, tppm@ca.rr.com (Tim Merrigan) wrote:

I don't know why they'd be complaining, as far as I know American
shops don't accept payments in Euros.

Never seen it myself but a friend told me about buying a tube ticket at Heathrow and the American in front of him tried paying in dollars. "Do
you have any real money, sir?"

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.

We were on a tour in Europe and when we were in the third country or so,
the woman in front of me at the cafeteria we had stopped at held out a
handful of mixed change from all three countries and asked, "Can I pay
with any of this?"

[face-palm] EfnarCirOCN+A

Emojis: https://emoj.info/facepalm-ascii
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116hr6k$2poi2$2@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

Guess what--back in the 1990s, we didn't have easy e-banking. Heck, I
don't think we had e-banking at all. And I would never send a dollar
cheque to another country. I assume that if tourists have some way to
change actual cash money, residents will also.

Yes, but.

I get the impression that e-banking is a lot easier in Europe. When a US company recently was discussing paying us by e-transfer, they sent me
forms to fill in. From my personal bank account, I can transfer money
anywhere if I know the recipient's details, no forms involved. And any currency. Saw a YouTube video recently from an American woman living in
the UK comments about how easy e-banking is in the UK compared to the US.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116hrd4$2poi2$3@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

We were on a tour in Europe and when we were in the third country or
so, the woman in front of me at the cafeteria we had stopped at held
out a handful of mixed change from all three countries and asked,
"Can I pay with any of this?"

These days with ATMs, having the right currency shouldn't be a problem.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we still get
a number of cheques in US dollars. Our bank does not have a branch in my >town. I can pay sterling cheques in at my local post office. Dollar
cheques I have to post to the bank's offices in Glasgow, about 400 miles >away. Americans should learn about easy e-banking.

I can send an EFT to the UK from my credit union, but I pay a $50 fee to do
so. That's fine if you're buying a car, not so good if you're buying
records. Also, because of the way things are set up in the US, once someone has my routing information they can (within the US) pull money from my
account, so I have to keep a small savings account just for international transfers. It's like the 1920s here.

I do occasionally buy tea from a small company in the UK which won't do
paypal. I just go to the airport moneychanger and get a couple five-pound notes and mail them off.

Paypal has been an absolute miracle for Americans doing small transactions abroad.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.

We're now coming into a new era where international drug traffickers are demanding payment in Euros.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

We were on a tour in Europe and when we were in the third country or so,
the woman in front of me at the cafeteria we had stopped at held out a >handful of mixed change from all three countries and asked, "Can I pay
with any of this?"

This is an excellent short film which explains Britain to American soldiers
who may be stationed there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyYSBBE1DFw

The section about British money is well worth watching and can be seen here: https://youtu.be/SyYSBBE1DFw?t=1759

You may find this method of currency use very enlightening.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 13:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we still get
a number of cheques in US dollars. Our bank does not have a branch in my
town. I can pay sterling cheques in at my local post office. Dollar
cheques I have to post to the bank's offices in Glasgow, about 400 miles
away. Americans should learn about easy e-banking.

I can send an EFT to the UK from my credit union, but I pay a $50 fee to do so. That's fine if you're buying a car, not so good if you're buying records. Also, because of the way things are set up in the US, once someone has my routing information they can (within the US) pull money from my account, so I have to keep a small savings account just for international transfers. It's like the 1920s here.

I do occasionally buy tea from a small company in the UK which won't do paypal. I just go to the airport moneychanger and get a couple five-pound notes and mail them off.

Paypal has been an absolute miracle for Americans doing small transactions abroad.
--scott

For me to go to the airport money-changer would be an hour each way plus
an outrageous amount for parking.

(I must remember to take my leftover European money to Montreal, in case
I can spend it in the Dealers Room with European vendors. In Edinburgh
in 1995, I bought an alternate history fanzine from a German fan. It was
DM8, and since I had some left-over DM from our stop-over on the way to
India, I gave him DM10, getting 90p change. Thus is international
finance carried out at conventions.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 13:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we still get
a number of cheques in US dollars. Our bank does not have a branch in my
town. I can pay sterling cheques in at my local post office. Dollar
cheques I have to post to the bank's offices in Glasgow, about 400 miles
away. Americans should learn about easy e-banking.

I can send an EFT to the UK from my credit union, but I pay a $50 fee to do so. That's fine if you're buying a car, not so good if you're buying records. Also, because of the way things are set up in the US, once someone has my routing information they can (within the US) pull money from my account, so I have to keep a small savings account just for international transfers. It's like the 1920s here.

I do occasionally buy tea from a small company in the UK which won't do paypal. I just go to the airport moneychanger and get a couple five-pound notes and mail them off.

Paypal has been an absolute miracle for Americans doing small transactions abroad.
--scott

And before that, credit cards.

In 1990 we were in the Amsterdam airport leaving for home, and Mark was looking at a couple of CDs in one of the shops. When we left the shop, I
asked why he didn't buy it, and he said he thought we didn't have any
Dutch money left. I said no, but we had a credit card, upon which he immediately pivoted back into the store.

The reverse, of course, is using your remaining local currency to pay
part of your hotel bill and use your credit card for the rest. This has
the advantage of saving standing in line at the airport to change your
money back. (Probably Montreal 2027 should mention this somewhere as a
travel hint.) Just be sure you have a way to pay for the ride back to
the airport!
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 13:07, Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <116hrd4$2poi2$3@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

We were on a tour in Europe and when we were in the third country or
so, the woman in front of me at the cafeteria we had stopped at held
out a handful of mixed change from all three countries and asked,
"Can I pay with any of this?"

These days with ATMs, having the right currency shouldn't be a problem.

The tour bus had stopped somewhere for us to change money; this woman
just threw everything in the same purse and couldn't be bothered figured
out which coins and bills went with which country.

(Somewhere on the level of the women on our China tour, who always
wanted forks but couldn't be bothered to learn how to say that one word
in Chinese.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 13:17, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.

We're now coming into a new era where international drug traffickers are demanding payment in Euros.
--scott

Not bitcoin?
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

For me to go to the airport money-changer would be an hour each way plus
an outrageous amount for parking.

I spend half my life in airports, which makes it easier for me. Most of
them are too small to have a money changer, though, but some do.

(I must remember to take my leftover European money to Montreal, in case
I can spend it in the Dealers Room with European vendors. In Edinburgh
in 1995, I bought an alternate history fanzine from a German fan. It was >DM8, and since I had some left-over DM from our stop-over on the way to >India, I gave him DM10, getting 90p change. Thus is international
finance carried out at conventions.)

How many Hong Kong Dollars is that?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/24/26 13:17, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere. >>

We're now coming into a new era where international drug traffickers are
demanding payment in Euros.

Not bitcoin?

Maybe, but I am not sure even drug lords trust Bitcoin.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In <116i4qg$apv$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

For me to go to the airport money-changer would be an hour each way plus >>an outrageous amount for parking.

I spend half my life in airports, which makes it easier for me. Most of
them are too small to have a money changer, though, but some do.

Tom Hanks, that you?
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 15:08, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

For me to go to the airport money-changer would be an hour each way plus
an outrageous amount for parking.

I spend half my life in airports, which makes it easier for me. Most of
them are too small to have a money changer, though, but some do.

(I must remember to take my leftover European money to Montreal, in case
I can spend it in the Dealers Room with European vendors. In Edinburgh
in 1995, I bought an alternate history fanzine from a German fan. It was
DM8, and since I had some left-over DM from our stop-over on the way to
India, I gave him DM10, getting 90p change. Thus is international
finance carried out at conventions.)

How many Hong Kong Dollars is that?
--scott

When we were there in 1990, the exchange rate was approximately HKD8 to
US$1, and it's about the same now.

In 1990, at one of the tourist attractions there a woman who was selling
a pack of post cards for "a dollar," but when Mark offered her a Hong
Kong dollar, it turned out she meant a United States dollar. This hardly seemed reasonable, but I guess she figures Americans can't deal with the concept of Hong Kong dollars. We didn't buy the cards.

But this proves that some vendors outside the US take US dollars, or
did. This is much less common in (western) Europe. But elsewhere things
are different.

In Yugoslavia in 1991, the last thing anyone wanted was Yugoslav dinars. Similarly, in 2012 in Zimbabwe they weren't even dealing in Zimbabwe
dollars any more, though they tended to prefer South African rand to
than US dollars. (If you paid in US dollars, you might still get your
change in South African rand, or sometimes in candy or other small
items.) And the US dollars had to be 2001 or later, and not torn.

And money in India in 1993 was ... weird. As Mark described it in our
log, "Indian money is a trip all by itself. The books say to change a
fair amount each time because it takes so long in most banks, but what
they don't say is that you end up with a *huge* wad of money. At the
current rate, thirty-one rupees is one United States dollar. A rupee is
about three cents. The biggest bill you generally see is Rs100. Imagine commerce in the United States if there were no bills worth more than
US$3. You don't have to be very rich to sport a wad of bills that would
choke a horse. We changed US$500. That means we got a lot of bills. They staple them together in stacks of a hundred about a half an inch thick.
Then you have to remove the staples and a torn bill will probably be
refused. It is a very big mess removing the staples. It took Evelyn
almost a half hour to remove the multiple staples from one batch we got."
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/26 15:15, danny burstein wrote:

In <116i4qg$apv$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

Evelyn C. Leeper <evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com> wrote:

For me to go to the airport money-changer would be an hour each way plus >>> an outrageous amount for parking.

I spend half my life in airports, which makes it easier for me. Most of
them are too small to have a money changer, though, but some do.

Tom Hanks, that you?

No, George Clooney.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116hu9c$l9f$1@panix2.panix.com>, kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

I can send an EFT to the UK from my credit union, but I pay a $50 fee
to do
so. That's fine if you're buying a car, not so good if you're buying records. Also, because of the way things are set up in the US, once
someone
has my routing information they can (within the US) pull money from my transfers. It's like the 1920s here.

In Europe, you push money, so no-one can pull money from your account.

Here's the YouTube video I mentioned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssrbGfmftTM



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/2026 11:49 AM, Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <116fr2c$29db1$1@dont-email.me>, tppm@ca.rr.com (Tim Merrigan) wrote:

I don't know why they'd be complaining, as far as I know American
shops don't accept payments in Euros.

Never seen it myself but a friend told me about buying a tube ticket at Heathrow and the American in front of him tried paying in dollars. "Do
you have any real money, sir?"

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.

I was in London last September, and paying on the Tube involved waving
my US credit card at the turnstile on the way in (and on the way out).

Very easy.

pt
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/24/2026 1:17 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul Dormer <prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.

We're now coming into a new era where international drug traffickers are demanding payment in Euros.

Part of it is that there's a 500 Euro bill. With US currency topping out
at $100, $1 million occupies a briefcase. With Euros, the same value can
fit in a purse.

The US got rid of >$100 bills decades ago due to the criminal use, and I understand the 500 Euro bill is being withdrawn for the same reason.

pt

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:15:47 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

But, as we ARE talking about Americans, here's what a fellow
Irishman thinks of the way some of them make tea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khzIcrQEgA0

Aw, come on. Microwave the teabag, THEN pour the water on top.

How else do you cook your tea?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 21:46:05 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:

The US got rid of >$100 bills decades ago due to the criminal use, and I understand the 500 Euro bill is being withdrawn for the same reason.

Only $500?? Pah.

<https://lunaticg.blogspot.com/2010/08/us-100000-dollars-bill.html>
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 16:49 +0100 (BST), Paul Dormer wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we
still get a number of cheques in US dollars.

You still have cheques?

Here Efc|Efc+ we got rid of them a few years ago.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 12:23:48 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

And I would never send a dollar cheque to another country.

It was quite possible to send international bank drafts and have them
converted at the receiving end. Of course, the bank would take a cut
in some fee or other.

... so I paid him the equivalent amount, and he wrote the cheque in
pounds to the agency. (And crossed it--I guess that's a British
thing.)

You donrCOt do crossed cheques? And write rCLA/C PAYEE ONLYrCY between the lines?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/25/26 03:04, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 12:23:48 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

And I would never send a dollar cheque to another country.

It was quite possible to send international bank drafts and have them converted at the receiving end. Of course, the bank would take a cut
in some fee or other.

... so I paid him the equivalent amount, and he wrote the cheque in
pounds to the agency. (And crossed it--I guess that's a British
thing.)

You donrCOt do crossed cheques? And write rCLA/C PAYEE ONLYrCY between the lines?

We don't even know what crossed cheques are. (I had to ask my co-worker;
this was before Google or even Ask Jeeves.)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116jeqd$3h1iq$4@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid (Lawrence D_Oliveiro) wrote:

... so I paid him the equivalent amount, and he wrote the cheque in
pounds to the agency. (And crossed it--I guess that's a British
thing.)

You don_t do crossed cheques? And write _A/C PAYEE ONLY_ between the
lines?

I remember when David Friedman used to post in here and he mentioned how
he'd been paid with a sterling cheque for a speaking engagement in the UK
and discovered that he couldn't just exchange that for cash in a high
street bank. Crossed cheques were explained to him.

It seems that for as long as I can remember, cheque books come with
crossing and "account payee" pre-printed. Of course, writing cheques is
rarely done these days.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116jem4$3h1iq$3@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid (Lawrence D_Oliveiro) wrote:

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 16:49 +0100 (BST), Paul Dormer wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we
still get a number of cheques in US dollars.

You still have cheques?

Here __ we got rid of them a few years ago.

I put off setting up e-banking as I was standing down, letting my
successor do that. Then covid delayed things.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116irtj$3blh9$1@dont-email.me>, petertrei@gmail.com (Cryptoengineer) wrote:

On 8/24/2026 11:49 AM, Paul Dormer wrote:

In article <116fr2c$29db1$1@dont-email.me>, tppm@ca.rr.com (Tim
Merrigan)
wrote:

I don't know why they'd be complaining, as far as I know American
shops don't accept payments in Euros.

Never seen it myself but a friend told me about buying a tube
ticket at
Heathrow and the American in front of him tried paying in dollars.
"Do
you have any real money, sir?"

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted
everywhere.

I was in London last September, and paying on the Tube involved waving
my US credit card at the turnstile on the way in (and on the way out).

Very easy.

Now. This was many years ago.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence DOliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:15:47 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

But, as we ARE talking about Americans, here's what a
fellow Irishman thinks of the way some of them make tea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khzIcrQEgA0

Aw, come on. Microwave the teabag, THEN pour the water
on top.

How else do you cook your tea?

Tutorial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336uhgD1clc

If anybody doesn't make a cup of tea like this, they are
just being perverse... and should probably be locked up.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

The philosophy seems to be that the dollar should be accepted everywhere.

I was in London last September, and paying on the Tube involved waving
my US credit card at the turnstile on the way in (and on the way out).

Very easy.

But you'll notice it wasn't billing your credit card in dollars! The credit card company does the conversion and gives you whatever rate you get with
your card. Computers do the hard work!

(Some places do have the option of allowing you to bill your card in dollars with the exchange provided by the vendor, but this is almost always at an extremely high rate and should be avoided.)
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 16:49 +0100 (BST), Paul Dormer wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we
still get a number of cheques in US dollars.

You still have cheques?

They are all over in the US because of the difficulties in doing EFTs
which I described earlier.

As I said, the American banking system is still stuck in the 1920s.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

Tutorial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336uhgD1clc

If anybody doesn't make a cup of tea like this, they are
just being perverse... and should probably be locked up.

This is very much like the way my grandfather made coffee in the morning, except that he used anisette and espresso.

More serious example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e90b1sN00aE

--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/25/26 11:25, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 16:49 +0100 (BST), Paul Dormer wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we
still get a number of cheques in US dollars.

You still have cheques?

They are all over in the US because of the difficulties in doing EFTs
which I described earlier.

As I said, the American banking system is still stuck in the 1920s.
--scott

How do you give people surprise gifts without cheques?
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

In article <116khbd$3mf6m$1@dont-email.me>,
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) wrote:

How do you give people surprise gifts without cheques?

Well, if you know their bank details, you can do a surprise transfer.

Many years ago, I sent a cheque to my nephew for his birthday. He never
cashed it. I don't think he knew how to.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/25/2026 3:02 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 16:49 +0100 (BST), Paul Dormer wrote:

I'm outgoing treasurer of the Science Fiction Foundation and we
still get a number of cheques in US dollars.

You still have cheques?

Here Efc|Efc+ we got rid of them a few years ago.

Banks love them here, because of the float.

The float is the period between when the money is
withdrawn from the check's account, until it is
made available tot he recipient.

During this period, which in the US is typically
a couple days, the bank on which the check was
written 'owns' the money, and invests it for
interest. The delay can be longer for large
checks.

This made some sense, when paper checks had
to be sent from the depositor's bank back to
the writer's bank to have signatures checked,
etc, but today it just a scam to allow the bank
to profit from money it doesn't really own.

I'm having my house painted. The contractor
received the first payment as a check last
Tuesday (a few thousand dollars), and
expressed concern that it had not cleared
on Saturday. I took him up to my bank,
where the delay was explained.

But it was still not cleared today (Monday),
so I took him to a branch of his bank, where
they said is would be available on Wednesday.
That's 6 business days.

I could see that he was in some distress, so
I paid him the second payment for painting in
cash this morning.

It turns out that the Expedited Funds
Availability Act (EFFA) limits holds to 3
business days for local checks
(which this was) and 5 for non-local, unless
there are specific problems. So at least one
bank was breaking the law, but I only learned
this afterwards.

pt

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/25/26 11:25, Scott Dorsey wrote:

As I said, the American banking system is still stuck in the 1920s.

How do you give people surprise gifts without cheques?

That's what pennies are for!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 11:29:03 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336uhgD1clc

If anybody doesn't make a cup of tea like this, they are just being perverse... and should probably be locked up.

Milk first, or hot water first?

I like to warm up the cup with a small amount of hot water first,
chuck that out, then proceed with the rest of the process.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 21:42:11 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:

I was in London last September, and paying on the Tube involved
waving my US credit card at the turnstile on the way in (and on the
way out).

That would work with all (major) credit cards, no matter where you are
from or where you are going. TheyrCOre international that way.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 11:29:03 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336uhgD1clc

If anybody doesn't make a cup of tea like this, they are just being
perverse... and should probably be locked up.

Milk first, or hot water first?

Gin first!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence DOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 11:29:03 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336uhgD1clc

If anybody doesn't make a cup of tea like this, they
are just being perverse... and should probably be locked
up.

Milk first, or hot water first?

The good news is, YOU get to make that call! We can all be Tea
Kings in our own kitchen.

Science says milk first, I do water first... but the Tea Police
won't come knocking on your door either way.

Unless you are a lazy bastard and use a microwave oven...

I like to warm up the cup with a small amount of hot water
first, chuck that out, then proceed with the rest of the
process.

Forget that mumbo jumbo, the real question is... what biscuits
do you dunk in your tea? Are you a Rich Tea man or a Digestive
man? Or maybe you are one of those posh type that prefers
Custard Creams?!



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 10:04:20 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 22:07:12 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

Milk first, or hot water first?

Science says milk first ...

Why?

Forget that mumbo jumbo, the real question is... what biscuits do
you dunk in your tea?

I donrCOt dunk.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/27/2026 1:46 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 10:04:20 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 22:07:12 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

Milk first, or hot water first?

Science says milk first ...

Why?

Forget that mumbo jumbo, the real question is... what biscuits do
you dunk in your tea?

I donrCOt dunk.

Lemon tea, hold the lemon
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Lawrence DOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 10:04:20 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 22:07:12 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence
DrCOOliveiro wrote:

Milk first, or hot water first?

Science says milk first ...

Why?

Something about even heat distribution, allegedly. But
I am not a scientist, it's just something I read once.

And ignore.

Forget that mumbo jumbo, the real question is... what
biscuits do you dunk into your tea?

I donrCOt dunk.

<shocked face> !

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 8/27/26 17:33, Blueshirt wrote:

Lawrence DOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 10:04:20 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 22:07:12 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence
DrCOOliveiro wrote:

Milk first, or hot water first?

Science says milk first ...

Why?

Something about even heat distribution, allegedly. But
I am not a scientist, it's just something I read once.

And ignore.

One site says, "However, scientifically speaking, putting the milk in
your cup first, allows the fat content of the milk to emulsify
differently when the tea is poured over it, which gives the tea a more
even and creamier flavour."

Another says, "... pouring milk after hot tea preserves flavor and texture."

And a third explains the (possible) origin:

"The practice of adding milk first is believed to have originated to
prevent china cups from cracking due to thermal shock from hot tea.
However, this theory is largely considered incorrect today, as modern porcelain is robust enough to handle hot liquids."

The lower class had cheap porcelain cups that would crack, while the
upper class had expensive bone china cups that would not. This meant
milk first was an lower-class thing, and tea first a upper-class thing.

This showed up in GOSFORD PARK, which was actually reviewed in the MT
VOID issue that started this thread (08/14/26, #2445)! In the tea scene, Inspector Thomson starts to pour the milk in first, but Lady Sylvia
stops him and says she prefers the tea first. Thomson complies, but
notes that his wife prefers the milk first.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn
Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit
that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes
-Friedrich Nietzsche
86 47 II/4 25
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

Tim Merrigan wrote:

On 8/27/2026 1:46 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 10:04:20 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

Forget that mumbo jumbo, the real question is...
what biscuits do you dunk in your tea?

I donrCOt dunk.

Lemon tea, hold the lemon

Lemon tea is nice though. Lemon is also nice in an Earl
Grey, without milk.

And... you can still dunk some Rich Tea biscuits!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 17:58:55 -0400, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

One site says, "However, scientifically speaking, putting the milk
in your cup first, allows the fat content of the milk to emulsify
differently when the tea is poured over it, which gives the tea a
more even and creamier flavour."

Another says, "... pouring milk after hot tea preserves flavor and
texture."

Both sound like handwaving to me.

I have also heard worries expressed about rCLscalding the milkrCY if you
do it the wrong way round. Which is also clearly nonsense.

And a third explains the (possible) origin:

"The practice of adding milk first is believed to have originated to
prevent china cups from cracking due to thermal shock from hot tea.
However, this theory is largely considered incorrect today, as modern porcelain is robust enough to handle hot liquids."

[etc]

That sounds the least unlikely of the three.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

On 27/08/2026 20:04, Blueshirt wrote:

Lawrence DOliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 11:29:03 GMT, Blueshirt wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336uhgD1clc

If anybody doesn't make a cup of tea like this, they
are just being perverse... and should probably be locked
up.

Milk first, or hot water first?

The good news is, YOU get to make that call! We can all be Tea
Kings in our own kitchen.

Science says milk first, I do water first... but the Tea Police
won't come knocking on your door either way.

Unless you are a lazy bastard and use a microwave oven...

I like to warm up the cup with a small amount of hot water
first, chuck that out, then proceed with the rest of the
process.

Forget that mumbo jumbo, the real question is... what biscuits
do you dunk in your tea? Are you a Rich Tea man or a Digestive
man? Or maybe you are one of those posh type that prefers
Custard Creams?!

TimTams!!! Always TimTams!!!!!!

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2