Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Logan Graves logan1@********.net
Subject:	TÃr na nÃ�g spelling
Date:	Wed, 29 Mar 2000 11:03:24 -0500

Message no. 1 In our last episode, Wordman wrote:
>
> > It's also
> > supposed to have accents on the "r" and "O", but I'm not
sure what (and
> > can't be bothered to type them in ASCII, either :o)
>
> Based on the accents used in the sourcebook, the proper HTML way of
> displaying the accents is:
>
> Tír na nÓg

Which looks like:
Tír na nÓg

for those of us without html-compliant mail readers ;-)

That's: alt+0237 & alt+0211 (keypad only) in case anybody's keeping score.

--Fenris
_____________________________________________WhoCares@************.virtualAve.net
(>) ...and I would have made it too, except
for those nosey kids & their stupid dog...
(>) excerpt of The Smiling Bandit's taped deposition,
Knight Errant casefile #E385h-0516

From:	Logan Graves logan1@********.net
Subject:	TÃr na nÃ�g spelling
Date:	Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:27:31 -0500

Message no. 2 In our last one, Wordman wrote:
>
> > > Tír na nÓg
> >
> > Which looks like:
> > Tír na nÓg
> >
> > for those of us without html-compliant mail readers ;-)
>
> ...and Windows. Users of other OSs are likely very confused by the above,
> because it probably doesn't look at all like it is supposed to. Also, my
> initial post was not really supposed to be readable, since it was not sent
> as HTML mail. I was just trying to describe how to write it in a way that
> was platform neutral.

Well, I did put a sm:)ey on it!

Oh, & apologies to the Mac folks, who are probably thoroughly annoyed be now...
--F

From:	Mark A Shieh SHODAN+@***.EDU
Subject:	TÃr na nÃ�g spelling
Date:	Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:57:19 -0500 (EST)

Message no. 3 Excerpts from ShadowRN: 29-Mar-100 Re: Tír .. by
Logan Graves@********.ne
> In our last one, Wordman wrote:
> >
> > > > Tír na nÓg
> > > Tír na nÓg
>
> Oh, & apologies to the Mac folks, who are probably thoroughly annoyed be
> now..

While we're on the subject, could we possibly have Subject lines
that make some amount of sense? I thought this was an ASCII, no
binaries, no html, etc. list. It's bad enough when e-mail addresses
consist of gibberish (Doc's does this off the top of my head,
appropriately enough), but it's not like someone's name has to be
legible. The subject line of this thread is about 50 characters
ofunprintable garbage followed by the word "spelling". This is what the
subject line of this thread looks like on my machine, arranged
vertically:

R
e
:

?
i
s
o
-
8
8
5
9
-
1
?
Q
?
T
E
D

r
?

n
a

?
i
s
o
-
8
8
5
9
-
1
?
Q
?
n
D
3
g
?

s
p
e
l
l
i
n
g

Mark

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer