Subject: Re: A big idea

From: Jean VALENTIN <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 97 20:43:27 +0200

>If you're going to be prejudiced, why not argue that Mac users are
>disproportionally scientists and engineers (true), and therefore
>less interested in Biblical subjects. :-)
>
Oh really? Bob, the glory of the macintosh is its WorldScript technology, 
allowing writing in middle-eastern languages very easily. Most 
Orientalists here in Europe prefer the Mac. In fact, all my colleagues 
and teachers in Belgium have a Mac... It's just a remark of course :-)

________________________________________________________________
Jean Valentin - 58/7 rue Van Kalck - 1080 Bruxelles - BELGIQUE
________________________________________________________________
email : [email-masked]   ***   netmail : 2:291/780.103
________________________________________________________________
Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop complique est 
inutilisable.
What's too simple is wrong, what's too complicated is unusable.
Wat te eenvoudig is, is verkeerd; wat te ingewikkeld is, is onbruikbaar.

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 14:14:17 -0700

>and teachers in Belgium have a Mac... It's just a remark of course :-)

Hey... I was *defending* the Mac. *Of course* WorldScript makes it
better for Hebrew... or Aramaic... or Armenian... or Georgian...
or Ethiopic... or any other language which does not use the Roman
alphabet.

This apart from the fact that it's generally better than Windows
anyway. :-)

But it's still true that scientists use Macs more often than business
people... scientists want the *best* tool for the job, and the fact
that business people like IBM PCs is hardly a recommendation for
them. I'm amazed it constitutes a recommendation for TCers. :-)

Obligatory TC content: The graphics and HTML files on my Encycopedia
site are entirely written on a Macintosh. They're served on a UNIX
machine. No Microsoft products were used in this process.

On an unrelated point: I sent a long response about a week ago to
a post of Maurice Robinson's. It never showed up, and I never
received a bounce. I notice that Maurice said something about
having troubles with long messages, too.

The message wasn't really important (which is just as well, since
I didn't keep a copy). But it does leave me wondering: Have others
had trouble sending long messages to this list? Is there a restriction
on message size that I didn't notice in the FAQ? Or is it just me?

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                            Robert B. Waltz
                         [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A very rough draft of part of the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)

---

From: "James R. Adair" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 16:35:33 -0400 (EDT)

> machine. No Microsoft products were used in this process.

I might add that the TC journal, as well as most of the maintenance of
this list, are done on a Mac, although the server is a Sun (running Unix).

> on message size that I didn't notice in the FAQ? Or is it just me?

There is a 20,000 byte message limit, but if you send a message that is
too long, both you (as sender) and I (as listowner) should get a BOUNCE
message.  I don't remember seeing one from you (I did see Maurice's, and
sent it through to the list), and since you didn't get a BOUNCE message,
either, my guess is that the message was lost in transit and never reached
the server on this end.  Try sending it again, and we'll see what happens.

Jimmy Adair, Listowner, TC-List
Manager of Information Technology Services, Scholars Press
    and
Managing Editor of TELA, the Scholars Press World Wide Web Site
---------------> http://scholar.cc.emory.edu <-----------------

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 08:19:56 -0700

>On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Robert B. Waltz wrote:

[ ... ]

>the server on this end.  Try sending it again, and we'll see what happens.

Unfortunately, I didn't keep a copy. It was 16K long, but not too
important. Another of these point-by-point arguments with Robinson,
in which we both restated our positions in detail.

The one thing I do remember is that Robinson commented that he
merely listened to and sometimes sang traditional music. I would
say that that is much more important than my work as a traditional
music scholar. If more people kept singing the songs, we wouldn't
need the scholars. :-)

Though the idea of Robinson singing "Sheath and Knife" is almost
beyond my ability to imagine. But he probably doesn't sing it (and
since chances are that none of you know it, I refuse to explain,
lest people throw me off the list...). :-)

Bob Waltz
[email-masked]

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 01:33:56 -0400 (EDT)

> lest people throw me off the list...). :-)

Robinson would more likely sing "Silver Dagger" or "Gilgarra Mountain",
but in any case, unless you really love the Bob Dylan style of vocal
performance, you probably _don't_ want to hear Robinson sing, or you might
throw me off the list also.  My musical ability is the primary reason why
I have a day job teaching textual criticism among other matters.... 

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 08:59:48 -0700

>I have a day job teaching textual criticism among other matters.... 

How does that line go? "Be afraid. Be very, very afraid." Here again,
Robinson and I agree. I sing versions of both songs.... Though, as
a music publisher, I do have the advantage of being passable if not
great on guitar and banjo....

TC content: I *still* say that oral transmission can give examples
of the sort of corruption that can occur in manuscripts. :-)

                            Robert B. Waltz
                         [email-masked]