- gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

PROTOCOLS (was Re: [gutvol-d] Another Collection)
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

In a message dated 5/21/2005 9:27:47 AM Mountain Daylight Time, jon_niehof(a)yahoo.com writes: >I could have sworn the Protocols went through DP last fall, but >I can't find evidence thereof. The DP consensus I inferred from >the discussions at the time was that we're trying to preserve >all literature, especially the important and influential, into >which category the Protocols certainly fall. Rather than print >disclaimers at the beginning or otherwise pass judgement on the >text, it was suggested that we find as much PD material >debunking the Protocols as possible, and process it through. Pray forgive me, O ye liberals, for I have sinned by being both GOP and Libertarian. I have just asked the John Birch Society to try to find me information refuting the PROTOCOLS. They had a lot of such information 40 years ago, but that was 40 years ago. It will be next week at the earliest before I hear back from them. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

2 1

re: [gutvol-d] PG for Mac users
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

the non-mac people here can't help you. so they'll steer you away from the mac people who can... :+) makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? as the saying goes, 5% of the people use macs, but it's the top 5%. ;+) -bowerbird

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Another Collection
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

In a message dated 5/21/2005 9:27:47 AM Mountain Daylight Time, jon_niehof(a)yahoo.com writes: >I could have sworn the Protocols went through DP last fall, but >I can't find evidence thereof. I haven't looked for it, and don't plan on it. >We would be doing a disservice to posterity if we picked and >chose what went through. It would also be a disservice to label >some texts as "generally approved" and some as "generally bunk," >imposing our turn-of-the-millenium viewpoint on the collection. >So as I see it, it's best to preserve as much as possible, from >as wide a range of viewpoints as possible, knowing that this is >*inherently dangerous* and that these texts will almost >certainly be used to support actions and viewpoints that we deem >contemptible. That's why all this work matters in the first >place: because books are dangerous, and they are powerful. That is, of course, a very strong argument. It happens that right now PROTOCOLS is running around a lot of the world exacerbating some already bad situations. Like Vijay, I'll leave it to majority vote. I've already read it, several years ago when my husband needed it for something he was writing, and it is so silly that it is incredible to me that anybody could ever have believed it. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Another Collection
by Jonathan Ingram 21 May '05

21 May '05

--- Jon Niehof <jon_niehof(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I could have sworn the Protocols went through DP last fall, but > I can't find evidence thereof. The DP consensus I inferred from > the discussions at the time was that we're trying to preserve > all literature, especially the important and influential, into > which category the Protocols certainly fall. Rather than print > disclaimers at the beginning or otherwise pass judgement on the > text, it was suggested that we find as much PD material > debunking the Protocols as possible, and process it through. Yes, it went through DPEU, in a translation which is public-domain in the EU, but not in the US. We're currently for a European life+X archive to set up, so we can publish this and the many other works that have gone through the site that are not US-public domain. The Protocols will almost certainly have a disclaimer at the beginning when they are published, due to the sensitive nature of the work. I would also, as you have mentioned, like to put it in context, but none of this material has been found or scanned so far. -- Jon Ingram __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Another Collection
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

Vijay, Did you mean to send this just to me, or to or to the entire board? I assume you meant the latter, so I have forwarded it. In a message dated 5/21/2005 3:27:33 AM Mountain Daylight Time, rvijay07(a)myway.com writes: >Here is what I was taught once. It is important to know the ways of the devil >inorder to be able to deal with him. I agree with this, within reason. One does not want to become obsessed with the devil's work. If you can afford to buy ebooks (some of us can't), you might like to go to FictionWise.com and buy RENTWING. It's my first fantasy and my first scripture-based novel, and it pretty well spells out my opinion in this matter. >A program I heard a few weeks ago on Deutsche Welle Radio talked about not >banning Hitler's Book MeinKampf in Germany. It is allowed and sold in the US. >Anyone can download it of the net. Unbanning a book allows all to read and decide i>f the material is good or bad for themselves. They say most people learn positively >from it. I read it when I was thirteen. I'm 61 now, so there's been a long span of time since then and I remember very little of it. But I do remember that he started the book by saying, in effect, "I used to think . . . " and presenting reasonably normal reasoning. He soon got into "But NOW I know . . . " and his reasoning became more and more insane the farther he got into the book. I felt that I was reading a man's collapse into paranoid schizophrenia. But too many people, even now, read it and believe his "logic." Banned Books Week: http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bannedbooksweek.htm My oldest daughter has an annual Banned Books Party. She sends out her invitations, then she goes to used-book stores all over Fort Worth, and then if necessary she buys some books at full cost. At her party, she hands out as party favors copies of the banned books. If I were into party-giving and didn't live in a neighborhood so staid that a lot of people STILL want to ban books, I'd do the same thing. I just bookmarked the site. I had it bookmarked at one time until a rather complex computer disaster occurred, and I hadn't gone back to look for it again. Anyways, I will go with the majority of PG in this case. The Author also has not responded so this is not an issue at this time. I seem to have come in in the middle of this discussion. Please enlighten me. Are we talking about Adolf Hitler having not responded? He's, uh, sort of dead, as of course you know, so I take it you are speaking facetiously. I agree that no matter how detestable the work is, and it is extremely detestable, it is a major document of world history and therefore should be available. However, as it already IS available online, I also will go with the majority on whether or not Gutenberg should post it. PROTOCOL OF THE ELDERS OF ZION, which is an extremely inflammatory and vicious collection of lies and hatespeak, also is available online, but I would strongly object to PG posting it. My position is this, I think: Banning books is wrong. However, I am not required to publish them myself if I find them distasteful. Let somebody who DOESN'T consider them distasteful publish them. Books are banned for many reasons, though, and some of them are extremely silly. Some schools have banned HUCKLEBERRY FINN because it uses what is now referred to as "The N-word." But Twain was making a point, and the point he was making was that a good black man is just as good as any other good man, and a lot better than most men, and he was demonstrating that. In one chilling example, Tom Sawyer's aunt, on being told of the explosion of a boiler in a paddleboat, asks, "Was anybody hurt?" The reply was, "No, ma'am, killed a nigger, though." To which the aunt replies, "Well, that's fortunate, because sometimes people are hurt in that kind of thing." But by this time the reader knows that Jim, the run-away slave, is the only REAL person in the book other than Huck. Everybody else in the book has assumed a persona in which a black person IS NOT a person, and thereby they have made themselves non-real. The cult of "the other" can cut two ways. As you may have noticed, I do not find this book distasteful, although I am from the Deep South. So I suppose, on careful consideration, that I do think PG should not publish MEIN KAMPF, but I won't throw a tantrum either way. It's available, so it's not banned from the Internet. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

2 1

Fwd: [gutvol-d] Another Collection
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] PG for Mac users
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

dick said: > Is there a sub-group to help Mac users to create e-texts > that will communicate successfully with PCs? not really. but i write mac software for that purpose, so if you're ready to start making e-texts, let me know. the e-texts you make will work on any platform. > Are there individual volunteers who use Macs > and can advise others? i do, and i can. just backchannel me. -bowerbird

1 0

World Health Organization
by Aaron Cannon 21 May '05

21 May '05

I'm wondering if anyone has considered getting permission to add the publications of the World Health Organization to our catalog? From their web site: "Become a WHO publishing partner Information about health is fundamental to saving lives and making us all healthier. To reach more readers with its information, WHO is seeking partners to reproduce and/or translate the books and reports in this catalogue. Royalties are modest and can be waived in the case of non-profit editions or those intended for developing countries. For further information, please contact: Knowledge Management and Sharing, World Health Organization, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, Tel: +41 22 7912460, Fax: +41 22 7914806 pubrights(a)who.int http://www.who.int/publications/en/ -- E-mail: cannona(a)fireantproductions.com Skype: cannona MSN Messenger: cannona(a)hotmail.com (Do not send E-mail to the hotmail address.)

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Re: HandHeld & E-Books
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

In a message dated 5/14/2005 8:48:43 AM Mountain Daylight Time, matthew(a)mc.clintock.com writes: Unfortunately I don't have an eBookwise-1150 to test it out. Anyone care to try it and let me know how it works for them? I've downloaded and read a few books on your site, and I just checked a couple more. They work fine on the Rocket. I've found that some Rocket books can't be put into the 1500 for reasons I don't understand; however, these download into the 1500 just fine and so presumably will work in them. I can't easily get at the 1500 right now, but if there's a problem I'll let you know. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] Reply comments on US issues raised by "orphan works"
by Gutenberg9443＠aol.com 21 May '05

21 May '05

In a message dated 5/20/2005 7:17:10 PM Mountain Daylight Time, cannona(a)fireantproductions.com writes: It would have been interesting to see his reasons for saying that PG is not a library, unfortunately, either he provided none, or they were not included in the article. I missed the whole post. However, legally PG is both a library and a publisher. Anne Do you like to breathe? Then save the trees! Begin a personal relationship with an ebook TODAY!

1 0