From: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 07:02:37 -0800 (PST)
To: Alec <camcc@abraxis.com>
Subject: Re: alt.cypherpunks.ebonics
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970218111658.006c4174@smtp1.abraxis.com>
Message-ID: <330A8A51.1B33@gte.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Alec wrote:
> A friend, who, in the CP tradition requested to remain anonymous, and I were
> doing an informal analysis of those subjects/topics which over the past year
> generated the most discussion and, by implication, interest on the CP list.
> Since the list at that time was reportedly unmoderated, we felt some weight
> should be given to members' interests/desires as measured by their posts,
> regardless of the applicability to the list topic.
> With the exceptions of AP (oh so clearly way off-topic), list censorship (too
> tedious),  and remarks either questioning or affirming the
> sexuality/virility/femininity (or lack thereof ) of almost every CP
> subscriber, the topic which claimed the most bandwidth was Ebonics.
> You name it; just about every well-known c'punk jumped in to make some
> urbane statement on this, sadly, now dead and  ignored issue.
> Nevertheless, the bandwidth was there!

What does it mean "now dead and ignored"?  Today, the L.A. Times had
more major coverage of the issue and how the L.A. school board is
pushing ahead on Ebonics.  There were several examples of books given
in the article which used Ebonics (more-or-less) the their choice of
linquistic style.  I'd say it's just getting off the ground.