mckee Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:Think of it this way, in our culture being a witch is a bad thing. In their culture, being a muggle is a bad thing, but they don't burn them at the stake. It is not about race, it is about ability. "We've found a muggle, may we burn her?" -------------------- You have the right to defend yourself, even when geocaching! Quote Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Burn her, anyway! Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness Quote Link to comment
mckee Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:Burn her, anyway! http://www.texasgeocaching.com Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness http://mywebpages.comcast.net/ihazeltine/bandbass.gif So a muggle weighs as much as a duck? -------------------- You have the right to defend yourself, even when geocaching! Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 quote:...believe me, 'spam' _does_ communicate pretty well to the large subset of email address owners who haven't seen Monty Python. So that's where that came from. Oh and muggle is two syllables. Quote Link to comment
+Team GPSaxophone Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 quote:Originally posted by mckee: quote:Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:Burn her, anyway! So a muggle weighs as much as a duck? Then she's made of wood! Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness Quote Link to comment
+Team Og Rof A Klaw Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 quote:You were the victim of a scam. Stouffer's lawsuit was rejected, and the judge determined she was attempting to perpetuate a fraud against Rowling and her publishers.You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say. Did I state anywhere that Rowling plagarized the Stouffer materials? Stouffer's lawsuit was rejected because she and her lawyer falsified evidence. However, she did write the Larry Potter series, in which she did use the term "muggles," a decade before Rowling wrote her first Harry Potter. IMHO, the most likely explanation is that Rowling may have been the victim of an author's worst nightmare. Perhaps she read some of the Stouffer material, forgot about it, then dredged it out of her subconscious. ____________________________ - Team Og Rof A Klaw All who wander are not lost. Quote Link to comment
+Hiemdahl Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 If Muggle, or more properly GeoMuggle is not acceptable. How about Skraling? Quote Link to comment
team_confidential Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Muggles or Muggle is not a Harry Potter term the true definition is a pot smoker, for weed, grass, it means hophead. The real term for these type is Grommets, or Wingnuts. MHO Look it up in the Webster's Millennium™ Dictionary of English Dictionary Quote Link to comment
team_confidential Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 already stated Quote Link to comment
+yumitori Posted September 16, 2003 Share Posted September 16, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Team Og Rof A Klaw: You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say. Did I state anywhere that Rowling plagarized the Stouffer materials? Hmmm. You said - quote: There's some evidence that Rowling, uh, recycled the term "muggles," and several other things. Sounds to me that's what you are saying. Obviously you are not, so I'm unclear on what your message is. quote: Stouffer's lawsuit was rejected because she and her lawyer falsified evidence. However, she _did_ write the Larry Potter series, in which she _did_ use the term "muggles," _a decade before Rowling wrote her first Harry Potter._ Actually, the 'Larry Potter' story and the 'The Legend of Rah and Muggles' are two separate books. As I understand it, one of the problems with Stouffer's claims is that there's no evidence that the 'Larry Potter' story ever existed before Rowling's books were released. quote: IMHO, the most likely explanation is that Rowling may have been the victim of an author's worst nightmare. Perhaps she read some of the Stouffer material, forgot about it, then dredged it out of her subconscious. Possible, but unlikely. The Stouffer book(s) had very limited distribution, Rowling was never in an area where she might have encountered them (or it). There would have had to be too many coincidences for her to have ever read the material. In any case, what Stouffer offered up on her website as 'evidence' of plagerism actually proved to me that the claims were groundless. The 'similarities' were nothing of the sort, or were very common literary devices. Ron/yumitori --- Remember what the dormouse said... Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.