Subject: FIONA OFFERS TO MAKE US ALL FAMOUS!!! (read this!!) From: fi@grebyn.com (Fiona Oceanstar) Date: 1991-04-11, 20:04 Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks Before you read any further, please note: I'm proposing a project here that will require a certain format, which is that from now on I will only read articles with the characters "RS" at the front of the subject heading. So if you want to talk to me for any reason-- if you want to tell me I'm full of hogwash, if you want to tell me something about COOP, I don't care what it is--please WRITE to me by private e-mail (fi@grebyn.com). You'll see why, after you read this proposal. The easiest way, of course, to express your total lack of interest in my proposal, is to stop reading now, and don't ever ever put "RS" in the subject heading of your article. That'll be fine by me. If it doesn't work out, that's OK. It's going to be hard work to pull this off, so I won't cry if you take me off the hook here. --Fiona :-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Thursday night, 10 PM All right, y'all, I just turned off the TV after watching "Twin Peaks," and I've got an idea. Let's do something to put alt.tv.twin-peaks on the map. Let's dream up an all- or mostly-inconclusive theory about what the mystery is--tying as many as possible of the pieces together-- and write it up for national publication. This is what I propose: --between right *now* and whenever the Canadians see the next episode, is the time period that we have for the discussion; if anyone on the group has secret inside knowledge of the next episode, I ask them to please (please!) refrain from contributing to the discussion --everyone who wants is in on the discussion--it's open to all members of the group who have seen all the way through what I will call the "Twin Kiss" episode--and to anyone else who doesn't mind hearing all the spoilers --we need a name for the project, so let's call it the _Rolling_Stone_ project --why _Rolling_Stone_? because what I'm proposing is this: we will develop this theory and I will write it up for submission to _Rolling_Stone_ magazine. We already know they like "Twin Peaks"-- they've covered the show extensively, including a cover photo the "women of TP" (remember all those eyebrows?), but what they haven't done is to write something *intelligent* about the mystery. --but we *DO* have something intelligent to say. We have lots of good ideas about the mystery, and even if we don't actually "figure out the answer," as it were, we're sure to come up with a nice sexy theory with all kinds of juicy details--that it be a FUN theory, is more important than whether it's right or not --the article's half-written already, because I can use the material from the article I wrote for the _Twin_Peaks_Gazette_ (I've got the copyright, don't worry) as the introduction, and then move right into this project of ours --so basically, I'm volunteering to be the "scribe" for the group, the person who writes up the "minutes" of our discussion and summarizes them in the form of an article Just as I did in my previous article, I would give full credit, by name, to everyone who contributes to the discussion in a substantive way--and you can make up your own names, your own details about your life-- whatever you want--pick some goofy name like "Fiona Oceanstar," I don't care--it's your chance to be famous. But don't start working on your handle and stuff until we've developed the theory--we need people to put together a good ascii drawing of the "map" or whatever it is, and also the lid of the inner puzzle box (I'm being purposely vague so as not to include spoilers)--we need people to compile all the clues so far--etc. etc. My position will be as a spectator: I will participate minimally in the discussion, and if I come up with anything unique, I'll just consider that "public domain" material that doesn't have to be credited to anyone, because it's awkward to both write the article and give credit to myself. A couple of other people have independently arrived at the owl-UFO connection (you know the one I mean), so I won't need to take credit for that. To preserve my ignorance of the remainder of this spring's series during the writing of the article, I will begin taping the shows on next Thursday, and not see any of the taped shows, nor read any spoilers in this newsgroup, from that date on--until I've finished writing the article. Then, after I've written it, I'll post it to the newsgroup for general critique--a short period just to check it over for mistakes or errors in giving proper credit. If any argument arises over who should get credit for things, I'll just name multiple people, don't worry--but let's try to be reasonable and not have to clutter the text of the article with too many names--I should think somewhere between 6 and 12 would be OK. But I *will* give credit to everyone, with an acknowledgments paragraph added after the end of the article. Got it? Read it over again if you're not sure. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- So what do you think? Do you think it will work? What can it hurt to try, huh? If we succeed in placing it in _Rolling_Stone_, we'll all be famous, and have something to show family and friends about what we've been doing these past many months. And if we fail, well... I'll just submit it to _Spy_ or _Details_ or some other magazine. Now. Here's the scoop. If you *agree* with this plan, do NOT--repeat, do NOT--post your agreement to the newsgroup. There's too much traffic already. If you agree with the plan AND want to launch right into the discussion (since we're going to be doing that anyway), start posting all your articles with "RS:" at the front of the subject heading. Anyone can join, but everyone has to label their contributions with "RS:" so I'll know which ones to read and which ones not to read. If you agree AND have nothing to contribute right away, you can write to me by private e-mail and give your support for the project. And, of course, if you think it's a terrible idea and you absolutely categorically refuse to have anything to do with it, then write to me by private e-mail and tell me *that*. I promise to listen to all suggestions, and summarize *all* of the negative feedback to the group, because there may be useful suggestions about the format of the discussion lurking in there we'd want to take into account. If there's an overwhelming swell of "No, Fiona! Never! I'd feel horribly betrayed if you did such a crass and tacky and self-aggrandizing thing!" then fine, I'll bag it. :-) But if you don't like the project, *and* you're in a very small minority of the letters I get, then you better keep the letters "RS" out of your subject headings. From this point on, I'm *only* going to read stuff that has "RS" in the heading. If you want to talk about how sweet David Lynch's eyes are (aren't they? ), that's fine, I don't care if you "RS" it one way or the other--I'll save everything anyway and read it later when the article's finished. But if you want me to include you in the credits for the mystery discussion, get that "RS" in there. The only problem I can think of, is the situation where someone strenuously objects and does NOT want to be included, but they're in the minority so we go ahead with the project anyway, and then someone quotes them in an RS-labeled article so I accidentally read their ideas. Sheesh. I don't how we can get around that. Just cooperate with each other, I guess. And hope that there isn't much dissension. This has been a pretty congenial group all along, so I doubt that problem will crop up. We'll just burn that bridge when we get to it, as they say. And we're off.... unless of course y'all decide to tar and feather me. I couldn't write the article then, I guess. It'd be hard to see, and I'd get black gunk all over the keyboard. REMEMBER: --if you want to talk about the format --> write *me* --if you want to talk about the mystery --> post using "RS:" in your subject heading --Fiona Oceanstar fi@grebyn.com