




From: Kenny1414 <Kenny1414@AOL.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 13:03:15 -0500 (
Subject: Re: sites with diagrams wanted

In a message dated 98-03-30 12:30:37 EST,
brett@HAGERHINGE.COM (Askinazi, Brett) writes:

> I have yet to see a page of diagram links that is COMPLETE.  Most pages
>  of links are _site specific_, i.e..  here are the links to the diagrams
>  at OUR page (and maybe others).  There is not one site that has
>  EVERYTHING.  So throwing in my .02 cents every diagram links page helps.
>  This is the nature of the Web, moving away from it to one or two sites
>  that hold everything is taking a step backwards.

Excuse, me, but, if I understand the dynamic structure of the Web aright,
a page of diagram links is a bad idea, since the links are liable to go out of

I've seen a lot of sites that specifically request you link only to the master
page
for the site, for this and other reasons. And it cuts down on complaints about
"broken" links, which in turn cuts down on Internet traffic.

And with master pages, when the site moves, an automatic transfer to the
new URL can be set up. I don't know how that works, or for how long,
but I have run into it, and benefited from it. Links to individual pages,
I think, don't have that feature.

In spite of the dynamic nature of the Web, you want to create sites that
are as low-maintenance as possible, preferably self-maintaining.

So, an index of diagrams, and links to the master pages of their sites,
would be reasonable, but a list of diagrams and links to the diagrams isn't.

Am I wrong on this?

On a related note, is there a time or cost penalty for accessing the
Internet and the Web across national boundaries? Subjectively, it seems
my imagination? Are UK users at a disadvantage accessing sites in  the USA?

If so, a mirror site sounds like a logical solution, tho maybe expensive.

Aloha,
Kenneth M. Kawamura    ( kenny1414@aol.com )





From: Pierre Hyvernat <Pierre.Hyvernat@CIPCINSA.INSA-LYON.FR>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 13:06:26 +0100 (
Subject: Re: Fuse spiral books
Priority: normal

> PIERRE,
>
> I HAVE THE FUSE SPIRAL BOOK 1 AND HAVE LOOKED AT BOOK 2 BUT DO NOT CARE
> FOR IT.  i LOVE BOOK 1 BUT THE SPIRALS ARE DONE BY CON BINDING UNITS.  i
> GOT MY BOOK IN SAN FRANCISCO AT KINYKUNIA, AT JAPANESE BOOK STORE AND IT
> WAS LESS EXPENSIVE IN DECEMBER THAN IT WAS IN JANUARY ARE THE BOTTOM FELL
> OUT OF THE YEN AND THEY SELL THEIR JAPANESE BOOKS AT THE EXCHANGE RATE.
> i DON'T KNOW ABOUT EUROPE BUT I BELIEVE ORIGAMI USA HAS THESE BOOKS
> AVAILABLE.  YOU CAN LOOK UP THIS INFORMATION ON THEIR SIGHT IT WOULD BE
> UNDER THE SOURCE.  hOPE THIS HELPS.
>
> JUDY

Thanks a lot.
Pierre Hyvernat
phyvernat@cipcinsa.insa-lyon.fr
Pierre Hyvernat
phyvernat@cipcinsa.insa-lyon.fr

                 O  __
             __/ P /
                 H





From: Douglas Zander <dzander@SOLARIA.SOL.NET>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 13:11:48 -0600 (
Subject: Re: READ PLEASE

>
> Hi All,
>  I am sorry but I am going to have to leave the list because I can only
> chechk my my box about 2-3 times a week and my box is always to full and
> I keep missing messages because of the overload.
>  BUT if you want to talk com anything one on one that is great with me.
> My Address is jaw727@hotmail.com and I love talking to peolple on the
> net so please e-mail me thanks.
> Julia
> jaw727@hotmail.com.
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/4755
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>

 I was going to say something but then I noticed you get your email through
 hotmail.  I was going to say that if you had an ISP (not web based) some
 system administrators will place the origami mailing list on a central
 location that you may access.  My sysadm offered to do this because he
 originally expected more people to read this list than just myself.
 I am not sure of the details but I know that a mailing list can be gated
 to a local newsgroup on the *local* news server.  This way, if a lot of
 people on one particular isp reads the same mailing list then instead of
 separate emails to each member, only one email goes to a central site
 and everyone can read the mailing list from their news reader.  Everyone
 on the isp would read the mailing list as if it were a newsgroup, and can
 post messages that would be sent to the mailing list.  This saves a lot
 of disk space and bandwidth depending on how many people read the list, and
 you do not need to store the messages in your in-box; you do have to worry
 about expiration though.  I think we talked about this once before.
 Anyways, it is something to think about if you have trouble with your
 in-box filling up.





From: "James B. Raasch" <jbraas01@STARBASE.SPD.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 15:01:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Business card frog

> Can anyone offer a pointer to the (1 of 2?) business card jumping frog.
I have (quickly) diagrammed the business card frog that I know and posted it
on my web page.  Take a look at:

 http://www.spd.louisville.edu/~jbraas01/origami/

I was in a rush, so they are not the best diagrams, and they assume you have
some folding experience (i.e., you know what a waterbomb base is and how to
fold it).

J.B. Raasch





From: Julius Kusserow <juku@STUDI.MATHEMATIK.HU-BERLIN.DE>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 15:31:10 +0200
Subject: Re: sites with diagrams wanted

Hi also try to create a list of diagrams found in the web. Up to today
I've listed 70 diagrams plus number of pages I not sorted yet.

http://wwP.mathematik.hu-berlin.de/~juku

The server is shut down today for www, because of technical problems.
Note the address, try it later. Specialist working on th proble, can take
a while.

Julius





From: DLister891 <DLister891@AOL.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 15:38:43 -0500 (
Subject: Back Home!

I got back home from Paris, four hours ago and have just downloaded my E-mail
for the past week. It took ages: I haven't yet tried to count the number of
messages, but I haven't had time to do more than skim through them and print
out one or two that seem to be paricularly important. There are several
messages addressed to me (thank you, everyone, for them) and others that
mention me and in particular my over-verbose contributions to Origami-L. I
can't reply to the messages immediately, but I will do so as soon as I recover
from my week in Paris.(We walked miles and miles. Paris is a truly marvellous
city.) I'm surprised to find that the dialogue about Robins has continued to
crop up from time to time.

Now for what I really wanted to say:  The Paris-Origami exhibition was
Fabulous Wonderful, Marvellous, Incededible -  both as a display of
paperfolding - far and away the greatest exhibition of paperfolding theat has
EVER taken place - and as an unprecedented meeting of the greatest
paperfolders of the world today. I had not thought that Yoshizawa intended to
attend, but there he was, in full form and full of life. Yoshihide Momotani
was there, and Tomoko Fuse and Robert Lang and John Montroll, Alfredo Giunta,
Vincent Floderer. Eric Joisel (he helped to orgnise it) Michael LaFosse,
Herman van Goubergen, Marieke de Hoop and her Origami Theeatre, Stephen
Weiss,Vicente Palacios and his paper whistles, Paul Jackson. It is really
invidous to give a list, because  there were many, many more and however many
paperfolders I mention, I am bound to mis some of them out. But there were
only the great folders. There was also a large group of Origami Lovers,
including Jan Homewood, Jan Polish, Silke Schroeder and Paulo Mulatinho, from
Germany and Tatiana Khliamova from Russia and David Lister from Grimsby.
Sadly David Brill could not be there because he was unwell. and because he had
been intending to bring his models with him, he was unrepresented in the
display. Kawasaki and Kunihiko Kasahara and some of the members of Origami
Tanteidan had models of display, but were unable to attend in person. I feel
very sorry that David was unable to join in. But I took many photographs and
Robin Macey spent a whole evening photographing models in a more professional
way out of the cases, so that there should be plenty to show David when next
we see him.

In aspect the huge exhibition hall, (we guessed it was 40 metres by 60 metres)
part of "Le Carousel du Louvre", a sort of de luxe shopping precinct deep
under the western courtyard of the Louvre, was dominated by the enormous
origami animals folded by Gerard Ty Sovann who came from Indo China, but now
lives in France. They were not only large, but very impressively folded. He
gave demonstrations of macro-origami on a stage at the end of the hall.

All the models were displayed in locked glass cases: horizontal ones, vertical
ones and dome-shaped cases and some on verticaql screens. They were all lit to
perfection. All the models were beautifully, beautifully folded. The whole
display left me, for one, and I think every-one else, even the contributors,
gasping with admiration.

The show was sponsored by a group of comercial firms, of which the main one
was Groupe Gascogne. a French paperf manufacturing firm. We all owe them an
enormouis debt of gratitude . The cost must have been phenomenal.

This posting can be no more than a shout of exhulation for an astonishing
event in the progress of Origami. I hope to write longer about it later,
because, I for one enjoyed it immensely. For the first time, my wife,
Margaret, who is scarcely interested in Origami, accompanied me to a
paperfolding function and even she was impressed. Throughout the Exhibition,
the participating contributors to the exhibition gave demonstrations of
Origami on two small stages in the centre of the hall..They were attended by
crovds of the visitors to the exhibition who were helped to fold by volunteer
assistants.. Meanwhile the rest of the Origami fraternity of the world spent
hours chatting to each other in the cafeteria area to one side of the hall. We
sat on extraordinarily strong cardboard chairs and tables. They were
prefabricated in sections for self-assembly, and provided by Kayserberg
Furniture one of the comercial exhibitors at the exhibition..

I must mention, too, the informal dinner gatherings which took place each
night afteer the show had closed at a French brasserie (a sort of pub) with
the name of "Les Deux Ducs" in one of the back streets of Paris. (The name
refers to dukes, not ducks!) The small room available was crammed to capacity
and Mr and Mrs Yoshizawa and Mr. and Mrs. Momotani and their daughter, Eiko,
who lives in Paris) were present. The meetings held on successsive nights were
very lively and a wonderful way of getting to know other paperfolders.

I recall that the first Western exhibition of Origami took place in Amsterdam
in the autumn of 1955, when Gershon Legman put on the first display of  the
then  little knownYoshizawa's works. What a long  long way Origami has come in
the 43 years since then!. And to everyone's delight, Yoshizawa himself was
still present with us and taking a lively part in the proceedings.

The praises of Paris Origami will surely be sung for as long as paper is
folded.

Yours in something of a daze,

David Lister.

Now, sadly, back in Grimsby, England.

DLister891@AOL.com





From: "Metzger, Jacob" <JMetzger@CITGROUP.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:53:16 -0500
Subject: Re: READ PLEASE

>>Date:    Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:35:42 GMT
>>From:    Julia Weinmann <jaw727@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>Subject: READ PLEASE

>>Hi All,
>>  I am sorry but I am going to have to leave the list because I can
only
>> chechk my my box about 2-3 times a week and my box is always to full
and
>> I keep missing messages because of the overload.

I know there was recently a response by someone with a whole laundry
list of reasons why DIGEST format is horrible/useless/non-beneficial,
etc. but in this case (and for anyone who would rather page down through
1 long letter a day than open 25-50 separate letters) digest format
would be a great help. So here again are the instructions:

>>This  list is  available  in digest  form.  If you  wish  to receive
the
>>digested  version  of the  postings,  just  issue  a SET  ORIGAMI
DIGEST
>>command to  LISTSERV@MITVMA.MIT.EDU  (or  LISTSERV@MITVMA.BITNET).
(NOT, repeat NOT to origami@mit.edu)

I will now burn my digest soap-box...
Yaacov Metzger
jmetzger@citgroup.com





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:04:04 -0700
Subject: Perfect Pentagons

I probably shouldn't be letting on to this.  But I feel it's only
fair to warn you that this letter is about math.  Wait!  Don't
delete it yet!  It's really EASY math.  There are no tough
equations.  And you might learn some really fun things.

I was really disappointed by Ian Harrisons "Folding Pentagonal
Angles", in BOS #188.  It's not that he uses approximation to
create the angles for a pentagon.  Hey! If it gives you want,
more power to you.  But it was his strong implication that it's
not possible to create an exact pentagon, the got me.  "No way!"
I thought!

You see, the way to make a perfect pentagon, is not by
approximating a 108 degree angle. There is another relationship
that is much more interesting.  Take a regular pentagon, (Meaning
that the sides are all the same length, and the angles between
the sides are all the same.)  Call the length of one of the sides
'A'.  Now draw a straight line between one corner and an non-
adjacent corner, and call it's length 'B'.  Now there is a very
special relationship between A and B.  It's called the Golden
Ratio.  I promised no tough equations, but here's an easy one:

  A/B = B/(A+B)

In other words the relation between A and B is the same as the
relation between B and, A and B combined.

When I first appreciated the significance of this relationship, I
was in amazement for several days. Here is just one example of
the beauty of this ratio.  Suppose you had a rectangle whose
sides had the golden ratio.  It would be called a Golden
Rectangle.  Now suppose, what you really wanted, was a square.
After all you want to fold a giraffe or something.  You fold one
of the corners in half and cut off the excess. Now put the square
a side and look at the rectangle you have left.  It's a smaller
Golden Rectangle! Now cut off another square.  Another Golden
Rectangle.  Keep doing this until the rectangle gets too small to
cut.  Now reassemble the squares to form the original rectangle.
Be sure that the diagonals you folded meet end to end.  These
diagonals form, an angular verasion, of a very special spiral.
You guessed it!  The Golden Spiral.  It is the same spiral you
find if you cut many sea shells, such as the Nautilus, down the
middle.

I'm not the only one enthralled by the golden ratio.  Pythagoras,
the ancient Greek, mathematician, philosopher, and certifiable
nut case, believed that the Golden Rectangle was the most
beautiful thing in the world.  He asserted that most people would
naturally pick the Golden Rectangle as the most pleasing
rectangle, if given the chose.  Modern studies have disputed this
claim, but hey!  How can you expect people who consider origami
as child's play, to appreciate golden ratios!

So what doe this have to with perfect pentagons.  Back when I was
taking Geometry classes.  We learn to draw neat geometric designs
using only a pencil, paper, a straight edge, and a compass.  One
of the last things we learned to draw was a regular pentagon,
using the golden ratio.  Now, are you going to tell me that you
can construct something using a straight edge and compass, that
you can't construct by folding?  I don't think so!  If we can
trisect angles, (Something the compass and straight edge guys
can't do) we can certainly fold perfect pentagons.

Fortunately, I know of at least one method of folding an exact
pentagon.  It is found in the book, "Geometric Exercises in Paper
Folding," by T. Sundara Row. It can be done by combining exercise
51, on page 18-20 with exercise 71 on page 30-31.  Unfortunately
he does not layout a straight forward folding sequence.  He uses
a lot of mathematical constructions such as:  "Lay off NP and MR
equal to MN, so that P and R lie on BC and AD respectively."
Yuck!  Fortunately I have created the following folding sequence
using his method:

http://rmcds6.med.utah.edu/kim/pent.htm

Now, how perfect is this pentagon.  Of course you can't really
fold a truly perfect pentagon.  It would take an infinitely thin
piece of paper, and an absolutely perfect folder.  Here is one
way to tell how perfect a pentagon is. Start by folding each of
the five corners through the middle, bisecting the opposite side.
Now collapse the pentagon into sort of a five sided preliminary
fold.  Theoretically, the five corners should meet at one point.
I used the above method on a 6 inch square, and all the points
folded to within a millimeter of each other.  All the other
approximation methods, I know of, were much further off, some
diverged by more than an eighth of and inch.

So why the popularity of approximation methods.  The exact method
may take some care, but the results are worth it, if you then cut
out the pentagon, and fold something else.  After all small
imperfections in the beginning are magnified later on.  Is the
golden ratio, that esoteric?

Are there other 'exact' methods.  For example, is Maekawa's
method in 'Origami for the Connoisseur", exact?  Or is he really
just fudging it as Ian Harrison suggests?

Maybe, I'm being over precise here.  After all if the resulting
pentagon looks good, and it is usable, there is nothing wrong
with it.  But it seems to me that a method that is mathematically
sound adds to the beauty of the resulting model, in an of it's
self.

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    * I don't get impeachment.    *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Don't low crimes beat       *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * high misdemeaners any day?  *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: DonnaJowal <DonnaJowal@AOL.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:10:03 -0500 (
Subject: Digest format

I get the digest format on two other lists that I am on.  I don't think it is
useless, in fact, I rather like it.  It only takes a few seconds longer to
load than a single e-mail message, and you can scroll right past the topics
you don't want to read.

I use e-mail at the office rather than at home so the mail piles up over the
weekend, and I'm sure my mailbox would be full if I didn't use digest on the
whippet lists.

So I'd recommend it to Julia over dropping off the list if that's the only
reason.

Donna





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:35:15 -0700
Subject: Re: Models Walt Disney would have hated!

>         Lang's  Eagle

>         Herman van Goubergen's Gecko and Fly on a Wall

Come on guys!  Haven't you ever heard of the "Circle of Life"?
--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    * I don't get impeachment.    *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Don't low crimes beat       *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * high misdemeaners any day?  *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Julia Weinmann <jaw727@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:35:42 +0000 (
Subject: READ PLEASE

Hi All,
 I am sorry but I am going to have to leave the list because I can only
chechk my my box about 2-3 times a week and my box is always to full and
I keep missing messages because of the overload.
 BUT if you want to talk com anything one on one that is great with me.
My Address is jaw727@hotmail.com and I love talking to peolple on the
net so please e-mail me thanks.
Julia
jaw727@hotmail.com.
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/4755

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Rachel Katz <mandrk@PB.NET>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 19:06:45 +0000
Subject: Re: Dorms at OrigamiUSA Convention
Priority: normal

> ----HI!!! Jan!!
>
> You sead
> >     suites have two bedrooms, each with two single beds, and a
> >     private kitchenette and bath.
> Does the bath have a tub? I think I have asked befor..
> I like the dorms.
> Just thought I'd try agin. Hope all is well
> Hobbit (Susan Dugan)

Last year, I noticed for the first time that next to the bathrooms with showers
was a "tub" room. It was in the "dorm building" though wasn't clearly marked.

Rachel Katz
Origami - it's not just for squares!





From: "r.greenberg" <75762.3214@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 19:41:41 -0500
Subject: Re: READ PLEASE

I just read your email about signing off of the origami list and I  would
like to know how to take my name off as well. I am inundated .
Arlene





From: Cathy <cathypl@GENERATION.NET>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 20:06:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Origami in dreams/nightmares?

I once had a nightmare in which somebody was folding me up into their
concept of a human figure.  I woke up quite terrified, it's hard to
understand how anything so silly could be so scary, but it really was quite
vivid.

                                                Cathy

At 06:08 AM 98-03-22 -0800, you wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>     This may seem odd to other members, but I was wondering if some of you
>ever had your origami
>creations come to life in your dreams or had any kind of dreams about
>paperfolding.  Once I had a
>dream about a robot-like paper creature that followed me.  It morphed itself
>into different things
>like those toys called transformers.  I think at the time I had been over
>working myself on a project
>for a holiday display.  Anybodyelse ever have that happen to them?
>
>Ria Sutter
>May the fold be with you!
>
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





From: Cathy <cathypl@GENERATION.NET>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 20:41:32 -0500
Subject: Re: origami in Canada

At 02:15 AM 98-03-23 -0500, you wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Mar 1998, Shawn Allen wrote:
>
>   Closest thing I've seen to conventions up here was a number of origami
>entries in the 'models' show at Con*Cept, an SF con in Montreal.  Which
>also had an origami workshop later.
>
>---------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
----
>Bryan Feir           VA3GBF|"This Santa Claus business is played out.  It's a
>bryan@sgl.crestech.ca      | sneaking, underhand method, and the sooner it's
>jenora@istar.ca            | exposed the better."     -- Stephen Leacock
>---------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
----

Dominique Durocher and I do the origami workshops at Con*Cept and also at
Toronto Trek.  Sometimes we get rave reviews, sometimes we get a whiner on
board who makes things awkward, but generally everyone goes home with a
dragon or an X-Wing.  We keep getting invited back, we must be doing
something right.  Last year's T Trek was possibly our best workshop.  We
had a lot of time and a lot of happy campers with positive attitudes.  This
year I've been asked to do something for very young children, a daunting
challenge.  Dominique took fright at the prospect of teaching such little
fingers how to fold a sheet of paper in half, so it looks like I'm on my
own for that one.  If only a few kids show up, it might be a good idea to
prefold the paper, thanks whoever suggested that, was it Jeff?  I'd like to
hear about very, very simple models of rockets.  Since ten-year olds show
up at the adult workshop, I'm expecting VERY young kids.  Two-piece models
are OK, even three piece, I'm not fussy, not if the kids are all under
five!!!!!

The model displays at these cons don't always accept paper--but we've some
input at Con*Cept, enough to bend the rules.  Melanie, whose last name I've
forgotten,  had a beautiful piece on display last year.  A carousel with
unicorns, it got a few second looks!  I've been talking to T Trek, and it
looks like they will be displaying origami next year.  It does have to
respect the theme, but anything touching on fantasy, myth, sci-fi, space
travel, and the like is acceptable.  Also dinosaurs, thanks to Jurassic Park!

                        Cathy
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





From: Thomas C Hull <tch@ABYSS.MERRIMACK.EDU>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:19:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

Yo yo yo yo!

Kim Best says,

>>>
I was really disappointed by Ian Harrisons "Folding Pentagonal
Angles", in BOS #188....
But it was his strong implication that it's
not possible to create an exact pentagon, the got me.  "No way!"
I thought!
<<<

Actually, what Ian Harrison says in this: "The angle of a regular
pentagon is 108 degrees which is not related in any simple way
He is not implying in any way that a 108 degree angle can't
be folded exactly.  He's saying that it isn't related
*in a simple way* to angles that we can fold exactly.

The point of Ian's article is to provide ** simple ** methods
for getting really close to a 108 deg angle.  These techniques
are very useful in the design of pentagonal modular units,
where simplicity is valued highly (so you won't have to
fold 100 units, each with a complex procedure just to get
a 108 degree angle).

Although I've never met Ian Harrison, I have it on very good
authority that he is a math dude.  Thus I am sure he's
aware of the fact that a pentagon can be folded exactly.
But this doesn't mean that we should stop searching for ways
to approximate pentagonal angles.  Ian's article is quite
interesting and worth while.  Hear hear to more origami-math
funness!

--- Tom "born to be geek" Hull
    thull@merrimack.edu
    NEW WEB PAGE HOME: http://chasm.merrimack.edu/~thull

PS The more links to my page, the better!  Keep going, Nick!
More access!  More math!
http://chasm.merrimack.edu/~thull/OrigamiMath.html





From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:53:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

Tom is right that Ian Harrison has been exploring modular
origami applications, where, as Tom says, simplicity
cuts down on the work. :-)

Another aspect of the search for the "optimal" (not
necessarily "perfect") pentagon is a search for ways
to produce one without interior creases. In this
respect, Jeannine Mosley's "Letter Paper Pentagon"
(uses USA 8.5x11 inch letter paper) has a variation
that produces a completely unmarred pentagon
accurate enough for all the pentagonal origami
purposes I've thrown at it (stars, dishes, pentagon
variations of one of David Mitchell's modules,
tessellations, etc.)

As for the "accuracy" of the numerous solutions
in the Japanese literature, determining the accuracy
or "perfection" of those methods is a matter of
high school geometry & trig (or less).

Ian Harrison, is not presently a member of the mail
list, I believe; perhaps David Mitchell or I should
let him know his work is under discussion here so
he can respond. :-)

Valerie





From: "Ka-leung, CHAN" <giloun@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 23:03:09 +0800
Subject: Re: Ronald Koh wanted

Does anyone know how to contact Ronald Koh of Singapore? I'm told that
his whippet model was featured in the 1995 Annual Collection of
OrigamiUSA. I would like to share with him my greyhound. :)

Ka-leung
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/8193/





From: John Sutter <sutterj@EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 04:23:40 -0800
Subject: Origami Sighting

Peanuts comic strip this past Sunday, March 29th.  Woodstock is test flying
Snoopy's paper airplane!
Snoopy tells the little bird to get a desk job if he doesn't like it anymore.
Ria Sutter





From: Sebastian Marius Kirsch <skirsch@T-ONLINE.DE>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 06:59:29 +0200
Subject: Re: READ PLEASE

On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Metzger, Jacob wrote:
>>  I am sorry but I am going to have to leave the list because I can only
>> chechk my my box about 2-3 times a week and my box is always to full and I
>> keep missing messages because of the overload.
> I know there was recently a response by someone with a whole laundry
> list of reasons why DIGEST format is horrible/useless/non-beneficial,
> etc. but in this case digest format would be a great help.

I don't think digest format would help, because hotmail probably restricts the
size of the mailbox and not the number of messages.

Yours, Sebastian                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





From: Dahlia Schwartz <dahlias@BU.EDU>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 08:47:11 -0500
Subject: Re: A final word (?) on the diagram database???

Hey everyone...

Well--I come from the bizarre perspective of having done both aerospace
& non-profit work, so my default mode for solving problems & disputes is
good idea?  a good way to do things?  etc.  Please consider this to be a
separate question than the BOS site discussion:

1)  Problem:  There are limited formats/search handles for finding
origami information.  That is: If I wanted to find all the dinosaur
diagrams that have been posted by folks on the web, as well as all the
dinosaur diagrams in books, I'm going to have to do some leg-work.  Or,
if I just want to browse for some new, complex project to sink my teeth
into, I'm going to have to look at a lot of different links/models.

For many purposes, there are already lots of sites out there (especially
Joseph's).  But, for some purposes it gets a little tougher.

2)  Proposal:  I like Joseph, et al.'s thoughts about the community
nature of this group and I think we should maximize the value of being
such a lovely, helpful group of people.  So:  I'd like to do what Joseph
suggested earlier:  gather up all the information in the links he
supplies on his page and put them into a nice, easy to browse, easy to
search format.  This resource would be available on Joseph's page, as he
suggested.  I've started to do a similar thing for my own purposes...an
example of the nomenclature/structure is:

origami:diagrams:animals:dinasaurs:stegasaurus:

at which point, there would be a series of resources on/pointers to
stegasauri with some very simple rating system of complexity.  e.g.,

John Montroll's Stegasaurus:  found in:  [list books] -- Challenging
Dahlia's stegasaurus:  found in [not yet invented] -- Simple

One could also search on various parameters -- List all the simple
diagrams, list all the diagrams located on the Web, list all the .pdf
diagrams, etc.

I have been verbose enough.  Please let me know if you think this would
be a useful/helpful approach. I'd certainly like to do it, even if it's
only for my personal edification about what's out there.

peace,

dahlia





From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 11:35:10 -0500
Subject: Re: A final word (?) on the diagram database???

Sounds like a really interesting project. Eventually maybe you could
include aliases (dinasaur=dinosour=dinaser), translations of key
words for major languages and traditional models (cootie-catcher=
saltcellar=??), and links to help:

Help with John Montroll's Stegasaurus:  found in:  [list origami-L
messages, web sites, somebody has a site with diagram
"bug fixes")

:-)
valerie





From: Tom Hill <tomh@GROUPWORKS.COM>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:54:28 -0600
Subject: Re: READ PLEASE

Sebastian Marius Kirsch wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Metzger, Jacob wrote:
> >>  I am sorry but I am going to have to leave the list because I can only
> >> chechk my my box about 2-3 times a week and my box is always to full and I
> >> keep missing messages because of the overload.
> > I know there was recently a response by someone with a whole laundry
> > list of reasons why DIGEST format is horrible/useless/non-beneficial,
> > etc. but in this case digest format would be a great help.
>
> I don't think digest format would help, because hotmail probably restricts the
> size of the mailbox and not the number of messages.
>

Actually, it might still help. The message headers of most messages make up a
significant percentage of the actual byte size of the message. Message headers
consist of such things as recipient name, mailing address, routing information,
mime encoding type, etc, etc, etc. This stuff can be bigger (byte-wise) than the
actual message in many cases. So, if Jacob likes the list and wants to continue.
 I
would suggest that we encourage him to try digest format.

Peace,

Tom Hill
tomh@groupworks-dot-com

PS: For a long time, I had my mail reader set to send all mail that came from
hotmail to my bitbucket. I did this because the first hundred or so messages
 that
I ever got from hotmail addresses were offers for "adult" web sites and
 900-number
(Just as well. I didn't want them in the first place.) Now, I get useful mail
 from
Origami enthusiasts. I went from this: ;-{ to this: ;-)





From: Lisa Hodsdon <Lisa_Hodsdon@HMCO.COM>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 13:54:38 -0400
Subject: New toy: triogami

A friend of mine who keeps me well supplied with math toys
just gave me something that others here might enjoy. It's a mat
of right isosceles triangles that are attached to each other so
that you can fold along the joint. They are attached so that 8
triangles around a point have joints that correspond to the
creases of a preliminary base (both diagonals and both book folds).

My "small" mat has 4 of these sets of 8 attached to form a square.
I don't know what the "large" mat looks like. It's a great doodle toy---
you can bend and fold to create cool patterns. You can also
rearrange the pieces so that they are attached to each other in
shapes other than a square.

I don't know where mine was purchased, but here's the info that's
printed on the package:

TRIOGAMI (tm) is a trademark of
Karl's Industrial Design (KID) inc.
Peekskill, NY  10566

Lisa
Lisa_Hodsdon@hmco.com





From: Mike and Janet Hamilton <Mikeinnj@CONCENTRIC.NET>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:41:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Origami Sighting

The archive of Peanuts comics can be found at:
http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/peanuts/a_striplib/index.html

The March 29th comic is not posted yet - they are posted a week after
publication.

Janet Hamilton

mailto:Mikeinnj@concentric.net
http://www.concentric.net/~Mikeinnj

-----Original Message-----
Date: Tuesday, March 31, 1998 7:27 AM

>Peanuts comic strip this past Sunday, March 29th.  Woodstock is test flying
>Snoopy's paper airplane!
>Snoopy tells the little bird to get a desk job if he doesn't like it
anymore.
>Ria Sutter





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:41:45 -0700
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

Thomas C Hull wrote:

> He is not implying in any way that a 108 degree angle can't
> be folded exactly.  He's saying that it isn't related
> *in a simple way* to angles that we can fold exactly.
>

I guess it all depends what you mean by simple.  If you use the method
in my diagrams, you have a 108 deg angle after step 9.  That's simple
isn't it?.

> The point of Ian's article is to provide ** simple ** methods
> for getting really close to a 108 deg angle.  These techniques
> are very useful in the design of pentagonal modular units,
> where simplicity is valued highly (so you won't have to
> fold 100 units, each with a complex procedure just to get
> a 108 degree angle).

No, no, no!  You just fold one using the ** complex ** method.Then you
fold the rest using the first one as a template.

> Although I've never met Ian Harrison, I have it on very good
> authority that he is a math dude.  Thus I am sure he's
> aware of the fact that a pentagon can be folded exactly.

Actually it wasn't just his opening statement that disturbed me. Later
on, he said, he believed that Maekawa's method in "Origami for the
Connoiseur", uses an approximation, with a fudge factor.  Even though it
was "touted" as being a exact.  I don't have access to "Origami for the
Connoiseur" right now, so I can't varify if Ian's statement is correct.
Maybe he went over it and found a flaw.  And I don't know how much of a
math dude Maekawa is.  But, I know Kasahara is, and I can't believe he'd
call it exact if it wasn't.

Then later on he suggested that the best way to obtain a 108 degree
angle was to combine two methods of approximation.  Well, if your going
to go to all that trouble, why not just do it right?

> But this doesn't mean that we should stop searching for ways
> to approximate pentagonal angles.  Ian's article is quite
> interesting and worth while.  Hear hear to more origami-math
> funness!

Sorry!  I wasn't trying to imply that it wasn't.  I just thought that
someone not familiar with mathmatical constructs, my conclude that an
exact method wasn't possible.

Actually, I was just looking for and excuss to talk about Golden
Rectangles, and my adaptation of Rows method.

OK! OK!  I admit it, my real imspiration wasn't Ian Harrison, it was the
Disney flick, "Donald in Mathmagic Land"

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    * I don't get impeachment.    *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Don't low crimes beat       *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * high misdemeaners any day?  *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:50:29 -0700
Subject: Re: New toy: triogami

Sounds like a neat way to get someone interested in origami.
Although personally, I'd prefer to make my own....

Can you imagine someone getting 12 of these and making a butterfly ball?

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    * I don't get impeachment.    *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Don't low crimes beat       *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * high misdemeaners any day?  *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:57:02 -0700
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

Valerie Vann wrote:

> Ian Harrison, is not presently a member of the mail
> list, I believe; perhaps David Mitchell or I should
> let him know his work is under discussion here so
> he can respond. :-)

Well you noticed that I only singled out Ian Harrison by name, but
didn't name the creators of the other methods I checked out.  That
because many of them ARE on the list, and could hurt me!

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    * I don't get impeachment.    *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Don't low crimes beat       *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * high misdemeaners any day?  *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:04:25 -0600
Subject: system work

If any one has tried to reach my web page in the last day or so, there was a
     system crash at the server, it will be back in a day or two I am told.
Perry
Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/





From: Sarah Wooden <sarah@FREDART.COM>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:05:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Models Walt Disney would have hated!

At 09:13 AM 3/24/98 EST, you wrote:
>
>
>What I'm wondering - in a roundabout way - is whether anyone in origami has
>tackled this rather harsh aspect of nature as a subject?
>

I just completed Lang's Bald Eagle from his Complete Book of Origami.  I am
currently finishing a clinical rotation for my physical therapy studies, I
made angels for the therapists, butterflies for the office staff and the
eagle for my actual clinical instructor, a former Army man.  I wanted
something more manly and I was thinking America and patriotism, etc.

I finished the eagle and Maarten van Gelder's stand model and presented it
to my fiance for inspection.  His first comment was that I needed to fold a
very tiny mouse to create a "scene".

Is it really the model or the veiwer's interpretations?

Many years ago, as a naive college student (trad) I volunteered to do crafts
at a regional correctional facility for teens.  It is only half a mile from
my home and houses juvenile rapists, murderers and shoplifters.  The
activity was tie dying.  It was an unmitigated fiasco and got worse from
there.  The crafts were confiscated because of gang colors, profanity, gang
symbols and it culminated in the theft of the scissors resulting in a total
lock down. Little did I imagine for what purposes tie dye could be used.

I have mulled over trying again with origami at the facility. Using totally
white, precut paper and no dragons or snake models. I'm sure I haven't even
considered everything yet.  I was beginning to think it was feasible if,
perhaps, uninteresting with so many restrictions. Then while thumbing
through Origami in Action (excellent book) by Lang, I ran across the folding
knife model.

I have since given up on the idea.  I just can't seem to stop thinking about
prison breakout stories where they escape with guns carved out of soap.
Knowing what it is possible to do with the artform and  the fact these
juveniles have way too much free time on their hands, I'm just not
comfortable with it.

If anyone has been successful using origami in a situation like this,
please let me know (I haven't *totally* given up yet).

Sarah

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah Wooden                          So much paper, so little time...
sarah@fredart.com
http://www.fredart.com/sarah/





From: Sy Chen <sychen@EROLS.COM>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:15:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

At 06:41 PM 3/31/98 -0700, Kim Best wrote:
>
>Actually it wasn't just his opening statement that disturbed me. Later
>on, he said, he believed that Maekawa's method in "Origami for the
>Connoiseur", uses an approximation, with a fudge factor.  Even though it
>was "touted" as being a exact.  I don't have access to "Origami for the
>Connoiseur" right now, so I can't varify if Ian's statement is correct.
>Maybe he went over it and found a flaw.  And I don't know how much of a
>math dude Maekawa is.  But, I know Kasahara is, and I can't believe he'd
>call it exact if it wasn't.
>

Ok. Here is what I found:

* The method in Origami for the Connoisseur is an approximate method (at
least  in my copy of the book, page 64)

* Roberto Morassi does publish a exact method to fold maximum pentagon from
square in Proceedings of the 1st International Meeting of Origami Science
and Technology, 1989

* There are 4 other appoximate methods (T. Kawai, A.Yoshizawa, R. Morassi,
and Fred Rohm) listed in above paper. Kawai and Yoshizawa's versions have
the same degree of approximation.

* The method shown in Kasahara's Origami Omnibus is the same as Kawai and
Yoshizawa's methods

* Sorry, Kim, I have not been able to look at your method. I am so pooped
right now.

Personally I would prefer simple method with fewer steps and acceptable
approximation. It all depends on the folding subject model.

|------------------------------------------------------\
|  _   Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy) <sychen@erols.com>     |\
| |_| Folding http://www.erols.com/sychen1/pprfld.html --\





From: James Minoru Sakoda <James_Sakoda@BROWN.EDU>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 01:39:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

     I have been working on the revision of Origami Flower Arrangement to
be published by Dover Publications, and have been working with pentagon
based flowers as well as methods of folding pentagons. Ian Harrison's work
inerested me because he used the 3x4x5 triangle which Husimi in his book
Origami no KIkagaku (geometry) refers to as Haga's theorem and claims that
the 5/8 line is the edge of a maximum pentagon fitted into a square.
Roberto Morrasi informed me that this was only a close approximation.
     What struck me with Ian Harrison's finding that two 3x4x5 triangles
on the top right and left top of the square form an angle which is close to
the angle of a pentagon.  With two sides of a maximum pentagon in place on
the square, it became a very simple matter to form the complete pentagon
with only a few folds, with the lines used being those used in folding the
pentagon bird base--i.e. wilthout interfering extra creases on th sheet.
I'm including the method in the Flower Arrangement book and will soon put
the diagram on my web page.  Here's a verbal desciption of the approach:
     1.  Fold a vertical center line on the square and fold the lower right
corner to the top of the center line to get the first pentagon side in
place.  To avoid extra creases fold the right corner over to make the
desired 5/8 length crease.  Do the same on the left side to get the two
pentagon sides into place.
     2.  Fold a perpendicular bisector on the right top pentagon side all
the way down to the bottom edge.
     3. Swing  the top of the left pentagon side down to meet the bisector
near the bottom.  The crease should meet the cross point of the other two
lines already drawn, one being the initial vertical line.
     .
    4.  The right pentagon side is close to the bottom and parallel to the
edge.  It forms a V with the center of the pentagon.  Fold under the right
side of the V and then fold over left side to the top. t  The two edges of
the two folds should meet at the left side.  The folded in edge should fall
on the center line of the V.
    5.  Open out the folded in corners and cut across the top edge of the V.

     Although both the outside angle and the lengths of the sides are
approximations I find this the most reliable method of getting a decent
pentagon.  At each step there are checks on the correctness of the move.
When you are through half of the folds for the bird base are already folded
and there are no extra lines.
James M. Sakoda   website:  http://idt.net/kittyv





From: David Dureisseix <David.Dureisseix@LMT.ENS-CACHAN.FR>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:24:04 +0200
Subject: Re: Perfect Pentagons

As there were a little discussion about polygons some times ago
in the list, and for those who are interested in, I wrote some
remarks about maximum regular polygons (i.e. maximum sized polygons
within a square), after the original work of R. Morassi for the
pentagon (in Proceedings of the First International Meeting of
Origami Science and Technology, 1989).

  They can normally be found in the archives at
ftp://ftp.rug.nl/origami/articles/polye.ps and
ftp://ftp.rug.nl/origami/articles/polye2.ps
(if the server is not down), thanks to Maarten van Gelder.
  There is in the first one, a large review of how to fold regular
pentagons, exactly or in an approximate way.

  Yours,
--
 +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
 |    David DUREISSEIX                                                 |
 |      LMT CACHAN             fax : (33) 1 47 40 27 85                |
 |      61 Av du Pdt Wilson    tel : (33) 1 47 40 22 25                |
 |      F-94235 CACHAN CEDEX   e-mail : dureisse@lmt.ens-cachan.fr     |
 |      FRANCE         (depuis la France, remplacer (33) 1 par 01)     |





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 08:22:28 -0800
Subject: A Tale of Two Models

A model that was originally folded from a rectangle is now folded from a
square.

Both models look almost identical. However the original model has a
color change which the second model does not have. And the second model
is differently proportioned at one end.

If the folding sequence is the same for both models, can the second
model legitimately be considered an adaption or modification of the
first model?  And if it is, is the original designer's permission
required for usage?

What do you think?

Dorothy

FoldingCA@webtv.net





From: Allen Parry <parry@ESKIMO.COM>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 11:00:25 -0800
Subject: Re: A Tale of Two Models

From a person who works almost exclusively with dollar bills and am often
adapting a square design into a rectangular design, I'd say yes, you
should get the creators permission.

Being a designer, I consider the approach to solving the problem (design
of the model) the essence of what I contribute . . . whether the paper is
square or rectangle.  Often a model can be compromised in some way to
adapt it to another starting shape . . . but in essence it is the same
model.

Here is a quote from a book on
copyright law; "The modifications you have created, belong to you.
However, because the copyright in the original work is not yours, you will
need the copyright owner's permission before you can perform or publish
the derivative work." (what you are talking about is considered a
derivative work).

Allen Parry

On Wed, 1 Apr 1998, Dorothy Engleman wrote:

> A model that was originally folded from a rectangle is now folded from a
> square.
>
> Both models look almost identical. However the original model has a
> color change which the second model does not have. And the second model
> is differently proportioned at one end.
>
> If the folding sequence is the same for both models, can the second
> model legitimately be considered an adaption or modification of the
> first model?  And if it is, is the original designer's permission
> required for usage?
>
> What do you think?
>
> Dorothy
>
> FoldingCA@webtv.net





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 12:10:17 -0800
Subject: Re: Off the Origami list?

At 14:57 -0500 1998/4/01, DORIGAMI wrote:
>Joseph, I seem to off the Origami-L all of a sudden and don't remember the new
>way to get back on.  Can you help me out?  Dorigami

Actually, Dorothy, I set you to NOMAIL on March 13th because your mailbox
had overflowed and I was getting a constant stream of error messages from
AOL saying that it couldn't deliver mail to you. Please be careful not to
let your mailbox get filled up. It causes problems for me, and I will
immediately set people with this problem to NOMAIL so that I don't get all
of those errors cluttering up my mailbox. I'll reset you now.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 12:16:34 -0800
Subject: Re: Off the Origami list?

At 14:57 -0500 1998/4/01, DORIGAMI wrote:
>Joseph, I seem to off the Origami-L all of a sudden and don't remember the new
>way to get back on.  Can you help me out?  Dorigami

Oh, yes, and the correct address to reach me at for list problems is
<origami-request@mit.edu>, not <origami@mit.edu>.

Everyone else: please excuse this public exchange, but I figured everyone
can benefit from this. Again. 8)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 14:45:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Models Walt Disney would have hated!

Sarah Wooden wrote:
> I finished the eagle and Maarten van Gelder's stand model and presented it
> to my fiance for inspection.  His first comment was that I needed to fold a
> very tiny mouse to create a "scene".
>
> Is it really the model or the veiwer's interpretations?

Consider the eagle, how it lives and survives.  That pose/attitude
is only used when attacking (despite a romanticization by David
Mitchell).

But then again, Disney didn't usually flinch from the arch
conservative lone "Grizzly Adams" type of stories with tales of the
hardships of survival, etc...

However, I think the models from Zachary Brown's Underground Origami
might prove "trying..."

Hee, hee.

-D'gou

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





From: DORIGAMI <DORIGAMI@AOL.COM>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 14:57:21 -0500 (
Subject: Re: Off the Origami list?

Joseph, I seem to off the Origami-L all of a sudden and don't remember the new
way to get back on.  Can you help me out?  Dorigami





From: McPhee <mcphee@ACCESSONE.COM>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 15:00:00 -0800
Subject: Re: A Tale of Two Models

        You can apply the "Average Observer" rule/principle to this case. Would
the "Average observer" see that these two models are the same, derivative
or unique? If the "Average observer" would not see these as duplicates but
rather unique unto themselves than the new model can be considered your own
work. I would say that this should be applied to both the finished model
and the step by step diagrams. If held side by side would they stand out as
unique to the "Average observer?"

        As an artist I have dealt with this issue a fair bit regarding the issue
of personal style. There are so many illustrator's using similar techniques
and even more similar processes in the digital domain. Many collage artists
use existing imagery as a base starting point but have the burden of
altering everything to the point of creating a new work so dissimilar to
the original pieces that it stands on its own.

-mcphee...





From: Susan Dugan <florafauna@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 08:48:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorms at OrigamiUSA Convention

Rachel,

Thanks! there is a glemmer of hope! I have R. Arthritis and need a good HOT
soak. I get by during the Convention with adrennalin, drugs, and backrubs
(give and you will recive;) but a soak gets to ALL the spots.

Hobbit (Susan Dugan)





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 13:04:48 -1000
Subject: Re: International Money Orders

Any chance that Tanteidan accepts credit cards?  Its so much easier.
Perhaps someone could suggest that to them.  Aloha, Jan





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 13:50:21 -0800
Subject: Re: USA subscribers to Tanteidan Newsletter?
At 16:32 -0500 1998/4/02, Jeannine Mosely wrote:
> I was told that I must order
>one from an address in St. Louis, by sending a check in dollars and
>they would send me the money order in yen in something like 3-4 weeks.
>This state of affairs is completely outrageous.

I agree. I'm glad Canada Post, debt-ridden as it is, still provides this
service.

>I got my membership when a friend when to Japan on business and signed
>me up (thanks Anne!).  Anyway, my membership just expired and now I am
>faced with the same problem again.  I have procured 2000 yen from a
>local bank that does foreign exchange, and I intend to wrap it
>carefully in an opaque envelope and hope for the best.

This usually works. The Japanese post office is quite honest, and I doubt
if most US Postal employees would know what yen are. (Sorry, couldn't
resist! 8)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:41:26 -0800
Subject: Re: International Money Orders
At 13:04 -1000 1998/4/02, Paul & Jan Fodor wrote:
>Any chance that Tanteidan accepts credit cards?  Its so much easier.
>Perhaps someone could suggest that to them.  Aloha, Jan

Credit cards are a pain to get in Japan, so many people don't carry them. I
can only imagine the headaches (an costs) involved in setting up a small
business to accept them. Besides, everyone in Japan just carries cash. It's
still a very safe society, after all.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:59:24 -0500
Subject: USA subscribers to Tanteidan Newsletter?

Are there any subscribers in the USA to the Tanteidan Newsletter on
this list?  I was just at the main post office in downtown
Pittsburgh trying to get an international money order in yen.  All
they could tell me was that I could get an international money order
in US dollars.  Since the Tanteidan web sites specificly mentions
yen, I figure that there might be someone else on this list who has
done this before and who could give me the incantation I need to get
the USPS to use the correct form/procedure.  Any help appreciated.

-Thanks,
        Doug

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>
