




From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@DORSAI.ORG>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 18:27:56 -0400
Subject: Re: repetition in diagrams

>
> For beginners, like myself, I've found that some of the designers of =
> many diagrams take for granted that we all know what should happen next =
> or they consider the step so trivial that it doesn't need to be =
> included.  This "filling in the blanks" makes easy models much more =
> complex.  One of our fellow folders told me a couple of weeks ago that =
> if a beginner can't understand a step in a diagram within 20 to 30 =
> seconds, the diagram is not detailed enough. I tend to agree. I guess =
> some people like the puzzle of figuring out the diagram. I would much =
> rather complete the model before the paper falls apart:)
>
Do you find this true for beginner models as well or only for the more
complex ones. Is it possible that the reason a beginner may not understand a
model is not because it is not detailed enough but because the individual is
a beginner and the model is more advanced? I asked this once before...Should
every model really be able to be folded by everyone? If diagrams were
perfect would the answer be yes?

Sheldon Ackerman.......http://www.dorsai.org/~ackerman/
ackerman@dorsai.org
sheldon_ackerman@fc1.nycenet.edu





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 18:54:48 +0100
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

Steve Woodmansee <stevew@EMPNET.COM> sez

>For the authors on the list, can you comment as to whether or not there is
>reluctance on the part of your publishers to support this method since it
>makes for much longer diagrams?

Yes there is, since the perceived value of a book to most publishers is
related to how many models it includes. I'm quite happy with using
"repeat behinds"  - too many diagrams can make a model seem like much
harder work than it is!

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - all new look!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
RPM homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk - now with RealAudio clips!





From: Terry Buse <tbuse@VSTA.COM>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 18:57:05 +0000
Subject: Re: repetition in diagrams

Should
>every model really be able to be folded by everyone? If diagrams were
>perfect would the answer be yes?

Let me use an example. Recently, I was working on Joseph's Flying Pig model,
definitely not a beginner model. Being a beginner, there were several steps
around the front legs and head that I had difficulty understanding from his
diagrams. This wasn't Joseph's fault. I don't think that Joseph could have
given me a visual representation of what I needed to do with the software
that was used to diagram the model. Anyway, a friend sent me a handdrawn
diagram on the steps I was having difficulty with and I completed the model
easily. Again, this isn't a slam against Joseph - his models are some of the
most creative I've seen. I've put several that I've completed in plastic
boxes on my bookshelves. It does seem that there is always that "one step"
that once I get passed I can usually complete the model. More detail
diagrams would help a lot of us out here.





From: Dahlia Schwartz <dahlias@BU.EDU>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:15:11 -0400
Subject: More on repeate symbols & text w/ diagrams

Just a note from someone who suffers from (and provides great amusement
to her spouse because of) severe dyslexia.

I go absolutely nuts not having a diagram of what goes on on the other
side.  It's really hard for me to visualize such things, as I have no
sense of spatial relations whatsoever (hence, my masochistic interest in
origami, engineering, and geometry).  In many cases, I cannot fold the
model b/c of a lack of obverse diagrams.

Altho...i wonder if i could xerox onto transparencies and flip it over
... hmmm never thought of that.  thanks!

-dahlia

DISCLAIMER:  the use of the word "masochistic" was not intended to
"spice" up the message!





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 20:40:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

>Peter wrote about the repeat behind symbol and some alternatives, including
>repetitive diagram steps.  I have to say, this is something I LOVE about
>Montroll's diagramming - the pre-creasing and often the repetitive steps
>are each diagrammed.  For the fearful and trembling folder (me), comparing
>the progress of my model to the diagram sample along the way is extremely
>comforting and reassuring.  (I know I sound pathetic, but I am)
>
>For the authors on the list, can you comment as to whether or not there is
>reluctance on the part of your publishers to support this method since it
>makes for much longer diagrams?

It may make for longer diagrams, but I find the precreasing to establish
     landmarks and make the folding easy, to be a great help.  In fact I find
     myself precreasing for common models if I want them to look their best.  I
     don't think I have ever seen anyth

Perry

Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/





From: Judy D Pagnusat <judypag@JUNO.COM>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 20:49:38 -0700
Subject: Re: Oops

Perry,

Having trouble with your e-mail address.  Please e-mail me personally.
It's concerning your diagrams.

Thanks,

Judy Pagnusat

judypag@juno.com

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 20:53:21 -0500
Subject: Re: Should everyone be able to fold everything?

>Personally, the models that leave me stumped do not do so because there are
>too many moves, and each diagram, if viewed by itself, seems to make
>perfect sense.  My problem is that I get to a certain point (usually step
>50-60) where the model doesn't seem to do what the diagrams suggest.
>("Where is *that* flap coming from?"  "Why don't I have a point right
>there?" etc.)

I think I agree here that is if I am thinking tonight.  The only trouble I have
     is when an author leaves out an intermediate fold as it is implied in the
     model, it may have been implied, but on one of my slow days I find myself
     unable to follow steps like

Perry

Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/





From: Magdalena Cano Plewinska <mplewinska@MINDSPRING.COM>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 22:28:15 +0000 (
Subject: Re: NO: Netiquette (was: Origami Deutschland Convention)

On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 15:19:57 -0400, Valerie Vann
<valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM> wrote:

>MSOutlook
>(one of the worst PIA's IMHO)

I agree that MSOutlook is among the worst (right up there with
MSWord), but what's a PIA?

Thanks,
--
Magda Plewinska                   mplewinska@mindspring.com
Miami, FL, USA





From: Rjlang@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 00:25:08 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

> For the authors on the list, can you comment as to whether or not
> there is reluctance on the part of your publishers to support this
> method since it makes for much longer diagrams?

Of the many aspects of origami books that publishers stick their nose into,
how you diagram repetition is (thankfully) not one of them! But as Nick said,
they do like to cram a lot of models into a fixed number of pages, so there is
indirect downward pressure on folding sequence length.

The reason I use repeats is simple economy of space, a bit of laziness at not
wanting to draw extra steps, and a bit of the thought that anyone who is
struggling their way through a 100-step beetle can probably handle the
instruction "do the same thing on the other side" without needing it
diagrammed out for them.

But I do agree with Steve Woodmansee on the desire to show a bit of compassion
for the novice folder in simple models, and if there is a chance of
misunderstanding a repetition, better to show an extra diagram here and there.

But not for every step. If you have a string of steps where each is repeated
behind, it's crazy to show the step, turn the paper over, show the same step,
show the next step, turn the paper back over, etc., etc. Too many turnovers is
more confusing than a verbal repeat instruction.

And you can't always do the whole run of steps and then repeat it. You might
need to match up the front with the back at each step.

Actually, the present generation of folders doesn't know how well off they are
(the old geezer said, grumbling about young whippersnappers). Nowadays most
complex folds are digrammed by computer and 200+ step diagrams are drawable in
finite time (check out Ronald Koh's 204-step stegosaurus in the OUSA Annual!).
Back in the Dark Ages of the 1970s when wizened scribes pored over their
drafting tables wielding manly Rapidographs, complex models had a vast amount
of information crammed into small number of steps; you'd see in a single step
simultaneous folds on the head, legs, body, and tail, plus repeats. In those
days, if you took 2 pages folks complained you were wasting paper.

Robert J. Lang
rjlang@aol.com





From: Rjlang@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 00:25:14 -0400 (
Subject: Re: one-piece omega star & related tidbits

Sorry if this is a repeat; I just found it in my "Out" box and may not have
ever sent it. -- Robert

> Does anyone know who the creator of the one-piece omega start is?
> I [Scott] want to teach it this weekend at the Convention.
> ...
> From speaking to Scott Bedrick, he is looking for the creator of
> the model that starts out with the 1/16 hem (used for locking the
> loose edges together). I learned this model years ago, and was
> under the impression it is by Patricia Crawford; would anyone out
> there be able to confirm this (or let us know what the proper
> attribution is)?

The "original" Omega Star was designed by John Richardson, and is diagrammed
(under the title "3D Decoration") in the Spring 1981 BOS Convention program.

The Omega Star, at least in its solid form, is a quasi-stellated rhombic
dodecahedra, i.e., a rhombic dodecahedron with 4-sided pyramids stuck onto
each rhombic face (the term "quasi-stellation" is used to distinguish from a
"true" stellation, which is obtained by extending facial planes of the
original polyhedron).

Another fairly well-known quasi-stellation is the Jackstone (by Jack Skillman,
which appears in one of the Harbin paperbacks), which is formed by erecting a
pyramid on each face of a cube. The Jackstone has 6 points; the Omega Star has
12. Both are spectacular models and it's hard to believe that they're from a
single square.

There are two distinct versions of the Omega Star; Richardson's, and
Montroll's. Montroll sinks each edge to make the pyramids solid, while
Richardson folds each edge to one side, which is considerably easier.

Two of anything start a pattern; and seeing the Jackstone and the Omega star
leads to the question, what other quasi-stellated polyhedra can be realized
with a single sheet? In The Complete Book of Origami, I showed a QS-
cuboctahedron (14 points), but it was from a rectangle, not a square. I've
since done a version from a square, but it's a real bear to fold & I haven't
found a diagrammable folding sequence yet.

But it leads to a family of nice origami problems: fold quasi-stellated
treatments of all the semiregular polyhedra. The solutions I've mentioned
above are the only ones I'm aware of where the points are "long" (by "long", I
take the rather arbitrary definition that the triangular faces of the pyramids
are taller than equilateral triangles).

John Montroll has showed that if you sink the points of his star at the
penultimate step and then sink the resulting points again, you get a similar
shape but with 4 times as many points. You can apply this procedure
arbitrarily many times to get arbitrarily many points. Second- and third-
generation treatments of this process look very much like sweetgum balls!

Robert J. Lang
rjlang@aol.com





From: Susan Dugan <florafauna@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 01:42:12 -0400
Subject: Re: More on repeate symbols & text w/ diagrams

Dahlia Hello,
As a fellow LD (Luring Different) I have the same problem with repeats on
the other side, our durn brains work so hard trying to un-flip they will
start to spin with a lot of repeats on the other side (I fall down trying to
blow dry my hair using a mirror.) But like you I am masochistic and enjoy
the brain work out, as long as I do not have to spell!
I have tricks to help me remember simple things like the symbols for
mountain and valley. The M in mountain has two humps the V in valley has one
hump (inverted) so the symbol for mountain has two components and the symbol
for valley has one component.
My worst experience with Origami was in my first class, at my first
convention in NY.
I had been folding from books for about 5 years and had never folded with
any one. Not knowing that most of the classes do not have diagrams. I jumped
in deep water taking a class by Joseph Wu. The class started and I asked
were are the diagrams, What? no diagrams? about 3 steps in to the model I
was sinking fast. I had never HEARD Origami, I had only SEEN it. WAM!!!
With the class staring with commits about first timers I started to freak,
But Joseph was super and with his and Lisa's help I unfreaked (some what)
and got through the first class. I can keep up now but I fold from diagrams
faster and with MUCH less stress. Now I just confuse some teachers who think
that the only way to get from A to C is byway of B, I some times go by X, Z,
and D!
I have some problems with diagrams that take Big steps between diagrams like
" double sink the new point and repeat on the other side" say what?

Hoppit the dyslex Hobbit





From: John Sutter <sutterj@EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 05:14:52 -0700
Subject: OUSA collection and diagraming

Hi all,
     I have enjoyed the recent thread about what a diagram should include
and I appreciated Joseph's
decipher even for him.  I
had a hard time with some of the supposedly easier models because of the
pictures without explanations.
What Jeff Kerwood said about diagramming goes double for me.  I don't expect
to be able to do every
model but comments about type of paper that works well and size to start
with etc. can help take some
of the frustration out of folding some models.  I'm always looking for tips
to improve my folding
pleasure.
Ria





From: John Sutter <sutterj@EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 05:15:35 -0700
Subject: Re: Pharmacy Origami

Hi!                                                                 \\
   Just thought I'd add my 2 cents.  Two cup folds, one right side up\\ and
one upside down would do for
druggist's symbol along with a cylinder or long flat rectangle.  \----\\--/
                                                                  \      /
                                                                   \----/
                                                                   /    \
                                                                  /      \
                                                                  --------
All the other suggestions were excellent if you're into folding that much!
Ria





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 07:42:05 +0100
Subject: Re: More on repeate symbols & text w/ diagrams

Dahlia Schwartz <dahlias@BU.EDU> sez

> In many cases, I cannot fold the
>model b/c of a lack of obverse diagrams.

Sometimes this can be confusing, but in the case of (say) a paper
airplane, showing one wing folding down with a repeat sign should be
enough. Ditto with a waterbomb, where every move is *identical* on the
reverse side. There really is no point in putting identical extra steps
in...

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - all new look!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
RPM homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk - now with RealAudio clips!





From: Robby/Laura/Lisa <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 12:35:57 +0200
Subject: Re: NO: Netiquette (was: Origami Deutschland Convention)

Magda,
At 22.28 24/7/1998 GMT, you wrote:

> but what's a PIA?

Programs Irreparably Awkward

or Painfully Idiot Applications....

:-)

Roberto





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 13:32:29 +0200
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

>Peter wrote about the repeat behind symbol and some alternatives, including
>repetitive diagram steps.

Just to avoid misunderstanding, I did not suggested to cram many things
together but to rationalize ("unbump") sequential "repeat behind"-s in the
sequence of diagramming if they are diagrammed as separate pictures.
However, this is in use already, so I didn't manage to say anything new  #8-(

>I have to say, this is something I LOVE about Montroll's diagramming - the
>pre-creasing and often the repetitive steps are each diagrammed.  For the
>fearful and trembling folder (me), comparing the progress of my model to
the >diagram sample along the way is extremely comforting and reassuring.

I know... :)  And agree :)

>For the authors on the list, can you comment as to whether or not there is
>reluctance on the part of your publishers to support this method since it
>makes for much longer diagrams?

I guess the publisher's goal is that the customer likes the book. The longer
diagrams help the customer better, thus the customer will be satisfied, and
thus, the publisher (and the author as well) reached his/her goal.
So we can tell the publisher this way he/she can sell more books and have
successful business... and kind reactions from the customers... A bit of
tactic helps...

Top secret diagrams can be found overleaf,

Peter Budai





From: MORGANA <la.llibreria@BCN.SERVICOM.ES>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 17:24:14 +0200
Subject: to harden the models

Dear folders.

Could you explain me some techniques and material for to harden the
models when they are finished.

I have some littles models folded over thin paper, and I want to present
them at my little nephew.

I need that the models resist, at least, ten minutes in his hands...
or...five minutes !!

Thanks for your patience.
And sorry for my spanglish.

Nicolas Jenson





From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 18:02:41 -0400
Subject: OUSA collection and diagraming

IMHO, there were a number of "problem" diagrams
in this year's OUSA Annual. At the top
of the list is the Magic Pyramid. I've reverse
engineered all kinds of geometric models from
photos alone, but it took me a while to figure
out what the end result of that pyramid model was
supposed to be, and then how to make it.

If I'm having trouble with some of these diagrams,
I can imagine what other people are experiencing!

Second on my list would be the 3D modular that has
such dark shading to show the colored side of the
paper that you can't see half the crease lines. I
think I finally figured that out, but I'm not sure
yet, as I haven't had time to get back to it.

I can't believe that the Magic Pyramid diagrams
were tested by an intermediate folder who had never
seen the object in question, working only from those
diagrams. Likewise, the module with dark shading.

Perhaps some more stringent testing and diagram
specifications are in order, such as no coloring or
shading that won't reproduce well in black and white,
and more geometric accuracy.

For the sake of those struggling with the Pyramid:
the drawing of the final pyramid could be either a
tetrahedron or a square-based (Egyptian type) pyramid.
The former is intended. The module itself is a
truncation of a tetrahedron, what you would get if
you sliced a tetrahedron with a plane parallel
to one face. The result is a sort of box with
5 faces, 2 small triangles and two trapezoids
(these share their long edge); The sliced face
is a square. The two drawings near the end of
the diagrams show this module: the one on the right
is a top view, the left a sort of 3D view.

The completed module, while quite sturdy, has multiple
unnecessary layers, and is very "messy". I'd say use
at least 10 inch paper, and the bigger the better,
because you're going to have to make creases through
several layers of paper, and fold a lot into the
inside.

The first set of 30 degree creases in steps 1-3 are
totally unnecessary, serving no later purpose. The
required 60 degree creases of step 4 should be obtained
by landmarking to the horizontal center crease of step
one instead. These creases should go through the corners
of the square, not missing, as the crease map in step 6
seems to indicate.

The 45 degree and vertical creases in step 8
are meant to aide in closing the square face as a sort
of lid.

The model goes 3D in step 9. Only the back layer gets
folded along the right diagonal mountain fold
to make the sort of diamond shape shown in 9b. View
9b is 3D, sort of looking down inside the front edge of
the box, with the diamond shape lying flat against
the inside of the front plane. This front plane becomes
one of the trapezoidal sides of the box, and all the
pleating going on on the right side in steps 9b-9d
produces the right trianglular side. (This all repeated
for the left side triangle face).

Then the remaining back material shown standing up in
step 10 is collapsed/pleated together and folded thru
all the layers at the sides using the creases from step 8,
in order to close the square lid, with
a rectangular flap fitting down inside the front
trazezoid, which I guess is what step 11 is supposed
to indicate.

At any rate, if you do
succeed in making 2 of these modules, you can put
them together square to square to make
a tetrahedron. (They just rest together, they can't
be securely joined.) If the modules were thinner,
and made as a sort of dish, with a square opening,
3 or 4 could be nested to make a tetrahedron in
more than one way.

On the positive side:
my favorites so far from this annual:

Sy Chen's beautifully engineered PopUp Heart Card
MJ Miller's Side Opening Box
David Deruda's Butterfly (several nifty squash/swivel
   fold maneuvers)
Ronald Koh's Rocking Horse (very nice horse, and I
   admire complex folds that turn out well even if
   made from ordinary origami paper, and don't have
   to be made from foil or wet folded, though it could be.)

Valerie Vann





From: Sam Kendig <neuro_mancer42@YAHOO.COM>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 18:04:43 -0700
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

---Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM> wrote:

> On the positive side:
> my favorites so far from this annual:
>
> Sy Chen's beautifully engineered PopUp Heart Card
> MJ Miller's Side Opening Box
> David Deruda's Butterfly (several nifty squash/swivel
>    fold maneuvers)
> Ronald Koh's Rocking Horse (very nice horse, and I
>    admire complex folds that turn out well even if
>    made from ordinary origami paper, and don't have
>    to be made from foil or wet folded, though it could be.)
>
> Valerie Vann

I do like Ronald Koh's Rocking Horse, but I've had some trouble with
it, as all of my attempts have come out looking more like rocking
dogs. For some reason, although I understand the diagrams, my ears
always turn out too big, and the nose and mouth out of proportion,
producing a more dog-like head.

I also like Jeremy Shafer's Crab and Unfortunate Suitor (I guess I
have a tasteless sense of taste).

I enjoyed Robert Lang's Goliath Beetle, but only because I was
challenged to do it after a friend and her father spent a few wakeless
nights trying. Proud to say, after sinking nearly to death, I reached
the surface with a finished, albeit thick, beetle from 10 inch kami
(next time I try with something a good bit bigger).

I was glad to see the Last Waltz, as I learned it some time ago
without directions, in the days before I had any diagraming competency
(I now have only some).

And I've left the Stegosaurus for a final summer challenge, it doesn't
look wildly complex, but at 205 steps, it'll keep me busy for a while.

Peace,
Sam
Neuro_Mancer42@yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 18:48:34 +0200
Subject: Re: Repeat behind
At 12:07 PM 7/24/98 -0700, Steve Woodmansee wrote:

>[...]
>As with Joseph's Vancouver Origamians I sometimes find it difficult to
>determine if "repeat behind" options are to be exactly as the opposite side
>is, or mirror imaged, with opposite angles rather than matching ones.

As for me I codsider that "repeat behind" could only be applied when the
back of the model is exactly the same as the front. Then it's clear that
when I turn over the model ("mirrored it"), the action should be repeated in
mirror image as well.

Supposed that I swivel-fold an edge to the left. Repeat behind tells me to
turn the paper over, and repeat the action in mirror image; that is, to
swivel-fold the edge that is found at the (mirror-imagically) same place on
this "other" side to the right (or if I turned it over in a top-bottom
fashion, swivel to the left).

Happy folding,

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 18:48:38 +0200
Subject: Re: Should everyone be able to fold everything?

At 03:41 PM 7/24/98 -0700, Steve Woodmansee wrote:
>At 06:27 PM 7/24/98 -0400, Sheldon Ackerman wrote:
>...(snip)  "Should every model really be able to be folded by everyone? If
>diagrams were perfect would the answer be yes?"
>>
>
>Well...this makes up an interesting thread.  Are advanced models considered
>advanced because:
>        a)  So many steps are involved
>        b)  The instructions are too complicated
>        c)  The moves are too complex
>        d)  The models have to be manipulated in unusual ways (stretched,
twisted,
>etc.)
>        e)  ?

I think what makes models advanced, is c) and d). But a model can be thought
advanced, because of b) as well.

a), that is, the number of steps, is not an objective way of deciding if a
model is advanced or not. If one navigates through all the steps, then it
can be decided if the model is advanced or not (the same goes for deciding
paper size).

Happy folding,

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 18:48:42 +0200
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

At 12:25 AM 7/25/98 EDT, Robert Lang wrote:

>[...] complex models had a vast amount of information crammed into small
number >of steps; you'd see in a single step simultaneous folds on the head,
legs, >body, and tail, plus repeats.

He-he, thinking about my early noncomp-diagrams, not only complex models
were diagrammed this way... ;)

Happy folding,

Peter Budai





From: Rob Hudson <rhudson@NETRAX.NET>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 19:35:01 -0700
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

I think one of the biggest problems with the situation you described is the
dearth of assistance (hint hint) available to preview and produce the book.
 We don't yet have an "Origami House" in America!

Rob





From: Judy D Pagnusat <judypag@JUNO.COM>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 20:01:18 -0700
Subject: Re: to harden the models

Morgana,

Traditionalists are against glue but if small children are handling them
they won't hold together any other  way.  I have several models that
flip, spin or move but fall apart when kids play with them so I glue them
together.

Judy

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 20:55:53 -0500
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

Been thinking a bit about folding and how things are listed for difficulty.  I
     think I might help to know if a normal person could fold it with less than
     a 10 inch piece of paper, like can this model be realistically folded by
     someone using the standard 4

Oh well my  .02

Perry

Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/





From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 21:29:39 -0400
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming
Priority: normal

On 25 Jul 98 at 19:35, Rob Hudson wrote:

> I think one of the biggest problems with the situation you described is the
> dearth of assistance (hint hint) available to preview and produce the book.

Actually, I don't recall anyone from the convention committee -asking- for
proof-folders.  I know that I"d have been happy to have given some of the
folds a test run.  There could even be a "beta-folder" mailing list so that
the testers and the committee could exchange email to "compare notes" on what
was hard, what wasn't, what was confusing, etc....  [Indeed, valerie, I and a
few other non-attendees [i.e., folk who've never seen the models folded] have
been furiously exchanging email trying to figure out some of them...]

Logistics to be worked out, but I'll volunteer now to proof-fold for next
year...

  /Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--





From: cyril winebrenner <shasta667@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 21:49:58 -0700 (
Subject: Re: My diagrams

i would like all of your windows diagrams please.

>From owner-origami@mitvma.mit.edu Tue Jul 21 11:37:13 1998
>Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.19) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM
(LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1b) with SMTP id <13.FF1D6F34@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>;
Tue, 21 Jul 1998 14:22:07 -0500
>Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8c)
with
>          NJE id 3277 for ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Tue, 21 Jul 1998
14:23:27
>          -0400
>Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail
>          V1.2b/1.8b) with BSMTP id 7703; Tue, 21 Jul 1998 14:22:14
-0400
>Received: from mail-out.keme.co.uk [193.164.179.43] by mitvma.mit.edu
(IBM VM
>          SMTP V2R4a) via TCP with SMTP ; Tue, 21 Jul 1998 14:22:13 EDT
>X-Comment: mitvma.mit.edu: Mail was sent by mail-out.keme.co.uk
>Received: from Dial36.pm3.keme.net (Dial36.pm3.keme.net
[193.164.179.186]) by
>          mail-out.keme.co.uk (8.8.6/8.8.4) with SMTP id TAA04136 for
>          <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>; Tue, 21 Jul 1998 19:19:44 +0100
>Received: by Dial36.pm3.keme.net with Microsoft Mail id
>          <01BDB4DC.C6B99DA0@Dial36.pm3.keme.net>; Tue, 21 Jul 1998
19:21:35
>          +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Message-ID:  <01BDB4DC.C6B99DA0@Dial36.pm3.keme.net>
>Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1998 19:21:34 +0100
>Reply-To:     Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>Sender:       Origami Mailing List <Origami@MIT.Edu>
>From:         Donna & Robin <robin@RGLYNN.KEME.CO.UK>
>Subject:      My diagrams
>To:           ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>
>Thanks again for your enthusiasm for proof reading my diagrams.
>They are ready to send out to all who asked, but before I do I
>think it is best to let you know the size and file formats.
>Just E-mail me back with which files you want me to attatch.
>
>VISIO *.vsd files created using VISIO 3.0
>bear (149k) teddy bear, 2 pages
>cannon (170k) 2 wheeled cannon, 2 pages
>flipper (96k) flexing toy (from a cardboard gift in a packet of crisps)
>monster (127k) working model, move arms and mouth opens and closes
>starbox (65k) 6 piece modular star of david box, 2 pages
>starlid (85k) lid for star of david box, 2 pages
>teeth (139k) jokey false teeth, 2 pages
>treasure (241k) treasure chest, 2 pages
>all files = 1.04mb
>
>Windows metafiles *.wmf - easy to import into various programmes (ie ms
word)
>bear1 (44k) teddy bear page 1
>bear2 (68k) teddy bear page 2
>cannon1 (65k) cannon page 1
>cannon2 (87k) cannon page 2
>chest1 (83k) treasure chest page 1
>chest2 (100k) treasure chest page 2
>flipper (76k)
>glider (31k)
>starbox1 (32k) modular star box page 1
>starbox2 (18k) modular star box page 2
>starlid1 (36k) modular star box lid page 1
>starlid2 (22k) modular star box lid page 2
>teeth1 (44k) false teeth page 1
>teeth2 (76k) false teeth page 2
>all files = 775k
>
>Robin Glynn

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





From: Michael Clark <mdc@IVC.COM>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 04:34:42 -0400
Subject: Model ID, please....
Importance: Normal

Can someone who either reads Japanese, or has more imagination than I please
identify the model that begins on page 63 of the 3rd. Origami Tanteidan
Convention ('97) book?  I have squinted at it, closed one eye, allowed my
eyes to cross like looking at one those "dot stereogram" pictures, turned it
upside down, and I still can't see what it is.

TIA,
Michael





From: Donna & Robin <robin@RGLYNN.KEME.CO.UK>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 11:29:14 +0100
Subject: OUSA collection

How can I get the OUSA collection, all the models sound very interesting,
I like the idea of the rocking horse?





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 14:36:43 -0400 (
Subject: Japanese stone dolphin fish (was Re: Model ID, please...).

In a message dated 98-07-26 04:44:54 EDT, you write:

> Can someone who either reads Japanese, or has more imagination than I please
>  identify the model that begins on page 63 of the 3rd. Origami Tanteidan
>  Convention ('97) book?

Aloha Michael Clark,

I don't read or speak my grandparents' language, and
have a limited imagination, but from the picture of the
finished fold is, I think, this is a representation of a
Japanese architectural ornament, a kind of fish,
used something like the stone lions and gargoyles in
Western architecture. (At least that's my impression.)

I think it's a dolphin fish, but it might be a carp.

It's resting on its jaw, with it's body and tail curved gracefully
up in the air, and in this model, I see two pleated fins and
an eye and eyebrow (?) on each side of the open mouth.

Does that help any?

I'm pretty sure I've seen the stone ornament labeled dolphin fish.
(but then again, the dragon-looking Kirin is translated Unicorn
but is supposedly an old Japanese attempt to picture a Giraffe
from Western descriptions).

I think they can be used as fountains too, with the water
coming out of the mouth.

I may be all wrong about this, since I'm going from memory, and
can't give you a reference. Good luck verifying this.

I couldn't resist doing a search on

See
 <A HREF="http://www.ibm.park.org/Japan/hometown/okayama/midoko-e.html">IBM
Hometown Homepage - Okayama @Places to Visit</A>
about
".Okayama-jo Castle and its glowing gold dolphin ornaments".

Unfortunately, I couldn't find a picture, or another link.

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





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 14:55:47 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Japanese stone dolphin fish (was Re: Model ID, please...).

P.S. -- Oops!   DON'T do an altavista search on
    +Japanese +dolphin.
You will get a lot of references to the ADULT TOYS pages
of a company named Japanese Dolphin. *sigh*.

The English is mixed with what I think is either Dutch or
German, but still, there's enough there to trigger some
inconvenient "Mommy, what does x--x mean?" questions.

I think I finally got it narrowed down with
+japan* +dolphin +castle
because I remembered the ornaments being used to
decorate castles.

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





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 15:18:28 -0500
Subject: Re: OUSA collection

>How can I get the OUSA collection, all the models sound very interesting,
>I like the idea of the rocking horse?

You can reach OUSA either through the internet or by phone or fax.
the internet address is

www.origami-usa.org/

Hope this helps, prices are around $25.00 US, but don't let that bother you,
     they run around 300 pages and are spiral bound, to lay flat.

Perry

Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@MTAYR.HEARTLAND.NET>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 15:24:55 -0500
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

>Me too.
>
>Jeff Kerwood
>
>> Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

>> I would like to participate in this.  Who ever is organizing a collection
>> of names/e-mail addresses, please put mine on it.
>>
>> Peg Barber
>> mbarber@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu

>> > Actually, I don't recall anyone from the convention committee -asking- for
>> > proof-folders.  I know that I"d have been happy to have given some of the
>> > folds a test run.  There could even be a "beta-folder" mailing list so that
>> > the testers and the committee could exchange email to "compare notes"
>on what  was hard, what wasn't, what was confusing, etc....  <SNIP>

Ditto

Perry

Paper, scissors, stone.....
Origami, Kirigami, bludgeon....
pbailey@mtayr.heartland.net
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/





From: "MARGARET M. BARBER" <mbarber@WELCHLINK.WELCH.JHU.EDU>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 16:39:28 -0400
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

I would like to participate in this.  Who ever is organizing a collection
of names/e-mail addresses, please put mine on it.

Peg Barber
mbarber@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu

On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Bernie Cosell wrote:

 <SNIP>
> Actually, I don't recall anyone from the convention committee -asking- for
> proof-folders.  I know that I"d have been happy to have given some of the
> folds a test run.  There could even be a "beta-folder" mailing list so that
> the testers and the committee could exchange email to "compare notes" on what
> was hard, what wasn't, what was confusing, etc....  <SNIP>





From: Jeff Kerwood <jkerwood@USAOR.NET>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 18:44:56 -0400
Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming

Me too.

Jeff Kerwood

----------
> From: MARGARET M. BARBER <mbarber@WELCHLINK.WELCH.JHU.EDU>
> To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: OUSA collection and diagraming
> Date: Sunday, July 26, 1998 4:39 PM
>
> I would like to participate in this.  Who ever is organizing a collection
> of names/e-mail addresses, please put mine on it.
>
> Peg Barber
> mbarber@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu
>
> On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Bernie Cosell wrote:
>
>  <SNIP>
> > Actually, I don't recall anyone from the convention committee -asking-
for
> > proof-folders.  I know that I"d have been happy to have given some of
the
> > folds a test run.  There could even be a "beta-folder" mailing list so
that
> > the testers and the committee could exchange email to "compare notes"
on what
> > was hard, what wasn't, what was confusing, etc....  <SNIP>





From: Steve M <steve179@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 21:49:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Should everyone be able to fold everything?

At 03:41 PM 7/24/98 -0700, Steve Woodmansee wrote:
>At 06:27 PM 7/24/98 -0400, Sheldon Ackerman wrote:
>...(snip)  "Should every model really be able to be folded by everyone? If
>diagrams were perfect would the answer be yes?"
>>
>
>Well...this makes up an interesting thread.  Are advanced models considered
>advanced because:
>        a)  So many steps are involved
>        b)  The instructions are too complicated
>        c)  The moves are too complex
>        d)  The models have to be manipulated in unusual ways (stretched,
twisted,
>etc.)
>        e)  ?
>
>Personally, the models that leave me stumped do not do so because there are
>too many moves, and each diagram, if viewed by itself, seems to make
>perfect sense.  My problem is that I get to a certain point (usually step
>50-60) where the model doesn't seem to do what the diagrams suggest.
>("Where is *that* flap coming from?"  "Why don't I have a point right
>there?" etc.)
>
<snip>
I agree ! I patiently follow the folding instructions and get to a point
where I've got 62 layers of paper and inch long and you have to do a crimp
fold or rabbit ear. The diagram looks great but my model explodes !





From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 22:21:45 -0400
Subject: OUSA collection and diagraming

OK OK, the cutting plane in *not* parallel
to one face of the tetrahedron, it cuts through
the midpoints of 4 edges, as is parallel to the
 other 2. :-)

Serves me right for shooting off email about
geometry when not at most alert...

valerie





From: Lisa Hodsdon <Lisa_Hodsdon@HMCO.COM>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 09:53:53 -0400
Subject: Re: repetition in diagrams

I'll admit, I'm no longer sure who wrote:

>> For beginners, like myself, I've found that some of the designers of
>> many diagrams take for granted that we all know what should happen next
>> or they consider the step so trivial that it doesn't need to be
>> included.

>Do you find this true for beginner models as well or only for the more
>complex ones.

I don't think it's entirely a problem of intermediate/complex models.
I can give you an example of a problem with diagrams for a model most
beginners want to fold eventually.

I wanted to post in my office directions for folding the traditional crane
because various people were helping me fold for a crane project. Most of
them received at least one hands-on lesson and the diagrams were meant
to serve as a reminder for these inexperienced folders.

I was surprised at how few of my books included diagrams for the crane. I
ended up using Ansill's _Lifestyle Origami_. The crane diagrams start
"begin
with a bird base." (no page reference) I find the bird base diagrams. They
start with "Petal fold." I go to the petal fold diagrams. They start with
"Begin with a preliminary fold." I go back to the preliminary fold
diagrams.
Now I can start my crane, assuming I can find my way forward through
the diagrams.

This is extreme, but is not unusual in books that a beginner is likely to
pick up. It's worst in reprints of older books where one diagram is used
for 4 steps. Many of these models aren't particularly hard, but folding
them from diagrams can be. So, when recommending books for beginners,
the quality of the diagrams is at least as important to consider as the
relative ease of the actual folding.

Lisa
Lisa_Hodsdon@hmco.com

Here





From: ktomlinson@PLATINUM.COM
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:13:19 -0400
Subject: Reminder: Littleton, MA, USA Origami Group Meeting Tuesday Night!
Hi All,

A reminder that the Littleton, MA Origami group will be meeting tomorrow, the
last Tuesday of the month.  We hope to have some news and examples from the
Origami USA Convention from Joyce (thanks Joyce!).  We're meeting downstairs in
the "small meeting room" near the elevator.

Kristine Tomlinson

When: Tuesday, 28 July 1998, 7:00 - 9:00.
Where: Reuben Hoar Public Library, Shattuck Street, Littleton, MA
Telephone: (978) 486-4046.

Directions:  Get to the junction of routes 2A/110, 119 and 495.  This
intersection is in the center of town at the only traffic lights.
There's a Mobile station and Bob's Solid Oak nearby.

1. Coming from 2A East take a left at the lights onto King Street (110/2A West)
 toward Ayer, MA.  Coming from 119
    West take a right at the lights onto King Street toward Ayer, MA.

2. You'll pass Bob's Solid Oak and a Shell station on the right, then a
cemetery.  At 2 tenths of a mile from the light is
    a right hand fork -- this is one entrance to Shattuck Street.

If you miss it, continue on 110/2A for 5 tenths of a mile.  The other entrance
to Shattuck Street is on the right opposite
Badger Funeral home. The sign says Town Offices.

There's parking to the left and rear of the building.





From: Jorma Oksanen <tenu@SCI.FI>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 15:52:34 +0200
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

On 24-Jul-98, Joseph Wu (josephwu@ULTRANET.CA) wrote:

>I get complaints here in Vancouver from some of our local origami
>club members that they can't do some models because they can't
>visualise the moves in mirror image.

When I was folding "way over my head" models two years ago I actually
used a mirror to see the diagrams mirrored.  Might be worth doing if
you have a problem with a new model.

>Besides, since the front is folded into a different configuration by
>the time you go to the back, even doing things in mirror image isn't
>exactly accurate, leading to confusion for some people.

I prefer folding both (all) sides in parallel to folding many steps on
one side and then repeating those on the other side.  It isn't a rule
for me, tho, as whether I do so or not depends a lot how familiar I'm
with the model.

--
Jorma Oksanen   tenu@sci.fi

Weyland-Yutani - Building Better Worlds





From: Sam Kendig <neuro_mancer42@YAHOO.COM>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 08:55:52 -0700
Subject: Re: repetition in diagrams

---Lisa Hodsdon <Lisa_Hodsdon@HMCO.COM> wrote:
> This is extreme, but is not unusual in books that a beginner is
likely to
> pick up. It's worst in reprints of older books where one diagram is
used
> for 4 steps. Many of these models aren't particularly hard, but
folding
> them from diagrams can be. So, when recommending books for beginners,
> the quality of the diagrams is at least as important to consider as
the
> relative ease of the actual folding.
>
> Lisa
> Lisa_Hodsdon@hmco.com

I don't totally agree, seeing that I started with a pretty complex
book (Montrol and Lang's Origami Sea-Life). However, I do think this
has to do with my starting at a young age. Children seem to have more
of a drive to complete more complex models, and while many of my
attempts ended as crumpled bits of paper, when I was able to complete
a fold, I felt like I'd truly accomplished something monumental. I had
no real interest in simple models, and went quickly to the more
complex. I have also seen this to be true in my friends who I have
started on origami, and I have one friend who's first book was Origami
Insects and their Kin (definetly not generally considered a beginner
book). She did surprisingly well, and has folded quite a few of the
models successfully.
For adults, I do see that simpler beginnings work better. I tried
teaching my mom the Magic Rose Cube, which I consider to be a
moderately simple model, yet she had great difficulty, and I reverted
to simpler folds I knew.

Peace,
Sam
Neuro_Mancer42@yahoo.com

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com





From: Steve Woodmansee <stevew@EMPNET.COM>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 09:12:32 -0700
Subject: Re: Repeat behind

Peter Budai writes:
(snip) ..."As for me I codsider that "repeat behind" could only be applied
when the back of the model is exactly the same as the front. Then it's
clear that when I turn over the model ("mirrored it"), the action should be
repeated in mirror image as well..."

Generally speaking this makes sense to me too, however it doesn't always
work.  For example, the elk/antelope in Montroll's North American Origami
has a step in which flaps are progressively folded and moved to the left,
however, as I found out in painful and paper-ripping experimentation, it
makes a *huge* difference how it all ends up.  Subsequent steps say things
like, "Notice that you can only fold this flap up part way" or words to
that effect.  If you have divided the model incorrectly, or have turned it
over instead of moving one flap at a time, this step does not work.  You
also don't realize your mistake until about 5-10 steps later (arrrrgh).

"Peace In Creases"

Steve Woodmansee
stevew@empnet.com





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 12:06:57 -0700
Subject: Re: Japanese stone dolphin fish (was Re: Model ID, please...).

At 02:36 PM 98/07/26 -0400, Kenny Kawamura wrote:
>In a message dated 98-07-26 04:44:54 EDT, Michael Clark wrote:
>> Can someone who either reads Japanese, or has more imagination than I
please
>>  identify the model that begins on page 63 of the 3rd. Origami Tanteidan
>>  Convention ('97) book?
>
>I don't read or speak my grandparents' language, and
>have a limited imagination, but from the picture of the
>finished fold is, I think, this is a representation of a
>Japanese architectural ornament, a kind of fish,
>used something like the stone lions and gargoyles in
>Western architecture. (At least that's my impression.)
>
>I think it's a dolphin fish, but it might be a carp.
>
>It's resting on its jaw, with it's body and tail curved gracefully
>up in the air, and in this model, I see two pleated fins and
>an eye and eyebrow (?) on each side of the open mouth.

I don't have the book in question, but from Kenny's description, I can
confidently say that this is a "shachi hoko", the mythical
dolphin/whale/fish creature. You can find another example of it in Steve &
Megumi Biddle's "The New Origami".
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t:604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331   e: josephwu@ultranet.ca





From: "L. Hayashi" <lmh@COMPUSMART.AB.CA>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 17:11:20 -0600
Subject: Re: Repeat behind symbol

----------
>
>
> On 24-Jul-98, Joseph Wu (josephwu@ULTRANET.CA) wrote:
>
> >I get complaints here in Vancouver from some of our local origami
> >club members that they can't do some models because they can't
> >visualise the moves in mirror image.

One of the things I have tried to do when finding that I couldn't visualize the
     fold in mirror
image (especially when I folded the devil) was I photocopied(dare I say this)
the part of diagram that was giving me the problem on a transparency (overhead)
     sheet.  This
allowed me to flip the diagram over and then I had no problem.s

If this works for someone else great...

Lynda





From: "L. Hayashi" <lmh@COMPUSMART.AB.CA>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 17:28:38 -0600
Subject: Just received my Origami USA -98 Convention Book

Yippee...
Although I didn't get to go to the Origaim USA Convention this year.  I did
order a "Sorry" Kit and I am glad to say I received it today in the mail.  I
     quickly browsed
through the convention book  and I am anxious to get started on folding
 some of the new interesting models.  I have heard some of you on the list talk
 about some of the models and it has heightened my interest in folding them...
 Well gotta go so little time so much to fold.  Let see should I start with the
     rocking
horse, last waltz, dancing couple, lord vader????)

If there are any other Canadians waiting for their pakages.  They are on the
     way..
Thanks for letting me share my excitement of getting the convention manual.

Lynda





From: Lynn & Ahliana Byrd <lnahbyrd@ONRAMP.NET>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 20:08:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Diagrams Mickey & Minnie

If the diagrams are still available, I would very much like a copy. If you
could please email me a copy as an attachment to the email, I would greatly
appreciate it. It is wonderful that you would do this, thank you very much.

Ahliana Byrd
lnahbyrd@onramp.net

At 06:54 PM 5/10/98 -0300, you wrote:
>Hi to all,
>
>I can not to put the diagrams in .gif, because they are 5.6 Kb, it's much
>for my page.
>Then, I realize all copies for the people that send me your address.
>The diagrams copies are 28 page for each one ($2,90 ), and the cost for
>send this copies is differente for each country ( $4 to $7 depend the
>country). Then, is more expensive to send, because I'll send 40 copies.
>Sorry, but all is more expensive for me.
>
>For the people that no send your address, I do not kow if like an attached
>them, and the people that was send me your address like to attached the
>diagrams in email address, tell me please.
>
>Thanks for your interest in my diagrams.
>
>Patricia Gallo
>
>http://www.netverk.com.ar/~halgall
>La Plata-Argentina





From: "Michael J. Naughton" <mjnaught@CROCKER.COM>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 20:23:19 -0400
Subject: Censorship of the List

Valerie Vann wrote:
>  . . . those making lists of "child safe" web
> sites, mail lists, etc. in an effort to appease and satisfy
> these people will take a safe course and list such sites
> as "adult content". . . .
> Many of us on the origami mail list very much want to be able
> to continue to recommend and provide links to this mail list
> and its archives without having to worry . . .

This is certainly not an easy issue, but I believe that the
censors have won when they get the rest of us to do their
work for them. I think we will always engage in self-censorship
(we will never say everything that's on our minds to everyone),
but when we do so not because of our own feelings and beliefs
but simply because of our fear of what "others may think",
then we have voluntarily surrendered a little bit of our freedom,
and we may never get it back.

I think it's sad that in today's world such fear seems so prevalent.

I think Alisdair did exactly the right thing.

Mike Naughton





From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@DORSAI.ORG>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 20:44:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Just received my Origami USA -98 Convention Book

> through the convention book  and I am anxious to get started on folding
>  some of the new interesting models.  I have heard some of you on the list
     talk
>  about some of the models and it has heightened my interest in folding them...
>  Well gotta go so little time so much to fold.  Let see should I start with
     the rocking
> horse, last waltz, dancing couple, lord vader????)
>
If you ever manage that Lord Vader let me know what that step is: open up
the entire top!
I have no problem with Montroll's stegasaurus nor with some of Lang's
complex models, and here I was opening the entire model, putting it back
together, and going in circles. As mentioned in an earlier thread it really
would have helped if the diagrams were shaded so we can see which side of
the paper is where. Oh well...

--
---
Sheldon Ackerman.......http://www.dorsai.org/~ackerman/
ackerman@dorsai.org
sheldon_ackerman@fc1.nycenet.edu





From: Unafolder@AOL.COM
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 21:31:39 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Censorship of the List

Again, the nutty thing is--  the people who hover over the list incessantly
like flies looking for dung have escalated a minor point and attracted more
attention to it than would otherwise have arisen.

Frankly, I would at least like to have seen something a little more hardcore
to justify having to sit and sift through the rhetoric...

Una
(jeez-- why not just have an "Origami Kids" Newsgroup??





From: Beth Maccallum <elizmacc@UMD5.UMD.EDU>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 22:43:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Censorship of the List

As a teacher I think that the "ratings" are important. However,
inspiration and creativity deserve a significant and meaningful forum.
If that is not here, where does it thrive or does it hide?

Well said Michael Naughton.

Beth Francis/Maccallum
Glen Burnie, MD





From: Judy D Pagnusat <judypag@JUNO.COM>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 23:21:35 -0700
Subject: Re: repetition in diagrams

Lisa,

I agree, to go back and forth to find the bases etc. is very frustrating
especially on a beginner.  I have books by masters who tell you to start
with base 1 or 2 and so on, some are not the standard bases we know and
sometimes are difficult to figure out where to start.  This comes from an
experienced folder.

Judy

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
