




From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:32:53 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO]

On 13 May 99, at 12:13, andalar wrote:

> Also, what is standard is that people subscribe and unsubscribe through a
> procedure that doesn't involve sending emails to everyone on the list.
> I've lost my directions about how to unsubscribe but I recommend you hunt
> through Joseph Wu's page which has a link to the directions about how to do
> this.

Actually, continuing in the tradition of "teaching a person to fish"
there are two other bits of info that every net-person ought to know to
help avoid being a net-pain to others:

1) for most lists, if the list is <LISTNAME>@<somehost> if you send an
email message to: listserv@<somehost> or majordomo@<somehost> with the
Subject consisting of just the word "help" *AND* the body of the message
consisting of just the word "help", you will almost always get back an
info-file that'll tell you things like how to subscribe/unsubscribe/etc.
Only one of those two addresses will work [if either does] for a
particular listserver, so it ought to be safe enough to try them both.

2) for **ALL** lists [take note!!!!!] if the list name is:
<list>@<host> then the email address <list>-request@<host>
is *required* [by RFC!!] to get you to a real administrator person.  As a
rule, they're harried and have other things to do, so you should not
bother them idly, but if you try step (1) and it doesn't get you the list
operation info file, then try the -request address and you will
*for*sure* get someone who can/will help you.  NOTE: for many lists,
sending a mesage *to*the*list* not only really-annoys a *LOT* of people
and marks you as being among the insufficiently clued, but often it won't
even do you any good because the list admin isn't _on_ the list!

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





From: Rosalinda Sanchez <RRosalinda@AOL.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:54:25 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star (Swedish Star)

A Swedish Star is made from four strips of paper that are woven together.  It
is also known as a German Star.  See :

http://www.thehistorynet.com/EarlyAmericanHomes/articles/12962_stars.htm

The stars made from one strip of paper are usually referred to as "Puffy
Stars"

Rosa





From: Hatori Koshiro <hatori@JADE.DTI.NE.JP>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 17:21:38 +0900
Subject: Re: Jerry Harris's "Tyrannosaurus"

Thank you Harris san, I enjoyed folding your model.
Here's my observations.

1. I also have a trouble in printing page 4 with Acrobat Reader 3.0J.
But I could print with Ghostscript 5.50.

2. The formation of spurs is new for me.
I found it interesting.

3. Since I use 35cm kami, my tyrannosaurus looks thin and starving.
I think wet-folding will work well.

 _ _ _ _ _
|         |  Hatori Koshiro (Koshiro is my first name.)
|_._._._._|          hatori@jade.dti.ne.jp
|         |      http://www.jade.dti.ne.jp/~hatori/
|_ _ _ _ _|_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 If they keep on risking failure, they're still artists. (S.Jobs)





From: Susan Johnston <supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 21:06:29 +0100 (
Subject: Re: [NO] Oops, now it is

hi again,
i would just like to ask you all a question...
what on earth are you on about when you say something like the pot is
black???????????
If you think i'm a bit thick, its probably cos i'm only 13 and i don't
really understand adult talk.
there, i've made my point
bye
from susan

>From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: [NO] Oops, now it is
>Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:55:54 -0600
>
>Marcus Hanson wrote:
> >
> > > Is that the pot calling the kettle black?
> >
> > Why do people say that?
> > pots and kettles are no longer made of black iron
>
>It purticularly doesn't make sense on an origami list, since we all fold
>our kettles from blue elephant hide.
>
>I thought pot was green...
>
> > Marcus Hanson's Digital Gallery
> > http://members.tripod.com/~MarcH_3/index.html
>
>Ever though of expressing any of this stuff in origami?  How about this
>for an origami challenge: something that comments on the Human
>Condition.  Anything out there?
>
>--
>Kim Best                            *******************************
>                                     *          Origamist:         *
>Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
>420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
>Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************

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





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <contract@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 16:13:28 -0700
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip

At 12:55 PM 5/13/99 -0700, <msaliers@HOME.COM>  wrote:

>I received the following missive.  Can anyone help this person?

>----- snip --------------------------------------------------
>
>From: "Victor" <YEEYI@prodigy.net>
>
>Hello,
>I've bought a few books, and started folding a while back. All in all, i've
>been searching for a star.
>I can't seem to find it, or the name of it.
>Please help me ! I really like that star.
>
>This is what I know about the star:
>This star is made from a long narrow strip of paper.
>After folded, you can push in on the sides of the start to make the
>appearance of puffiness.
>These stars are usually small.

This is known as the Swedish Star. If you tie any strip of paper into a
knot, a pentagonal shape will form. You can then pass the loose ends
continously through the loops of the knot. The sides of this shape could
then be pushed in to make it 3-d.

Marc





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <contract@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 16:14:57 -0700
Subject: Re: hello origami people!!!

At 06:07 PM 5/12/99 +0200, <binzi@MUENSTER.DE> wrote:
>P.S..... I forgot to tell, that I am looking especially for an "USS
>Enterprise"
>space ship model.

There are a bunch of them out there.  I have one at ftp.rug.nl/origami

Marc





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 14:03:43 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] Oops, now it is

At 13:55 99/05/13 -0600, you wrote:
>Ever though of expressing any of this stuff in origami?  How about this
>for an origami challenge: something that comments on the Human
>Condition.  Anything out there?

It's been done many times by many people. Yoshizawa even has a pair of
abstract pieces entitled "Joy" and "Sorrow".

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Edward Crankshaw <ejcranks@HIWAAY.NET>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:29:44 -0500
Subject: List requests

Mark,

There is a Pennsylvannia Star folded from four strips of paper available
at:

http://www.thehistorynet.com/EarlyAmericanHomes/articles/12962_stars.htm

Evi,

I believe there is a "USS Enterprise" space ship model at the
ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/culture/japan/origami/rugcis.rug.nl/models/ site
but I couldn't connect to check. I'll try to look at my paper copy and
double check the URL.

- Ed





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 18:12:23 -0600
Subject: Re: [NO]

andalar wrote:

> That's what filters are for.  A "good" list will provide ways for people to
> filter out the subtopics they aren't interested in.  [NO] means no origami.
> You could set up a filter that just trashes emails with "[NO]" in the
> subject line.
>
> Even if you are upset enough from this list that you do remove yourself, I
> hope you'll remember that this is standard practice for most (all?) lists.

It has been my experience that filters are provided by the users e-mail
software.  I know it is possible to retrieve messages on a given subject
using the listserver, but I don't believe it is possible to use the
listserver to prevent certain messages from arriving in your mailbox.
If there is a way of doing this, using the listserver, please let us
know.

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    *          Origamist:         *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 19:01:07 -0600
Subject: Re: paper and questions

david whitbeck wrote:
>
>         Hi, my name is David.  I'm brand new to this email group.  I was
> wondering what kind of paper is best for the average Lang/Montroll/Engels
> models?  I've just been using typewriter paper I can buy at Raley's or
> Longs (hey it's cheap, thin and doesn't tear easy!)  I would also like to
> know what kind of paper you guys generally use for wetfolding and any other
> supplies needed. I've never wetfolded before.

By far the favorite paper for wet folding, seems to be Wyndstone Marble
or Elephant Hide.  It's thickish, holds a crease well, and is
practically indestructible.

You might also try thin cardboard stalk.  While it make be extremely
difficult, for complex models, the finished results are very sturdy.

But, in my opinion, the very best paper to use is two pieces of paper
fused by a process known as back coating.  Last year, at the OUSA
convention, I took a class, give by Courtney Spooner, that has changed
my wet folding forever.  Where as in the past, I could only wet fold
single color models, now I can wet fold just about anything I want.
Even complex two tone models by Montrol, Lang, and Kirshenbaum.  Where
as before, I had to hunt for the best combination of colored and white
paper, now I use the best colors for the particular model.

In Courtney's class she recommended Thai Unryu paper.  But I have had
good results with mono-colored washi paper, handmade paper, and even
combining the stronger wrapping tissues, with thicker paper.

If Courtney is teaching the class this year, I highly recommend it.
Even if you were put off by the method demonstrated by Michael Lafosse
in one of his videos.  This method is easy.  Even a klutz like me can do
it.

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    *          Origamist:         *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Kim Best <kim.best@M.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:09:51 -0600
Subject: The Human Condition

Joseph Wu wrote:
>
> At 13:55 99/05/13 -0600, you wrote:
> >Ever though of expressing any of this stuff in origami?  How about this
> >for an origami challenge: something that comments on the Human
> >Condition.  Anything out there?
>
> It's been done many times by many people.

Maybe that's true, and I just haven't really noticed it.  But it seems
to me that where as in most art galleries, pieces that somehow comment
on the human condition are the rule.  In Origami displays, it is the
exeption.  Where as most non-origami artists are attempting to make a
statement or evoke an emotion on the part of the viewer.  Most origami
artists are attempting to faithfully depict some animal or other object.

And when the discussion comes around to whether origami can actually
evoke an emotion such as fear or sensuality, there is always someone
questioning whether it is even possible within the constraints of one
square piece of paper, using no cuts.  But I don't buy it.

I think there are two reason was we don't see more emotionally charged
or thought provoking origami.

1) Even though origami is thousands of years old, as a living art form
it is really in it's infancy.  Most new pieces have been created in just
the last 30 years.  We are still refining, our technique.  That's why
you see so many challenges like flying insects or smoke.  We have to
discover what we can do, before we can use it to say something.

2) As an creative medium, origami is hard.  I mean really hard.  If an
artist can paint a really good lion, you can reasonably expect she can
also paint a good tiger or cheetah. After awhile the technique fades
into the background.  But that is not necessarily so with origami.  Each
new model has it's own challenges, and the technique never really fades
into the background.  But it  is this puzzle aspect of origami that
makes it so appealing to many, and it attracts a different type of
artist.

But maybe this can be the new direction for origami.  Maybe the new
challenges should be.  Can you make origami that is really frightening.
Or origami that makes you cry.  Or origami that make you as mad as
hell.  How about origami that makes an unambiguous political statement.
Or a piece that comments on some great wrong in the world.  I would to
see more origamists who say "What can I say?" instead of "What can I
make?"

I know your reaction.  What about you smarty?  Why don't you make
something like that?  Well......   I'm not sure what I want to say, yet.

> Yoshizawa even has a pair of abstract pieces entitled "Joy" and "Sorrow".
>

I don't think I've seen these.  But I have a question.  Are these merely
a symbolic depiction of the emotions of "Joy and Sorrow", or do the they
evoke the emotions in the viewer.  Coming from Yoshizawa, I expect the
latter.

Ok, how about this.  Everyone is always asking about good dog and monkey
models.  Are the any good models out there describing the Human
Condition?  What's your favorite?

--
Kim Best                            *******************************
                                    *          Origamist:         *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: Carole Young <youngcj@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:19:52 -0500
Subject: Re: [NO]

For anyone who is on a number of listservers, it is necessary to do
something or if you sneeze and forget a day you have 800 messages.

Mytwocentsworth





From: MacTeabird@AOL.COM
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:22:34 -0400 (
Subject: "USS Enterprise" space ship model

In a message dated 05/13/1999 2:25:46 PM, ejcranks@HIWAAY.NET writes:

<< I believe there is a "USS Enterprise" space ship model at the
ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/culture/japan/origami/rugcis.rug.nl/models/ site
but I couldn't connect to check. I'll try to look at my paper copy and
double check the URL. >>

hey Ed,
The url works, but no sign of the "USS Enterprise" space ship model.
What folder is it in???
T-bird





From: Jeffrey Yen <orangex3@YAHOO.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:31:29 -0700
Subject: hm...

Hey,
does anyone know how to fold a square from an 8x8 inch paper?

Just kidding.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com





From: andalar <andalar@AIMNET.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 21:32:01 -0800
Subject: Re: [NO]

Yes, filters are a part of whatever email software package we're using.
What I meant was that those who organize lists provide ways of  setting
apart different types of messages, like "[NO]", for us to key on in our
user software with a filter.  No, I don't know of a way to prevent a subset
of msgs from being sent from the listserver to my or anyone else's address.

Laura

>andalar wrote:
>
>> That's what filters are for.  A "good" list will provide ways for people to
>> filter out the subtopics they aren't interested in.  [NO] means no origami.
>> You could set up a filter that just trashes emails with "[NO]" in the
>> subject line.
>>
>> Even if you are upset enough from this list that you do remove yourself, I
>> hope you'll remember that this is standard practice for most (all?) lists.
>
>It has been my experience that filters are provided by the users e-mail
>software.  I know it is possible to retrieve messages on a given subject
>using the listserver, but I don't believe it is possible to use the
>listserver to prevent certain messages from arriving in your mailbox.
>If there is a way of doing this, using the listserver, please let us
>know.
>
>--
>Kim Best                            *******************************
>                                    *          Origamist:         *
>Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
>420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
>Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 21:32:03 -0700
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

>Joseph Wu wrote:
>>
>> At 13:55 99/05/13 -0600, you wrote:
>> >Ever though of expressing any of this stuff in origami?  How about this
>> >for an origami challenge: something that comments on the Human
>> >Condition.  Anything out there?
>>
>> It's been done many times by many people.
>
>Maybe that's true, and I just haven't really noticed it.  But it seems
>to me that where as in most art galleries, pieces that somehow comment
>on the human condition are the rule.  In Origami displays, it is the
>exeption.  Where as most non-origami artists are attempting to make a
>statement or evoke an emotion on the part of the viewer.  Most origami
>artists are attempting to faithfully depict some animal or other object.
>
>And when the discussion comes around to whether origami can actually
>evoke an emotion such as fear or sensuality, there is always someone
>questioning whether it is even possible within the constraints of one
>square piece of paper, using no cuts.  But I don't buy it.
>
>I think there are two reason was we don't see more emotionally charged
>or thought provoking origami.
>
>1) Even though origami is thousands of years old, as a living art form
>it is really in it's infancy.  Most new pieces have been created in just
>the last 30 years.  We are still refining, our technique.  That's why
>you see so many challenges like flying insects or smoke.  We have to
>discover what we can do, before we can use it to say something.
>
>2) As an creative medium, origami is hard.  I mean really hard.  If an
>artist can paint a really good lion, you can reasonably expect she can
>also paint a good tiger or cheetah. After awhile the technique fades
>into the background.  But that is not necessarily so with origami.  Each
>new model has it's own challenges, and the technique never really fades
>into the background.  But it  is this puzzle aspect of origami that
>makes it so appealing to many, and it attracts a different type of
>artist.
>
>But maybe this can be the new direction for origami.  Maybe the new
>challenges should be.  Can you make origami that is really frightening.
>Or origami that makes you cry.  Or origami that make you as mad as
>hell.  How about origami that makes an unambiguous political statement.
>Or a piece that comments on some great wrong in the world.  I would to
>see more origamists who say "What can I say?" instead of "What can I
>make?"
>
>I know your reaction.  What about you smarty?  Why don't you make
>something like that?  Well......   I'm not sure what I want to say, yet.
>
>
>> Yoshizawa even has a pair of abstract pieces entitled "Joy" and "Sorrow".
>>
>
>I don't think I've seen these.  But I have a question.  Are these merely
>a symbolic depiction of the emotions of "Joy and Sorrow", or do the they
>evoke the emotions in the viewer.  Coming from Yoshizawa, I expect the
>latter.
>
>Ok, how about this.  Everyone is always asking about good dog and monkey
>models.  Are the any good models out there describing the Human
>Condition?  What's your favorite?
>
>--
>Kim Best                            *******************************
>                                    *          Origamist:         *
>Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * Some one who thinks paper   *
>420 Chipeta Way #120                * thin, means thick and bulky *
>Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         *******************************

Speaking about Yoshizawa, what is a good way to get any of his books?  It
seems that there aren't many books in print here, and the one or two that
are expensively priced.

David





From: Meristein@AOL.COM
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 21:54:17 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip

Instructions for this puffy star are in Gay Merrill Gross's book, The Art of
Origami, ISBN0-7924-5841-9. She calls it the Chinese Lucky Star, and says it
is a traditional design.

Have fun folding lots of them!

Merida





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 23:00:00 -0400
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

On Thu, 13 May 1999, Kim Best wrote:

+to me that where as in most art galleries, pieces that somehow comment
+on the human condition are the rule.  In Origami displays, it is the
+exeption.  Where as most non-origami artists are attempting to make a
+statement or evoke an emotion on the part of the viewer.  Most origami
+artists are attempting to faithfully depict some animal or other object.

Seems a fair assessment. I might argue that in some of the more technically
advanced models, there is an emotion of "WOW!" invoked in the observer, esp.
when the model is known to be from one uncut sheet. I might get the same
reaction from a 10'x10' piece of art done with 300 dots per inch, pointillism
(done by hand, not computer synthesis). I might also argue that Joisel's
(cartoonish) rat does evoke humor.

+1) Even though origami is thousands of years old, as a living art form
+it is really in it's infancy.  Most new pieces have been created in just
+the last 30 years.

Sorry, Kim, couldn't let that one by. Most "new" pieces have been created
recently (30 years, 10 minutes, pick your "after this long its old" time
scale).

+you see so many challenges like flying insects or smoke.  We have to
+discover what we can do, before we can use it to say something.

Oh? Are you implying (or trying to) that the tools now available are not
sufficient? I'd say Josiel's masks/faces are, and probably several pieces of
Yoshizawa's work on the same subject, though I can't recall the citation for
an exact piece. Despite some members of B.O.S. who want to explore beyound
the 90/45/22.5 degree folds, what Yoshizawa does with a bird base amazes me.

Actually, I think it is very much the "one piece of paper" that is limiting in
this regard. Elias' "Last Waltz" (when well folded) doesn't elicit an
emtional response from you? While great art cannot be confined, I think
origami has a particular hard time in the arena of emtional content because we
(in the west) are too much into folding one model in isolation, creating in
isolation, displaying in isolation. As a counter point, there is a site on
the web (darn, can't find the URL) with greyhound's coursing a rabbit. David
Brill's "Brilliant Origami" has several dioramas in it that transcend this
isolation. I think the direct result of a reductionistic/scientific approach
to origami. Contrary to you, I think the "bun-shi" method, Lang's TreeMaker,
and probably other methods give us the technical framework for realistic
origami. I'd say its now time to take that and start resynthesizing origami
into an art. Dioramic, or if you prefer "scene" based origami seems to be
more common in Japan, at least judging from the photos i see in western
origami publications versus the NOA magazine).

+But maybe this can be the new direction for origami.  Maybe the new
+challenges should be.  Can you make origami that is really frightening.

I like that!  Maybe VanGoubergen's Skull is close.  I might imagine Yoshizawa,
LaFosse, Brill, or some others may have gone here.

+Or a piece that comments on some great wrong in the world.  I would to
+see more origamists who say "What can I say?" instead of "What can I
+make?"

This gets back to your distinction of technique versus subject.  In a way, I
think you are right, there is a great lure in origami for puzzle solvers, but
I think that is a (perhaps not deliberately) self imposed "I want to keep
playing with this wonderful toy" phenomina, rather than a "we don't know how
to do it yet" "problem."

+Ok, how about this.  Everyone is always asking about good dog and monkey
+models.  Are the any good models out there describing the Human
+Condition?  What's your favorite?

At the moment (and only for the moment!) I'll pick Elias' BullFighter and
Bull.  I may not agree with the "politics" of bull fighting, but at least the
model I say photographed in an issue of ORU (for me) transcended origami as
technique.

-Daddy-o "just my two cents of ramblin'" D'gou





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 01:52:11 -0400 (
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

In a message dated 99-05-13 23:04:55 EDT, you write:

> At the moment (and only for the moment!) I'll pick Elias' BullFighter and
>  Bull.

Is that the model I thought I remembered under the title "Moment of Truth"?

As far as "The Human Condition", which I am guessing is Mortality and
the consciousness of it, there are another two Neal Elias creations, from
Randlett's "The Flapping Bird": "The Crucifix" (two-piece); and
"Michaelangelo's Pieta".

For emotional response, "Vera Cruz" out of one of Harbin's paperbacks,
"The Moor at Prayer", ditto, and "The Water Torture" out of a Spanish
children's origami book  ( Sorry, I've forgotten the original Spanish title,
but the English here is a literal translation. This was the first indication
I had of how deeply the Spanish Inquisition had imbedded into Spanish
culture. Imagine, this model is supposed to amuse a child !!!! ) .

Emotional response doesn't occur in a vacuum. It usually needs an
enveloping cultural context.  Given the current contexts, the so-called
Peace Crane, which is the traditional crane (tsuru), and its history as
a political symbol, going back to the story of Sadako and The
Thousand Cranes, and the story that the healing superstition she was
trying to invoke was actually a local superstition and not the common
symbolism for the Thousand Cranes, the simple crane evokes a very
complex emotional response, at least for me.

Similarly, consider an origami cross, or swastika.

In the light of recent headlines, doesn't the Dollar Bill Rifle imply the
Human Condition and evoke an emotional reaction?

Imagine an uncompleted origami, ... on an empty bed.

("The flag is moving.
   The Wind is moving.
    The mind is moving." -- from an illustrated koan in Zen Comics)

Aloha,
Kenneth Kawamura    < kenny1414@aol.com >





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 02:17:16 -0400
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

Kenneth Kawamura indited, in response to an earlier message of mine:

+> At the moment (and only for the moment!) I'll pick Elias' BullFighter and
+>  Bull.
+Is that the model I thought I remembered under the title "Moment of Truth"?

I didn't look it up, my title was just a guess, so you're probably right.

+As far as "The Human Condition", which I am guessing is Mortality and
+the consciousness of it, there are another two Neal Elias creations, from
+Randlett's "The Flapping Bird": "The Crucifix" (two-piece); and
+"Michaelangelo's Pieta".

I can't speak for Kim Best, but to me the human condition isn't so limited.  I
think for the moment I'll decline trying to define it.;-)

+Emotional response doesn't occur in a vacuum. It usually needs an
+enveloping cultural context.

Indeed.  My point was that single models, displayed in isolation, are likely
to be as far "out of context" as they can get.  Most displays have just the
model, set against a neutral background.  Imagine a picture (photo, drawing,
etc.) of a field teeming with butterflies.  Now, from that picture, cut out
the image of one butterfly, exactly around its edges, leaving no context.
Compare the emotional content of the two....

-D'gou





From: Emmajg <emmajg@CUSTARD.ORG>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 04:16:29 +0100
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip

I have that on my web page
http://chocolate.custard.org/origami
happy folding
Emmajg*
-----Original Message-----
From: Meristein@AOL.COM <Meristein@AOL.COM>
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 14 May 1999 02:59
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip

>Instructions for this puffy star are in Gay Merrill Gross's book, The Art
of
>Origami, ISBN0-7924-5841-9. She calls it the Chinese Lucky Star, and says
it
>is a traditional design.
>
>Have fun folding lots of them!
>
>
>Merida





From: Emmajg <emmajg@CUSTARD.ORG>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 04:17:11 +0100
Subject: Re: "USS Enterprise" space ship model

I have this, I'll scan it in for you but the instruction are very clear :o(
http://chocolate.custard.org/origami
-----Original Message-----
From: MacTeabird@AOL.COM <MacTeabird@AOL.COM>
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 14 May 1999 01:23
Subject: "USS Enterprise" space ship model

>In a message dated 05/13/1999 2:25:46 PM, ejcranks@HIWAAY.NET writes:
>
><< I believe there is a "USS Enterprise" space ship model at the
>ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/culture/japan/origami/rugcis.rug.nl/models/ site
>but I couldn't connect to check. I'll try to look at my paper copy and
>double check the URL. >>
>
>hey Ed,
>The url works, but no sign of the "USS Enterprise" space ship model.
>What folder is it in???
>T-bird





From: Kimberly Crane <kcrane@KIMSCRANE.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 06:56:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip

Just curious...have you sought and received permission from the authors of all
these diagrams from published copyrighted books to put them on your web-site?
I thought it to be against copyright and ethical law to just blatantly
photocopy something  onto mass media communication.
Just curious,
Kimberly Crane
http://www.kimscrane.com

Emmajg wrote:

> I have that on my web page
> http://chocolate.custard.org/origami
> happy folding
> Emmajg*
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Meristein@AOL.COM <Meristein@AOL.COM>
> To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> Date: 14 May 1999 02:59
> Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip
>
> >Instructions for this puffy star are in Gay Merrill Gross's book, The Art
> of
> >Origami, ISBN0-7924-5841-9. She calls it the Chinese Lucky Star, and says
> it
> >is a traditional design.
> >
> >Have fun folding lots of them!
> >
> >
> >Merida





From: Pat Bush <patbush@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 06:58:09 -0700 (
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star (Swedish Star)

Dear Rosa,
Thank you the directions to the Swedish Star.  I loved that model but had
misplaced the directions; I was wandering around in the dark like on a
starless night 8-)  -- Pat

>From: Rosalinda Sanchez <RRosalinda@AOL.COM>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: Instructions for Star (Swedish Star)
>Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:54:25 EDT
>
>A Swedish Star is made from four strips of paper that are woven together.
>It
>is also known as a German Star.  See :
>
>http://www.thehistorynet.com/EarlyAmericanHomes/articles/12962_stars.htm
>
>
>The stars made from one strip of paper are usually referred to as "Puffy
>Stars"
>
>Rosa

_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com





From: Jennifer <jsgerrish@YAHOO.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 07:37:36 -0700
Subject: Re: New folder needs help with Kawasaki Rose

Jane Rosemarin -

Thanks for your assistance.  The Rose is the most complex item I have ever
folded and it was beautiful when finished.  The hints about laying the flaps
on top of one another was very instructive.  Thanks again.

Jennifer





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 08:07:55 +0100
Subject: Star Trekzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Leeh McArthur <Lamms@AOL.COM> sez

><< >You would make a lot of trekkies happy!
>Count me in!!

Count me out! Give me Elmer Fudd any day.

Nick Robinson





From: RPlsmn@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 08:59:54 -0400 (
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

How about geneticly researched miniature folding variations on a full sized
DNA Double Helix model?
                                                            -RPlsmn-





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 09:21:23 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] Read Bernie's email about email!

At 21:32 99/05/13 -0800, andalar wrote:
>Yes, filters are a part of whatever email software package we're using.
>What I meant was that those who organize lists provide ways of  setting
>apart different types of messages, like "[NO]", for us to key on in our
>user software with a filter.  No, I don't know of a way to prevent a subset
>of msgs from being sent from the listserver to my or anyone else's address.

At 09:52 99/05/14 -0400, Bernie Cosell wrote:
>The next stage is not to receive the stuff at all.  There are some
>mailing lists [origami-l is *NOT* one of them] that are run by an MLM
>that supports tag-filtering.  For such mailing lists, -every- message
>will have a [something] tag in its Subject line and when you subscribe to
>the list you'll actually be able to select which [something]s you choose
>to receive and which you don't.  I actually find this tagging stuff a
>nuisance [and have yet to actually "turn off" a subtopic], but for a very
>diverse high-volume list it could be handy and I know that many people
>very much like this approach.

Thanks, Bernie for your detailed explanation of email. Those who didn't
understand should understand now (assuming they read it).

One point of clarification (and in answer to Laura's question, too): the MIT
listserver is capable of doing topic tagging of messages, but, as you
pointed out, it is a nuisance to use, and a nuisance to maintain. For this
reason, I have not activated it.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: "Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 09:38:49 -0500
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

www.sasusgabooks.com <http://www.sasusgabooks.com>  for the new expensive
ones.  If you are serious . . . bit the bullet and buy one.

Check you local library, a lot of the older out of print books can be had.
Also ask you librarian about Interlibrary Loan, have the Title and ISBN
ready for them and they can attempt to locate it for you.

On the web www.powells.com <http://www.powells.com>  sells used books.  On
occasion you may find a treasure.

Brett

                Speaking about Yoshizawa, what is a good way to get any of
his books?  It
                seems that there aren't many books in print here, and the
one or two that
                are expensively priced.

                David





From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 09:52:42 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO]

On 13 May 99, at 18:12, Kim Best wrote:

> andalar wrote:
>
> > That's what filters are for.  A "good" list will provide ways for people to
> > filter out the subtopics they aren't interested in.  [NO] means no origami.
> > You could set up a filter that just trashes emails with "[NO]" in the
> > subject line.
>
> It has been my experience that filters are provided by the users e-mail
> software.  I know it is possible to retrieve messages on a given subject
> using the listserver, but I don't believe it is possible to use the
> listserver to prevent certain messages from arriving in your mailbox.
> If there is a way of doing this, using the listserver, please let us
> know.

This thread wanders farther and farther afield..:o)...  All tripped off
because one person hit their frustration level at receiving five lousy
messages a day for three days that they didn't want to see and were too
lazy just to delete [or filter out or just killfile the thread].  Can't
imagine what he'll do if/when he gets on a higher-traffic, more volatile
list where an argument will flare up and turn into 100 or 200 offtopic
messages [and not so carefully tagged as our "NO" ones here are], or if
he's away for a weekend he'll find 700 messages waiting for him..  14
whole bothersome messages in three days... FEH!!

Anyhow, in the scheme of things, if you don't want to see something from
a mailing list there are three places where you can intervene.

The easiest, surest, most fault-free way to manage your incoming email is
in your client.  There you can filter, sort, sub-folder or do whatever
you want, by whatever criteria you wish. [that's what most of us do, I
suspect -- e.g., I auto-filter the origami list into a folder of its own
[so that the origami mail isn't mixed in with my other email], and I
additionally filter any origami stuff with an 'NO' tag into a subfolder
of the origami folder].  If you're planning to do very much mailing-
listing (sic..:o) around the Internet, gettting facile with the
sorting/filtering machinery on your client [and, indeed, moving to a more
capable client if yours won't hack it!] is a pretty key step in ones
internet-evolution.

OK, the next step: you can delete stuff on your mail server out of your
mailbox [so you don't even have to download it].  there are a bunch of
utilities that'll do this sort of thing [for windows folk, you can go to
a place like TUCOWS and check out "email tools" for a fair selection of
POP3-based clients that'll peek at your on-the-server mailbox and prune
stuff out do you don't even have to download it.]  The problem with these
is that the underlying protocol [POP3] doesn't provide you with very much
"horsepower" for testing/filtering/patternmatching and such [pretty much
the only info you can get about a message on the server are header-lines
and the length of the message, so you can detect attachments [which is
keyed by a header line] and you can detect '[NO]' and other such 'tags'
in Subject lines] and the only action you can do with the message is
"delete it sight unseen".[*]  that's probably adequate for most folks'
needs.  The problem I have with this approach is that when you delete
something from the server it is *GONE*.  If it screws up and deletes
something by mistake you'll never know...and the email will be lost
forever and you'll have no way to recover.  If you do the filtering in
your client, you can "dump stuff" by putting it into a garbage-folder [or
'deleted' or "mightbespam" or whatever] and you can skim it quickly to
make sure that your filters haven't done anything untoward before you hit
the 'delete' key.
    [*] NB: some folk use a different protocol to access their mailbox
    called IMAP.  IMAP is a much more capable protocol than is POP3
    [e.g., you can actually store stuff in folders _on_the_server_].
    This is already far enough afield, so I'm not going to talk about
    this.  For the most part, almost all of us probably use POP3.

The next stage is not to receive the stuff at all.  There are some
mailing lists [origami-l is *NOT* one of them] that are run by an MLM
that supports tag-filtering.  For such mailing lists, -every- message
will have a [something] tag in its Subject line and when you subscribe to
the list you'll actually be able to select which [something]s you choose
to receive and which you don't.  I actually find this tagging stuff a
nuisance [and have yet to actually "turn off" a subtopic], but for a very
diverse high-volume list it could be handy and I know that many people
very much like this approach.

[NB: if you're one of the rare folk with a Unix shell account on the
system at which you receive your email, there is another place you can do
filtering: using a utility called "procmail" you can do filtering
_between_ your server and your mailbox.  [that is, it arrives at your
server, but you can "procmail" it before it gets put in your mailbox].
Procmail is mindbogglingly powerful and you can do amazing things with
your incoming email if you're proficient with it.  If this applies to you
[and you're not procmail-proficient] you can contact me privately for
some pointers to info on what you cna do with procmail and how to do it]

[if only I know a tenth as much about origami as I know about this
network stuff...:o)]

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





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 10:41:06 -0400
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

Allan findlay wrote:

+You could extend Thoki Yen's A4 DNA model to be made from a single very long
+strip of paper. I wouldn't fancy doing it though, the single A4 took me long
+enough.

A few years I did just the opposite.  If you fold it from a square you
can make DNA "Modules" and if you use different colored papers, you can
encode the DNA base pairings!  The only "lock" I used was friction.  Because
of the stair step twistings the lock worked fairly well, but the model
wouldn't hold up to much handling.

-D'gou





From: RPlsmn@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 10:52:24 -0400 (
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

do my eyes decieve me? are we knocking about the prospects of creating an
animated paper tiger?                               -RPlsmn-





From: RPlsmn@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:15:18 -0400 (
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

reconsidering the complexity, as my Montroll's Beetle usually more closely
resembles a softball ... is anyone out there smart enough to adapt the
flapping crane into a tiger that bites your finger when you pull its tail?
-RPlsmn-





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:27:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Instructions for Star made from strip

On Fri, 14 May 1999, Kimberly Crane wrote:

+Just curious...have you sought and received permission from the authors of all
+these diagrams from published copyrighted books to put them on your web-site?
+I thought it to be against copyright and ethical law to just blatantly
+photocopy something onto mass media communication.

(This is not written only to Emmajg:)

Kim is right, without permission that is in violation of copyright law.
Unfortunately, the origami community (at least the cross section I've
seen in the US and at OUSA's conventions) regularly flaunts copyright.
And when that is pointed out people are hurt that they are being
asked not to share what they have (in that great origami tradition). It
is quite schizophrenic actually, because in addition to the issue of
copyright LAW, most origami organizations, at least in lip service, go
beyond the law and state that one should obtain permission from the
creator before making one's own diagrams. Ethically more stringent
than the law.

We've had discussions (check the archives) about copyright and sharing
in the past... it comes up from time to time.

I am grateful to all the origami creators who press on and try to
publish in spite of all this. Thanks! Origami book writing is not a
(financially) lucrative proposition, for the authors at least! Also,
thanks to all the creators who have given permission to have, or who
have themselves put, their works on the web!

And if you wanna play some sob story about how poor you are, and how
you can't afford it, then I guess you have to use your library
(if you don't have one locally, I've heard of some libraries having
outreach programs for those unable to leave their homes, as well as
services available through the mail).

-D'gou





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:45:44 -0700
Subject: Re: copyright of diagrams

At 19:42 99/05/14 +0100, you wrote:
>I have written to the relevant publishers and I am awaiting conformation
>I don't see a problem in it but if they do then they will be removed.
>I'm just trying to help other people have fun with paper
>happy folding

It's good that you've asked permission, and it's nice that you want to help
others. However, taking things without permission (even if it's been asked
for) is stealing, plain and simple.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Christopher Holt <Ella-mae@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:49:04 -0700
Subject: Re: Star Trekzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Do you have an Elmer Fudd fold? I'd like to see Woody Woodpecker myself.

> Leeh McArthur <Lamms@AOL.COM> sez
>
> ><< >You would make a lot of trekkies happy!
> >Count me in!!
>
> Count me out! Give me Elmer Fudd any day.
>
>
> Nick Robinson





From: Binzi <binzi@MUENSTER.DE>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:51:14 +0200
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

Hi Kim,

you find my favorite dog model on following web site:

Origami, Art & GIFs of Greyhound & Whippet Page:
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/8193/

Cu
Evi





From: 3d <3d@NWFX.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:53:36 -0700
Subject: Violins conclusion.

Hi everyone,

Just a short note to conclude this thread:

The violin model by Daniel Porter exists in th 1991 Origami USA Annual
Collection (the one with the red cover, and no thumbnails of the models in
the contents, just plain text).  It's a nice model, and very fitting for my
Grandma's 90th birthday!

The violin model on the BARF site was more simplified than I needed.

And about the tank, the "Origami 4" book by Harbin has one of the better
tank models.  The gun even elevates!  Use foil-backed paper for the best
results.

Thank you to everyone who responded.

Dave R. Howe

3D Supervisor & Senior Animator
Northwest Imaging & FX
Vancouver, BC





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:53:42 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] Ted Brown...

At 14:22 99/05/14 -0400, you wrote:
>ROFLOL, LMAO!     :o)
>
>WOW!
>
>-Ted  :o)
>
>At least I read all the replies, apparently you have not!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@fantasyfarm.com>
>To: Ted Brown <tbrown@DIRECTI.NET>
>Date: Friday, May 14, 1999 2:10 PM
>Subject: Re: [NO]

Ted, Bernie wrote to you privately in an attempt to end this useless
discussion that you started. Again you break common netiquette by replying
to a private message in a public forum. I don't care if you have been online
for a long time, or if you have not. I do care that you are disruptive and
incorrigible. As administrator of this list, I ask you to give me a good
reason why I should not bar you from this list.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, List Owner of ORIGAMI@MIT.EDU   t: 604.730.0306 x 105
e: origami-request@mitvma.mit.edu          f: 604.732.7331





From: Binzi <binzi@MUENSTER.DE>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 12:32:33 +0200
Subject: Re: hello origami people!!!

Hello Marc,

Thank you very much for the great Enterprise models! I hope I'll understand
the diagrams.
Hopefully you don't mind my little joke (letter to Joseph), I'm just
kidding...I admire your work a lot.

Happy folding!
Evi





From: Allan findlay <a_findlay@EXCHANGE.CREATIONS.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 13:53:24 +0100
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

You could extend Thoki Yen's A4 DNA model to be made from a single very long
strip of paper. I wouldn't fancy doing it though, the single A4 took me long
enough.
--------------------------
        Allan           (a_findlay@exchange.creations.co.uk)

> ----------
> From:         RPlsmn@AOL.COM[SMTP:RPlsmn@AOL.COM]
> Reply To:     Origami List
> Sent:         14 May 1999 13:59
> To:   ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject:      Re: The Human Condition
>
> How about geneticly researched miniature folding variations on a full
> sized
> DNA Double Helix model?
>                                                             -RPlsmn-





From: Bob Stack <Noobob@AOL.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 14:05:32 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Violins anyone?!

I think that the Daniel Porter violin was in one of the old, very old,
Origamians.





From: Binzi <binzi@MUENSTER.DE>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 14:06:51 +0200
Subject: Re: hm...

>Hey,
>does anyone know how to fold a square from an 8x8 inch paper?

>Just kidding.

....yes, but it needs cutting... :o)

Evi





From: Allan findlay <a_findlay@EXCHANGE.CREATIONS.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 15:40:34 +0100
Subject: Re: The Human Condition

Excellent. Thats a good idea.
--------------------------
        Allan           (a_findlay@exchange.creations.co.uk)

> ----------
> From:         Doug Philips[SMTP:dwp@TRANSARC.COM]
> Reply To:     Origami List
> Sent:         14 May 1999 15:41
> To:   ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject:      Re: The Human Condition
>
> Allan findlay wrote:
>
> +You could extend Thoki Yen's A4 DNA model to be made from a single very
> long
> +strip of paper. I wouldn't fancy doing it though, the single A4 took me
> long
> +enough.
>
> A few years I did just the opposite.  If you fold it from a square you
> can make DNA "Modules" and if you use different colored papers, you can
> encode the DNA base pairings!  The only "lock" I used was friction.
> Because
> of the stair step twistings the lock worked fairly well, but the model
> wouldn't hold up to much handling.
>
> -D'gou





From: Allan findlay <a_findlay@EXCHANGE.CREATIONS.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 17:38:59 +0100
Subject: Re: [NO]

So, if you obviously have _some_ idea about using the 'net (ROFLOL) why are
you so intolerant of a tiny bit of off topicness?

Most of the other lists I have been on are much worse than this one.
--------------------------
        Allan           (a_findlay@exchange.creations.co.uk)

> ----------
> From:         Ted Brown[SMTP:tbrown@DIRECTI.NET]
> Reply To:     Origami List
> Sent:         14 May 1999 17:42
> To:   ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [NO]
>
> Hahahahahah ROFLOL!
>
> -Ted
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernie Cosell <bernie@FANTASYFARM.COM>
> To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> Date: Friday, May 14, 1999 9:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [NO]
>
>
> On 13 May 99, at 18:12, Kim Best wrote:
>
> > andalar wrote:
> >
> > > That's what filters are for.  A "good" list will provide ways for
> people
> to
> > > filter out the subtopics they aren't interested in.  [NO] means no
> origami.
> > > You could set up a filter that just trashes emails with "[NO]" in the
> > > subject line.
> >
> > It has been my experience that filters are provided by the users e-mail
> > software.  I know it is possible to retrieve messages on a given subject
> > using the listserver, but I don't believe it is possible to use the
> > listserver to prevent certain messages from arriving in your mailbox.
> > If there is a way of doing this, using the listserver, please let us
> > know.
>
> This thread wanders farther and farther afield..:o)...  All tripped off
> because one person hit their frustration level at receiving five lousy
> messages a day for three days that they didn't want to see and were too
> lazy just to delete [or filter out or just killfile the thread].  Can't
> imagine what he'll do if/when he gets on a higher-traffic, more volatile
> list where an argument will flare up and turn into 100 or 200 offtopic
> messages [and not so carefully tagged as our "NO" ones here are], or if
> he's away for a weekend he'll find 700 messages waiting for him..  14
> whole bothersome messages in three days... FEH!!
>
> Anyhow, in the scheme of things, if you don't want to see something from
> a mailing list there are three places where you can intervene.
>
> The easiest, surest, most fault-free way to manage your incoming email is
> in your client.  There you can filter, sort, sub-folder or do whatever
> you want, by whatever criteria you wish. [that's what most of us do, I
> suspect -- e.g., I auto-filter the origami list into a folder of its own
> [so that the origami mail isn't mixed in with my other email], and I
> additionally filter any origami stuff with an 'NO' tag into a subfolder
> of the origami folder].  If you're planning to do very much mailing-
> listing (sic..:o) around the Internet, gettting facile with the
> sorting/filtering machinery on your client [and, indeed, moving to a more
> capable client if yours won't hack it!] is a pretty key step in ones
> internet-evolution.
>
> OK, the next step: you can delete stuff on your mail server out of your
> mailbox [so you don't even have to download it].  there are a bunch of
> utilities that'll do this sort of thing [for windows folk, you can go to
> a place like TUCOWS and check out "email tools" for a fair selection of
> POP3-based clients that'll peek at your on-the-server mailbox and prune
> stuff out do you don't even have to download it.]  The problem with these
> is that the underlying protocol [POP3] doesn't provide you with very much
> "horsepower" for testing/filtering/patternmatching and such [pretty much
> the only info you can get about a message on the server are header-lines
> and the length of the message, so you can detect attachments [which is
> keyed by a header line] and you can detect '[NO]' and other such 'tags'
> in Subject lines] and the only action you can do with the message is
> "delete it sight unseen".[*]  that's probably adequate for most folks'
> needs.  The problem I have with this approach is that when you delete
> something from the server it is *GONE*.  If it screws up and deletes
> something by mistake you'll never know...and the email will be lost
> forever and you'll have no way to recover.  If you do the filtering in
> your client, you can "dump stuff" by putting it into a garbage-folder [or
> 'deleted' or "mightbespam" or whatever] and you can skim it quickly to
> make sure that your filters haven't done anything untoward before you hit
> the 'delete' key.
>     [*] NB: some folk use a different protocol to access their mailbox
>     called IMAP.  IMAP is a much more capable protocol than is POP3
>     [e.g., you can actually store stuff in folders _on_the_server_].
>     This is already far enough afield, so I'm not going to talk about
>     this.  For the most part, almost all of us probably use POP3.
>
> The next stage is not to receive the stuff at all.  There are some
> mailing lists [origami-l is *NOT* one of them] that are run by an MLM
> that supports tag-filtering.  For such mailing lists, -every- message
> will have a [something] tag in its Subject line and when you subscribe to
> the list you'll actually be able to select which [something]s you choose
> to receive and which you don't.  I actually find this tagging stuff a
> nuisance [and have yet to actually "turn off" a subtopic], but for a very
> diverse high-volume list it could be handy and I know that many people
> very much like this approach.
>
> [NB: if you're one of the rare folk with a Unix shell account on the
> system at which you receive your email, there is another place you can do
> filtering: using a utility called "procmail" you can do filtering
> _between_ your server and your mailbox.  [that is, it arrives at your
> server, but you can "procmail" it before it gets put in your mailbox].
> Procmail is mindbogglingly powerful and you can do amazing things with
> your incoming email if you're proficient with it.  If this applies to you
> [and you're not procmail-proficient] you can contact me privately for
> some pointers to info on what you cna do with procmail and how to do it]
>
> [if only I know a tenth as much about origami as I know about this
> network stuff...:o)]
>
>   /Bernie\
> --
> Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
> mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
>     -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--





From: Yurii and Katrin Shumakovs <origami@AAANET.RU>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 18:50:48 +0300
Subject: Re: paper and questions

>
>         Hi, my name is David.  I'm brand new to this email group.
>
>I would also like to know what kind of paper you
>guys generally use for wetfolding and any other
>supplies needed. I've never wetfolded before.
>

Hi, David.

Creating our models, we use a paper for copy engineering, for example,
Swedish paper by "MoDo" ( 80 g / sq.m.).
Models from this paper you can see on our site " Oriland - the Paper World
".
http://www.origami.aaanet.ru

Yurii and Katrin

ORILAND - THE PAPER'S WORLD
www.origami.aaanet.ru
Yurii and Katrin Shumakovs,
Origami artists and psychologists
origami@aaanet.ru
