4.0013 Responses on Modems and on Students (56)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Tue, 8 May 90 17:14:28 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 4, No. 0013. Tuesday, 8 May 1990.

(1) Date: Mon, 07 May 90 21:51:21 EDT (29 lines)
From: Ken Steele <KSTEELE@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: 2400 Baud Modems

(2) Date: Tue, 08 May 90 14:11:01 CDT (27 lines)
From: Herb Danow <GA0708@SIUCVMB>
Subject: derogatory terms of reference to students

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 May 90 21:51:21 EDT
From: Ken Steele <KSTEELE@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: 2400 Baud Modems

I have no specific brand name recommendations for 2400 baud modems,
although I have no reason to complain about my GVC Supermodem 2400,
but I do have some recently-learned advice to share: avoid internal
modems! A few months ago I tried to upgrade from a 1200 baud
external modem to a 2400 baud internal one, since I finally had a
full-size AT case with plenty of expansion slots, and thought it
might be nice to clean up some of the clutter on my desk. Almost
immediately there were hardware conflicts that three separate batteries
of experts could not resolve: I/O addresses, interrupts, COM port
settings, etc were the least of the trouble. Erratic problems with
various programs occurred without rhyme or reason, yet disappeared
whenever the modem card was removed. Ultimately, the only solution
was to exchange the internal GVC for an external GVC -- which was
just as well, because within a month I needed to use it on a PS/2,
and its micro-channel architecture would not have accepted an AT-
style modem card anyway.

External modems, though aesthetically less pleasing, offer fewer
internal hassles and greater compatibility across machines. Any
brand should do -- I had absolutely no problem with my first one,
either, an Avatex 1200, which was simply the cheapest in town.

Ken Steele
University of Toronto
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------33----
Date: Tue, 08 May 90 14:11:01 CDT
From: GA0708@SIUCVMB
Subject: derogatory terms of reference to students

A few weeks ago someone raised the question about slang terms for
students. At the time I glanced at these remarks without giving them
much thought--although I remember one in particular. This correspondent
believed th at the reason we don't make up derogatory references to
students is because we recognize them as our bread and butter. I think
he may also have said that we are, after all, very fond of the little
buggers. As a matter of fact, we do speak of students--both
undergraduate and graduate alike--in derogatory terms. We just don't
have an argot for describing them. What we do is repeat the incredibly
bizarre things that they say and write. For example, I like to tell
people about a reading several students gave to a line in Shakespeare's
Sonnet 116--"It [i.e., love] is the star to every wandring barke"--which
has a stray dog baying at the heavens. Or very recently one of my
students wrote that Lady Macbeth was "roofless." But I don't think I
have ever had any as funny as a couple printed recently in The Chronicle
of Higher Education ("Marginalia"). Did you know that King David was an
Israelite king who was always fighting the Falafelites; or that Sir
Francis Drake circumcised the globe with a 100-foot clipper?

Professors, being articulate and verbose, are not as likely as carnival
people to invent words to describe outsiders. But by recording, or at
least remembering, these gaffes, we make clear that we, the teachers,
"never" appear ridiculous while our feckless disciples always can be
counted on to amuse us. In time, of course, they give us less cause to
be amused.

Herb Donow Southern Illinois U. at Carbondale