RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 1/1
    1. Re: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 1
    2. Robert Earl Woodham
    3. Mail Delivery Subsystem wrote: > > The original message was received at Sun, 1 Jun 1997 18:54:47 -0500 > from fh102f.infi.net [208.131.160.101] > > ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- > <ralph@psyberlink.net> (unrecoverable error) > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > deliver: can't create lockfile /var/spool/mail/ralph.lock: File exists > deliver: delivery error on host waverly. > Delivery to these addresses failed: > ralph > Reason(s) for failure: > "ralph": Can't write to mailbox > 554 <ralph@psyberlink.net>... unknown mailer error 1 > > ----- Original message follows ----- > Return-Path: woodham@leo.infi.net > Received: from fh102.infi.net (fh102f.infi.net [208.131.160.101]) by waverly.psyberlink.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA20886 for <ralph@psyberlink.net>; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 18:54:47 -0500 > Received: from pa2dsp12.csg.infi.net (pa2dsp12.csg.infi.net [207.0.197.60]) > by fh102.infi.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA00831 > for <ralph@psyberlink.net>; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 19:55:51 -0400 (EDT) > Message-ID: <33921EEC.3B05@leo.infi.net> > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 18:16:28 -0700 > From: Robert Earl Woodham <woodham@leo.infi.net> > Reply-To: woodham@leo.infi.net > Organization: InfiNet > X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: "Ralph J. Mauelshagen" <ralph@psyberlink.net> > Subject: Sasser family > References: <01BC6E91.2E1E9240@net51.psyberlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Dear Cuz, > > Sorry cuz, I did not mean to tread upon any toes. I had to look up the > real meaning of the word because although I have spent most of my life > as a writer, I am not in the habit of using it. > > "To assume an air of superiority." I don't believe this is the meaning > you intended. > > "To descend to a less formal level..." This is the meaning I prefer. > And I have ALWAYS > preferred to be on a "less formal level" with family. In Spanish, for > instance, they have a pronoun which is used for friends and family and > another word which is used for strangers and acquaintenances. Were I > Spanish, I would NEVER think of using anything but the informal words > with my own kinsmen. > > I was born and raised on a farm in South Georgia, where we are informal > with everyone--that is just our friendly nature. To this day, folks > down there still throw up their hand as they pass another car on the > rural roads. You speak to EVERYONE you meet on the street, whether you > know them or not. Not to do so is considered an insult. > In times past, a man doffed his hat when he met a lady on the street and > moved to the side. > > Now, if my pattern of speech offends you then you are apparently not > familiar with country folk from the Deep South. We don't mean to be > forward, we just like to be friends with anybody and everybody. I have > often heard other folks say of my Granddaddy that "He never met a > stranger". I have tried to follow in his footsteps. > > My Granddaddy had only an eighth-grade education; he attended a one-room > school with one teacher and there was only eight grades. Yet he had > self-educated himself well beyond those eight grades and was a wise and > kind gentleman. I would NEVER have thought of "talking down" to him > even though I had more education. > > For several years, I was a writer in my small hometown and covered > Southwest Georgia for a metropolitan newspaper. The first time my > editor came down and visited me in person at a resturant there, he > sternly asked me why I was not wearing a suit and tie. He pointed out > that I was representing the newspaper and should always put my best > appearance forward. I asked him to look around him (we were in the > nicest resturant in town) and see if he could find anyone wearing a suit > and tie. The only one present who did was a lawyer and politician. I > was NOT acting "condescendingly" by "dressing down", I was simply > dressing normally as my friends and neighbors did in my hometown. > > My editor learned a lesson from that visit, he later told me. He also > advised me (not the first one to do so) to remember that I was writing > for a mass audience and to use "everyday" language. Yet while writing > for the ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, I had to change the style > somewhat. And still another change when I was assistant editor of > several magazines with an international circulation. > > I learned this lesson many times over in my life. I once was an avid > cave explorer and I learned on many trips to the mountains of north > Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee that you can never appear to be a "big > city slicker" to the folks who live in those areas. There are folks in > some of those back hollows who can be very anti-social to one of those > slickers from Atlanta yet very friendly to a country boy from South > Georgia. > > Now, if you perceived my messages as "shouting and angry", that is > certainly not the intent I meant to convey. > > On the contrary, I simply wished to convey the facts that we had > kinfolks in America who came from ENGLAND and not Germany as was being > reported almost on a daily basis through > the discussion group. I read the reports for about three weeks before I > finally sent the first message (the server was supposed to send an > automatic message but it never sent me info on how to post messages). > During that time, no one even mentioned the fact there were Sasser's in > America before the reported immigration in 1735 from Germany, nor did > anyone mention anything about England. > > That was why my first message was on this subject. I don't think I was > shouting nor did I intend to. However, I have been in the journalism > profession too long to believe that someone would be offended by a "new" > idea different from their own. > > (for some reason, my printer won't print beyond the (b) line, down to > "Thank you." > and then prints only one additional line (beginning an immigrations). > I keep having to make the window smaller so I can refer back to your > letter. > More on the way... > Your cuz, > Robert Earl ------------------------------

    06/01/1997 02:29:38