I feel reluctant to post a seemingly large plot hole here without author permission. I had it all typed in and then saved it elsewhere. Mr Bywater has said that his email doesn't like my email, so I can't go that route.
So, Mr Bywater may I discuss this here? Either way this goes is fine with me and I do respect the craftsmanship and originality going into your work.
Steve
go for it, I got nothing to hide - and that scares the cops.
A couple of US based ISPs still don't like iiNet and block them.
edit to add: if it seems a reasonable issue, I'll probably have to do a blog entry about it, anyway.
Email blocks can be from both providers. Unless you have access to check it out. I would assume the block is on both ends (but what do I know).
Email blocks can be from both providers
No, it's from the US end. When they first happened (and a couple of times since) I contacted the ISPs involved in the USA and found out what was going on. iiNet is The Biggest ISP in the Asia & western Pacific area. Some of the Asian spammers use them as their ISP. Although iiNet shut them down as fast as they can identify them, it's not fast enough to stop mobs like Comcast from blocking every IP address used by iiNet because they got spammed from that network. Both Comcast and Bellsouth admitted to me, by email, the reasons for blocking that group of IP was reports of spammers from within the block. It's kind of like blocking the whole of the USA and Canada because they had a few spammers from North American IP addresses.
Thanks Ernest. I admit I tend to try and not judge too quickly. Your information just fits the profile of the groups I have struggled against for over 40 years. They do tend to go overboard in their reactions and of course it is never their fault.
First of all there are a few prefaces to make
1) Mr Bywater has said in his blog that my Email and his doesn't get along, so I am posting here.
2) I have very few technical problems with his writing (usually involving lots of exclamation points or quotes and italics for some reason they make me twitch)
3) I do find his writing enjoyable and more than worth the time reading.
In Zombie I was reading and loved the names (Mr Zebediah Ombee and Walker) and enjoyed the story; but, there was something wrong.
I read it and reread it. And then it hit me. *SEE FOOTNOTE ABOUT THIS TYPE OF "COMPLAINT" PLEASE* The people with the blood type AB- ARE the rarest common blood type (less than 1%) they are NOT the hardest to get blood for, they can use O- A- B- or AB- about 16% of the population. Oddly enough the "universal Donor" O- is in a much worse position being only able to receive O- blood at 7% of the population. A- is at 9% (O- and A-) and B- is at 13%(O- and B-) AB+ people are in the happy category of not caring about blood type their body likes it all.
Or at least that is my understanding of the whole blood donation system.
Then I reread the story and still liked it.
*FOOTNOTE*
There are several books by various professional, i.e. we throw money at them, authors that have an impossibility as the main "problem" in the story. The worst one that I can remember was by Marrian Zimmer Bradley that had a problem with weightlessness while accelerating out of the solar system - physically impossible. Anne McCaffrey had a similar problem with her "solution"in the Pern books . For the record I enjoyed both books, I just have to know that space/time has changed.
Thanks, Steve
Here is a link that explains blood type compatibility.
https://www.pathology.med.umich.edu/bloodbank/manual/bb_chart/
If I understand the chart correctly, since the patient was receiving whole blood, type AB was required.I was under the same impression about compatibility as you until I looked it up.
G'day Steve,
First, I never object to anyone making an honest comment on any aspect of my writing. In fact, in a couple of stories I've made some changes due to people pointing out errors I had to fix.
2. I do not have an issue with any ISP, per se, but experience has shown (as explained in a post above) certain ISPs have a problem with my ISP and replies to those ISP usually get bounced back as not deliverable. Since the action is at the US ISP I can't do anything about it. Sorry about that.
This issue only relates to me sending the people replies, I can receive emails from them without any troubles.
Another issue I have is when the Reply to address in an email has a fault in it, the reply gets bounced. I recently had a couple where the people had the domain as .con and not .com that is an n and not an m as the last letter. So it got bounced because the address didn't exist. Another had an extra letter in their name and it got bounced.
3. My writing format is a cross between the styles for a print book, PDF, e-pub, html and SoL. I use italics and bold to help differentiate various things within the story. The use of exclamation marks and quotes is as I was taught and as my editors agree with (yes, they sometimes talk me into changing some). I'm aware the use of such punctuation does vary between some countries. I'm Australian and write using the methods taught here in Australia. One big one I have is the use of an exclamation mark for a rhetorical question, one of the US editors insists it has to be a questions mark if it sounds like a question, but use of the exclamation mark makes it clear it's a rhetorical question.
4. Now, as to the blood factors, since you've raised the issue I'll look into it. However, this story was originally written back in 2008 and that section was based on the information I had been given a couple of years earlier by a pathology nurse, and matched what I'd been told many years prior to that. In the several years this story has been available for sale on certain websites no one has said anything about the blood groups before, so I've not felt the need to look at it.
Another aspect is I was told is some situation, such as a major blood replacement situation, and exact blood group match is required. How truthful that is, I'm not sure, but I got that from different medical professionals some years ago when I started on the story.
In short, I wrote what I had been told was the true situation, now it's been challenged I'll look into. At this time I've no intention of making any further changes to the story, but that may change in the future.
Thanks for raising the issue.
One big one I have is the use of an exclamation mark for a rhetorical question, one of the US editors insists it has to be a questions mark if it sounds like a question, but use of the exclamation mark makes it clear it's a rhetorical question.
Everything I've read says a rhetorical question ends with a question mark. I hate that rule. After all, you're not asking a question.
Well, I guess you technically are, it's just that you're not expecting an answer. You're making a statement in the form of a question, but it is in the form of a question.
Everything I've read says a rhetorical question ends with a question mark.
Switch,
I think it's best said in these articles:
http://www.grammarly.com/handbook/punctuation/end-sentence-punctuation/2/question-mark/
A question mark is, naturally, a mark which shows the sentence is a question. A question mark is required at the end of an interrogative sentence.
http://www.grammarly.com/handbook/punctuation/end-sentence-punctuation/3/exclamation-mark/
Exclamation marks are used in exclamatory sentences, and sometimes in imperative sentences.
............
A rhetorical question is not an interrogative sentence, it's more of a imperative sentence, despite how it's formed and sounds.
..................
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/qMarks.asp
Rule 3b. Some sentences are statements-or demands-in the form of a question. They are called rhetorical questions because they don't require or expect an answer. Many should be written without question marks.
......................
I have found that many of the US based sites on writing often have different instructions on how to use punctuation marks to the UK based sites. And that does help readers or writers. The worse are the blogs put out by writers who are not well trained or qualified in the proper use of the English language.
Rule 3b. Some sentences are statements-or demands-in the form of a question. They are called rhetorical questions because they don't require or expect an answer. Many should be written without question marks.
Yeah. When the boss says, "Got a minute" it's not a question. It's "get your ass in my office." I wouldn't end it with a question mark.
I wouldn't end it with a question mark.
Nor would I, and that's when the use of the exclamation mark helps to make it clear it's a rhetorical question and not a real question.
that's when the use of the exclamation mark helps to make it clear it's a rhetorical question and not a real question.
The only time I use an exclamation mark for that is with, "What!"
The only time I use an exclamation mark for that is with, "What!"
Personally, I don't consider that "What" to be rhetorical. That comes up when someone is surprised by something bizarre and / or epically stupid.
They do want an explanation, but the know before the question gets out of their mouth that the answer is going to be either insane or stupid or both.
I write that as: "What?!
I write that as: "What?!
The interrobang never caught on and is considered a nonstandard punctuation mark. Personally, I believe it should have become standard.
Personally, I don't consider that "What" to be rhetorical.
But it is. It's really saying "What did you say!" without expecting an answer, thus a rhetorical question. If someone was actually asking "What?" I'd write it with the question mark.
But it is. It's really saying "What did you say!" without expecting an answer, thus a rhetorical question. If someone was actually asking "What?" I'd write it with the question mark.
It could be "What did you do?" or "What the fuck/hell?"
Even if it is "What did you say!" it's not really rhetorical. You are basically daring the person to say it again to your face.
I write that as: "What?!
That's when you need an interrobang (Please, let's not start that whole discussion again!).
That's when you need an interrobang
Interrobang - - isn't that the interrogation technique where you give the subject a thorough banging (i.e. rape) while asking them questions?
Robang sounds like a gangbang by robots. If they are different races, then its an interrobang.
Robang sounds like a gangbang by robots. If they are different races, then its an interrobang.
What would the different races of robots be? Analog and Digital, or Google, Apple and M$?
What would the different races of robots be?
Asimovian Robots, and their enemies, the Saberhagen Robots. Then of course, all of Mr. Smith's Androids.
And I forgot, but now add, Cylons.
Asimovian Robots, and their enemies, the Saberhagen Robots.
And their cousins, the Skynet-bots.
And I forgot, but now add, Cylons.
and their very mathematical robot cousins, the Pi-lons
and their very mathematical robot cousins, the Pi-lons
Pi-lons are the support foundation of the Cylon armada.
I don't know if this will work, did itβ½ (Note, in case it didn't, I ended that sentence with an interrobang (unicode 203D).)
Re races of robots: Mustn't forget Karel Δapek's, or are those Rosum's (Universal Robots).
I don't know if this will work, did itβ½
yes it did, but I don't like it because it confuses a lot of people, especially those who've not seen it before, and it doesn't print well in many fonts.
Everything I've read says a rhetorical question ends with a question mark. I hate that rule. After all, you're not asking a question.
If a rhetorical question isn't clear from the context, then it's failed. There is no rhetorical punctuation mark.
Although it rubs many the wrong way, I agree with Ernest's thinking. If the sentence isn't stated as a question, then you can eliminate the question mark. But again, it's essential it's clear it's rhetorical from the context.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_type_distribution_by_country
http://knowyourblood.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Rare-Blood-Type-Transfusion-List.png
Whole blood compatibility is very different to red cell or plasma compatibility. Major trauma is one of the main situations where whole blood is required instead of just red cell or plasma transfusion. In the story the situation requires whole blood due to major trauma and acute hemorrhaging.
Many countries no longer do whole blood transfusions or store whole blood because of past problems with blood transfusions.
Notes below are from the websites listed.
----------------------------------
https://www.pathology.med.umich.edu/bloodbank/manual/bb_chart/
shows that for whole blood transfusions AB is the only option for AB as whole blood, for red cell or plasma only then there is a much wider option.
----------------------------------
http://patient.info/doctor/blood-products-for-transfusion
Whole blood
In most circumstances, blood component therapy has replaced the use of whole blood. However, whole blood is still occasionally used for massive transfusion in circumstances in which rapid correction of acidosis, hypothermia and coagulopathy is required. This mainly occurs in military situations for trauma patients who require resuscitation
-----------------------------
https://labtestsonline.org/lab/bloodbank/start/6
Whole Blood (WB)
Whole blood contains red blood cells for transport of oxygen to tissues, white blood cells for fighting infection, platelets for clotting, and plasma, the fluid part of whole blood. Compatibility testing is required before transfusion of whole blood.
Red Blood Cells (RBCs)
Red blood cells (RBCs) typically make up about 40% of the blood volume. RBCs contain hemoglobin, a protein that binds to oxygen and enables RBCs to carry oxygen from the lungs to the tissues and organs of the body. RBCs are prepared from whole blood by removing the plasma from the collection bag. They may be transfused in the treatment of anemia resulting from, for example, kidney failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, or blood loss during trauma or surgery. Donor red blood cells must be compatible with the recipient's plasma. Compatibility testing is required before transfusion.
Fresh Frozen Plasma (FFP)
Plasma is the fluid portion of blood. It consists of water, fats, sugar, protein and salts. Its main functions are to transport the blood cells throughout the body as well as other substances, such as nutrients, clotting factors, antibodies, and waste products. It helps to maintain blood pressure and the fluid-electrolyte and acid-base balances of the body. Plasma may be transfused to help control bleeding when no coagulation factor-specific concentrate is available.
------------------------
http://reference.medscape.com/drug/whole-blood-999509
Acute Hemorrhage
As whole blood transfusion is limited to acutely hemorrhaging individuals, dosing should be based on the patient's clinical condition, estimated blood loss, and other measures being used to maintain hemodynamic stability.
Ow, my head hurts. Ok you are correct, I am wrong. there are two conflicting compatibilities one for the blood cells and one for plasma. AB- is the universal plasma donor. Whole blood transfusion HAS to be strictly by blood type. My day has not been wasted, I Have Learned Something. The Human body is so weird its a wonder that it works at all.
Thank You garymrssn it was quite edifying
The exclamation point thing was for a few stories. Odd Man in College had a typical example: a response from a prompt "can I help you?" was "Probably! What's the fees, and what does membership. . ."
To me the exclamation point puts too much emphasis on the "probably" unless you have been waiting. You didn't do it before those stories and I haven't noticed it recently. So I will blink and keep reading.
And I will keep reading :)
Steve
To me the exclamation point puts too much emphasis on the "probably"
Great, that's what I was trying to do with that sentence. It was done that way to emphasis he's there for a purpose, realises the other fellow is working there, but doesn't know who's doing what because of the way it is. So he's not sure about what's going on.
I'll also admit I started using the exclamation marks a bit more after a protracted discussion with an English teacher and one of my editors. That was a couple of years ago. My style of writing has changed a lot in the last five to eight years, but the most has been in the last two years. Over all it conveys the story in a clearer and smoother manner. Which is why I'm currently revising everything, thus anything that doesn't have a 2016 revision date is likely to be an older style than those with a 2016 revision date.
BTW Odd Man in College has recently been revised and is with the editors at the moment.
Ow, my head hurts. Ok you are correct, I am wrong. there are two conflicting compatibilities one for the blood cells and one for plasma. AB- is the universal plasma donor. Whole blood transfusion HAS to be strictly by blood type. My day has not been wasted, I Have Learned Something. The Human body is so weird its a wonder that it works at all.
I ran into this in my "Great Death" series, which revolve around a treatment protocol based on plasma transfusions (since that's the preferred technique in immunity transfers).
It caused me no end of grief, as people kept writing to tell me I got all my blood types wrong. I went to great lengths, repeatedly, to explain the difference between whole blood transfers and plasma transfers, but still, each time I'd mention it, I'd get complaints all over again.
Interesting items, but hardly enough to be ranting on about. Example:
Feck off! (obvious invitation/demand)
Feck off? (invite to repeat the invitation/demand, with a confrontation brewing.)
In fiction writing with so much culture involved, wrapped in jargon, slang, popular usage, expository vs. dialogue, and all that, I do seriously question the endless nit-pickerage concerning what's "proper," "legal," "allowed" and otherwise "according to Hoyle" (who is long dead and long may his bones moulder! The last thing we need in this forum is endless whinging about four-handed Whist!)
And what was considered proper in the days of Hoyle. Probably is not considered proper now or in some cases even legal. That is why I try and judge some things by the period the writers were living and writing their stories. Its the same with language its usage changes over the years.
I do seriously question the endless nit-pickerage concerning what's "proper," "legal," "allowed" and otherwise "according to Hoyle"
And that's the beauty of writing in the vernacular, the way I do. There are a lot of restrictions when using Formal English which you are supposed to toss aside when using Vernacular English, which I enjoy tossing aside.
