>True, Mr. Badger, my post was hastily written, and was in need of
>correction. I was in fact referring only to the so-called "bitty boxes"
>when I made my blanket statement. Of course plenty of folks out there use
>Unix, and, as you mentioned, they can run either TADS or Inform just as
>easily.
>What saddens me, however, is your assumption that I am an ignorant newbie
>not because of the content of my post, but because it was posted from AOL.
>On the Internet, you can't tell a person's race, creed, color, age, height
>or weight. Despite this, some people *still* will find an equally baseless
>reason to prejudge others. It's called bigotry, and it's just as wrong in
>r.a.i-f. as it is in the real world.
>I hope I have gotten the wrong impression from you, but if this is what
>you intended in your posts, your ignorance is *not* excusable.
Ah, but I didn't assume you are ignorant because you were on AOL. You
made a statement that could be percieved as ignorant in respect to the
existence of machines that were not not personal computers, and I
correlated with the fact that such statements often come from AOL
members. No prejudgement was needed.
Also you may wish to reflect that sterotypes are not created in a
vacuum. If a large number of people in a group did not act like the
sterotype, then where did the sterotype come from? This is true both
of positive sterotypes (Korean immigrants do well in school) and
negative (Inner city youth are gang members).
The danger in sterotypes comes not from the sterotype itself but from
confusing "many" with "most or all", which ignores those who do not fit
the rule.