Tanya Mitchell's Message
Here is the long-winded and logically vacuous message that Tanya Mitchell sent to Mikazuki. I have also included my responses to her message.
> First of all, whether you're doing it on purpose or not, thank you
> ever so much for giving me the benefit of the doubt, Mistress 9.
> Tomoe, and the RPG busters have been very kind to the Tomb over the
> past few years, pointing out where it's mentioned and who's been
> taking images, despite the fact my site has little to do with RPGs
> beyond a small information overview point. Though that appears to
> what is on trial here, eitherway, I'm extremely grateful.
> Still, I hope you'll pardon my reluctance to stick my head into the
> forum, and thus send this 'cowardly' email. While everyone's
> definitely trying to be polite and civil (and some not trying at
> all), there's still enough animosity in there already to have made
> noose just my size. I feel that if I stick my head in, a couple of
> people will have the chance they've been, appearantly, festering
> longing for, and I'll be hanged. I've never been good at talking
> people, and no doubt I'll end up helping to hang myself, so don't
> mind the email, please. I'm simply fond of breathing.
[Editor's note: What a cute metaphor! It is a shame that she was overreacting.]
> Of course, Miller -or maybe, "that Miller"? One can hide behind a
> whole shipment of red herring if they like, but when something is
> referred to as "that RPGBuster", or "that Crescent Moon Princess",
> it's usually with negative connotations, resonating along the same
> lines as "that THING!" It *is* a derogatory method of reference, so
> if you'd like to pick at my wording...
[Editor's note: Well, there is only one Miller in this situation. There were apparently several RPGBusters at one time.]
> Sorry, sidetracked. Yes, Miller's right. The Tomb is roughly 90%
> correct in it's contents, if I can allow myself that much credit,
> no, this is not because I'm making "silly" crap up as a go along
> fill informational blanks, or because I "don't care" about my site.
> It's a rather low generalization to assume that I must not care about
> my site simply because I barely update it; as though I have a choice
> in my timing, ability to update, or leisure time availble. Not
> everyone's that lucky.
[Editor's note: It certainly seems like she has been making up “silly” crap. From what I have seen at the Tomb, I would say that it is roughly fifty percent correct in its contents. Besides, it is not simply the fact that she does not update her site often. She does not fix what needs to be fixed.]
> All my information I found from somewhere. I haven't made anything
> up, so if the information is wrong, then it's more of a problem with
> my sources, sources that I hunt down in a hectic limited net time. I
> take what I can find without wasting time debating its accuracy, and
> for many of these characters ANY source is a damn lucky strike. I
> throw the information I've scrounged up in a flurry, try to make sure
> the text is legible, promise myself I'll type a biblio. to all my
> meager sources (which I never do), and run away to live my life.
[Editor's note: It would have been nice if she cited her sources.]
> As the updates say, my time is limited, and work outweighs leisure
> as the years plod on. I'm not kidding when I say I fight for internet
> time; I DO. As Mikazuki's already noticed, Chanel and Gucci haven't
> been updated in all of "2-years!". But, ss Mistress 9 also noticed in
> the updates, it says I'm busy. This is also painfully true. Even now,
> I read mistress9's email yesterday, and have been writing on it in
> little burst of time squeezed from poking my sister, mother, little
> brother, off the computer. Do any of these facts even /remotely/ show
> how little time I have to keep track of everything, update, even,
> lately, draw?? Quite a bit if the info has not shifted an iota since
> the day it was written, because 1) it's easier to change an image and
> 2) more people ask for updates to "cute images." I know most of my
> viewers are 15-. Not many of them may care for the extra tidbits, and
> more depth strikes me as more of a matter for the singular character
[Editor's note: Since most of your viewers are fifteen, it is okay to leave up misinformation and misspellings? Is it really that difficult to spend ten minutes correcting spelling errors?]
> I cater to the younger crowd, the bunch that keeps emailing me
> over "cute images" and midi's, things long lost to the
> more 'mature.'How can I help being a Sailor Moon site and not cater
> to children? That would miss the point. If a junior student studying
> law somewhere in the depths of the U.S. doesn't like Tomb, I don't
> care. Good for him. He's not my target audience, and if he craves
> instant justification, then by all means, let him make his own site
> and place his reserach there. Time and computer gods are obviously
> more on his side than mine, so let him take advantage of that and
> make his own large BSSM collective somewhere. I may not have time for
> my own measely tweaks, but I could certainly make time to link and
> reccomend that venture.
[Editor's note: She caters to the younger crowd? Boy, that was really difficult to figure out!]
> While on the Gucci topic, I thought it was obvious the actual
> translation of Guccicci was something Takeuchi made to avoid getting
> sued. I also though that Guccicci was obviously a play on Gucci, so
> as long as the general play is mentioned in some form, Guccicci or
> Gucci, the absolute specifics do not matter to me, and might be
> better captured in a Fashion Senshi shrine than an overview Tomb
> site. But then, I thought the play on an old Gucci logo, as obvious
> on Naruru's attire, the face-to-face GG of designer Guccio Gucci, was
> obvious. I'd seen the double-G on a watch previous to ever writing
> page 10 in the Tomb, and seeing it in the manga rang of "Gucci" loud
> and clear.
[Editor's note: Going by that logic, she should write “Sailor Heavy Metal Butterfly” because the “absolute specifics do not matter to” her. Seeing Papillon in the manga rang of “Butterfly” loud and clear!]
> "During this period, the company adopted the GG logo, taken from
> initials of its founder, as an ornamental motif for a distinctive
> cotton fabric called GG canvas. This original material was used in
> the making of handbags, accessories, luggage and the first articles
> of clothing."Gucci.com
> Of, course, you won't find that logo much anymore unless you hunt it
> down in vintage; it was more popular in the 70's, and still popular
> in Tokyo around '86ish when BSSM came into play, even if it reached
> Japan in '72. Chanel, as in the designer Coco Chanel, still has the
> double C-logo, back to back, as can be seen on the chanel.com (beware
> the flash). The only modification made in the Diary's pages was a
> cutesy flower stuck where the C's meet, but it still reads
> as "Chanel." Same goes for the face to face G's and the artful
> insertion of a six-point star for cover-up. Her modifications are
> funny and borderline.
> (http://members.nbci.com/AnimatesEtAl/guchan13.gif Being that that's
> on nbci, former xoom, you might want to type the address out. It may
> not go where it's clicked to ^^;.)
> I really have no plans on changing that. In my miniscule view, it
> doesn't seem wrong at all, and neither translation has much of "rumor
> spreading" potential; that seems like an overblown assumption. Mine
> may not be what Takeuchi /has/, but it's very likely what
> she /meant/, or like Mikazuki said, the "real" words.
[Editor's note: Does not Channel and Guccicci mean exactly Channel and Guccicci? If Ms. Takeuchi meant Chanel and Gucci, why did she go out of her way to write Channel and Guccicci differently?]
> BTW, fyi, the first time Channel and Guccicci where up in the Tomb,
> you know what happened? Dozens of emails flooded in, not *gasp* to
> compliment my "cute image", but to /correct me/. Every little
> American viewer kept saying that the name was CHANEL and GUCCI, and
> that I'd obviously spelled it wrong because I was an idiot. Tired of
> the pressuring chirps, I 'corrected' myself and rewrote it as Chanel
> and Gucci; Channel and Guccicci lasted all of a weeks-length in the
> Tomb before that change. What is up there now may not be exact, but
> it's still -technically-correct, and it keeps the complaints down. If
> people are looking for further depth on the matter, then I direct
> them to specific character shrines, and not to my sparse overview
> Tomb. I know I don't say everything- I don't have time to-, I don't
> know everything -that's impossible-, and I'm guilty of cutting
> corners to save time.
[Editor's note: So, she is willing to eschew accuracy in favor of pandering to fans who do not know any better? Should I call Sailor Aluminum Seirn “Sailor Aluminum Siren” because many other fans do?]
> I thought my summary rewording of the ChibiUsa Diary event conveyed
> that Naruru and Ruruna were not true senshi. "These two are not
> really official Sailor Senshi, but they have the hearts of true
> soldiers!" Repeat: Not official sailor senshi, but have the hearts of
> them, meaning they're not real senshi at all, just a couple of otaku
> who showed the senshi-ish courage. In the tranlation I read 2 years
> ago, they did delcare themselves as Sailor-suited Chanel and Gucci.
> Even the true senshi declare their presense that way, and as studious
> otaku, they no doubt knew that. Present day (present time!
> Mwahahah!), I have, yes, seen differant wording to it, in which they
> never declare that at all. Not knowing Japanese leaves me ever
> uncertain, and if I've been rendered inaccurate, then *shrug* I've
> been rendered inaccurate. I'll change it when I can, if I can, and
> not any time before. Deal? Deal. If people are in such a hu rry, why
> not make their own shrines to them, or correct those with more
> specific shrines.
[Editor's note: Does any of this have anything to do with the fact that Ms. Takeuchi wrote “Channel” and “”Guccicci” and not “Chanel” and “Gucci”?]
> I'm sorry, but Lethe is very bad at taking non-vital things
> seriously. She has the atrocious habit of putting work before play.
> No doubt she should be shot. The Tomb is her hobby, a toy, a
> plaything, not a job she's being paid for, or an assignment with
> fixed due dates. She'll update when she feels like it, at her own
> pace, when she /can/, and answer to questions on it in the same
> manner, as she see's fit.
> If the Tomb must suffer a case of not being diehard specific because
> of this 'bad habit' of mine, then fine, I can deal with that. If
> patience is not a virtue a viewer possssesses, then I can't do much
> about that, but I feel no driving need to appease their impatience
> either. They'll just have to get over it and live their lives, much
> like I do. Suffice to say, I like Sailor Moon, adore its characters
> and story line, but little mistranslations of the titles of an an
> actor, decked in green taffeta, green feather boas, bright green
> odango-ed wigs, portraying a fictional character designed for
> Japanese children, all the way in Japan, is nothing I'm going to
> gripe over, or bitterly discuss with my cronies. My heart won't stop,
> and the world keeps turning. People will sit down and enjoy the soap.
> Having correcting translated said actor's title does not rank up
> there with inventing the light bulb, and, to me, doesn't seem like
> something worth waving a flag over( and over, and over) for. If one
> person hadn't, someone else would have, and neither are going down in
> the Tomes of Greatness for it.
> So the webmistress made a mistake. It's not as though she did it with
> some sort of vicious intent to yank all her readers astray into the
> depths of Hades with her. Allow the possiblity to sink in that
> maybe, just maybe, being hard pressed for time online, she found
> sources in a rush. If she barely has net time to begin with, why
> would she waste what little she has debating on her sources accuracy?
> She designed her information in a naive, half-DiC-headed flourish.
> Like many others, she was awestruck by the Gloverness(with all his
> copycats) and worshipped them as a solid resource. She even says
> her her page that the Drama's she knows the /least/ about
> (http://animemanga.net/tomb/drama.htm) so it's likely that, knowing
> the least about something, she's going to end up being innacurate
> somewhere. Even she knows that, but she's not losing sleep over it.
> She didn't even remember to correct the Stone Croco to Minte Kerokko
> on that drama page or Kero's own page title.
[Editor's note: Incidentally, even “Minte Kerokko” is incorrect.]
> ( While you're there, take a look at the musical links. Those where
> the best links I was able to find one day in in a quick hunt- please
> note thise one
> (http://rain.voidembraced.net/seramyu/preformance/eien.html) says
> Mint Croco. Or maybe go here
> http://members.tripod.com/~Iron_Mousey/chart.html where it's Stone
> Croc. I found out about the Drama senshi from Iron Will a year back,
> peoples. She seemed a trustworthy source to _me_ at the time. Are
> beginning to see that maybe, just maybe, that "silly" thing Lethe
> wrote, she derived from, mmm, maybe, THIS? Why pin me for information
> I obviously found at wrong sources, hmm? How would I know better,
> when information is so rare to begin with? I have no tapes of my
> to listen to, to see, and even then, what's the chance that the
> subtitler didn't mess up in their translations?Hmmm?)
> I say I'm busy, I say I don't know, I say I'm pressed for time,
> say I'm unsure- Are people missing these "I don't know" areas of
> mine, or do they have a bad case of Selective Reading?
> Just the same, if someone doesn't answer my email, I don't
> they put on airs because they negelcted to answer Me. If people
> happen to link a site a lot, I don't assume the webmistress must
> a head the size of Chad with a dash of neighboring countries. There's
> always the chance she could be /completle oblivious/ to that fact,
> and I am, sadly, that chance.Why cynically pounce on some other
> assumption, i.e. full of herself, or did I just answer my own
> Believe it or not, I have no clue how supposedly "popular" I am.
> When I use the net in quick, spasmodic burst, I look up mail, answer
> what seems to need answering, perhaps read a few news articles, and
> I'm off! Work, school,work, study,workstudy, study! I don't have
> the computer access in the world, and when I do have it, I don't
> linger.I don't waste time running through sailor moon sites to see
> who linked me, who loves me, or who curses the muck that spawned
> forefathers. The only sites I see who've linked me of late
> well, the people who email me and tell me they did so! My link list
> is derived from those who email me with applicable sites and from
> quick peeks at the list of Crow's Nest, Heavy Metal, and Trouble
> Makers. It still catches me off guard when I run across some-random-
> else who liked the Tomb enough to link it too. I don't have a big
> head, though he's not the first to assume I do. I don't see what
> reads as "SNOB!!" in my text, and p erhaps if my accusers spent more
> time telling me what exactly rubbed them the wrong way and less time
> whining upon my sheer EEEEvvill, I might begin to consider it a
> matter worth fixing.
> It seems that when one neglects an email, they must be "putting on
> airs". I'd say he, like most people, feels he should be instantly
> acknowledged, pronto! Well, sorry dear, but that's life. Not everyone
> feels a need to answer everything, me included. If I told him the
> real reason, it would sound like a cop out, even to me, and being
> that he "has no respect for me" to begin with, why should I defend
> myself to him? He's viewing me through screaming neon-yellow lenses.
> He's even discussed his disgust with others, like that Brian fellow
> mentioned, the members of this board, and I can't really help but
> assume that everything I say will doubtless be viewed with scorn
> contempt. This is why I've no plans to justify myself to him,
> Mr.Brian, and the happy clique. However, would you like to know why?
[Editor's note: “Acknowledged, pronto,” huh? If she did not write this message, she would not have ever acknowledged me or my message! How many straw men must Ms. Mitchell attack? Why does she not acknowledge my real intentions?]
> Mr.Miller emailed me on Aug 23, 2000.(Yes, I kept
the email in
> case I ever found the chance to make corrections one day. Fancy
> that.) For the record, I returned to college for Fall Semester Aug
> 22. My things were packed away by the 21st. I was actually happy
> this semster, being that my new roomate had *gasp!* a computer, so
> thought maybe, just maybe, I wouldn't have to run out through the
> cold to the labs every time I wanted to read a lousy email. As it
> turns out, both of us became nice and caught up in registration and
> initial classes and add-dropping fun-
> Let's take a break from my fall semester to note the word "became"
> here. Now, Ms.Mikazuki, does my use of "became" leave you with the
> impression that the registration of my college snatched me and and
> roommate up off the floor and "caught" us up, litterally? No, it
> doesn't. In the same sense, something like "Naruru and Ruruna used
> items from the shop *to become* :: drum roll please:: Sailor Chanel
> and Sailor Gucci!" Is not to be taken litterally. Every bit of text
> in your eyes, or words in your ears, go through the Y.O.U. filter.
> If , from my bad writing, it sounds like Naruru and Ruruna truly
> became sailor senshi in that instant of collecting pawnshop items,
> then that's the way you've chosen (and Ian's chosen) to read it
> as 'sounding' like. To others, like myself, it might sound sarcastic
> and corny. Any real senshi would have at least held up a henshin
> item, or powered up with well-lit fanfare, not grabbed items off
> pawnshop shelves and racks. There's even a drum r oll in there, for
> Pete's sake. I wasn't aware people needed the complete spelling-out
> of the overall F-A-K-E of theses two, but appearantly I'm giving
> readers too much credit.
[Editor's note: Oh, great. As if we really care about her life story.]
> Where was I? Registration. After registration and class beginnings,
> roomate tried to hook up her computer, only two discover our ethernet
> connection (and everyone's ethernet on the 1st-3rd floor of the dorm)
> was dead to the world. No one came to fix our connections till near
> the end of Oct, and I continued my usual cycle of quick hoppings
> into the labs at random to *read* my email, and answer what I could
> answer in the time given. Those mails where more of questions
> requiring yes and no answers. Mr. Miller, obviously being one
> requiring a longer answer for his effort, became(became[became])
> pushed aside for more recent emails, more easily answered, and
> eventually forgotten.
> Boo-hoo. End of story. Another one fell through the cracks, as do
> many to my negelence, but you can't tell me I'm the only person in
> the world guilty of that.
> It's not a matter of not being "nice", nor Evil Vicious Purposeful
> Ignorning, it's a matter of little time and Other Things to Do in
> Said Little Time. Litterally hundreds of people have pointed out
> mistakes/ inaccuracies to me over the years, and as far as
> concerned, Miller's just one more. Many of his points had been made
> by others long before him, though I admit he was the first of anyone
> to translated the heiroglyphs. The titanium, chanel&gucci, even
> deimos/phobos being adressed as 'sailor' mistakes, had all been said
> before. I saw to reason for immediate concern, and, either way, I
> couldn't update a Damn Thing from campus. Ironically, if the Tomb
> were still in geocities, perhaps I could have touched up from a
> library. I threw up my updates practically the day before I left
> I'm so sorry, but Lethe has the tendecy never of taking non-vital
> things seriously. She has the atrocious habit of putting work before
> play. No doubt she should be shot. The Tomb is her hobby, not a job
> she's being paid for, or an assignment with fixed due dates. She'll
> update when she feels like, at her own pace, when she /can/, and
> answer to questions on it in the same manner, as she see's fit. If
> that's going to be read as snobby, arrogant, ego-tripping, cold-
> hearted, and rude, so be it. I'm happy knowing that, at least, such
> crap was, and is, never my intention. Ever.
[Editor's note: Her Web site really is not that important? Of course, she spent hours writing the information and drawing the pictures for her Web site. That is a lot to do for something so unimportant! Like a petulant child, she strugs off her errors and complains about how they are “non-vital.”]
> If the overall goal of this discussion was to point out my
> inaccuarces (yet again, like so many before) to me (yet again~etc)
> then sit back and relax, and have a cookie. I've gotten the Point, as
> I've known the Point for a long, long time.You may not see the fruits
> of your labors anytime soon, but do try to be happy witht he thought
> that it will be there, someday, when I find time to do it.
> Soup for you. Next!
[Editor's note: She has gotten the point, but she does not do anything about it.]