Talk:SMOF

Latest comment: 7 years ago by 104.186.132.216 in topic Origin

Verbing edit

I think we should add smofing as a verb in there somewhere. We use it as one all the time. - hurtstotouchfire

Went ahead and added that in. Based the definition on the 2006-09-15 penguicon blog page. Feel free to fluff it up. Being nice of course. See how I managed to avoid the words "gossip" and "power-play"? Very delicate. --Hurtstotouchfire 02:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

The section on verbing doesn't make much sense as it stands. The only real distinction I've seen in use is that when "SMOF" is lowercase, the "f" is doubled: smoffing, smoffish, smoffery, etc. --TNH

Origin edit

We have a problem. We can't say the term dates to a 1955 book if someone notes that that book doesn't mention it. Modifying. -- Akb4 09:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

The original article text in question: The term SMOF dates back at least as far as 1955, when Wilson Tucker referred to it in Neo-Fan's Guide to Science Fiction Fandom. Even as early as that time, the term, which could refer as easily to fanzine fans as well as convention runners, could be used as a verb to refer to the process of discussing con running and fan politics. (This term does *not* appear in the original 1955 edition of the NEOFAN'S GUIDE or in the 1966 edition. The author of this caveat does not have the 1973 and 1975 editions, but it *does* appear in the 1978 edition.)--Hurtstotouchfire 11:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply
I've added both a proper citation and a fact tag to this section. - Dravecky (talk) 17:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure I understand why. There is a specific, published book that is considered a source within the field whose name, editor, and edition are given. What more are you looking for in a citation? 104.186.132.216 (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ridiculous edit

There is far too much of this rubbish here - it would never get in a real encycopedia. 80.7.238.150 (talk) 08:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Subcultural terms have a place in an exhaustive encyclopedia, I disagree. And I've seen this term used in practice for over 20 years, you should check google to see how prevalent it is, before making such a sweeping statement. You would be surprised! Timmccloud (talk) 12:39, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
All Google proves is how many idiots there are in the world. 80.7.238.150 (talk) 22:22, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
I've been a member of LASFS since 1980 and it was in use there when I first showed up. JDZeff (talk) 04:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)Reply