The Sandra Muskan and Connie Drivin Controversy

Related terms:
See also:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

The Sandra Muskan and Connie Drivin Controversy was an event that took place in the Star Trek apazine APA Enterprise in 1984.

Some Context

In 1984, the topics of age statements and censorship had became a heated topic of discussion in the apa. The apa's members debated whether or not they should add an amendment that would restrict members by age and require an age statement to join, and was an age statement itself an act of censorship.

Some possibilities suggested:

1) Don't change anything regarding the apa, including adding an age statement.

2) The apa should require fans to complete an age statement and membership would be limited to those 18+ -- this would "protect the children" and hopefully protect the apa from lawsuits, though this legal argument seemed to be much less an issue than the first one.

3) The central mailer should be a gatekeeper and edit tribs for offensive material.

4) Fans would not be allowed to discuss or include any material that could be considered offensive or explicit.

Enter... "Sandra Muskan"

In June 1984, the 19th issue of "APA Enterprise" included a story called "To Summon the Past." It had been submitted by "Sandra Muskan," a fan who'd very recently joined the apa. Muskan's story had been redacted/altered/edited by another fan before it had been sent out to the entire membership.

Muskan's Story, "To Summon the Past": Fan Comments

[Eric]: Gee, what's here is so tantalizing... all right, who's gonna write pages 5-8?!?

[Sim]: I liked this, what I got to read of it, that is. Hard to tell from this snippet, but I'd say you do have talent. I'll give you a raincheck on a review, till I've seen something that isn't suffering, okay?

[Mitchell]: "To Summon the Past" was your basic Buck Rogers script with sex as an add-on accessory. Like most Trek fiction (fanfic AND profic), it's very underwhelming. Be advised, people, that I will produce an illo of a nude man for this apa in the near future. Those of you with virgin eyes may want to blind yourselves before then.

[Connie Drivin]: "To Summon the Past" by Sandra Muskan -- nice cover. Wish I could have read you story, but if it is as bad as Mark and Susan say, I hope you'll clean it up first.

The "Sandra Muskan" Hoax

"Sandra Muskan's" resignation letter, printed in "APA Enterprise" #20

Sandra Muskan was revealed to be a hoax perpetrated by the apazine's Central Mailer, Susan with the assistance of the First Officer, Mark Ernst. Both the existence of the fan, the editing of her story, "To Summon the Past," and Sandra Muskan's resignation letter were performance art/a trick and created in in response to the censorship issue.

Many fans felt the hoax had a worthy cause, that of showing the dangers of censorship. However, they did not like the way it was presented, calling it a cruel trick.

The "Sandra Muskan" Hoax: Fan Comments

Two fans, who hadn't caught on that Sandra wasn't a real person, begged her to stay in the apa, something that likely later made them feel foolish:

[Mary]: Sandra -- in case you read this. Please reconsider. We all got to read some, rather than none, from you and we liked it. Our AE is "General Persons." Please come back. You wouldn't regret it. PS. I also considered sending a letter to her home -- besides the above -- and one to the welcommittee defending AE. What would they have thought.

[John]: Letter of Resignation - Sandra: Hey, like, whatever. Ya'know?

On the whole, fans were generally not happy with the hoax and its results, and they stated their feelings of betrayal and unhappiness.

[Ruth]:

Sandra Muskin (Mark and Susan): Re censorship. I think you both know by this time how I feel about [censorship]. As to the joke, you both did a beautiful job. Diluting the whiteout and putting the same words in caps in your zine, Mark. And stapling the blank sheets in and then tearing them out, was a stroke of genius. Mark, I won’t apologize for what I said to you, because if you had truly done what I thought you had done, I would have meant every word. But it is nice to find out that you are not the person I thought you were.

Susan, it is nice to find out that my judgement of you wasn’t wrong after all. But you sure lied through your teeth when I called you up and screamed "How dare you!!!" over the phone. How could you keep the secret that long with me yelling and bitching at you over the phone?

To all of you who thought that the censorship was O.K., please rethink your position. I can think of some topics that I would rather not read in this APA also. If we all had our say in taking out what we didn’t like or found offensive, there would be precious little left to read in this APA. Susan would probably be able to send it to us in a number 10 envelope. Do you really want some one else to decide what you should or should not be reading? How do you know what kind of likes and dislikes and values "your censor" will have? Isn’t it just easier not to read what you don't want to read? We do it all the time in our lives. We change the channel when we don’t like what we are watching. We leave a discussion that we are not interested in. Would we tell the others that they can’t discuss whatever they are discussing, just because we don’t want to discuss it? In history, censorship has impeded progress and new discoveries. People must learn to make decisions for themselves. We don't want Big Brother coming into our lives, do we? America was founded on the concept of freedom and the concept that government is here to serve the people, not the people to serve the government as in other countries. Susan, I agree with you. "Responsibility and Freedom — both very Trekkish [and very American] ideals."

[Shelley Kay]: When I am wrong I cheerfully admit it. I AM WRONG. (See, that didn't hurt, did it?) I said last issue that the censorship was correct. But the responses to the falsehood our illustrious leader perpetrated on us brought home the fact that such censorship was not right. I now believe a warning should have been issued as to the contents, or the story withheld pending Sandra's decision about what to do with it. (Had this been a real instance of course). You have a very effective way of getting your point across, and a persuasive manner of arguing. How much would you charge to defend Kirk at the court martial?

[Eric L.]: The single advantage of running an issue behind in mc's is now not having to write the scathing diatribe in "Sandra's" defense as I had originally planned, and as nearly everyone else did. I honestly don't know whether to laugh or scream. No one likes to be the butt of a practical joke, to be made a fool of, and all the hostile feelings of betrayal, stupidity, and vengeance swell within me. On the other hand, at the same time, I have to admit that you and Susan executed the hoax with exquisite perfection. The collective response was "I can't believe you did this" - yet everyone did believe it. Congratulations on the astounding success of the hoax - but don't you ever do it again.

[Mary]: Sandra unreal! WHAT! I don't believe it. SPUTTER SPUTTER. Mark, you started this. When you get busted down from first officer, you'll be lucky if you can get a slave's berth on a lowly merchant ship after this. You'll be drummed out of APA Enterprise\AE, drummed out of ST, drummed out of the Galaxy. P.S. What a way to find out what we think on the subject.

[Sim]: I do not like the idea of censorship. It goes against my grain. Harder still to take is a disemboweling of this nature. Please, in future, please censor completely or not at all. You may think it strange, but I feel as strongly about a mutilated work as I do a mutilated animal or human being. In all three cases, the object suffers, only in different fashion.

[Dawn]:

I have never been so impressed with a practical joke. I felt faintly ridiculous because that morning I had been thinking about the implications of the 'censorship' and feeling generally disturbed by it, and then to read...

Thanks, guys, your point of the who project was well made.

However, I am assuming that the proposal Susan made in her zine, that of [of censorship by] restricting AE to adults, is not made in fun. This proposal disturbs me, primarily because I was still sixteen when I joined AE. By the time the amendment is discussed, ballots cast, and the amendment becomes part of the code, I will have met the requirement of "I am over the age of eighteen and aware of the nature of the material contained herein, etc." My point is if this amendment had come up sooner I would have not been able to join or worse, would have had to resign from AE because of my age.

Bear with me as I share some statistics: in a current issue of Universal Translator, 21% of the Star Trek zines require an age statement, 19% of the American ST zines require age statements; 27% of the international ST fanzines require age statements, and 20% of the proposed zines require age statements. Is AE going to be added to that list?

[...]

Unfortunately, I have watched as fandom has made it increasingly difficult for younger people to join the ranks. By requiring an age statement, you are turning away those fans will maintain fandom in the future. I have been under the impression most became fans when they were adolescents but you are now denying the same opportunity to others.

[..]

I have never been too generous about letting my age be known, especially in the past. From my experience, the most prevalent discrimination in ST fandom is that of age.

On the other hand, I understand Susan's predicament. Naturally she does not wish to become the unfortunate victim of any lawsuits. I am only unhappy that an age statement is the only solution she sees available. I believe it would be just as easy to add an amendment to the code that states the AE is a ST apa where explicit themes were unacceptable. However, I do understand that type of amendment would require the Central Mailer to act as an editor... and we are back to square one.

I have stated my opposition to Susan's amendment and my reasons for it. It is unfortunate that I can find no other recourse for her to take.

[Eric]: Shame on you! A terrible, yet terribly successful, practical joke -- but done to make a point. The only thing to add here is that this revealing should have waited until the next issue, since the two of you carried through with this in this issue's OO .

[Judy]:

(Since our zine for last time was lost and I wrote this I have mellowed some but since so many took it hard it's only right that they hear what my views were at the time.) Phyllis and I have talked more than once about what we could do with our time and money we've chosen to spend on AE. We both have a problem dealing with the negativism involved, I feel we shouldn't be given more reason to quit. We just might decide to...

I don't handle practical jokes well and don't feel this one should have been played on members of an APA that is full of hateful feelings, anyway. I know Mark doesn't know any better, but Susan you are in a position where you should be making things better not worse.

[...]

I think Mark and Susan made fools of everybody, especially themselves.

[Blackwolf]: I cracked up when I read, Secrets of the Ages Revealed. You sure pulled the wool over my eyes, effectively to [sic].

[Colin]: The "Sandra Muskan" business was a real kick... I had almost a zine's worth of quibbling on the issue of censorship when lo, it was revealed as a hoax!

Bobbie Hawkins' Resignation

Before the reveal, one of Muskan's defenders had been a long-time and out-spoken member named Bobbie Hawkins. Like other fans, Hawkins felt humiliated by the hoax. Hawkins also cited her new lack of faith and trust regarding whether all fans in the apa were "real people." In October 1984 issue, Hawkins sent an angry, strongly worded trib, and she resigned from the apazine.

Hawkins had been a tribber of this apa since the early days, and addressed this controversy in her 13th, and last, trib to APA Enterprise:

To put it plainly and simply, I QUIT.

I have only one reason for doing so, and its name is Sandra Muskan. It's a matter of having gotten used to certain things. You see, in the circles I tend to gravitate in, one can take what other people say at face value without having to wonder whether or not what they are feeding you is above—board. I mean, it never even occurred to me to question the authenticity of 'Sandra Muskan,' or any other newly-joined, first-time member. I can't believe the depths Apa E has sunk to, I think there is something terminally wrong with this apa if these are the kinds of tactics that must be resorted to. So I think I'll make my exit now before the whole thing becomes irreversibly diseased.

I can already hear the cries of "No sense of humor!" rising behind me. And I don't know — maybe it's true — all I know is that this whole business leaves me really, REALLY cold. I still can't decide whether or not someone was trying to make a serious point about censorship (I don't know why this would be the case — I don't seem to recall any hot issues in Apa E dealing with this topic recently, and I have been following the qoings-on rather closely) or if this was just meant to be a practical joke. I suspect the latter. I never could abide the practical—joker frame of mind, and I also feel constrained to point out that if this thing was meant to be a demonstration of the evils of censorship, then it has failed miserably. One could even go so far as to term this a kind of 'reverse censorship' — it was done without the consent of the members. I mean, even though I am a member of good standing in Apa E (or so I thought), this thing was done to me EVEN THOUGH I HAD NO SAY IN THE MATTER, NO CONTROL OVER A THING THAT I HAD ONCE THOUGHT MYSELF A PART OF. Well, gee. It hurts — what else can I say? To put it even more simply, I think the Sandra Muskan incident was not only unwarranted and totally pointless, it was a mean, low-down, dirty, rotten trick. I guess that just about says it all, unless I wanted to add that I want out — NOW.

I had intended to tie up the loose ends of various conversations I had going, but I don't seem to have the heart for it anymore. The fact that I couldn't ever real1y be sure anymore whether or not I was addressing real live people and having to wonder who might be practicing a what kind of deception probably has a lot to do with this. But if any of you serious fans out there have anything you want to add or have anything you want me to add to the conversations we had going you can write me privately — you all have my address,and I can assure you that I, for one, am a real, live, flesh and blood person.

Good luck to all of you, and I wish only the best for everyone. I'm truly sorry it had to end this way, but as they say on Earth, C'est la vie.

Bobbie Hawkins' Resignation: Fan Comments

While at least two fans told Hawkins to "lighten up," most fans supported Hawkins and were unhappy about her departure:

[Sally]: The Secrets of the Ages Revealed, Captain Madame Susan: I'm not real sure what I want to say about this. It has be both amused at such a perfect hoax, yet so pissed off that it happened here that I still don't know how to address this. It definitely was something completely different, but it really was a dirty trick to pull on us poor unsuspecting persons. It has even lost us a member, as of this writing, and Bobbie Hawkins is not a person we will replace easily, if we can at all. I guess all I can say is that I appreciated the art form, and the story was very good, but if this happens again, it will go hard on the perpetrators.

[John]: Bobbie: Your reaction to the PS surprised me. And I'm glad. I expected that you would have been one of the people that didn't care for it. And even tho you found it just "mildly entertaining" that's much better than I expected. Hope you enjoy the rest.

[Judy]:

I'd like to apologize for my remark concerning your story, Bobbie. That is not like me to be negative concerning someone's writing. I know how hard I work in creating something and believe in only encouraging other people when they have done the same. The original concepts for Trek had a lot to do with the 1960's. Being an ex-hippie I will always believe in love instead of war but I do also realize that those beliefs are a thing of the past. We must continue to change and evolve even if those changes are not for the better. So must our beloved Trek go.

[...]

I agree with what you said and almost did the same thing [by leaving]... but your membership is a high price for Susan and Mark to

pay.

[Ruth]: As I have said to you over the phone, I am really sorry that you feel that way, and that you are leaving, I will miss your zine. It is one of my favorites.

[Cammie]: Sorry to have you leave, Bobbie, but if you feel this way I guess it's best for you. Good luck. I know everyone is going to miss you.

[Phyllis]: Sorry that you couldn't have been more open minded for the first joke, anyway, Bobbie.

[Judy]: Next, is it live or is it Memorex??? Here goes another one of my personal feelings, which has much to do with the members of this APA. First, there was Sandra Muskan. The masterminds of this creation really pulled one over on us and I felt like a had the word 'sucker' tattooed on my forehead for several days. Still yet, I did have to laugh about it. The 'joke' made it's point in a valid subject and I buried my pride on being taken so manipulatively.

[Eric]:

Bobbie will be truly missed... IF she's truly gone...

[...]

It is with great sadness that I read this resignation zine. While I certainly agree that "Sandra" was a dirty trick, I do believe it's an overreaction to up and quit, not unlike a spoiled child who, if not allowed to play his way, refuses to play at all. The only thing I am hoping is that this resignation is also a hoax to get back at the original perpetrators and that a real zine will appear next issue. Failing that, farewell and good luck.

[Kalifia]: Able's leaving was no surprise. If you can't stand the hear get out of the kitchen. But Bobbie's resignation was certainly a surprise. Altho I can understand her feelings. She will be missed.

[Colin]: I hope somebody talked you out of quitting, Bobbie, but it's a bit of an overreaction, wouldn't you say? Hey, it wouldn't be a joke if everyone was let in on it, would it?

Reactions and Comments from the Hoax's Perpetrators

Both Susan and Mark, the two leaders who'd perpetrated the prank, commented on the original hoax.

Susan

[Susan]:

This issue we have had two resignations: Bobbie Hawkins and Able Littlejohn. Bobbie has a farewell zine in this issue... From her letter to me. I'd say her main reasons were a loss of interest in our subject matter and unhappiness over the tone of the MCs that had been addressed to her in the latest issues. Let me assure both that a warm welcome is waiting whenever you choose to beam aboard again.

[...]

A general "thank you" and apology to all who were kind enough to welcome Sandra and who tried to offset the rotten treatment to which Mark and I subjected her by encouraging her to stay and continue writing. Everyone was so nice that at least half of her is sorry she doesn't really exist.

[...]

Bobbie, as you now know, you were preaching to the converted but don't think you were wasting your breath. Certain truths, such as the value of free speech, need to be aired occasionally. I'll just say, when you get mad, your speech becomes very vivid and intense. It is astonishing what an effective weapon the English language can be when it's wielded by a master... Anyway to repeat, there will be no censorship while I'm CM. If someone sends in something really questionable -- say, a collection of Hustler centerfolds, I'll follow Sally's suggestion and staple the edges together in the right margin and put a warning footnote in the TOC. Then everyone can decide for themselves.

[Susan]: Bobbie, I'm sorry the Sandra Muskan thing upset you so. It's a shame to lose an old member like you.

Mark

[Mark]:

Sandra Muskan was a hoax. I abhor censorship in any form, and leaving members out because of their age fits into that category. Everyone should take that into consideration, though. I don't think any central mailer should be responsible for YOUR words. I do think YOU should be responsible for your words. Thus, if you wish to run something -- particularly pornographic -- I think you should be held responsible for any repercussions, legal or otherwise.

[...]

Susan tells me Bobbie Hawkins quit. So I guess I'll skip all the things I had to say to her. Most of them might have caused more rifts anyways. I was, of course, looking forward to proposing an issue to please Bobbie in which no one would talk about anything that might be controversial to anyone -- hence 200 pages with NOTHING on them.

Mark A. Ernst, the original founder of APA Enterprise, then resigned as First Officer from the apa in the same issue that Bobbie Hawkins left. He cited disinterest in the subject matters, frustration with fannish discussion, and lack of time.

His co-captain, Susan, remained as Captain, and commented:

[Susan]:

No, I won't be playing any more practical jokes in AE but that doesn't mean that I will prevent anyone else from doing so. That is, I won't actively participate but neither will I reveal anything I've been told in confidence about someone else's hoax -- at least - as long as it seems like a harmless prank that won't hurt or humiliate any person or AE as a whole. For example, remember that one issue that “Sandra Muskan" was admitted to membership? There were 26 names on the roster that tine, and the 26th person wasn't let in by mistake but because I didn't want to keep a real person on the waitlist because a phantom was taking up space.

And, of course, there could be practical jokes played that I would know nothing about. Even phantom people — take Kathy Aaron, for example. I haven't gotten a zine from her, haven't even had a postcard from her — just a letter from you and Sally. For all I know, she's just as unreal as Sandra was.

Enter... "Connie Drivin"

The name "Concordia Drivin" with a Concord, New Hampshire addressed had appeared on the apa's waitlist in issue #18. That fan, who later went by the name Connie Driven, was admitted to the apa in issue #20. APA Enterprise had two tribs by Drivin titled "Farewell Andromeda," one in #19 and one in #21.

A fan wrote:

[Blackwolf/George]: CONNIE, I enjoyed your zine. I just hope your [sic] not also a hoax member.

"Connie Drivin's" Comments About "Sandra Muskan"

[Connie Drivin comments about Mark Ernst's trib]: I'm all for the amendment [to require an age statement for this APA] since I intend to be a regular contributor. But I'm not sure you should have censored Sandra's story. Maybe it would have been better to ask her to rewrite it before running it?

[Connie Drivin commented directly to Muskan about Muskan's story]: "To Summon the Past" by Sandra Muskan -- nice cover. Wish I could have read you story, but if it is as bad as Mark and Susan say, I hope you'll clean it up first.

[Connie Drivin addressed Susan (the APA's Captain and Mark's "partner in crime" in Muskan hoax]: "Anatomy of a Hoax" by Susan Beth Schnitger -- I never would have guessed, that you two would palm off a "fake" member on us. Haha.

The "Connie Drivin" Hoax

It was revealed that Connie Drivin was a pseud for Mark A. Ernst, the apa's founder who'd recently resigned as First Officer, something that Susan the Central Mailer knew and supported.

The "Connie Drivin" Hoax: Fan Comments

Fans were again, not pleased:

[Eric]: Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

[Phyllis]: Connie, too bad you don't really exist. I came to like you.

[Christine]:

Mark's an asshole.

[...]

As I read this through, I realize. I have put down Mark several times. And I would like to say, I feel he deserved it. This "Connie" incident, so soon after "Sandra" was a big mistake. He should learn the old proverb "look before you leap." By the way, I do completely agree with the massage put forth by "Sandra". Our forefathers busted their asses so that we may worship as we wish, retain rights, and say what we wish. We were beginning to bannish our own rights! Something HAD to be done.

[Eric]: It has come to my attention that once again, the membership of Apa Enterprise has been duped by the presence of a fictional member, with apparently no intent on the part of the perpetrator of revealing the deception. The pseudonym that we have been unknowingly addressing is "Connie Driven" [sic] and the guilty party is, again, Mark A. Ernst, His deeds have already bred ill will among the actual membership and have caused the loss of at least one valuable member, and I can only guess at the repercussions this second cruel and malicious deception will generate. Ernst has been a constant source of ill will and this second prank is the penultimate expression of his malicious attitude. I can see no possible reason or benefit from his actions; neither can I allow such devastating deeds to pass without retaliatory action. Therefore, I do now call for and demand the immediate voluntary resignation of Mark A. Ernst and his fictional member(s) from Apa Enterprise.

[Dawn]: As for the subject of the hoax ... it bothered me but it did not upset me. As I recall, I never made a comment to "Connie" and only extended a comment to "Sandi." Okay, someone(s) made a mistake...fine, acknowledge and oppose it, but then DROP it. That's all it takes and I do think it is a shame that members are so violently upset that they feel they must forsake AE. Instead of being constructive about the mess, they are turning their backs on it... running away, if I may state it that way. Running away is not the solution and certainly is in contradiction of molding this world and its people into the Star Trek ideal. Run away... and you are running away from a small part of Star Trek -- that of co-existing with people.

Who Among Us is Fake?

Connie Drivin and this second hoax released the kracken of distrust, and fans were now questioning everyone's identity:

[Eric]: If there any doubts in anyone's mind, I am a real, live, flesh and blood human being. If I am a figment of anyone's imagination, it must be my own. My cover for this zine should be more than sufficient to resolve any question of my existence. Now perhaps we'd best take a good hard look at the rest of the roster. Judy and Phyllis sure do seem to do a lot together, don't they? And doesn't one type for the other? Didn't Susan say their zines arrive together? Sounds suspicious to me. Has anyone ever actually seen Greta and Mark together? They have the same name, after all... I wonder if Mark has a fetish for female clothing. And Blackwolf... that is hard for me to swallow in the first place. Then there's this Cammie Royce person... has anyone been really convinced about her yet? I can't say I have. Yes, I definitely think some investigating is in order around here. After all, can someone rea11y function in life as deluded as Mary appears to be? I mean, really.

[Judy]:

Then, there came Connie Drivin. She also is non-existent. I'm sorry, fellas, but whatever the reasons were behind Connie’s creation, it becomes rather hard to swallow deception for the second time. It’s beginning to leave a bad aftertaste. Trust, my friends, is the basis to any type of friendly relationships and until now, I've never questioned the believably of anyone in this APA. Now, with the exception of a few members that I have either met or have talked to, I wonder just who is real? It is my opinion that creating characters for story ideas is what this APA is about, not creating them to comprise some of the membership.

I know that dealing with the membership strictly through the mailing system, makes it difficult (if not impossible) to recognise the 'creations' from the 'real people'. I really believe that we need some serious discussion on this matter.

[Shelly]: To those of you besides Bobbie who aren't sure who's real and who isn't, I wish to take this opportunity to inform you that I do not exist. I am the product of a mass hallucination, an illusion created by the Melkotians.

[Mary]: I've had to deal with the problem that Connie caused me to consider what was I was spending all my time doing this for? You can also ask Greta, Phyllis and I have talked to her twice. (Both of us being on the phone). Of course, I might have played both parts uh? Ha. ha. ha.

The two hoaxes in a row eroded personal trust, but it also furthered fans' unhappiness and ennui in what they felt to be declining quality, as a well as a focus on the apa's original topic, Star Trek:

[Eric]:

Which brings me to another and more critical gripe. The overall mentality of our membership appears to me to be one of increasing juvenility. This attitude may be influenced more by the absence of for our members than by the presence of current ones, but the effect remains the same: the calibre and quality of this apa have declined sharply. Gone are such essayists as Crystal, Caro, and Bobbie, thrashing over interpretations of Trek philosophies; now we have evangelists, Pythonists, and Dr. Who buffs who seem to regard Trek as one of numerous golly-gee-wow hobbies, none of which are taken seriously.

Freedom of speech and of press and the avoidance of censorship demand that these members be allowed to express themselves as they will, even if it means three unicorn cartoons for every Trek illo. I have defended those rights constantly. But this is also why I must now determine whether there is enough Trek left in AE — in substance as well as in spirit - for it to be worth it to me to remain.

And I do mean in spirit. The first hoax was a violation of that spirit. The second hoax was strike two. The last straw was being blatantly lied to over the phone by our illustrious Captain when I called her about the Connie Driven mess. She told me she knew nothing about it.

Susan, you can explain and rationalize and defend all the reasons you may have had but you cannot ever change the single unalterable fact that you LIED to me.

I've had my say for the time being. I think I've made my point. A serious self-analysis is in order - of the apa, and of ourselves.

[Sally]:

The latest hoax perpetrated on the membership of this APA has forced me to sit down and re-think the reasons I have belonged to this group since issue 8, and it seems that those reasons, for the most part, no longer exist.

Once upon a time, this was a Star Trek APA that was devoted to Trek, and there were very few incursions of other topics. The discussions were lively and extremely intelligent, and I felt like I was doing well to keep up with them. Now, Trek has almost become a sideline issue, with religion, Dr. Who (and I am a Whovian, don't get me wrong) and other things taking precedence. The members I used to work so hard to keep up with are all gone, for one reason or another, and I now feel as though I far outstrip the majority of the membership. There's no challenge in here anymore. Where has it all gone??

Now let's talk about the membership roster, and the names that have been there that have been no more than simply names. The first, "Sandra Muskan", while I did not like it, I could see the point behind it, but the second, Connie Drivin, was done in a spirit of pure malice and spite, with the intent of making fools of the membership, and this I will not stand for, Especially will I not stand for lies from anyone in any situation of leadership in any fan organisation I belong to. What am I talking about? Well, Judy called me and said that she had heard from Phyllis who had heard from Greta who had confessed her part of the hoax. Judy wanted to check with me about how many of the membership I could vouch for to see if there were any more false members. I vouched for as many as I could and proceeded to inform the Columbia contingent of the membership about the scandal. Eric, in an attempt to confirm or deny the rumour, called Captain Madame Susan. "No," she said, "I don't know anything about that." As it turned out, she had known about it from the beginning. This was the straw which broke the camel's back. Whatever happened to the little things in life, like honesty and integrity?? Well?? I'm sorry, but I will not put up with this.

Ruth, Judy, Phyllis, Shelley, I'm going to miss you, but I must go. Loss of quality and integrity are more than enough reason for me to leave. I wish you all the best.

The central mailer, Susan, addressed fans' comments about the second hoax, as well as her previous statements some fans felt to be dishonest, or at the very least disingenuous:

[Susan]:

Sally and Eric raise three points which deserve prompt acknowledgement.

My role vis a vis Connie Driven: CD was placed on our wait list in issue #18. This was the last issue of Greta's term but Mark was actually handling the CM duties. When Mark delivered the membership records and back issues he told me that CD was his invention -- that he would be writing her zines and paying her share of the expenses. I agreed to allow "her" to remain a member so long as her occupying a slot would not prevent any real person from joining AE. During the course CD's membership, I treated her the same as everyone else: she had a separate minac record and postage account that was debited for 1/25th (or whatever) of the cost of each issue. When Mark resigned for both the regaining funds in each account were forfeited and used to offset some of our postage bill.

As for my denying knowledge of CD's non-existence in a phone call with Eric -- he and Sally are quite correct. That was a lie. At the time I considered myself bound by my promise to Mark that I would not reveal his secret. I admit I have many flaws (and patently lapses from truth are among them) but I have always placed great store in keeping commitments.

[...]

Probably the real answer is that I shouldn't have gotten myself into that position in the first place by letting Mark go ahead. Why did I? Because it honestly seemed like a harmless prank to me. It never even occurred to me that someone else would find it so horribly upsetting. Bobbie said she never could understand the practical joking type of mind. I do — I have one. I don't approve of cruel or dangerous jokes (like pulling a chair out from under someone) but I find hoaxes amusing (I chuckled when I read about those Italian art experts authenticating a stone face that a couple of school kids had roughed out in an afternoon and dropped into the river near a dredging project.) One commonly applied rule to determine behavior is to put yourself into the other's place. How would I feel if a member in the either APA I belong to turned out to be a phantom? It’s hard to say for sure before it happens, but I think it would depend on the zines themselves. If they'd been clever or humorous or thought-provoking, I think my reaction would be a wry chuckle and if they'd been dull or boring, I'd be annoyed at such a pointless prank. But either way, I very much doubt I d be really upset or bothered. I guess I just assumed everyone else would react like me — bad assumption, obviously.

It was never my intention to hurt, humiliate or upset any member of this APA, but I have done so. For that, I am sincerely sorry. The question is, what should I do about it now? I would resign immediately as CM, but given that the current Assistant CM also knew of the hoax and that in any case the selection of a new CM is already underway that would be an empty gesture. Shall I resign from AE completely? As you, the rest of the crew, are the offended party it should be your choice. If you want me out let me know. Tell me in a letter or your zine or include a note with your CM ballot. I'll abide by your decision.

The APA's Death Blow

These two hoaxes affected morale and trust and this, plus declining interest in the subject matter, caused the apa to fold.

A fan in the August 1986 issue of Interstat asked:

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO APA ENTERPRISE? After four years and twenty-four thriving issues helmed by three competent central mailers, the healthy roster of some twenty members elected Phyllis D. Langdon of Pueblo, Colorado as its fourth Captain to lead the amateur press association into its fifth year, who in turn appointed Judy M. Korte of Denver, Colorado as her First Officer. The two new officers mailed the twenty-fifth issue of Apa Enterprise to the membership in July 1985... ...and that's the last anyone that I know of has heard about Phyllis, Judy, or the apa. Several members of the apa are regular contributors to INTERSTAT: Susan Beth, Ruth Lym, Dawn Law, and others. I've received absolutely nothing concerning the fate of Apa Enterprise in my own mail and am extremely surprised not to have seen any reaction from any of the other former members. I ask again, of anyone with any knowledge at all: Whatever happened to Apa Enterprise? To the zines that were sent for the August 30, 1985 deadline? To the $58.25 treasury entrusted to them? To the back issues and all other materials connected with the apa?