Letter of Comment

From Fanlore
(Redirected from Letters of Comment)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Synonyms: LOC, letterhacking
See also: Feedback, Concrit, Zines, Kudos
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

A Letter of Comment, or more commonly, a LoC or LOC, was originally a letter written by a fan and sent to a professional SF magazine or to a fanzine and published in a lettercol. Frequent contributors of LoCs were called letterhacks, and the act of writing the LoC was called letterhacking. The term LOC was in use as early as 1961. See Science Fiction Citations.

artistic commentary by Arthur Thompson (ATom)

In media fandom, where zines contained a lot of fanfiction, LOC became synonymous with feedback sent to the creator of a fanwork. A LoCer is one who writes the letter.

The term was carried over to the Internet, with LOCs transitioning to mean the feedback email that an author, zine publisher, or archivist received.[note 1] However, there is no evidence that the term ever caught on with fans who discovered fandom online in the 21st century[note 2]; communities with a higher proportion of pre-internet fans saw a few uses in the 2010s[note 3], but as fannish feedback more commonly takes the form of "comments" or "reviews" published directly to sites like Fanfiction.net, AO3 or Wattpad, the term "Letters of Comment" has fallen out of use.

Debate on Pronunciation

Fans often discussed the correct way to say "LoC."

From Jundland Wastes Roll Up:

The letters were called LoCs, letters of comment, and few have ever agreed on how to pronounce the term. Some say "loke," others, "lahk"; and some even speak out the letters, "el-oh- see". (A situation very similar to the current controversy over how to say ".gif". Is it gif as in "gift" or jif after the peanut butter? I've heard both sides claim that the inventor supports their interpretation.)

The newsletter The Propagator called its lettercol "LoCSmith" (a pun on the term "lock smith") which suggested how at least that editor felt the word was pronounced.

In a letter to Southern Enclave #2, a fan wrote about the name of a column: ""LoCs and Bagels"... At least it tells people how to say LoC correctly."

a rare formal appeal for LoCs, this one via a form on the last page of Teo Torriatte, a Professionals slash zine

Their Purposes

Letters of comment served as a reminder of the interconnectedness of fandom. They were also part of the unspoken agreement that LoCs were a form of payment for the work that went into producing fanworks. They were also used in a practical way to determine what sort of material fans really wanted.

In 1990, a long-time fan wrote a letter with a focus of the purpose of LoCs and reviews:

When you cast your zines upon fannish waters, you want to produce ripples, possibly even waves -- not to sink without a trace. That's where LoCs come in. LoC is an acronym for Letter of Comment but what it really stands for is ego-boo, compliments, feedback, and constructive criticism. Letters of Comment are not necessarily the 'just due' of the zine ed and contributors and the obligation of the readers. The privilege is not all on your side. LoCs are also the RIGHT of the zine readers, and it is YOUR obligation to be open to their comments. Zine readers write LoCs for many reasons. In a perfect universe, you would only receive letters full of glowing praise for your sparkling dialogue, original plots, imaginative layout and high production standards, or wizardry with cross-hatching and composition... However, favorable LoCs are not the only kind that will, can, or should be written... Which brings me to the rumblings that provoked this letter. Some zine eds have a tendency to reject out of hand letters of comment that are not favorable. They won't print them; they label them unnecessarily harsh. They say the letter letter is reacting out of proportion -- after all, 'it's only a hobby.' So what's wrong with this attitude, other than the obvious fact that the zine reader's right to express an opinion... is guaranteed by the Constitution? Well, it may be YOUR 'hobby,' but if you want readers to pay out THEIR hard-earned dollars for it, it entitles them to comment on any aspect of your zine from the staples to the copyright notice... A carefully throughout, constructive critique on your zine, detailing what the reader liked or didn't like and why,... is an invaluable learning tool for you as an editor, writer, or artist... From the reader's viewpoint, when the zine creators learn from their mistakes and produce a better zine, fandom benefits as well. There has been a definite lack of critical LoCs in the last several years, resulting, in my opinion, in declining zine quality in many fandoms. With the ever-increasing costs of purchasing zines, this factor becomes more and more important. For those of you who are just in it for the Vanity Press, who don't want to hear anything but ego-boo and the compliments, you'd be much better off to just hand your material away free to your family and friends. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the fanzine. [1]

A fan in 1994 wrote:

I only write locs to 1) make my friends happy--not the content, just the reminder that someone did read it and notice all their hard work-- 2) attempt to underhandedly coerse people to change their zines/art/vids/cons to make me happier. [2]

From a fan in 1998:

I like the idea of 'comments as tipping', but I always tip unless the wait staff does something really wrong. The default is 'yes, of course you deserve a tip', not 'I'll only tip if the service is outstanding'. And a 'tip' in this sense is the standard 'read your story. Loved the bit where this happened. Thanks for posting it.' The better the story, the bigger the tip, so the more effort I put into the comment I send. I still don't do big critical, analytical letters -- I say instead how the story affected me, so that the writer *knows* their work had impact, and that they aren't just sending it out into the sterile darkness of the internet void.

Shoshanna often brings up how important the LOC is in the establishment of the sense of community, and that community -- that connection -- provides us with the knowledge that 'we are not alone.' It's important to have that sense that other people are interested and like this stuff as well; it's an emotional high. This is a completely different reason to write a LOC than the one traditionally used, and has absolutely nothing to do with critical commentary on the craft or structure of the story itself. This is the type of LOC I most often send for the stories I read on-line, when I can just hit the 'send comments to author' button right after I've read the story and am still flush with the emotional afterglow. It's easy, and it makes both of us feel good, so I do it; I don't see any reason not to. [3]

Another 1998 comment:

My view on tipping in restaurants, the story has to be worth the LOC. I don't believe in dissing a story, I wouldn't hurt the author by pointing out the flaws (unless I'm editing, then it's all fair in love and porn), so I only write a LOC if a story is outstanding, if it deserves to be treated as such. Snake Oil by [Saffronhouse] for example, could not be ignored! [snipped] I've sent five LOCs in 10 years, four to authors who deserved it, one to an author I felt sorry for. [4]

The public LoC was a form of payment. Sometimes personally providing private feedback wasn't enough. A fan in 2001 explains in The K/S Press:

This is a three page vignette that is so powerful. I've read it a few times and each time it's still so moving. I remember writing Carolyn and telling her how much I loved it when I had first read it. But I don't remember doing an LOC. [5]

A fan in 2010 remembered a zine she wrote to:

Two even inspired me to write my first-ever LOC to a zine; I'd sent comments to online writers before, but I'd learned that part of the deal with zines was that if you read one, you were supposed to send a LOC. So after I finished it, I wrote... the stupidest LOC ever. *g* I had no idea what I was doing!... [A number of years later, I] looking at the other letters, and having a jawdrop moment. See, some of the names in there I remember from back then... One right after the other, I saw letters from sakana17, sherrold, and movies_michelle -- all women I became friends with a few years later via other fandom means, and whom I'm still friends with. (*waves!*) And there we all were, sitting in the same LOC column together in 1997, in a zine printed in Australia and shipped halfway 'round the world. I really love seeing how far back fannish connections actually go. <3 [6]

Also from 2010:

I too have written LOCs and seen them published, and at one point I mentioned wanting to read some story or other, and a complete stranger sent me the entire zine, all the way from the US, omg! (I do not remember the story, or who sent it me, alas, but I know that the zine had a gorgeous drawing of Spock pulling his shirt off on the cover...) It was a jawdropping moment of fannish kindness, and it wouldn't be the last. <3! [7]

Letters of Comment were also used as a tool for content. One definition of a letter of comment from an 80s zine: "A letter sent to the editor to let her know what you did/didn't like about the zine. Very helpful in getting zines to be the way you want them. Also a great way to encourage writers you like." [8] From Jacqueline Lichtenberg: "In ST fanzine fandom, the feedback was immediate and detailed because every fiction 'zine carried LoCs that made it very clear what readers were looking for -- and often spurred writers to writing the next story." [9] From the editor of the zine In a Different Reality #2: "I would like to thank all of you who have sent us your comments and suggestions... Since we are not into market research, etc., you letters are the best guide to how well we are doing and to what you really want." And from the same zine, issue #11: "I fully expect anyone with comments on any story in this issue to send them along to me. I can't print what you want to read if you don't tell me what you like - and don't like."

Publishing Letters of Comment

Many zine editors published all of their letters of comments in a section of the zine called a lettercol.

The Starsky and Hutch letterzine S and H's editors were adamant in that they printed every one received, and without any editing. The Star Wars letterzine Southern Enclave printed most, but sometimes edited them for repetitious content. The Star Trek: TOS letterzine The K/S Press also printed all letters received, though in at least one editorial admitted it wished it hadn't, as it was felt the previous issue had included some needlessly hurtful ones.

Other letterzines did more editing. There was much discussion in Halkan Council on this subject after Connie Faddis wrote: "I note from having seen a copy of some of the complete, undiluted letters sent to HC, that there has been some editing." The editors responded: "Neither of us, until receiving Connie's letter, was aware that any contributors were dissatisfied with the quality of our editing...we retain the right to edit out statements which could be detrimental to ST fandom or revival."

It was common for LOCs to publish the letter writer's full address with the letter. Other editors published only the fan's name and city or state, and some just the fan's name. Many fans first found other fans by writing to a LOC writer near their area.

Letter columns in letterzines (or non-letterzines that ran many LOCs), could be contentious, providing the pre-internet version of flame wars. They also provided community -- giving information on deaths, on professionals sales by zine writers, on fannish and canon news. Many early media fen, such as Leslie Fish, were as well-known for their participation in letter columns as they were for their fiction.

Some editors made a point of not forwarding, or even mentioning, negative LOCs to their authors. If a zine didn't print its LOCs, then the editor forwarded any comments about specific stories onto the individual authors. From the editor of the zine, In a Different Reality: "I will faithfully forward any comment to any author, and if you don't want to discuss something or start an argument with him/her/them I'll also send the author your address, at your request. I will not become a clearinghouse for any lengthy correspondences, not because I'm not interested in eavesdropping but because I can't afford that much postage!"

Other editors printed and forwarded whatever came their way stating: ""Write and scream and write and say well done to the writers, please. All LoCs become property of ITTOI, and will be shared with the authors, printed in part or in whole in the next volume." [10]

Fans Comment on the Lack of LoCs

Much fannish time -- from the first Star Trek zine, Spockanalia, until most fanfic moved to the internet -- was spent by editors complaining that they didn't get more letters of comment.

In 1980, Leslye Lilker comments on the decline of LoCs:

(Once upon a time, in a world that seems far, far away, there were LoCs. For a few weeks after the zine's initial mailing, an editor had the joy (or heartbreak) of receiving reader comments... they were the feedback the editor (read 'author') required to judge the quality of his or her publication. Apparently, the LoCers are becoming a breed of readers who are threatened with extinction. The decline has been evident over the past five years. In 1975, I published my first issue of IDIC, sure that I would never sell at least half of the 60 copies, I, with great temerity, had dared to print. Fortunately, it was not so. The run sold out at the first con I attended. With with two weeks I had received approximately 25 LoCs... With their encouragement to continue, I dared to try another story, and a second issue, whole simultaneously reprinting the first. Again came the phenomenon of LoCs, all of which were encouraging... And mine was not an isolated case. Other zine editors and writers have also spoken to me of the positive effects LoCs have had on them. So, why have you, the readers, stopped writing them? ... There are several possible reasons for the slowdown: the post office ate your letter; you went pro and don't have time to write; the post office ate your letter; you have your own zine and don't have time to write; the post office ate your letter; you don't know what to say; the post office ate your letter.) [11]

Another fan comments in 1980:

PLEASE SEND LOC's!! The reward in zine publishing/writing/drawing is NOT in cash -- it's in the comments you send (both positive AND negative) about the zine, stories, poems/artwork. Your comments are our payment, so if you like something, tell us (and be specific about WHY). And if you hate something, the same rules apply -- tell us about it, and tell us WHY!! Believe me, apathy hurts more than criticism. So, please write!! [12]

A fan in 1981 writes that one reason there are fewer LoCs is that just as the art of the LoC has become a lost one, so has the response to the LoC, something that probably discourages feedback:

I write far fewer LoCs now than I did a year or two ago... Probably some of the responses I've typically received may illustrate why I'm not so ready to dash off a LoC as I once was. I know it isn't for lack of things to say... In the old days, a fair number of writers I wrote LoCs to responded with intelligent letters of their own... The resulting exchange was stimulating and fun. Ideas were bounced back and forth, and friendships were born.[13]

A fan in 1984 has this opinion:

I have a couple of ideas about why LoC's are rarer these days than they used to be. 1) Many zines are so long (and I'm guilty here) that commenting adequately is a formidable task, especially when your time is limited. 2) Media fandom is more stratified than it used to be, and some fans may be intimidated by the thought of writing to a 'BNF', let alone criticizing her, and editors and writers tend to become de facto BNF's simply because of exposure. 3) There seems to be an increasing number of media fans who don't know of the origins of media fandom in SF fandom and aren't familiar with the traditions and expectations we took from SF—such as the important of LoCs. In sf fandom, a LoC will frequently get you a contributor's copy of the fanzine. 4) Less palatably, and perhaps related to (3), there may be a drift toward passivity in media fandom: that is, toward the general fan as a mere consumer of the creative products of others. And consumers don't usually comment on the products they consume. (Also, with the loss of the sense of importance of LoC's comes a loss of the SF fannish assumption that a LoC can be a creative work.) Perhaps this drift is a general one in fandom, not just in fanzines. For instance, I've seen filking change from a group endeavor ten or eleven years ago to a performance, in which one member of the group performs while the others passively listen; even if every member of the group performs, they do so individually. Letters of comment aren't supposed to elicit a response in return; they were supposed to be the reader's response to a fanzine—her participation in the zine, as it were—and the editor's response, if there is one, is in the form of interjected comments when the LoC's are printed. In a sense, the LoC is a letter to the editor, but unlike either that kind of letter or a personal letter, it's also a letter to all the other readers of the zine. Editors don't answer LoC's personally for practical . reasons. Assuming SKYWALKER is typical, a zine gets about 20 to 30 LoC's per issue, all but a few of them long and detailed. If the editor replied to all of them, she wouldn't have time to do anything else, especially if any of the replies turned into a correspondence. That's why letterzines are useful as [Sally S] pointed out: they provide a forum for discussion that genzine lettercols can't and never were intended to. [14]

From a letter in 1985:

One subject I feel needs to be discussed in the letterzines is the future of fanzines. I found a letter of Pat Molitor in Shadowstar #18 upsetting. She has written a series of stories about the fall of Anakin Skywa1ker that have been published in several zines, but she is so demoralized by the lack of any kind of feedback, good or bad, that she isn't writing anymore. If this situation applies to other authors and artists. then something needs to be done.[note 4]

In 1991, Maggie Nowakowska wrote:

While shuffling through my filksong binder, I came upon an old (1983) filk on LoCs. I'm afraid the situation that it described back so long ago still exists today: Tune: I'm Gonna Sit Right Down and Write Myself a Letter

I'm gonna sit right down
and write myself a letter;
and make believe that it's a LoC.
I'm gonna heap the praise so deep, I'm gonna sink up to my teeth.
Exclamations on the bottom -- I'll be glad I got 'em!
I'm gonna catch each subtle nuance and allusion;
and hope there'll be a sequel soon.
I'm gonna sit right down
and write myself a letter,
If I don't get some LoCs damn soon!"

In 2000, Flamingo got some insight into why fans don't write LoCs:

I don't like the fact that LOCs have become an endangered species, but I no longer think it is weird that people take time to discuss stories on line when they will never speak their mind to the writer. I don't think I really understood the reasons (and there are many) for the dearth of responses to authors until I started posting Total Eclipse of the Heart on the net. ADVICE TO AUTHORS: You want LOCs? Post partial stories. I'm not kidding. I got more LOCs on that incomplete novel than I did for *all* the other stuff I've written ever in my life put together. And because I got so many LOCs about it, I found this interesting trend in them: almost all LOC writers used certain phrases: "I know you get deluged with mail since your stories are so good, so I won't go on at length..." "I'm not very good at writing LOCs so I won't bother you with a lengthy note..." "I know you hear this all the time, but I just wanted to say briefly..." (Meanwhile, I'm banging my head on the desk moaning, no, no, I'm not deluged, tell me!!!!). But the one I found most disturbing which I got a lot: "I never write to authors because I'm afraid of saying something wrong," or its variant, "I hope I haven't said anything inappropriate or that offended you." So, even the people who got it together to write an LOC usually ended up apologizing for bothering the writer with it. And if they were unhappy about something in the story, the amount of dissembling before they'd admit it and the length of the apologies afterwards (almost always over minor issues) made me really sad. [15]

Please. Send Only the Positive Ones

In 1984, a prominent and prolific zine ed, Dovya Blacque, gave some stern, discouraging, and sometimes conflicting advice regarding LoCs in the editorial of As I Do Thee #2,

LOC's: Letters are very welcome. But (there's always one of those, ain't there?) please keep those letters reporting the location of each and every typo to yourselves. And I don't expect everyone to agree with every idea presented within these pages. I don't want to hear that Kirk and Spock bonded too quickly; that they didn't think long enough about it; that they didn't suffer enough for them to bond; that Vulcan's don't bond; that someone stole an idea from someone else; that there's too much explicit sex; that there's not enough explicit sex; that the art isn't right for the story; that McCoy's too much a part of the story for it to be K/S (I've already explained my stand on that); that Shatner wouldn't say that; that Nimoy would say this. If you have something nice or truly helpful to say (even if that may be of a negative nature), please do write to me. And I thank those of you who wrote about AIDT #1 with helpful, positive, encouraging ideas.

The Value of the Public LoC?

Not everyone was a fan of public LoCs printed in zines.

Dovya Blacque, commented in 1989:

Why don't I (or other K/S editors) print LOCs in the zines anymore? Well, I never have for the simple reason that I always skipped over them in zines I bought that had LOC sections. In essence, a LOC is of ultimate interest to only two people; the editor and the author/artist. (And, may I add that that LOC is of interest to those two people only if those two people know who has written the LOC. Anonymous LOCs aren't worth the name they're signed by!) I've never been interested in reading what people think of everyone's writing/drawing and, with publications such as ON THE DOUBLE and DATAZINE, any need to do so can be fulfilled easy enough without me getting into the discussion ring. [16]

Too Many LoCs!

Not everyone felt a dearth of Letters of Comment.

A writer and zine ed, Dovya Blacque commented in 2001:

I figured this might be the best way to thank the many, many of you who have written to me privately about Legends. I cannot believe the torrent of e-mails and letters I've received; the response has been extremely gratifying. I'm sorry I can't respond to each and every one of you privately, there are just too many, but I wanted to take this opportunity to thank all of you who have written with detailed LOCs and to those who've just taken the time to say 'loved it.' I cannot tell you how much your time and effort means to me.[17][note 5]

In 1976, Gerry Downes wrote that she is overwhelmed with LoCs:

I still have a hundred letters from issue #1 and Alternative to answer. A thoughtful letter deserves an answer, and I have tried to respond... We all know that personal contact is the best part of trekfandom. But there is only one of me, and in trying to answer all your letters, I have not time to write stories. I may try using postcards to acknowledge LOC's with a letter only when necessary to answer questions... but I will probably still get bogged down. Forgive me.[18]

In 1989, a zine ed, Kathy Cox, said:

We welcome your comments. Tell us what you loved; this inspires and encourages (besides, it's great fun to read!). Tell us when you think we stubbed our toes; this is more helpful than you may realize, so don't hesitate. Tell us what you thought of our work, how you felt and why. We truly care. Unfortunately, we are unable to answer most letters personally, but time considerations make this all but impossible - please understand.[19]

Fannish Myths Regarding LoCs

There are plenty of urban zine myths about the amount of comments printed zines generated, many of them contradictory. Many blanket statements about the number of LoCs received by fans in the past were pushed through a very rosy filter, one that lauded the good old days.

Reporting amount of LoCs fans received can be a bit of a moving target. Some fans could be less-than-upfront about the number of LoCs they reported to have received. This was due to ego, how they defined a letter of comment, forgetfulness, and other factors.

In 1998, this zine publisher told "newer" fans:

We get very few letters from folks. It used to be that every single person who bought a zine wrote a letter of comment on it, good or bad. That doesn't happen at all these days. [20]

In reality, LoCs were often thin on the ground, and almost everybody wanted more, regardless of the venue or decade.

For more on this topic, see Feedback.

Fewer LoCs as a Reason for the Decline of the Number of Zines Published?

Less LoCs, less zines? Less zines, less LoCs? And where does the Internet come into play?

Jacqueline Lichtenberg blames the decline of the LoC as one reason fewer zines were being issued. She has a long letter in 1988 commenting on rejected fan fic, LoCs and the difference between letterzines, review zines and LoCs:

Lately, I've been hearing from established writers that Trekdom has lost the habit and art of the LoC... Faneds ceased publishing Locs because zine prices skyrocketed, so LoC writers ceased writing them because there was no free copy to be won by doing a good job on a LoC, so new writers no longer had incisive reader commentary about published stories to study and learn writing from, faneds no longer had a running commentary on their own editorial practices to keep them polite in their rejections, and as a result the quality of zine submissions has fallen and zine eds are baffled and offended by that fall in quality. Meanwhile, to make matters worse, the upfront investment in publishing a zine is going up and up, and the zine buyers are totally spoiled by the number of professional-level writers working in the zines... Zine eds are trying to revive the vitality that we used to have in zine fandom, but which we lost when we lost the LoC column and the free-issue for a published LoC policy. With our feedback look cut like that, faneds are getting ulcers, writers are depressed, and the readers are starving for good reading. Letterzines and review zines don't do the job because the letter writer has to consider that many of the readers haven't read the stories being discussed. Letterzines and review-zines consist of people expressing their own opinions, usually without reference to what anyone else in the issue is saying, or to what was said in the previous issue. Perceptive and in-depth discussion of a work which all the readers of the zine have also read, argument over various points in the work, so that the LoC column reader can see all sides of the issue, is just missing. [21]

A 1991 comment:

Why are there fewer and fever stories around? One certain reason is because the writers can't believe fandom wants stories anymore, not really, not without the guaranteed proof in the hand that a LoC represents. It's not a coincidence that stories started to get sparse about the same time that LoCs began dwindling. In Gian Paolo's letter, he says he'd like to see stories on Mon Mothma. Okay, I published a story on MM, but whether it was good or bad or indifferent, I don't bloody well know because no one has told me. The artist liked it (thanks, Catherine), but not one LoC appeared. Zilch. Nada. Niente. [22]

One fan felt it was the Internet that killed feedback, and by default, print zines:

Once the BBS's such as GEnie and CompuServe's started popping up, slowly and surely fans moved from the long wait between printed issues to the instant gratification (and conflagration) that the world wide web provides. Nowadays, a fan who writes a story can post it to his or her website (or someone else's) with instant gratification or disappointment from its readers. Clearly, the Internet has put an end to much of the printed fanzines. (Sadly, it also has put an end to much of the feedback we used to receive on our fan fiction, but that's another story...) [23]

For more on the decline of the print zine, see: History of Media Fanzines

Meta and Further Reading


  1. ^ For example, Sandy Herrold's Big List of Fanfic Peeves (1999) contains the following end note: And if you're thinking..."who in the hell is she to say all this -- I bet her fiction ain't all that great," all I can say is, feel free to check it out and send me a LOC telling me what you think. (LOC is a mailto: hyperlink).
  2. ^ A fan on dreamwidth who wrote a 2015 post reminiscing about discovering fannish mailing lists in the 1990s references the term loc, but then defines it for fans who are not "dinosaurs". Snowflake Challenge Day Five, Archived version, posted by turps on January 5, 2015.
  3. ^ For example, a few uses turn up in a search of a Pros fandom livejournal community. See Early Pros Writer Sue S. aka The Android Removing Some Stories From Website In 2012, posted in the_safehouse 14 June 2012.
  4. ^ from Southern Enclave #10 -- Note that the plea wasn't just about LoCs in general, but specifically that we might lose potential fiction and art -- similar to arguments about feedback in Livejournal decades later.
  5. ^
    [Dovya Blacque commented on the value of detailed versus vague LoCs in 1989 from the editorial in As I Do Thee #12]
    "Recently, I've been receiving a lot of questions about the value of LOCs (Letters Of Comment). People are wondering if their comments do any good, if they even get to the authors/artists. Well, I try to pass along all comments I receive but most LOCs consist of something along the lines of "I really liked AIDT #802!" Or "Z.Q. Kadiddlehopper's story in AIDT #5,396 was really hot!" In other words, most LOCs aren't very specific so, when I write to an author or artist, the best I can pass along is "A lot of people have really enjoyed your story in "2,345,981". When I do receive specific comments, I do pass them along, it may take a while for me to find the time to actually sit down and write a real, live letter, but the comments get there eventually. So, to answer the original question, yes, LOCs do some good and your comments do get to the people they are intended for... but more specific LOCs would do more good, would be more appreciated."


  1. ^ from Comlink #44 (1990)
  2. ^ Sandy Herrold, from Virgule-L, quoted with permission (March 15, 1994)
  3. ^ comments by Rachael Sabotini on Virgule-L, quoted with permission (July 15, 1998)
  4. ^ comments on Virgule-L, quoted anonymously (July 15, 1998)
  5. ^ from The K/S Press #63
  6. ^ from Arduinna, written 4.8.2010, accessed 5.16.2011
  7. ^ from marycrawford, written 4.8.2010, accessed 5.16.2011
  8. ^ source unknown
  9. ^ from Alien Romance
  10. ^ It Takes Time on Impulse #1.
  11. ^ from Stylus #1
  12. ^ from the zine Casa Cabrillo
  13. ^ personal correspondence between two fans in 1981, accessed 2011
  14. ^ from Southern Enclave #3
  15. ^ comments by Flamingo, June 2000, at VenicePlace, quoted on Fanlore with permission
  16. ^ from the editorial of As I Do Thee #12
  17. ^ comment from a 2001 issue of The K/S Press
  18. ^ comment from Stardate: Unknown #2
  19. ^ comment from Destiny #2
  20. ^ from Randy Landers at alt.startrek.creative, posted October 21, 1998, accessed January 30, 2013
  21. ^ from On the Double
  22. ^ from Southern Enclave #29
  23. ^ from Orion Press: Questions and Answers, accessed March 10, 2012 (archived)