> Stephen Mulraney wrote at 2003-03-03 12:28:45 (+0000)
>
> > Peter Clark wrote:
> > > A thousand apologies. It's an occupational hazard, especially
> > > when people don't sign their emails. Of course, you're in good
> > > company; H. S. Teoh has been (repeatedly) accused of being
> > > female... Of course, there's also the saying, "On the Internet,
> > > no one knows you're a dog." It would not surprise me (much) to
> > > learn of canine conlangers, although I would wonder about their
> > > keyboarding skills.
> >
> > I've gotten quite used to switching my mental image of online
> > people from male to female, or vice versa [though not from human to
> > canine], whenever a clue as to gender arises. But I honestly was
> > convinced that I'd come across a strong "H. S. Teoh is female"
> > clue. Very odd. I wonder what it was. I usually assume that
> > indeterminately-gendered names belong to males (unfair, but
> > appropriate in this, as in many, online fora), unless there is some
> > evidence to the contrary. Sorry, Teoh :)
>
> I definitely remember some specific post referring to Teoh by a
> feminine pronoun in the past few months, which sent me looking for
> some kind of corroboration or contradiction. I couldn't find anything
> until I read the LaTeX-for-Conlangers archives some weeks later. Most
> disconcerting. Searching the archives, I believe the post in question
> was this one:
>
>
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0212D&L=conlang&P=R6098
>
> by Christophe.