- Members - lists.sigcis.org

The Women of Datamation
by Dag Spicer 04 Sep '15

04 Sep '15

Dear SIGCIS friends, I’m beginning research for a long-form essay on how women were used to sell computers as protrayed in the industry magazine Datamation. I have completed my survey of images and am now seeking some guodance abdout possible theoretical perspectives to consider. Estelle Freedman at Stanford pointed me to The Feminine Mystique, which I am now reading. Of course, that was written many decades ago. I don’t really track the scholarship in this area so any pointers would be greatly appreciated. Working observation: In the late 1950s, women were portrayed as functional, "sensibly” dressed, clerical workers using the computer in a (contrived) but plausibly real-world application. Beginning in the mid-1960s and onwards into the mid 1970s, women were portrayed as highly sexualized, alluringly dressed “human parsley,” garnishing a computer product -- in one case literally draped over a mainframe CPU cabinet in a bikini — with no relevance or appeal to the usual benfits cited for computers, viz. efficiency, cost-control, &c. One of many questions I have: Does this long-term movement to sex rather than the prior economic or technical arguments reflect a change in the people making computer purchasing decisions? Was it an ephemeral trope in adverstising — “it was the 60s, man!” or something else? Sex sells… but who’s buying? How does the portrayal of women in the leading journal for the ccomputer industry over decades reflect buerys and sellers? Can we draw parallels with how other technologies have used women in their advertising? &c. Thanks for any thoughts… Dag -- Dag Spicer Senior Curator Computer History Museum Editorial Board, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 1401 North Shoreline Boulevard Mountain View, CA 94043-1311 Tel: +1 650 810 1035 Fax: +1 650 810 1055

6 6

Call for "paper"
by "Dr. Stefan Höltgen" 03 Sep '15

03 Sep '15

Dear SIGCIS members, I am planning to publish a book on handwritten programming code (means: written without computer, only with pencil and paper). That kind of „programming“ has been manily practiced in the 1970s and 1980s when kids without own computers planned their programs on paper to type them in later (at school, in computer ware houses, at friends, …) But that kind of programming is as old as programmable computers themselves, I guess. Every programmer surely had written short algorithms as drafts by hand or had corrected and commented program printouts by hand. Handwritten code, I think, today is almost extinguished. So the book will show today’s computational scientist that special kind of programming history and will also give a slightly insight into how the programmer anticipates the work of machine works while he is trying to think as the machine that runs his/her code. The book will show such handwritten codes and code fragments (of any programming language) as scans, gives informations about the author, date of origin, programming language, computer where it was typed in (if so) and a about the planned function of the code or fragment. If the system and language are available and the code is readable and (sort of) complete, it will be tested and a screenshot of the output will addet to the text. The book will be published in 2017 and there will be an exhibition at the „Heinz Nixdorf MuseumsForum“ in Paderborn (Germany) - one of the largest computer museums in Europe. WHAT DO I NEED FROM YOU? 1. Original paper* with handwritten code or reprintable scans of such papers (300 dpi, color, TIFF, with the edges of the paper in the picture). 2. A permission to reprint that code from its author. 3. Informations about the origin of the paper (author name, date of origin, programming language and system, if remembered: anecdotes about that code and its genesis) * If you want your paper to be shown at the exhibition at „Heinz Nixdorf MuseumsForum“ in 2017 you have to send in the original. Before you send in anything please contact me (se below)! Sent-in original papers will be scanned and kept safely until they are not needed anymore and than will be returened to the owner. Shipping fees from the sender to me can’t be refunded, since the project is completely unsalaried. But those who’s code has been reprinted or shown at the exhibition will get a free copy of the book. The book with the working title „Papier-Maschinen“ (engl. „Paper Machines“) will be published in summer 2017 in our series „Computerarchäologie“ (engl.: „Computer Archaeology“) at the German „Projekt-Verlag"). If you need more informations do not hesitate to contact me at: email(a)computerarchaeologie.de or visit our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/computerarchaeologie I would appreciate it if you would spread my call for „paper“! thanks, Stefan Hoeltgen --- Dr. Stefan Höltgen Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Institut für Musikwissenschaft und Medienwissenschaft Fachgebiet Medienwissenschaft Zimmer 2.33 Georgenstraße 47 D-10117 Berlin Studienfachberater für Medienwissenschaft Telefon: (+49) (0)30 2093-66-185 Telefax: (+49) (0)30 2093-66-181 (Sekretariat) Mobil: (+49) (0)173 9025982 E-Mail: stefan.hoeltgen(a)hu-berlin.de Web: http://u.hu-berlin.de/hoeltgen Sprechstunde: Mittwochs, 13-14 Uhr

12 16

Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Call for "paper"
by Taylor-Smith, Ella 03 Sep '15

03 Sep '15

Hi, earlier in the year I heard Dame Stephanie Shirley talk about her career (promoting her book). She'd run a software company mostly staffed by women writing code on paper in their own homes (and working at the times that suited them). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Shirley Hope this helps -Ella Ella Taylor-Smith Institute for Informatics and Digital Innovation Edinburgh Napier University 10 Colinton Road Edinburgh, EH10 5DT Email: e.taylor-smith(a)napier.ac.uk http://www.iidi.napier.ac.uk/e.taylor-smith http://about.me/EllaTaylorSmith @EllaTasm This message and its attachment(s) are intended for the addressee(s) only and should not be read, copied, disclosed, forwarded or relied upon by any person other than the intended addressee(s) without the permission of the sender. If you are not the intended addressee you must not take any action based on this message and its attachment(s) nor must you copy or show them to anyone. Please respond to the sender and ensure that this message and its attachment(s) are deleted. It is your responsibility to ensure that this message and its attachment(s) are scanned for viruses or other defects. Edinburgh Napier University does not accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from this message or its attachment(s), or for errors or omissions arising after it was sent. Email is not a secure medium. Emails entering Edinburgh Napier University's system are subject to routine monitoring and filtering by Edinburgh Napier University. Edinburgh Napier University is a registered Scottish charity. Registration number SC018373

1 0

gender advertisements/Datamation
by Sharon Traweek 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

Hi For a quick survey of the visual conventions when the images you describe appeared see Erving Goffmann’s Gender Advertisements (Harvard, 1979). I presume Estelle recommended that you read Friedan’s 1963 book so you would get an introduction to the first ten years of "second wave" scholarship on representations of women/gender/sexuality. For research generated since 1963 on gendered media images see first the foundational work in England/France/Italy/US by Irigaray, de Lauretis, Mayne, Mulvey, Penley, and Silverman; they launched a new field of inquiry. To access some of that work search for “male gaze” at https://scholar.google.com and get links to 24,800 articles; adding the word 'computers' to your search will limit the links to 5,000, etc. Cheers, Sharon Sharon Traweek, UCLA ________________________________________ From: Members [members-bounces(a)lists.sigcis.org] on behalf of Dag Spicer [dspicer(a)computerhistory.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 7:54 PM To: members(a)lists.sigcis.org Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] The Women of Datamation Dear SIGCIS friends, I’m beginning research for a long-form essay on how women were used to sell computers as protrayed in the industry magazine Datamation. I have completed my survey of images and am now seeking some guodance abdout possible theoretical perspectives to consider. Estelle Freedman at Stanford pointed me to The Feminine Mystique, which I am now reading. Of course, that was written many decades ago. I don’t really track the scholarship in this area so any pointers would be greatly appreciated. Working observation: In the late 1950s, women were portrayed as functional, "sensibly” dressed, clerical workers using the computer in a (contrived) but plausibly real-world application. Beginning in the mid-1960s and onwards into the mid 1970s, women were portrayed as highly sexualized, alluringly dressed “human parsley,” garnishing a computer product -- in one case literally draped over a mainframe CPU cabinet in a bikini — with no relevance or appeal to the usual benfits cited for computers, viz. efficiency, cost-control, &c. One of many questions I have: Does this long-term movement to sex rather than the prior economic or technical arguments reflect a change in the people making computer purchasing decisions? Was it an ephemeral trope in adverstising — “it was the 60s, man!” or something else? Sex sells… but who’s buying? How does the portrayal of women in the leading journal for the ccomputer industry over decades reflect buerys and sellers? Can we draw parallels with how other technologies have used women in their advertising? &c. Thanks for any thoughts… Dag -- Dag Spicer Senior Curator Computer History Museum Editorial Board, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 1401 North Shoreline Boulevard Mountain View, CA 94043-1311 Tel: +1 650 810 1035 Fax: +1 650 810 1055 _______________________________________________

1 0

Handwritten "First Draft" in Dyson's book?
by Mai Sugimoto 02 Sep '15

02 Sep '15

Dear SIGCIS members: I found George Dyson's book, Turing's Cathedral (2012), seems to show the original hand-written version of the "First Draft" (probably?) in a picture page, which is on 13 pages after p.136. Since the caption says the picture is from Princeton University Libraries, I contacted archivists of the Libraries to access the manuscript. But the archivists answered they cannot find any material like the picture within the collection or elsewhere in related collection. I also asked to the IAS Library, but they cannot find anything, either. Then, as the archivists suggested, I contacted the publisher to send a message to Mr. Dyson. They told me just a forwarding address, so I sent a regular mail to Mr. Dyson in last February to make sure of the location of the manuscript. I have not received the reply yet. I am stranded. Does anyone know contact information of Dyson, or have any idea about the picture on the book or the original hand-written version of the draft? My colleagues and I have been working of a Japanese translation of von Neumann's original paper. Dyson's book is very interesting, but it seems to have a lot of unreferenced information, so my collaborators and I think that we should be careful to handle this book in the bibliographical comments. Best, Mai Sugimoto Associate Professor Faculty of Sociology, Kansai University 3-3-35, Yamate-cho, Suita-shi Osaka, Japan 564-8680 msgmt(a)kansai-u.ac.jp

8 8

Business History Conference call for papers - due October 1
by Andrew Russell 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

Greetings all - The deadline for paper and panel proposals for the Business History Conference is October 1. The meeting takes place in Portland, Oregon from March 31-April 2, 2016. The theme for the 2016 meeting is “Reinterpretation” - see http://thebhc.org/call-papers-2016 for details. It is sounding more and more like a timely theme, given recent discussions on this list. I’m writing to encourage you to submit proposals, and to make a few comments about BHC: - for those who haven’t been to BHC, you shouldn’t be too put off by the word “business” in the group’s title. Topics under discussion at BHC include the history of capitalism, political economy, regulation, organizations (including non-profit and public-private orgs), and (of course) technology. Also, one can attend BHC and be *anti*-business, if that suits your ideological preferences. - Several SIGCIS members regularly attend BHC; indeed, many of us consider BHC to be a second scholarly home. There are often more than one or two panels that deal explicitly with computing and/or information. Perhaps some of them/us will comment here about their experiences with BHC. I believe we have at least one former BHC President as a list subscriber… For what it’s worth, my own experiences there have been uniformly positive, and I’m looking forward to attending the meeting in Portland. - BHC has an excellent infrastructure for supporting young scholars, including travel grants, the Herman Krooss Prize for the best dissertation in business history, and the BHC Doctoral Colloquium in Business History - see http://www.thebhc.org/doctoral-colloquia for details of the latter. - This year's CFP notes that the 2016 meeting location on the west coast provides an opportunity for the community to “take a fresh look at what might be termed the communities of the Pacific.” For those planning to attend the SHOT/SIGCIS meetings in Singapore in June 2016, the BHC meeting in Portland looks like it could serve as a nice way to focus attention on things Pacific. Finally: I would be happy to facilitate a SIGCIS-themed submission (or submissions) for this year. If you have a paper idea or panel idea, and would like to find other scholars to join in, please let me know by September 15. Or, better yet, feel free to use the list to float your ideas and recruit others to join in. All the best, Andy Russell SIGCIS Chair --------------------------------------- Andrew L. Russell, Ph.D. Director, Program in Science & Technology Studies Associate Professor, History College of Arts & Letters Stevens Institute of Technology Hoboken, New Jersey 07030 t. 201-216-5400 || f. 201-216-8245 arussell(a)stevens.edu<mailto:arussell@stevens.edu> || @RussellProf www.stevens.edu/cal/sts<http://www.stevens.edu/cal/sts> || www.arussell.org<http://www.arussell.org> Open Standards and the Digital Age: History, Ideology, and Networks (Cambridge University Press, 2014 || www.arussell.org/open<http://www.arussell.org/open>)

1 0

Unix Racism: Winner vs. McPherson, et al
by Sharon Traweek 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

Hi SIGCIS members are likely to be familiar with how these four groups read the putative successes/failures of each others' interpretive/methodological strategies: historians of sci/tech, philosophers of sci/tech, STSers, and practitioners of sci/tech. It appears from the discussion of the past week that this group is less familiar with the field of cultural studies of sci/tech which is about 35 years old, or how its practitioners read/evaluate the work in related fields. Generally, cultural studies scholars focus on the workings of language/discourse and definitely do not regard its various forms (vocabulary/grammar/oral/written/et al) as a neutral tool or transparent window for representing the world. That field also has a practice of circulating exploratory essays as a way of launching new topics of investigation. It is useful for my work to learn from the strengths/weaknesses of each approach; demarcating territories or engaging in border control is not. Cordially, Sharon Sharon Traweek ________________________________________ From: Members [members-bounces(a)lists.sigcis.org] on behalf of Willard McCarty [willard.mccarty(a)mccarty.org.uk] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 11:28 PM To: members(a)lists.sigcis.org Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Unix Racism: Winner vs. McPherson Dear colleagues, I'm merely a fellow traveller of the primary audience of SIGCIS, though I am much indebted to STS and its closely related disciplinary communities. But this particular discussion moves me from lurker to participant. It seems to me that Tom's argument should find wide acceptance in many disciplines. The problem I see with McPherson's and similar stories is a terribly naive, undereducated historiography that comes from the imperious politicization of academic research. To question the connection between the prejudices of a time and place and the work done then and there is very important indeed. We need to understand this connection. But to assert a simple and necessary causality between the one and the other is thoughtless and at best damaging. So basic is history to the disciplines of the humanities that striving to get it right and succeeding as well as one can should earn very wide respect indeed. If it doesn't then we really do have a problem. Yours, W On 25/08/2015 07:05, Thomas Haigh wrote: > Thanks Hansen, > > You are exactly right regarding my argumentative intent. I am sure that > design choices within Unix do exert certain kinds of political influence > on the world. My point is simply that _/within McPherson’s story/_ no > effort is made to demonstrate that influence. Thus she does not depict > Unix as something Winner would recognize as an artifact that “has > politics,” merely as something socially (or more accurately culturally) > constructed. > > I share your instinctive reaction that McPherson is trying to make a > generic STS-like social construction of technology (SCOT) argument and > failing egregiously. However, as per my earlier post, I must concede > that this reading only holds from within our disciplinary community. To > readers in other disciplines it presumably looks as if she’s making a > novel argument supported by exciting critical theory and succeeding. > This is perhaps a sign that STS has not been successful in demarcating > its turf, to the extent that even humanities scholars issuing manifestos > to explore the mutual shaping of code, culture, and politics feel no > need to familiarize themselves with our methods, cite our literature, or > take seriously our objections. There are many more comp lit and media > studies programs than STS programs, and our view of the world is not as > widely shared as we would like it to be. > > Tom > > *From:*Members [mailto:members-bounces@lists.sigcis.org] *On Behalf Of > *Hansen Hsu > *Sent:* Monday, August 24, 2015 6:22 PM > *To:* Joris van Zundert <joris.van.zundert(a)huygens.knaw.nl> > *Cc:* thaigh(a)computer.org; members(a)sigcis.org > *Subject:* Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Unix Racism: Winner vs. McPherson > > My take on Tom’s remarks is not necessarily that he meant to say that > "Unix has no politics" per se. I think in STS it’s pretty much been > shown that political and cultural context shapes design choices. That > design choices can have political effects in the large is also not > controversial, though whether specific design choices /necessarily /or > /inevitably/ leads to certain effects, or even highly disposes society > to lean in certain political directions, as Winner’s nuclear power > argument goes, is still up for debate, and as Joris has pointed out, > intention does not straightforwardly lead to outcome, especially when > user appropriation comes into play. > > But I think what Tom is saying is that McPherson neither makes this > argument nor has the evidence to support it. Even if Unix’s modular > design was somehow influenced by pervasive societal racism (which she > hasn’t convincingly shown), does that modular design then have racist > political consequences for society? She doesn’t make that argument nor > provides any evidence to support such an argument. Tom’s point is that > Winner’s argument about how artifacts have politics is about their > political effects, in an almost soft-determinist way, whereas McPherson > wants to make a social constructivist argument about opening the black > box of Unix to show how racial politics shaped its construction, though > she isn’t successful in doing so. Winner is not a social constructivist > of technology along the lines of Trevor Pinch or Wiebe Bijker, and in > his paper “Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding It Empty” Winner > outlines his disagreements with Pinch and Bijker and the SCOT school. So > my interpretation of Tom is that when he’s saying “Unix has no > politics,” he’s really saying (and he’s free to disagree with my reading > of him) that McPherson doesn’t argue that Unix has politics in Winner’s > sense, that a particular technical design has social effects either > through its materiality or its strong compatibility with particular > institutional or political structures. McPherson wants to make a SCOT > argument, but is going about it more like Foucault and painting a fairly > broad brush, whereas STS/SCOT scholars really get much deeper into the > socio-technical detail, which involves more than just a discourse > analysis of marketing materials, technical writing or code but extensive > archival research, interviews with the designers, or ethnographic > observation of design work. I’m all for McPherson’s larger project, we > need to investigate the role race plays in the design and effects of > technology, and we need to do it by opening up the black box of things > like Unix and showing how technical decisions are not purely technical > but also social, cultural, political, ideological. > > My problem with McPherson’s piece is that it’s not good STS; she doesn’t > succeed in opening the black box as she doesn’t have the empirical > evidence to show compelling linkages between modular design and the > racial politics of the civil rights era, other than simply waving her > hands and saying that we’d be naive to think that it isn’t mere > coincidence that the two happened at the same time. Anyone can make any > similar (or even contradictory) claim, as Tom pointed out in his > original post, and such broad assertions are practically impossible to > disprove. Perhaps it’s not fair to apply STS standards of evidence on a > scholar from another discipline, but she is trying to reach outside her > own discipline to make an STS argument without doing any STS work, and > to me that makes it fair game to critique from the standards of STS and > social science more broadly. From that perspective she appears as a > scholar who has imposed some preconceived theory onto the empirical data > and goes through some theoretical contortions to make her evidence > support her argument, something that historians and anthropologists are > careful to avoid. So although her provocation to scholars to do more to > study the imbrication of race and technology is welcome and necessary, > unfortunately because her evidence is so poor, it severely damages her > credibility and makes it much more difficult for not only engineers and > students but other scholars who might otherwise support her larger > political project to take her work seriously. > > It’s for these reasons and the many others Tom has explicated that > Winner’s piece is a better pedagogical tool than McPherson’s. > > On Aug 24, 2015, at 1:19 PM, Joris van Zundert > <joris.van.zundert(a)huygens.knaw.nl > <mailto:joris.van.zundert@huygens.knaw.nl>> wrote: > > My quibble remains with "Unix has no politics" as a generalized > statement. I readily assume that Tom Haigh does not intend > absolutism with his remark that "the technology here is shaped by > culture, but it does not have politics". Nevertheless, I think this > is an important point to challenge, to draw out the politics that is > inherent in Unix and any other technology. > > Even if Winner's 'Moses' Bridges' and McPherson's articles are more > effective as rhetoric than powerful as proof, they serve to show > that technologies arise in some cultural context (McPherson) and/or > some context of authorization (Winner). These contexts are in any > case highly politicized. Certainly the IT engineering contexts I > have witnessed had/have all the office politics going on that you > would expect. Design choices are influenced by that, even decided on > basis of these politics, both consciously as tacitly. That is not to > say UNIX must be racist, just that design choices in part are > politically informed. Thus I would argue that office politics, > institutional politics, and bigger ideologies do shape IT design and > technology in general. > > Of course Tom's statement foremost considers the intent and agency > of technology, not its context of development. So I take this to > mean that Unix is not an agent of the possible politics that > influenced its development. Indeed the politicized context that > gives rise to a technology needs not result in a technology > imprinting those particular ideas onto society. They certainly can > be intended as such however: Linux (a descendant of UNIX) is > explicitly political, or at least ideological. Of course, whether > intended influence and actual effect match is an entirely different > matter, with 'results vary' as a probable answer. > > In any case neither at the design end, nor at the business end of > technology do I see a possibility that technology is without > politics. If there are politics at play in the design phase, then > how probable is it that there would not be—even be they > unintended—politics as a result at the business end? > > > > _______________________________________________ > This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org > -- Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk/) Professor, Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London, and Digital Humanities Research Group, University of Western Sydney _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org

3 2

New book on Michael A. Jackson
by Edgar Daylight 31 Aug '15

31 Aug '15

Dear fellow historians, Just appeared: a conversation with Michael A. Jackson. title: Formalism and Intuition in Software Development. Excerpt from the preface: "It is in the field of data processing that Jackson began his computing career, encountering a computer for the first time in 1961. After starting his company Michael Jackson Systems Ltd. in 1971, he developed the Jackson structured programming design method and later elaborated that into Jackson system development (JSD). During these years, he began to realize that ..." entire preface available here: www.dijkstrascry.com/node/132 The book can be purchased from Aamazon. best wishes, Edgar Daylight

1 0

[SHOT} accomodations
by Akera, Atsushi 30 Aug '15

30 Aug '15

Hi All, Is anyone still looking for housing at SHOT? Normally I wouldn't circulate conference housing queries to the list, but it looks like housing may be an issue this year because of the international balloon festival. - Sam Smiley, who teaches in the Boston area, is looking for housing, and is willing to look for Air BnB options for a group to share, unless someone's still looking for a female roommate. - I /believe/ I have a double booked at the conference hotel ($159+tx; staying Wed-Sun). (It was so long ago; I now have to check to make sure!) So if anyone is still looking to share a room, feel free to let me know. Best wishes! - Atsushi _________________________________________________________ Atsushi Akera Associate Professor, Department of Science and Technology Studies Rensselaer Polytechnic institute 110 8th Street Troy, NY 12180 USA cel: 518.300.0613/fx:518.276-2659/e:akeraa@rpi.edu /w: http://www.rpi.edu/~akeraa -----Original Message----- From: rocketscience [mailto:rocketscience@astrodime.org] Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2015 10:07 AM To: Akera, Atsushi Subject: STS and SHOT accommodations Hi Akira! I'm looking for room mates for both STS and SHOT to save money. For STS, I have a room already booked, so said room mate would basically split with me, which is reasonable, I reserved two queen beds. I can find out the exact amount, it's the STS hotel. If I'm sharing with one person, and the person is random, I prefer a female room mate. For SHOT, it's a harder thing for me to figure out. The hotel is booked and extremely expensive. Jane just emailed me and said there' s no grad student option.. So I'm thinking of doing Air B and B. Best case is to find a few people to share. if I have my own room, I don't care what gender room mates are, mostly I just want to be in relative proximity of the conference. I hope you are well! -sam smiley http://astrodime.org

1 0

ENIAC and the Cold War
by Daniel Ferrell 27 Aug '15

27 Aug '15

SIGCIS members: I have an inquiry into ENIAC. I understand that one of its purposes was to track and calculate artillery trajectories. I am looking for resources that emphasize the development of ENIAC against the backdrop of the Cold War era, including the role ENIAC had in analyzing the hydrogen bomb. Are there any suggestions? -Daniel Ferrell Home Acceptance Corporation (NMLS #1151715). 65 S. Outer Rd. P.O. Box 72 Benton, MO 63736

6 5