From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V7 #320 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Thursday, November 8 2001 Volume 07 : Number 320 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: shoutcast -> grassy hill radio :) [Tom Neff ] Hello from Julia Macklin [Julia Macklin ] Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling [Jessweiser24@aol.c] Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling ["Michael R. Colfor] Shortlistofmusic.com [] RE: Hello from Julia Macklin ["Bill Adler" ] Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling [Joseph Zitt ] Re: getting buffed [kitty kat ] Re: getting buffed ["Elin Sjoelie" ] Re: getting buffed [Greg Bossert ] Voices on the Verge shows [Jessica Byers ] Re: Shortlistofmusic.com ["Xenu's Sister" ] Re: Shortlistofmusic.com [kitty kat ] Re: Shortlistofmusic.com [Steve VanDevender ] Re: getting buffed [Joseph Zitt ] Re: Shortlistofmusic.com [Joseph Zitt ] RE: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling ["Earl J. Woods" ] Anyhting happening in Toronto this week/weekend [Jason Gordon ] Re: Shortlistofmusic.com [Neal Copperman ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 02:02:28 -0500 From: Tom Neff Subject: Re: shoutcast -> grassy hill radio :) If you have a Shoutcast compatible player like Winamp or iTunes or MusicMatch, you might enjoy Grassy Hill Radio, online since 1999 with some of the best acoustic music streaming anywhere. The catch is that you need better than a dialup connection to listen: cable modem, DSL, ISDN, company T1 will all work. The URL is http://radio.grassyhill.org and you will hear many of your ecto favorites there, 24x7 with an 8 day deep playlist and clickthroughs to each artist on the playlist page. Give it a try - it's free and presented for your enjoyment... - -- Tom Neff original Sib-list guy general Grassy Hill bottle washer and confirmed Ecto junkie :) tneff@grassyhill.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 03:08:17 -0500 From: Julia Macklin Subject: Hello from Julia Macklin Hi all! Just wanted to introduce myself. I'm Julia Macklin, a New York city based singer/songwriter, and I've just released my second indie CD (called HALF WILD, cause that's just what I am). The music is sweet, ethereal, a little angry... a little haunted? Marina Belica from October Project sings background harmonies on both of my records - I'm a huge fan of that band. HALF WILD is on CDBaby now and coming to Amazon. A friend told me I'd enjoy the ectophile websites and the ecto-digest, and that I should say hi, because I guess I am "ecto" and didn't know it! I've been a fan of Jane Siberry for years, and fell in love with Happy Rhodes the first time I heard her voice. I love sharing my music - check out http://juliamacklin.com and drop me an email. All the best - looking forward to the digest. julia ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 07:45:06 EST From: Jessweiser24@aol.com Subject: Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling Meth writes: > All of the cast members did their own singing, with varied results. Since > Anthony Stewart Head (Giles) has a musical theater background (I'd have > LOVED to see his Dr. Frank-n-furter in London), I was expecting him to > school the rest of the cast in how it's done, but Amber Benson (Tara) just > blew me away. The girl can *sing*!! Yow. Actually Anthony is releasing an album and apparently Amber Benson is going to be providing some vocals on it as well... I thought the episode was really wonderful... Jess www.jessicaweiser.com ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 08:04:59 -0500 From: "Michael R. Colford" Subject: Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling I've been looking forward to this episode with great anticipation since I first found out about it, (being a huge fan of musicals and all that.) As Meredith said, it was amazing that Joss did such a terrific job with this since it was his first attempt at songwriting. It's clear he's a huge fan of the musical, and really stayed true to form both with respect to the story, and with respect to the musical genre. The storylines were so beautifully handled through the context of the musical. I was greatly impressed. And while I was impressed with Amber Benson's vocal ability, and her love song to Willow, it was that big climactic fight scene number that Sarah Michelle Gellar sang that really sticks in my mind. Michael n.p. The Book of Life Soundtrack n.r. The Gate to Woman's Country by Sheri Tepper "Earl J. Woods" wrote: > I just finished watching tonight's episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, > "Once More, With Feeling." Once again Joss Whedon and the crew have produced > an amazing episode - perhaps my favourite thus far. (I'm a late adopter of > the show, though; I only started watching at the beginning of season four.) > > I mention this only because Tara's voice seemed very ecto-ish to me. Her > love song to Willow was fabulous; my favourite number in the show, though > there were a lot of great bits to choose from. > > Earl J. Woods > CEO, Paranoid Productions > #2, 11564 St. Albert Trail > Edmonton, Alberta T5M 3L5 > CANADA > (780) 453-3541 > ewoods@powersurfr.com > http://plaza.powersurfr.com/paranoid > ICQ: 6639798 - -- Michael Colford, Head of Technical Services Reading Public Library, Reading Massachusetts colford@noblenet.org North of Boston Library Exchange ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:29:52 -0500 From: Subject: Shortlistofmusic.com Previously said; > I tried to get to this website (http://www.shortlistofmusic.com/) and > it's got a freaking brain-damaged front page. Anybody know how to reach > this site past the front page? Try this way of getting in... http://www.shortlistofmusic.com/welcome.html thought the Flash may crash your system if you're running I/E 4.0 or earlier. Rich R. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:05:22 -0500 From: "Bill Adler" Subject: RE: Hello from Julia Macklin Julia, Welcome to Ecto. I bought your EP on CDBaby a while ago and have been enjoying it every since. Your music is indeed very ectoish -- and terrific, too. - --Bill n.p. Vienna Teng, Waking Hour (still) - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org]On Behalf Of Julia Macklin Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 3:08 AM To: ecto@smoe.org Subject: Hello from Julia Macklin Hi all! Just wanted to introduce myself. I'm Julia Macklin, a New York city based singer/songwriter, and I've just released my second indie CD (called HALF WILD, cause that's just what I am). The music is sweet, ethereal, a little angry... a little haunted? Marina Belica from October Project sings background harmonies on both of my records - I'm a huge fan of that band. HALF WILD is on CDBaby now and coming to Amazon. A friend told me I'd enjoy the ectophile websites and the ecto-digest, and that I should say hi, because I guess I am "ecto" and didn't know it! I've been a fan of Jane Siberry for years, and fell in love with Happy Rhodes the first time I heard her voice. I love sharing my music - check out http://juliamacklin.com and drop me an email. All the best - looking forward to the digest. julia ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 11:08:46 -0600 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 11:38:15PM -0500, meredith wrote: > Funny, I just finished posting to the Buffy list I'm on about this amazing, > brilliant episode. Buffy list? Not that I really need a 40th mailing list to be on, but I'm curious. > All of the cast members did their own singing, with varied results. Since > Anthony Stewart Head (Giles) has a musical theater background (I'd have > LOVED to see his Dr. Frank-n-furter in London), I was expecting him to > school the rest of the cast in how it's done, but Amber Benson (Tara) just > blew me away. The girl can *sing*!! Yow. Yeah, her singing was quite the surprise, as were Xander and Anya's dance number. And just loved the way that the lyrics remained so in-character for each ... uh ... character, and how the songs goofed on themselves. (Willow's line about that line being filler in the big group number cracked me up, as did Xander's occasional wandering off into "never mind"edness. n.p.i.m.h. The "life's a game" number. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:00:12 -0800 From: Greg Bossert Subject: getting buffed i was going to say "better late than never", but i guess vampires are an exception to that rule... ;) so, not only have i missed about ten thousand ecto messages (yup, for real), but i've only started watching Buffy since FX started the replay, so i'm stuck at the end of the second season (with the start of the third on the TiVo)... i *hate* spoilers, so i am wrestling with whether i should watch the musical episode or not -- will it ruin all my rerun fun? anyway, i am sure this is an old old topic but it's more fun to post than search the archives, so: is there a web site, etc., that lists groups and music from the episodes -- both as soundtrack and playing at the Bronze? i caught Rasputina the other day, and Cibo Matto was a gimme, since they were standing there, not to mention Sarah from the episode i just watched. but just about every episode plays something i either have and can't remember or probably should have ;) love and footahs. - -g - -- www.suddensound.com -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:37:26 -0800 (PST) From: kitty kat Subject: Re: getting buffed I'm in exactly the same boat, and I've decided not to watch this yet. FX is breezing through the episodes at 2 a day at this point, anyway, so we'll catch up Real Soon Now. :) I'm ultra-militant about spoilers, and I don't want to know about the new characters and such, and certainly don't want to get new plot stuff in my head. - -K On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Greg Bossert wrote: > i was going to say "better late than never", but i guess vampires are an > exception to that rule... ;) > > so, not only have i missed about ten thousand ecto messages (yup, for > real), but i've only started watching Buffy since FX started the replay, > so i'm stuck at the end of the second season (with the start of the > third on the TiVo)... i *hate* spoilers, so i am wrestling with whether > i should watch the musical episode or not -- will it ruin all my rerun > fun? > > anyway, i am sure this is an old old topic but it's more fun to post > than search the archives, so: > > is there a web site, etc., that lists groups and music from the > episodes -- both as soundtrack and playing at the Bronze? > > i caught Rasputina the other day, and Cibo Matto was a gimme, since they > were standing there, not to mention Sarah from the episode i just > watched. but just about every episode plays something i either have and > can't remember or probably should have ;) > > love and footahs. > -g > > -- www.suddensound.com -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 20:02:21 +0100 From: "Elin Sjoelie" Subject: Re: getting buffed On 7 Nov 2001, at 10:00, Greg Bossert wrote: > is there a web site, etc., that lists groups and music from the > episodes -- both as soundtrack and playing at the Bronze? I think http://www.buffyguide.com/ has the music listed. I also love BBC's Buffy site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/buffy/ Elin - -- http://home.no.net/dreaming/ - NOR http://home.no.net/lunacia/ - ENG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 11:03:12 -0800 From: Greg Bossert Subject: Re: getting buffed ah, but i live in fear that FX will not play through season five, and i will be left staring hopelessly across an episode gap at season six. ah well, i can always watch the Xena musical episodes again ;) speaking of which, anyone have an opinion on Xena soundtrack CDs? some of the Mr. LoDuca's music, particularly the bits with wailing vocals, are downright ecto-ish. - -g ('tah) On Wednesday, November 7, 2001, at 10:37 AM, kitty kat wrote: > I'm in exactly the same boat, and I've decided not to watch this yet. > FX is breezing through the episodes at 2 a day at this point, anyway, so > we'll catch up Real Soon Now. :) I'm ultra-militant about spoilers, > and I > don't want to know about the new characters and such, and certainly > don't > want to get new plot stuff in my head. > > On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Greg Bossert wrote: >> [...] >> i *hate* spoilers, so i am wrestling with whether >> i should watch the musical episode or not -- will it ruin all my rerun >> fun? - -- www.suddensound.com -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:07:33 -0700 From: Jessica Byers Subject: Voices on the Verge shows fyi... Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:11:20 EST From: GDUnger@aol.com Subject: VOICES ON THE VERGE - new confirmed dates incoming JUST ANNOUNCED!!!!! CONFIRMED DATES for the NOV/DEC TOUR of VOICES ON THE VERGE supporting their DEBUT ALBUM- LIVE IN PHILADELPHIA (featuring Jess Klein, Rose Polenzani, Erin Mckeown, Beth Amsel) In stores everywhere and on the web. MORE INFO COMING SOON. . . Weds 11/28 Club Helsinki, Great Barrington MA 8:30pm w/ Flora Reed opening Thurs 11/29 The Point, Phily PA - 2 shows 7pm and 10pm w/ Sara Slean supporting Sunday 12/2 Star Hill Music Hall Charlottesville, VA w/ special guests Monday 12/3 Thirsty Ear, Columbus OH WCBE- MEMBERS ONLY SHOW (become a member) Weds 12/5 Cat in the Cream- Oberlin College, Oberlin OH Thurs 12/6 The Rosebud, Pittsburgh PA FULL NATIONAL TOUR KICKS OFF IN FEBRUARY 2002 Also check out www.voicesontheverge.com spread the word. - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jessica Byers jess913@blackfoot.net 23373 Highway 93 North ~~~ http://www.blackfoot.net/~jess913/ Arlee, MT 59821 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 15:19:55 -0800 (PST) From: "Xenu's Sister" Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com - --- rich.rapp@effem.com wrote: > Previously said; > > I tried to get to this website > (http://www.shortlistofmusic.com/) and > > it's got a freaking brain-damaged front page. > Anybody know how to reach > > this site past the front page? > > > Try this way of getting in... > > http://www.shortlistofmusic.com/welcome.html Thanks, but that doesn't work, I get a "Not Found." > thought the Flash may crash your system if you're > running I/E 4.0 or earlier. Nope, my IE is 5.50. I was trying to access this from work, and my company just spent somewhere around 10 million bucks to upgrade everybody in the office with brand new computers, monitors, Windows 2000 everything-under-the-sun (thank goodness they thumbed their noses at XP!), DVD-ROMs, CD-writers, new speakers, the whole works. I guess they "forgot" to include the very useless Flash, and I couldn't download and install it even if I wanted to, which I don't. Oh well, if those guys don't consider the content of their web site very important, I guess I shouldn't either. (I'll never understand people who build "public" web sites but then install a bruising bouncer at the door who won't let people in to see what's going on unless they're oh-so-hip and cool and have all the very latest bells and whistles. It makes no sense to me.) Thanks though, folks. Vickie Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 15:36:51 -0800 (PST) From: kitty kat Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Xenu's Sister wrote: > (I'll never understand people who build "public" > web sites but then install a bruising bouncer at > the door who won't let people in to see what's > going on unless they're oh-so-hip and cool and > have all the very latest bells and whistles. It > makes no sense to me.) It's hard to say where to draw the line, though. Web browsers and plugins are always evolving, and we wouldn't be able to view _images_ on the web if things didn't keep growing and changing. Should a site not use frames, or fonts, or bold/italic/etc, or cascading style sheets, or java script, or active-x, or forms, etc. etc. etc.? It really is up to the website designers and their clients (marketing, etc.) to decide how many features they are willing to give up for the sake of satisfying all users. Sites that use Active-X are going to look seamless to those who are running Windows, since it's built into the operating system, but those sites can't be viewed by the mac community. Flash is installed on a very large percentage of computers these days, nearly to the point of being ubiquitous. Should there not be the option to view Quicktime movies, or play mp3s? Granted, most sites detect whether the user has flash and offer an alternate HTML site if they don't, and I think that's the best way to go. But a graphical web browser used to be oh-so-hip and cool, and it's important to think with that perspective. - -Kat ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:05:27 -0800 From: Steve VanDevender Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com kitty kat writes: > It's hard to say where to draw the line, though. Web browsers and plugins > are always evolving, and we wouldn't be able to view _images_ on the web > if things didn't keep growing and changing. Most of the problems with badly-designed web sites have to do with designers designing for specific browsers rather than designing to standards. Tim Berners-Lee has scathing things to say about all the designers and browser authors who say "you must be running such-and-such to view this page" -- his goal was to build standards so that content would be accessible with browsers of many different levels of capability, not so that everyone had to be running specific applications to view each specific kind of thing. > Should a site use frames, No. > or fonts, or bold/italic/etc, or cascading style sheets, These can be presented alternately, or often safely ignored, by browsers. > or java script, No. > or active-x, Absolutely not, it's not a cross-platform standard. > or forms, Again, browsers have a choice about how to present forms, and at least they're part of the HTML standard. > Granted, most sites detect whether the user has flash and offer an > alternate HTML site if they don't, and I think that's the best way to go. No, that's stupid too. Mainly because the detection tends to require Javascript and breaks if you don't have it. And anyway I have yet to find a page with Flash that doesn't suck and where the Flash adds any useful functionality or content. > But a graphical web browser used to be oh-so-hip and cool, and it's > important to think with that perspective. It's the hyperTEXT transfer protocol, people. More and more often I find myself using lynx as a browser because it cuts out all the crap -- pages load quickly and I don't have to deal with as much stupid graphical junk to find the textual content I'm looking for. If designers would quit thinking in terms of "I'm going to make the viewer experience exactly what I want", and instead present content in a way that lets the user make choices about what fonts and layouts _they_ want to see, and not require umpteen thousand generally useless features that almost always get in the way of reading a page, then I'd be a lot happier with the web. But instead we have designers who think HTML is a page layout language instead of a content description language, cram in epilepsy-inducing meaningless eye candy that they can find, and abuse the standards in oh-so-many ways to create pages that only look good on the designer's computer with that designer's freakish idea of what looks good. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:22:19 -0800 (PST) From: "Xenu's Sister" Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com - --- kitty kat wrote: > On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Xenu's Sister wrote: > > > (I'll never understand people who build "public" > > web sites but then install a bruising bouncer at > > the door who won't let people in to see what's > > going on unless they're oh-so-hip and cool and > > have all the very latest bells and whistles. It > > makes no sense to me.) > > It's hard to say where to draw the line, though. Not at all. It's not a question of either/or. A site can have bells and whistles *and* information. > Web browsers and plugins are always evolving, > and we wouldn't be able to view _images_ on > the web if things didn't keep growing and > changing. Of course, but should I be kept out of a site *altogether* just because I can't view images for whatever reason? > Should a site not use frames, or fonts, or > bold/italic/etc, or cascading style > sheets, or java script, or active-x, or > forms, etc. etc. etc.? Should I not be able to use the site *at all* because I don't have one or more of those things? Site can use whatever they want, but if they have actual informational *content* on their site and they want people to access that content, there had better be an alternate way to get to it. Notice I said "informational content". If it can be said, it can be written, and if it can be written, it can be on a web site that can/should be accessible. If I were using a text browser, I should be able to go to, say, Atom Films to see what's there, then I can to back at some other time with another browser (and whatever else is needed) to view the films I want to see. > It really is up to the website designers and > their clients (marketing, etc.) to decide how > many features they are willing to give up for > the sake of satisfying all users. No, actually it's up to the web site designers who generally don't tell the clients how they're keeping out folks on purpose. Most clients haven't a clue about all this. Designers don't have to "give up" anything to let people know what the site is about and what the visitors need to experience the full range of possibilities. > Flash is installed on a very large percentage > of computers these days, nearly to the point > of being ubiquitous. I'll bet that's not true at all, sorry. (I speak from my current experience of working for a LARGE international company with tens of thousands of employees. I'd say 90% of those employees have their own computer, either as a workstation or a laptop. A very large percentage use Palm Pilots too. This is not a backwards company with no clue about computers. I'll bet there are a ton of firms who are completely or fairly up-to-date computer-wise who also don't have Flash or some of these other things.) Even if it were true, so what? Why should people be completely kept out of a site just because they don't have Flash. Sites who want that junk should provide an alternate means of entry. > Should there not be the option to view > Quicktime movies, or play mp3s? You are completely misunderstanding where I'm coming from. I hope I've made myself a bit clearer. > Granted, most sites detect whether the user has > flash and offer an alternate HTML site if they > don't, and I think that's the best way to go. That's where I'm coming from too. > But a graphical web browser used to be oh-so-hip > and cool, and it's important to think with that > perspective. No no, it's important to think with the perspective that *people* and *information* is what's important, and if a company or personal site wants people to know *what information is on that site*, they'd do well to make sure it can be seen. V. Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 19:20:49 -0600 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: getting buffed On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 10:00:12AM -0800, Greg Bossert wrote: > so, not only have i missed about ten thousand ecto messages (yup, for > real), but i've only started watching Buffy since FX started the replay, > so i'm stuck at the end of the second season (with the start of the > third on the TiVo)... i *hate* spoilers, so i am wrestling with whether > i should watch the musical episode or not -- will it ruin all my rerun > fun? Well, there's at least one character whose very existence will probably confuse the hell out of you, and two (perhaps three) relationships that would probably have you scratching your head. OTOH, I came in late (at the start of the third season) and have only caught intermittent earlier episodes, so, for example, I have never actually seen an episode with Jenny Callendar (?) in it. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 20:09:36 -0600 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 03:36:51PM -0800, kitty kat wrote: > It's hard to say where to draw the line, though. Web browsers and plugins > are always evolving, and we wouldn't be able to view _images_ on the web > if things didn't keep growing and changing. But conscientious web designers use ALT tags so that you don't need to have images turned on. There are some there who insist in putting necessary content only in graphic images, but they either haven't thought about accessibility and future interfaces, or they just don't care whether people can use their sites. > Should a site not use frames, > or fonts, or bold/italic/etc, or cascading style sheets, or java script, > or active-x, or forms, etc. etc. etc.? *Using* them is fine. But designing your site so that people who can't handle the gimmicks can't get at the sites at all is a poor choice. > It really is up to the website > designers and their clients (marketing, etc.) to decide how many features > they are willing to give up for the sake of satisfying all users. Sites > that use Active-X are going to look seamless to those who are running > Windows, since it's built into the operating system, but those sites can't > be viewed by the mac community. Flash is installed on a very large > percentage of computers these days, nearly to the point of being > ubiquitous. Should there not be the option to view Quicktime movies, or > play mp3s? Yes, yes, there should be the *option* but the site shouldn't depend on the user being able to access them for him/her to be able to navigate through the rest of the site. This is elementary design: a site must degrade gracefully through lesser technologies, and not lock people out. > Granted, most sites detect whether the user has flash and offer an > alternate HTML site if they don't, and I think that's the best way to go. > But a graphical web browser used to be oh-so-hip and cool, and it's > important to think with that perspective. Granted. But that perspective doesn't explain away the problems of poor design. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 20:25:06 -0700 From: "Earl J. Woods" Subject: RE: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling Actually, I'd be interested in the Buffy list, too. I particularly loved Anya's throwaway line, "It's like there were three walls, but no fourth wall..." I love reflexive film and TV, so this line and Willow's "This line is just filler" bit really strummed my strings. No, I don't know what "strummed my strings" means; it just came to mind. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org]On Behalf Of Joseph Zitt Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 10:09 AM To: meredith Cc: ecto@smoe.org Subject: Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once More, With Feeling On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 11:38:15PM -0500, meredith wrote: > Funny, I just finished posting to the Buffy list I'm on about this amazing, > brilliant episode. Buffy list? Not that I really need a 40th mailing list to be on, but I'm curious. > All of the cast members did their own singing, with varied results. Since > Anthony Stewart Head (Giles) has a musical theater background (I'd have > LOVED to see his Dr. Frank-n-furter in London), I was expecting him to > school the rest of the cast in how it's done, but Amber Benson (Tara) just > blew me away. The girl can *sing*!! Yow. Yeah, her singing was quite the surprise, as were Xander and Anya's dance number. And just loved the way that the lyrics remained so in-character for each ... uh ... character, and how the songs goofed on themselves. (Willow's line about that line being filler in the big group number cracked me up, as did Xander's occasional wandering off into "never mind"edness. n.p.i.m.h. The "life's a game" number. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:15:08 -0600 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 04:22:19PM -0800, Xenu's Sister wrote: > Site can use whatever they want, but if they > have actual informational *content* on their > site and they want people to access that content, > there had better be an alternate way to get to > it. Notice I said "informational content". If > it can be said, it can be written, and if it > can be written, it can be on a web site that > can/should be accessible. Agreed -- for a limited subset of the class of "information. OTOH, the answer to the questions "What does 'Feed the Fire' sound like?", "What color is 'blue'?" and "What is the scent of a rose?" are all information that can not be adequately transmitted in words, either spoken or written. (Actually, the answer to the last question can't be transmitted in any form yet, unless someone's working on developing scratch'n'sniff plugins :-]) However, any information that *can* be transmitted with text should indeed be handled through text without necessary gimmicks. And having site navigation depend on Flash, graphics, Javascript, or similar technologies when text would work displays either ignorance or arrogance on the part of those responsible for the site. - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 12:09:48 -0800 (PST) From: Jason Gordon Subject: Anyhting happening in Toronto this week/weekend Meth, It looks like I am stuck in toronto the rest of this week/this weekend...Can you post the message below to ecto for me? (I cc'd the ecto address but am not sure if it will go through by an unsubscribed address). Thanks Jason Hi toronoians...(and ontarioians too) It appears as I have gotten stuck in Toronto for the rest of this week and this weekend...I was wondering if there was anything interesting going on. If you could respond to my yahoo email [jason_a_gordon@yahoo.com] and let me know I would appreciate it :) :) :) Thanks Jason n.p. Nields "Live in Northhampton" Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:31:53 -0800 (PST) From: kitty kat Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com I'm just going to respond to a little part of this. I concede your points about if they want to convey information to people, they should make it accessible to everyone. Maybe I'm just jaded since I'm in QA, and the decision makers at this company or that company have continuosly made decisions to drop various browsers or browser versions in favor of optimising IE, much to my dismay and arguing and trying to enforce website standards until I'm blue in the face and close to tears... On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Xenu's Sister wrote: > --- kitty kat wrote: > > Flash is installed on a very large percentage > > of computers these days, nearly to the point > > of being ubiquitous. > > I'll bet that's not true at all, sorry. (I speak > from my current experience of working for a LARGE > international company with tens of thousands of > employees. I'd say 90% of those employees have > their own computer, either as a workstation or > a laptop. A very large percentage use Palm Pilots > too. This is not a backwards company with no > clue about computers. I'll bet there are a ton > of firms who are completely or fairly up-to-date > computer-wise who also don't have Flash or some > of these other things.) > http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/survey/ (This may be a flash only site, so let me quote) In September 2001, NPD Research, the parent company of MediaMetrix, conducted a study to determine what percentage of Web browsers have Macromedia Flash preinstalled. The results show that 97.4% of Web users can experience Macromedia Flash content without having to download and install a player. With a statistic like that thrown at me, I'd be more than likely to go ahead and use the product... > Even if it were true, so what? Why should people > be completely kept out of a site just because > they don't have Flash. Sites who want that > junk should provide an alternate means of entry The sad fact is that commercial websites exist to benefit the company who puts out the website, and they simply do not care about all people being able to reach them. If 97.4% of people browsing my site can see nifty stuff and 2.6% can't reach it, them's good odds. It's pretty much capitalism at work. If enough people bitch and moan and tell them they aren't visiting their site, and they start not making enough money, or getting bad press, or get sued by the National Organization for the Blind, or whatever pushes their buttons, then they might make a change. But otherwise, it's worth it to them. Please don't get me wrong - I am idealistically with you all the way. I just think I understand (painfully, after having dealt with it and fought against it for so long) why it's not going to change. - -Kat ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:07:13 -0700 From: Neal Copperman Subject: Re: Shortlistofmusic.com At 9:31 PM -0800 11/7/01, kitty kat wrote: >(This may be a flash only site, so let me quote) > >In September 2001, NPD Research, the parent company of MediaMetrix, >conducted a study to determine what percentage of Web browsers have >Macromedia Flash preinstalled. The results show that 97.4% of Web users >can experience Macromedia Flash content without having to download and >install a player. > >With a statistic like that thrown at me, I'd be more than likely to go >ahead and use the product... There is something that smells very fishy about that statistic (and I don't even have Joe's scratch 'n' sniff plug-in yet). Without bothering to attempt to wade through the misleading cover to get to the core truth, here is an observation based solely on Kat's message... As of Sept 2001, 97.4% of Web browsers being shipped had Flash preinstalled. That's not 97.4% of the existing market. It ignores all the browsers already in existance. I do not believe for a second that less then 3% of users cannot access sites with Flash. I'm like Vickie. I have a Mac at home with decent up-to-date browsers, and there are a ton of sites I can't get to. So I check them out at work, where I have an NT box with the latest browsers. I've tried to install Flash so many times, and basically have got to the point in the help files that says if all else fails, reload your OS. So I have downloaded current generation browsers, and still can't access Flash sites. That's 6 browsers on 2 OS's. As far as I'm concerned, if they put a flash gateway on it, I just ignore the site. And I have encountered a lot of musicians who were really surprised to learn their sites were inaccessible. I also know people who have to look up info on web sites a lot, and they keep at least three different browsers on their computer in the hopes that one of them will work. neal np: Slightly Haunted - Lynn Miles ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V7 #320 **************************