From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #624 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, June 5 2008 Volume 16 : Number 624 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! [2fs ] Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) [2fs ] Alphabetizing-a-go-go [Michael Sweeney ] Re: Alphabetizing-a-go-go [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: NEIL YOUNG UNRELEASED ----WAS no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) [craigie* ] Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! [craigie* ] Re: cwinkydink! [Sebastian Hagedorn ] Re: cwinkydink! ["(0% rh)" ] Re: cwinkydink! ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: cwinkydink! [craigie* ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 [2fs ] yucky band names [Jill Brand ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 [Jeff Dwarf ] I'm a sucker for shit like this [Jill Brand ] Re: yucky band names [HwyCDRrev@aol.com] Re: Alphabetizing-a-go-go ["kevin studyvin" ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 ["(0% rh)" ] Re: yucky band name ["(0% rh)" ] Re: cwinkydink! [Capuchin ] Re: cwinkydink! [Capuchin ] Re: cwinkydink! ["Jason Brown" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:52:59 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! On 6/4/08, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > > > > if you rob a bank - you don't just return the money - you go to jail And if you rob a bank, the bank doesn't have the money any more. If you download a song, who exactly is deprived of possession of that song? Information is fundamentally different from physical property, in that it's infinitely reproducible. The notion of "intellectual property" has always been a philosophical abortion - ideas are only meaningful when shared, and when they are shared, they are inevitably reshaped, transformed, etc. The proper model for credit in the arts is not property law but plagiarism. Writers, for instance, well understand the difference between homage, borrowing, quoting on the one hand and plagiarism on the other (or at least they did prior to the propertization of ideas). Of course, art *was* a material medium until recently (cue Walter Benjamin...), with the exception of...music, in that unlike visual art - which could only be viewed by those within a limited field of view - and unlike printed art - which of course required multiple copies (of books, say) - music is quite comfortably heard by multitudes at once (okay, some physical limitations...but nowhere near as obvious as, say, how many people can comfortably view the Mona Lisa at the same time). I think the notion that artists treat their art as commodity is almost completely opposed to the goals of art. Insofar as art communicates (not at all the same thing as having a "message" or even particular, specifiable "content'), its nature is to be shared and distributed. Sure, you can find exceptions - artists who *wanted* their work viewed only by the king, say; or modernists indulging in obscurantism (one copy of this work - or what is it, Duchamp's "With Hidden Noise," a ball of string with an unidentified object in it). Anyway: the reality of downloading, and of recording contracts, is that the former *encourages* music to be heard, while the latter in practice often *prevents* artists from being paid. FWIW: I still buy CDs (bought three today, in fact) - and one of them (the new Portishead) I probably would not have purchased, would possibly have dismissed as a past-its-time release by an out-of-date act - except that various websites had posted three or four tracks, which I downloaded for free (not sure how legal, since labels nowadays typically release a track or two *to be distributed online* - thus downloading such songs is *not* illegal but encouraged - see below) and liked quite a bit. I can't even count how many CDs I've bought, or legal downloads I've purchased, because I initially heard the music in "illegal" downloads. Any number of current bands wouldn't have careers were it not for the buzz generated by downloading. I'm not adding "illegal" there, sicne as I suggest, most acts (and many labels) nowadays have recognized the economic utility of giving things away for free. In terms of what listeners pay, anyway the industry's *always* given away songs for free. Airplay, promotional placements, etc. - listeners don't pay (directly) for those, and it's long been recognized those things drive sales. Or at least buzz, which ultimately translates into the same thing. Ultimately, the argument is pointless: there's simply NO WAY to stop downloading, and the industry needs to accommodate that fact. It's as if once upon a time, they led people to believe that you could sing only if you paid them money...then people realized, wait a minute, I can sing perfectly well on my own. Above, I mention the fact that labels now encourage downloading...only of certain songs, but still: they're attempting to have it both ways, grasping onto a narrow thread of control over how people use music. It won't work, of course: the industry will have to restructure and figure out a way to provide real value (and, you know, actually pay the people on whom it depends: musicians). What's always clinched this argument for me is that, to be reductive, musicians by and large understood the value of downloading in letting their music be heard; those opposed to it were mostly suits. Music can exist without the music industry; the music industry can't exist without music. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:55:26 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) On 6/4/08, Stacked Crooked wrote: > > actual cartoon): > > Woman in nightgown wandering into dimly room at which unshaven man sits > illuminated by light of computer screen: "Honey, come on to bed. It's 3 am, > and you've been sitting there typing for hours." > > Man: "Yes - but there are still people on the Internet who are *wrong*!"> > > > you don't say which part you think i'm wrong about. but you seem to be > saying that every person should organise his or her database according to > some universal standard? why? No, no - I'm not saying you *are* wrong; I'm saying my database principles are different from yours...and if I were to *insist* on them as universally applicable (which I'm not), I'd *then* be thinking "you're wrong!" The reference to the cartoon - which points out the absurdity of the situation - was meant to suggest that I'm not taking my own preferences so seriously as to argue that you are, in fact, wrong. Except, of course, when you are wrong. ;) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:57:44 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Buttock (The Untold Story) On 6/4/08, Christopher Gross wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, 2fs wrote: > > I'm reminded of a cartoon someone recently referred to (didn't see the >> actual cartoon): >> > > http://xkcd.com/386/ Ah - yes. Much pithier; less extraneous detail. Then, I'm a fan of extraneous detail. I think extraneous detail is utterly essential. I'm also a proud owner of a pair o' ducks. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 05:16:05 +0000 From: Michael Sweeney Subject: Alphabetizing-a-go-go >...A seemingly unending stream of cataloging minutiae...ritual asking of nearby librarians...attempts at decoding upshifted numerals...all merely to decide where to shelf Robin Wright's ex-sister-in-law's latest CD...ENOUGH!!!! OK -- I give...Bring back the Buffy talk, please...sigh... Michael "A broken man..." Sweeney _________________________________________________________________ Search that pays you back! Introducing Live Search cashback. http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=srchpaysyou back ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:57:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Alphabetizing-a-go-go On Wed, 6/4/08, Michael Sweeney wrote: >...A seemingly unending stream of cataloging minutiae...ritual asking > of nearby librarians...attempts at decoding upshifted numerals...all > merely to decide where to shelf Robin Wright's ex-sister-in-law's > latest CD...ENOUGH!!!! I'd probably go for assuming it's Fucking Smilers, and go from there. Incidentally, is this one also produced by Michael Penn's other ex-sister-in-law's brother-in-law? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 08:59:21 +0100 From: craigie* Subject: Re: NEIL YOUNG UNRELEASED ----WAS no not that guy Mix CD (actual RH content!) On 05/06/2008, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > > > Dude... I have *never fucking heard of this*. How can that be? And just > *how many* unreleased records can one man have cut in the '70's? I don't know - I'll ask Prince next time I see him, he should have a pretty good idea. I would have asked Frank Zappa, but he's not here anymore... :-) c* - -- first things first, but not necessarily in that order... I like my girls to be the same as my records - independent, attractively packaged and in black vinyl (if at all possible)... Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc (the motto of the Addams Family: "We gladly feast on those who would subdue us") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:20:32 +0100 From: craigie* Subject: Re: cwinkydink! oh, @#%$*! c* On 05/06/2008, Rex wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:26 PM, wrote: > > > oh - right (embarrassment icon) > > > > an ampersand is: & > > > > still - AT SIGN still starts with an "A" > > > > the title is EITHER At Number Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation > > Point > > OR At Sign Tic Tac Toe Board Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation > > Point > > > > I was just wondering if it stood for any particuar epithet or something, as > in Neil Young's "F Asterisk Exclamation Point Tic Tac Toe Board in > Apostrophe Up", more popularly known, of course, as "Snakin' Up". > > -Rex > - -- first things first, but not necessarily in that order... I like my girls to be the same as my records - independent, attractively packaged and in black vinyl (if at all possible)... Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc (the motto of the Addams Family: "We gladly feast on those who would subdue us") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:27:58 +0100 From: craigie* Subject: Re: the perennial alphabetization geek thread returns! I like Jeffreyw2fs. He is my friend. c* On 05/06/2008, 2fs wrote: > > On 6/4/08, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > > > > > > > > if you rob a bank - you don't just return the money - you go to jail > > > And if you rob a bank, the bank doesn't have the money any more. > > If you download a song, who exactly is deprived of possession of that song? > > Information is fundamentally different from physical property, in that it's > infinitely reproducible. The notion of "intellectual property" has always > been a philosophical abortion - ideas are only meaningful when shared, and > when they are shared, they are inevitably reshaped, transformed, etc. > > The proper model for credit in the arts is not property law but plagiarism. > Writers, for instance, well understand the difference between homage, > borrowing, quoting on the one hand and plagiarism on the other (or at least > they did prior to the propertization of ideas). Of course, art *was* a > material medium until recently (cue Walter Benjamin...), with the exception > of...music, in that unlike visual art - which could only be viewed by those > within a limited field of view - and unlike printed art - which of course > required multiple copies (of books, say) - music is quite comfortably heard > by multitudes at once (okay, some physical limitations...but nowhere near > as > obvious as, say, how many people can comfortably view the Mona Lisa at the > same time). > > I think the notion that artists treat their art as commodity is almost > completely opposed to the goals of art. Insofar as art communicates (not at > all the same thing as having a "message" or even particular, specifiable > "content'), its nature is to be shared and distributed. Sure, you can find > exceptions - artists who *wanted* their work viewed only by the king, say; > or modernists indulging in obscurantism (one copy of this work - or what is > it, Duchamp's "With Hidden Noise," a ball of string with an unidentified > object in it). > > Anyway: the reality of downloading, and of recording contracts, is that the > former *encourages* music to be heard, while the latter in practice often > *prevents* artists from being paid. FWIW: I still buy CDs (bought three > today, in fact) - and one of them (the new Portishead) I probably would not > have purchased, would possibly have dismissed as a past-its-time release by > an out-of-date act - except that various websites had posted three or four > tracks, which I downloaded for free (not sure how legal, since labels > nowadays typically release a track or two *to be distributed online* - thus > downloading such songs is *not* illegal but encouraged - see below) and > liked quite a bit. I can't even count how many CDs I've bought, or legal > downloads I've purchased, because I initially heard the music in "illegal" > downloads. > > Any number of current bands wouldn't have careers were it not for the buzz > generated by downloading. I'm not adding "illegal" there, sicne as I > suggest, most acts (and many labels) nowadays have recognized the economic > utility of giving things away for free. > > In terms of what listeners pay, anyway the industry's *always* given away > songs for free. Airplay, promotional placements, etc. - listeners don't pay > (directly) for those, and it's long been recognized those things drive > sales. Or at least buzz, which ultimately translates into the same thing. > > Ultimately, the argument is pointless: there's simply NO WAY to stop > downloading, and the industry needs to accommodate that fact. It's as if > once upon a time, they led people to believe that you could sing only if > you > paid them money...then people realized, wait a minute, I can sing perfectly > well on my own. > > Above, I mention the fact that labels now encourage downloading...only of > certain songs, but still: they're attempting to have it both ways, grasping > onto a narrow thread of control over how people use music. It won't work, > of > course: the industry will have to restructure and figure out a way to > provide real value (and, you know, actually pay the people on whom it > depends: musicians). > > What's always clinched this argument for me is that, to be reductive, > musicians by and large understood the value of downloading in letting their > music be heard; those opposed to it were mostly suits. > > Music can exist without the music industry; the music industry can't exist > without music. > > -- > > ...Jeff Norman > > The Architectural Dance Society > http://spanghew.blogspot.com > - -- first things first, but not necessarily in that order... I like my girls to be the same as my records - independent, attractively packaged and in black vinyl (if at all possible)... Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc (the motto of the Addams Family: "We gladly feast on those who would subdue us") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 20:57:18 +1200 From: grutness@slingshot.co.nz Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 > > That's a silly question because the only way to organize CDs by artist > > and then chronologically within artist. So Aimee Mann would go after > > Magnetic Fields but before Matching Mole and the @#%$*! Smilers album > > would go after The Forgotten Arm. > >Of course - but let's say you were making a mix featuring songs from various >albums in alpha order. FWIW, which aint much, I usually see the band !!! filed before A alphabetically, which makes sense in an Asciitorial sort of way. >However, one could argue that you could sort a title like 16 Lovers >Lane as Sixteen Lovers Lane and then carry over the logic over and >sort @#%$*! Smilers as just Smilers. Well...no... the same logic would actually mean you filed it inder "At Hash Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation Smilers" (Hash is, surely, the usual name for #). >I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but there are two Throwing Muses albums >which appear to be called Throwing Muses, but according to the band, the >first one is simply *untitled* and the second one is actually *called* >"Throwing Muses" (although, to make matters worse, the latter one appears by >some reckonings of its artwork to be entitle "Uses"). It might be argued >that the whole concept is a load of pretentious shit, but I think that it's >probably just something that makes perfect sense in Kristin Hersh's mind, >and less so elsewhere. Oh lordy - this gets back to that age-old philosophical question of what happens when you deliberately title a work (painting/album/whatever) "Untitled". Is it untitled, or is untitled its title? This is particularly relevant in art, where you can have, say, paintings called "Untitled no. 4". James - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 05:54:07 -0400 From: "(0% rh)" Subject: Re: cwinkydink! craigie* says: > oh, @#%$*! okay, now i'm in on (was it kevin's?) snakes game, e.g. i'll say to sebastian "the boy with the @#%$*ing @#%$*!" wins my vote over "dear @#%$*! waitress" and it's hard for me to imagine that changing with more plays of "dear @#%$*! waitress." mostly because i love how belle and sebastian's earlier work evokes this very specific feeling for me... the only way i can describe it is that it feel likes walking around campus after almost everyone's cleared out for the summer. it has both of a feeling of sadness, and of belonging. it think for stuart murdoch, the year will always begin in september**. xo (** or whenever those nutty scottish start their school year.) - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:27:42 +0200 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: cwinkydink! - --On 5. Juni 2008 05:54:07 -0400 "(0% rh)" wrote: > okay, now i'm in on (was it kevin's?) snakes game, e.g. i'll say to > sebastian "the boy with the @#%$*ing @#%$*!" wins my vote over "dear > @#%$*! waitress" and it's hard for me to imagine that changing with > more plays of "dear @#%$*! waitress." Really? In my mind the contender for first place is "Tiger@#%$*!" (which sounds cooler than @#%$*!milk). OTOH, the latter has its own twisted allure ... BTW, where did you get the -ing from? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 06:49:09 -0400 From: "(0% rh)" Subject: Re: cwinkydink! Sebastian says: > --On 5. Juni 2008 05:54:07 -0400 "(0% rh)" wrote: > >> okay, now i'm in on (was it kevin's?) snakes game, e.g. i'll say to >> sebastian "the boy with the @#%$*ing @#%$*!" wins my vote over "dear >> @#%$*! waitress" and it's hard for me to imagine that changing with >> more plays of "dear @#%$*! waitress." > > Really? In my mind the contender for first place is "Tiger@#%$*!" (which > sounds cooler than @#%$*!milk). OTOH, the latter has its own twisted allure > ... "the boy with the @#%$*ing @#%$*!" has always been my favourite, mostly because a few individual tracks stand out for me ("a @#%$*! wasting", the title track, "@#%$*! the clock around"). but the more that i've listened to the first three albums, the more difficult it's become to have a real preference for one over the others. the mood of "dear @#%$*! waitress" is more mature, lyrics-wise, although i'm glad to find the boys and girls still wandering, holding hands, and reading the saddest books ever written. > BTW, where did you get the -ing from? i only noticed that after i posted it. apparently, i made it up. xo - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 07:04:14 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: cwinkydink! (0% rh) wrote: > > (** or whenever those nutty scottish start their school year.) used to be october, but now it's september. "School" is what you stop going to at about age 17-18; it's college or university after. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 12:19:24 +0100 From: craigie* Subject: Re: cwinkydink! Pedantic? I? On 05/06/2008, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > used to be october, but now it's september. "School" is what you stop going > to at about age 17-18; it's college or university after. c* - -- first things first, but not necessarily in that order... I like my girls to be the same as my records - independent, attractively packaged and in black vinyl (if at all possible)... Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc (the motto of the Addams Family: "We gladly feast on those who would subdue us") ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 08:31:23 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 On 6/5/08, grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > > >> > > Oh lordy - this gets back to that age-old philosophical question of what > happens when you deliberately title a work (painting/album/whatever) > "Untitled". Is it untitled, or is untitled its title? This is particularly > relevant in art, where you can have, say, paintings called "Untitled no. 4". Or "Untitled no. X" - is "X" an actual number that's part of the title, or is it merely a symbol for an unknown number? ;-) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:34:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Jill Brand Subject: yucky band names When I first moved to Boston, there was a band called Smegma and the Nuns. Tom Clark, do you remember them? Jill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 08:01:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 On Thu, 6/5/08, grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: >> However, one could argue that you could sort a title like 16 Lovers > >Lane as Sixteen Lovers Lane and then carry over the logic over and > >sort @#%$*! Smilers as just Smilers. > > Well...no... the same logic would actually mean you filed it inder > "At Hash Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation Smilers" (Hash is, > surely, the usual name for #). I always heard it called the pound sign. Could be one of them divided by common languagy things though. > Oh lordy - this gets back to that age-old philosophical question of > what happens when you deliberately title a work > (painting/album/whatever) "Untitled". Is it untitled, or is untitled > its title? This is particularly relevant in art, where you can have, > say, paintings called "Untitled no. 4". That one's easy: The last song on The Cure/Disintegration is called "Untitled," the last song on R.E.M./Green is untitled. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:24:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Jill Brand Subject: I'm a sucker for shit like this As I write, my son is sitting on the same stage as JK Rowling. He refused to take his camera with him, but I just watched her receive her honorary degree (it's streaming) and I bawled. Her speech is this afternoon, and Curt will be on the stage as well. Being a mom - gotta love it. Jill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:58:09 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: Re: yucky band names i remember the name - i think they changed their name from something else i think they were called LEPER before ? i remember Blowfish on WMBR saying they went for a more commercial name ! here are some names for you : http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/weirdbandnames/ In a message dated 6/5/2008 9:38:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jlbrand@bu.edu writes: When I first moved to Boston, there was a band called Smegma and the Nuns. Tom Clark, do you remember them? **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&NCID=aolfod00030000000002) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:19:01 -0700 From: "kevin studyvin" Subject: Re: Alphabetizing-a-go-go Did I mention I kinda have a thing for vampire Willow? On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Michael Sweeney wrote: > >...A seemingly unending stream of cataloging minutiae...ritual asking of > nearby librarians...attempts at decoding upshifted numerals...all merely to > decide where to shelf Robin Wright's ex-sister-in-law's latest > CD...ENOUGH!!!! > > > OK -- I give...Bring back the Buffy talk, please...sigh... > > > Michael "A broken man..." Sweeney > _________________________________________________________________ > Search that pays you back! Introducing Live Search cashback. > > http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=srchpaysyou > back ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:30:26 -0400 From: "(0% rh)" Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #622 Jeff Dwarf says: > On Thu, 6/5/08, grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: >> Well...no... the same logic would actually mean you filed it inder >> "At Hash Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation Smilers" (Hash is, >> surely, the usual name for #). > > I always heard it called the pound sign. Could be one of them divided by common languagy things though. the pound sign is how i've heard it as well, although for some reason i call it "number sign" (i think i only have to deal with it in the context of enumerated lists.) xo - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:41:24 -0400 From: "(0% rh)" Subject: Re: yucky band name 2fs says: >> oh, i do wish i had done away with my middle name on my gmail account >> sooner. like before it happened. > > Sorry - didn't know you didn't just go by that. I will refer to you as > "Lauren" or "softboygirl" or anything else you prefer. i kind of thought you were ragging on me (not in a bad way as in my world, that's a sign of affection.) i didn't realize people might think of me as a two-name person until jeanne (hi!) said something about it at a show. but it by then it was Too Late. i had just used the "elizabeth" instead of putting a last name into my hotmail account (i think it didn't accept an initial in the last name field), and i just kept the same "name" when i switched to gmail. i'd hate to think of people having to go through the bother of six syllables just to say my name. that seems like a bit of imposition. xo - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:04:44 -0500 (CDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Jason Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Jason Brown wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:30 PM, 2fs wrote: >>> Also, for the geeks among us (that's funny - not a single feg just went >>> away...): how the hell do you alphabetize the title of that Mann CD @#%$*! >>> Smilers ? >> >> That's a silly question because the only way to organize CDs by artist >> and then chronologically within artist. So Aimee Mann would go after >> Magnetic Fields but before Matching Mole and the @#%$*! Smilers album >> would go after The Forgotten Arm. Well, that's absolutely absurd! I mean, sure, albums are organized by artist and then chronologically within the artist subsection. That much is clear. However, Aimee Mann is nowhere near The Magnetic Fields! I mean, not unless you don't have any records by Bauhaus or even The Decemberists (both of which go between those two). Aimee Mann's new record would, of course, come immediately after her previous record and before that one Al Green record. And if I still kept CDs (which I don't -- that was a painful day, but also somewhat liberating), that would be very near the bottom right corner of the top drawer. Of course, now it's all just sorted automatically since I always set LANG_ALL=C. J. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:06:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > the title is EITHER At Number Percentage Dollar Asterisk Exclamation > Point OR At Sign Tic Tac Toe Board Percentage Dollar Asterisk > Exclamation Point If you're going that route, we'd call it "At Pound Percent Dollar Splat Bang Smilers". But that's a dying subculture. J. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:59:00 -0700 From: "Jason Brown" Subject: Re: cwinkydink! On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Capuchin wrote: > However, Aimee Mann is nowhere near The Magnetic Fields! I mean, not unless > you don't have any records by Bauhaus or even The Decemberists (both of > which go between those two). > > Aimee Mann's new record would, of course, come immediately after her > previous record and before that one Al Green record. Ok now that is just wrong. Do you shelve your books that way too? With William S. Burroughs and William Shakespeare next to each other? > And if I still kept CDs (which I don't -- that was a painful day, but also > somewhat liberating), that would be very near the bottom right corner of the > top drawer. Im going through this process right now. it feels wonderful. Now i have to figure out what to do with the CD shelves i got from IKEA years ago. If anyone in seattle wants 4 or 5 of these in dark grey they are yours for the taking Email me off list. http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/87305207 - -- "Never go with a hippie to a second location." - Jack Donaghy ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #624 ********************************