From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V4 #216 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk JMDL Digest Sunday, May 16 1999 Volume 04 : Number 216 TapeTree #8 is ready to roll. To sign up go to: http://www.jmdl.com/trading ------- Join the Joni Mitchell Internet Community Glossary project. Send a blank message to for all the details. ------- The Official Joni Mitchell Homepage is maintained by Wally Breese at http://www.jonimitchell.com and contains the latest news, a detailed bio, original interviews and essays, lyrics, and much more. ------- The JMDL website can be found at http://www.jmdl.com and contains interviews, articles, the member gallery, archives, and much more. ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Stormy Weather CD [Leslie Mixon ] Re: Stormy Weather CD ["Mark or Travis" ] Joni Honored by ASCAP May 17th ["Kakki" ] Artists and the Internet (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Shameless self promotion (NJC) [Randy Remote ] Saving Our List (NJC) [dsk ] Re: Saving Our List (NJC) ["Winfried Hühn" ] Plug Of The Week #19 ["Peter Holmstedt" ] Re: Saving Our List (NJC) [catman ] RE: Saving Our List (NJC) ["Wally Kairuz" ] VH1- History of Rock&Roll [luvart@snet.net] Re: Saving Our List (NJC) ["Mark or Travis" Subject: Stormy Weather CD Hello: If anyone has an extra Stormy Weather CD, I'd trade for one of my photos of Joni. I tried many times to get one, but have not been successful so far. Thank you. Leslie ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 10:33:04 -0700 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Stormy Weather CD > Hello: > > If anyone has an extra Stormy Weather CD, I'd trade for one of my photos > of Joni. I tried many times to get one, but have not been successful so > far. > > Thank you. > > Leslie > > Leslie's photos are well worth it. Check some of them out on Wally's page. Mark in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 12:26:23 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Joni Honored by ASCAP May 17th In today's L.A. Times (page F2) there is a short annoucenment: "Joni Mitchell will receive the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers' highest honor, the ASCAP Founders Award, on Monday at the group's Pop Music Awards Gala at the Beverly Hilton Hotel. Past recipients include Stevie Wonder and Paul McCartney" Oddly, there is no mention of this on ASCAP's web site. Kakki, thinking of ways to finagle a pass ;-) NP: Joni at the Garden - Hejira ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 12:36:37 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Artists and the Internet (NJC) While browsing the ASCAP site I came across this speech given by Vernon Reid Of Living Colour last year and thought some may be interested in it: Creativity and the Internet: "Artist" or "Content Provider"? BY VERNON REID Good afternoon. It seems that a lot of the discussion about the Internet as it relates to artists these days is about the possibilities the Internet offers artists primarily as a direct marketing tool. For example: ways that an artist can bypass the marketing model of record labels to market their work directly; ways the artist can be in more immediate communication with their fan base; ways the artist can find new fans; ways the artist can distribute a wider variety of releases in different genres than those that have mass appeal; ways an artist can distribute work differently. But since that discussion is happening in so many places, and people in this room are probably at the center of that discussion, I thought I would explore something a little different. What I like to call "the flesh-and-blood" issues that I may want to avoid as a person, but have to grapple with as a songwriter. Because that's what most of us who write music and lyrics do. We wrestle with the "flesh-and-blood" issues as part of creating and expressing. The Internet is supposed to be a tool. But it's a tool in service of what? Does it enable us to get closer to the heart of the matter of the human condition? Or does it enable us to avoid the thorny questions we don't really want to ask? Today, we have heard a lot of people talking, and here I am talking, a keynote speaker. So let's look at words. Words can be very powerful. And whoever defines the terms that we as a culture use to describe things or people has a lot of power. In fact, you can tell who has power in a relationship by who defines the terms, literally. If I called a "plane crash" an "unscheduled landing", you would know I worked for the airline. If I were the brother, or father, or friend or someone who was on that plane, I wouldn't be calling it an "unscheduled landing." "Content provider." I wonder if there is any composer, or lyricist, or songwriter in this room who thinks of him or herself as a "content provider." Now, our music will end up on the Internet, probably whether we sanction it or not, but we don't write music to "provide content." So, it's easy to see who is defining the terms, who holds the power in the relationship between the technological and creative communities. As people who write music, who concern ourselves with the human condition, we are writing from the heart, from the soul, about things that touch us or move us or inspire us as human beings. And the people who are seeking out our music are not looking for content to fill their hard drives. They are looking for music, rhythm, melody, lyrics that touch them, or move them, or inspire them. Yet, the term "content provider" has become a standard way of describing who we are. It is a technology term that distances people from flesh-and-blood reality. Creative people, whether we write music or books or create artwork, are the flesh-and-blood reality. We have to eat. In fact, many creative people have to struggle to be able to eat. We aren't paid salaries for our ideas by large corporations with new technology development divisions. We earn our living by the fact that people relate to what we create enough to want to listen to it, hopefully over and over again. When we talk about the Internet and intellectual property rights, we are really looking at who we are as a culture. There really isn't anything new here, except that the Internet exacerbates certain mind-sets of the culture as it is, like: "How can I get it for free? Now that I've figured it out, I'll share it with as many people as I can so they can get it for free (or maybe just to show off that I was the one who figured out how to get it for free)." The anonymity of the Internet promotes the "How can I get it for free?" attitude. Someone who wouldn't be comfortable going into Tower Records and s tealing a CD, because they would be too embarrassed or afraid of getting caught, doesn't mind trying to download something without paying for it. In fact, the more you can scam off the Internet, the bigger of a hero you are. We are also a culture of anxiety. Am I good enough? Am I worthy enough? Am I sexy enough? Am I safe enough? While you're browsing on-line, you have these not-so-subliminal messages coming at you -- "This is not a secure site. It can be seen by a third party." What does that mean? Who is that third party and why do they care that I visited that site? The Internet has us scrambling to set up this whole elaborate system of checks and balances. As artists, we are asked to cooperate with a system and a culture when there is no real trust between anyone. How can you create something wonderful without trusting each other? How can you take a great leap forward and cover your butt at the same time? How can we convince the women and men involved in designing technology and making money from technology and using technology that we are here for a purpose other than being "content providers?" Which brings me full circle, back to the question: If the Internet is a tool, what is it in service of? How can we, as creators, use it to get closer to the heart of the matter of the human condition? A few years ago, when I had access to the first RealAudio files, I found a site with sound clips of Tibetan monks. The sound quality was very poor -- it was this lo-fi sound gurgling out of my computer. But something of their devotion lived, and that was very powerful. It had nothing to do with the technology. The intention and expression of that music could transcend any technological limitations. This is what is exciting to me as a creator in terms of the possibilities of the Internet as a global communication tool. I could tap into these Tibetan monks and have a very powerful personal experience in my house on Staten Island. I can browse around online and find some "News of the Weird" which triggers some interesting thought streams for me. I can communicate with people who listen to my music and let them know I appreciate their support directly, wherever they are in the world. As an artist, it is very easy to be seduced by the technological wizardry syndrome. I need the newest gimmick, the fastest modem, the latest model. There is nothing wrong with using the technology. As long as we remember what it is in service of. Getting to the heart of the human condition, the flesh-and-blood issues. So, with all the possibilities for all of us, as creators, as venture capitalists, as people who use the Internet for whatever we do, to be seduced by the technology, we have to be very diligent. We have to be diligent about reminding everyone all the time, that we are not "content providers" out there to serve the interests of technology giants. We are artists who create music that moves people, that touches people, that inspires people. That's how we live. That's what we do. And the music that we write is what is of real value to the people who seek it out. And that is why it needs to be valued by the culture. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 13:14:42 -0700 From: Randy Remote Subject: Shameless self promotion (NJC) I will be doing a 3 hour radio show-The return of the Remote Bros-on KMUD FM-which you can listen to over the net if you have the RealAudio RealPlayer. This is a comedy show-NJC! When: Monday 10AM-1PM http://www.kmud.org If you don't have RealPlayer, it is downloadable for free at http://www.real.com Note the regular G2 Player is free (right side of the screen, small print). The G2Plus costs 29.95 and you don't need it (main part of screen). Also, photographer Richard Cash has seen fit to post a pic of me on his website. That's me next to the big words "BAY CITY" http://sfbandphotos.com Best to All RR ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 16:21:29 -0400 From: dsk Subject: Saving Our List (NJC) Les Irvin wrote: > > 7) Do not post another person's private email to the list without their > permission. Les, This protects just the sender; what about the recipient of unwanted private mail? Is there nothing that the recipient can do to stop it? (short of asking one's ISP to filter out messages from certain email addresses, which is not always possible). To just say we should all be tolerant and respect each other is not enough; of course we should, but some people either don't realize how they come across, or don't want to or cannot hear any feedback if they have been offensive. Some private email I've received has turned me off more than anything I've ever read on the list, including the emotional angry outbursts. At least such outbursts are honest expressions of the moment instead of the continuous superficially polite but actually sneering name-calling rantings I've received, some of which I've completely ignored and some of which I've answered with an attempt at appeasement and honest communication. But that seems futile. And since I'm not interested in having relationships with misogynistic, know-it-all men in real life, why should I put up with it here in the form of private correspondence? One way of not receiving such messages is to stop posting to the list or to keep all posted comments very superficial, but the idea that a few people could have such influence makes me mad. I think it's personally hurtful and detrimental in the long-run to the list to hide continuing unpleasantness. My thought is that it will lessen if it's all made public. At the least, there would be the opportunity for such ongoing behavior to be seen and commented upon by many different people, instead of being in just a destructive one-on-one loop. So I suggest that point 7 in your list be modified somewhat and am adding these comments to the ones Patrick and Bob have made: "If the sender has been told, privately or publicly via the list, that recipient is not interested in receiving any more private messages and that if any more are received they will be posted to the list, then the sender should stop corresponding privately with that person, and if he or she does so, those posts will be forwarded immediately to the list." What do you think, Les? Anyone else have ideas about this? Debra Shea As Patrick wrote: maybe there should be another etiquette point: don't post privately without permission from the recipient. And from Bob: To dovetail onto Patrick's comment, a good rule of thumb is not to say something antagonistically in private that you wouldn't want to see made public. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 23:38:26 +0200 From: "Winfried Hühn" Subject: Re: Saving Our List (NJC) Debra writes: > > Les Irvin wrote: > > > > 7) Do not post another person's private email to the list without their > > permission. > > Les, > > This protects just the sender; what about the recipient of unwanted > private mail? > So I suggest that point 7 in your list be modified somewhat and am > adding these comments to the ones Patrick and Bob have made: > > "If the sender has been told, privately or publicly via the list, that > recipient is not interested in receiving any more private messages and > that if any more are received they will be posted to the list, then the > sender should stop corresponding privately with that person, and if he > or she does so, those posts will be forwarded immediately to the list." > > What do you think, Les? Anyone else have ideas about this? Debra, Patrick, Bob, list, Although I personally haven't received any real "nastygram" yet, I can definitely understand your concerns and I agree, there should be effective means to deal with people who write insulting or harassing private eMails. Still, forwarding such messages to the list will do more harm than good IMO. I imagine there are quite a few quarrels going on off-list and I am truly happy that these very rarely surface on the list level. If they did, it would most certainly mean the end of this largely flame-free internet sanctuary and the destruction of our strong sense of community which we maintain despite all our controversial attitudes, sometimes heated discussions - and - yes - private flame wars. What happens, for example, if somebody abuses somebody else's eMail address to send you insulting eMails and you "out" the wrong person? (stole this point from Kakki) Private matters should be dealt with privately. If you experience abusive eMails and the person continues to send them despite your objections, the way to handle this is to complain to that person's ISP and/or to Les privately. I get extremely suspicious when I see someone else deliberately posting private mails to the list. I feel asked to take sides in a matter which is not of my concern and which I don't want to get involved in. There is no way for me to find out what's actually going on since what I see might be taken out of context. I feel abused, and I actually think publishing private stuff always constitutes an abuse in itself, regardless of somebodys else's abusive behavior. Let's not add insult to injury I strongly vote for sticking to "Do not post another person's private email to the list without their permission". Winfried ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 14:31:22 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Saving Our List (NJC) I'll leave it to Les to give his own opinions on this but have a few comments. Debra wrote about the rule against posting private email: > This protects just the sender; what about the recipient of unwanted > private mail? Is there nothing that the recipient can do to stop it? > (short of asking one's ISP to filter out messages from certain email > addresses, which is not always possible). You can report the offender to his/her ISP and ideally they should intervene for you to stop that person sending you email. There is also filters on your own software where you can easily filter out email from the person. If nothing else works, you can make copies of the emails, take them to your local law enforcement and file a complaint. I've studied the law a little in this area (U.S. Code Title 18, et seq.) One very important point that many people miss is that it is actually a crime to send people harassing and threatening email. Some people mistakenly think that their right to free speech under the First Amendment protects them and allows them to write anything they please to someone in email. They are very wrong. The law specifically states that rights under the First Amendment are not a defense to sending harassing or threatening mail. Under the law email is considered exactly the same as a letter in your regular mailbox. I think some people participating in internet groups tend to assume it is all like some big chat room (which is different than mail). They let their worse impulses and thoughts have free rein and spill over into email sent to people they meet on the internet and never have a clue that they are putting themselves at a real risk for a legal action or prosecution. They think they are safe behind their computer screens, self-indulgently shooting off all kinds of content to some unwilling victim. On the other side of the coin, I'm not quite sure about the legality of forwarding private email without someone's permission. Since it is also the offender's own "mail", the offender may have some of his/her own rights under the law. If it is illegal, then the forwarder could potentially involve the listowner in certain liability. > Some private email I've received has turned me off more than anything > I've ever read on the list, including the emotional angry outbursts. At > least such outbursts are honest expressions of the moment instead of the > continuous superficially polite but actually sneering name-calling > rantings I've received, some of which I've completely ignored and some > of which I've answered with an attempt at appeasement and honest > communication. But that seems futile. I am really shocked and sorry to hear this. I cannot imagine why anyone reading this list would feel justified in any way sending you such email. >At the least, there would be the opportunity for such ongoing > behavior to be seen and commented upon by many different people, instead > of being in just a destructive one-on-one loop. However, there is always the risk that once the person's behavior has been made public, that person's friends and supporters may come to his/her public defense. Then we see a list war with people taking sides, new people starting fights of their own with each other, and on and on. I don't mean to be pessimistic but not everyone's idea of inappropriate or offensive email is the same. I know this from hard personal experience. > So I suggest that point 7 in your list be modified somewhat and am > adding these comments to the ones Patrick and Bob have made: > > "If the sender has been told, privately or publicly via the list, that > recipient is not interested in receiving any more private messages and > that if any more are received they will be posted to the list, then the > sender should stop corresponding privately with that person, and if he > or she does so, those posts will be forwarded immediately to the list." I think it may be a good idea to publically tell the offender to not email them anymore and leave it at that. That alone should be enough deterent for the person to cease their behavior. I think anything further has too much risk of turning the discussion list into a public tribunal that could end up in a kangaroo court, perhaps for the victim themself. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 00:00:51 +0200 From: "Peter Holmstedt" Subject: Plug Of The Week #19 Hi there, Remember Allan Thomas from Hawaii? His first album on his own Black Bamboo Records produced by Stephen Barncard? Second album included "The Navigator", which might turn up on the new CSN&Y-album? Now, one of his musical friends and co-writers has released his first album on his own : Bryan Kessler - Heart Jams ( Wire & Wood Records ) Kessler is maybe best known for his days with The Hawaiian Style Band. They released 3 albums and won 3 prestigious *Na Hoku Hanohano* awards in Hawaii. He now spends most of his time practicing, writing, recording and playing with his band, *The Red Zone*, as well as a much in demand free lance guitarist. The new album, *Heart Jams*, includes 10 new, original songs written by Kessler, Allan Thomas and Michael Ruff. Musicians include Michael Ruff, Ken Emerson, Barry Flanagan ( ex-Hapa ) and lots of other players from Hawaii and Los Angeles. *This collection of songs and performances reflect what I love about life in the islands - with it's many cultural treasures, and the personal experiences I've had to draw from*, says Kessler. *And this, being my first solo effort*, he adds, *I wanted to sing about matters of the heart - things important to all of us and that we can relate to*. These last couple of years has seen quite a bunch of talented artists from Hawaii releasing their albums independently on their own, small labels : Hapa, Allan Thomas, Pamela Polland, Mick Bird - and now Bryan Kessler! Copies of this great album is available from : Wire & Wood Records PO Box 75296 Honolulu HI 96836 - 0296 Phone : ( 808 ) 538 - 6144 Email : blk@lava.net Heavily recommended! Take care, Peter ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 00:33:50 +0100 From: catman Subject: Re: Saving Our List (NJC) Last year I received 3 extremely offensive and just plain nasty mails from someone who on the list appears really pleasant. i desperately wanted to post them to the list. However, I chose not to because I felt it would just stir up even more rubbish. As time passed, several other people got similar mail from the same person so I didn't need to out them anyway! There are some sad and disturbed people around and eventually they will out themselves. the one thing the almost two years here as taught me-to let go! Fortunately i no longer get riled by people's posts. They are only words and cannot hurt unless we give them the power to. I learned not to give that power to anyone. One always has to bear in mind that such negativity is the expression of the senders inner world and NOT an expression of truth about the sendee. Takes some time to sink in but it is worth the effort in saved emotional stress. bw colin ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 23:57:26 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RE: Saving Our List (NJC) Having been the target of the same person Colin is talking about, I've learned a very valuable lesson from something Patrick Leader once said: forgive and avoid. Some peolpe are too disturbed or have been hit too hard by personal tragedies or what have you to be accountable. You can only delete and move on. I wish I had known this a few months ago, before I made a fool of myself by taking my situation -- and, what's worse, myself -- much too seriously. WallyK Colin wrote: >Last year I received 3 extremely offensive and just plain nasty mails from >someone who on the list appears really pleasant. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 23:51:30 -0400 From: luvart@snet.net Subject: VH1- History of Rock&Roll I'm not sure if this has already been posted: Has anyone else seen Joni on VH1-History of Rock & Roll? Just a little snipet ... she was giving her views on the Isle of Wight and how it is being in the so call *limelight*. They seem to keep replaying different segments of this program so I'm sure it will be on again. Also, there was a show on photographers which was (I think) on VH1 earlier this week. Mostly b&w photos by some famous photographers. There was one of Joni towards the end of the program. Did anyone else catch this show? I only saw the tail end so I didn't catch the name of the program. Heather ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 22:22:04 -0700 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Saving Our List (NJC) > I strongly vote for sticking to "Do not post another person's private > email to the list without their permission". > > Winfried > Winfried, Kakki and Colin have expressed my opinions on this subject very well. I think posting private email to the list without the sender's permission is always a bad idea for the reasons that these three have already stated. In the past it has, at the very least, embarrassed people and at the worst has nearly torn the list apart. I think we've probably lost a few people who were great contributors to the list because of private spats being made public. If someone's harassing you, take it to Les or take it to your ISP. Or simply ignore the harasser until they stop. If you don't give them the attention they want they will eventually give it up. Mark in Seattle ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V4 #216 ************************** There is now a JMDL tape trading list. Interested traders can get more details at http://www.jmdl.com/trading ------- The Song and Album Voting Booths are open again! Cast your votes by clicking the links at http://www.jmdl.com/gallery username: jimdle password: siquomb ------- Don't forget about these ongoing projects: FAQ Project: Help compile the JMDL FAQ. Do you have mailing list-related questions? -send them to Trivia Project: Send your Joni trivia questions and/or answers to Today in History Project: Know of a date-specific Joni fact? -send it to ------- Post messages to the list at Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe joni-digest" to ------- Siquomb, isn't she?