From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #202 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Sunday, June 9 2002 Volume 02 : Number 202 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume [dmw ] RE: [loud-fans] CD Volume ["Ian Runeckles & Angela Bennett" ] Re: [loud-fans] Late for the picnic [Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, King Roger wrote: > Chris Prew on 6/7/2002 10:46:57 AM wrote: > > > > and if you guys think I9m going to learn how to type sans apostrophes just > > There's your problem right there: "When it converts html emails to > text". Anyone who sends out e-mails in anything other than plain text > format should be shot. No, I take that back. Tortured, and THEN shot. not to gainsay the king, but i think the *real* problem is not so much the html as the "smart quotes," a technology which takes unambiguous, universally-recognized punctuation characters and replaces them with cutesy direction-indicating curlicues which use character codes not necessarily present in many environments. i'm looking forward to the part where i get to inflict prolonged hurt on the engineers who perpetrated this and made many other staggeringly unfortunate interface decisions. - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 14:36:34 +0100 From: "Ian Runeckles & Angela Bennett" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] CD Volume > >my short answer: you'd call it a compressor/expander (with optional > >brickwall limiter), and no, i don't think there is a device > that will > >do what you want without adversely affecting the musical > quality of the > >signal. There's a high-end hi-fi company in the UK called Russ Andrews www.russandrews.com who supply cables made by Kimber that do just this - attenuated interconnects. They are set up depending on the type of amplifier and CD player. They are seriously fuckin' expensive though... Ian Np ORGONE BOX ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 11:17:45 -0400 From: David A Seldin Subject: [loud-fans] Late for the picnic Lat: 42.302719 42:18:9.788N Lon: -071.063099 71:03:47.156W I was busy, honest. The map from the Geocode website added a couple acres of parkland to the area around my house, eliminating some elderly housing and a autobody shop. Sweet! Just another effect Eastern snob, David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 13:11:11 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Late for the picnic At 11:17 AM 6/8/2002 -0400, David A Seldin wrote: >The map from the Geocode website added a couple acres of parkland to the >area around my house, eliminating some elderly housing and a autobody >shop. Sweet! What was interesting about the geocode map for me is that it, for once, showed that our street does *not* in fact connect to the cul-de-sac a block over. There is, in fact, a big honkin' brick wall separating the two. On all other maps of this neighborhood that I've seen, it shows that these streets are connected. I've often wondered if that's an honest mistake or a copyright trap. live from Allston Rock City, Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 12:17:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume (this message utterly pointless) On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey on 6/7/2002 10:30:49 AM wrote: > > > First Roger alludes to some land I supposedly own but have seen zulch from > > in the way of proceeds, > > An allusion which I'm pretty sure was made in a PRIVATE e-mail... Okay, now I'm confused: I try not to quote or summarize content of offlist e-mails (if I remember that they are, in fact, offlist), but now you're alluding to an allusion which alluded to something you might have said offlist. I say we just pretend we have no idea who each other is. Are? Oh hell. > "zulch"? Is the autoworks. And also an intensified "zilch." - -j ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 20:10:49 +0100 From: "richblath" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume (this message utterly pointless) - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey" To: "Bucky...Firewoman...and John Cameron Swayze...." Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume (this message utterly pointless) > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey on 6/7/2002 10:30:49 AM wrote: > > > > > First Roger alludes to some land I supposedly own but have seen zulch from > > > in the way of proceeds, > > > > An allusion which I'm pretty sure was made in a PRIVATE e-mail... > > Okay, now I'm confused: I try not to quote or summarize content of offlist > e-mails (if I remember that they are, in fact, offlist), but now you're > alluding to an allusion which alluded to something you might have said > offlist. > > I say we just pretend we have no idea who each other is. Are? Oh hell. > > > "zulch"? > > Is the autoworks. > > And also an intensified "zilch." > > -j ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 23:45:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume (this message utterly pointless) I'd just like to point out that this is the subtlest, most brilliant skewering of nonsensical, content-free posting I've ever seen: reposting the whole message, with no added content, just preserving the subject line. I sure hope that was your intent, Rich - cuz you're a hardcore Zen comic if so. Uh, if you actually meant to say something & only accidentally hit send, I'm disappointed, really. - -j On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, richblath wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey" > To: "Bucky...Firewoman...and John Cameron Swayze...." > Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 6:17 PM > Subject: Re: [loud-fans] CD Volume (this message utterly pointless) > > > > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Roger Winston wrote: > > > > > Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey on 6/7/2002 10:30:49 AM wrote: > > > > > > > First Roger alludes to some land I supposedly own but have seen zulch > from > > > > in the way of proceeds, > > > > > > An allusion which I'm pretty sure was made in a PRIVATE e-mail... > > > > Okay, now I'm confused: I try not to quote or summarize content of offlist > > e-mails (if I remember that they are, in fact, offlist), but now you're > > alluding to an allusion which alluded to something you might have said > > offlist. > > > > I say we just pretend we have no idea who each other is. Are? Oh hell. > > > > > "zulch"? > > > > Is the autoworks. > > > > And also an intensified "zilch." > > > > -j ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #202 *******************************