From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #255 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 Friday, July 26 2002 Volume 02 : Number 255 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) [Dana Paoli ] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) [dmw ] [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) [Jeffrey] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) ["glenn mcdonald" ] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) ["glenn mcdonald" ] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) ["Joseph M. Mallon" ] Re: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) [AWeiss4] Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) [dana-boy@juno.com] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) ["me" ] Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) [Aaron Mandel ] [loud-fans] zing zing zoom [dmw ] Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying [Sue Trowbridge ] Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) [JRT456@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] colorful blue grass covers (furia) [John F Butland ] [loud-fans] from the Orange Peels list [Boyof100lists@aol.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 07:57:31 -0400 From: Dana Paoli Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) Weird how people who apparently like a record can manage to toss off so many casual insults toward the band and its fans...makes you wonder which records they like guiltlessly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did look up the reviewer on google to see if I could find any dirt on him, but based on what I saw (during a pretty casual search) he seems alright. His favorite record of 2000 (the year of Attractive Nuisance) was by Aimee Mann, and AN did not appear in his top 10. I found the review kind of strange, so I'm glad that others have the same reaction. Any publicity is good publicity, of course, and a review in Time Out really amounts to a small feature as they only feature ten or so albums per issue. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 08:39:37 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Dana Paoli wrote: > many casual insults toward the band and its fans...makes you wonder which > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > I did look up the reviewer on google to see if I could find any dirt on > him, but based on what I saw (during a pretty casual search) he seems > alright. His favorite record of 2000 (the year of Attractive Nuisance) and a lurker here, i'm guessing? or has the mann/miller collab gotten coverage elsewhere? ...i'm going to be chuckling all morning over the "if you don't like loverybody, you're a fag," line. i think i actually remember somebody embarassedly saying something along the lines of "i like one song by that band loverboy, even though i think they're really gay." Or maybe i'm mixing them up with wham uk. - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:17:09 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) hey -- it may be that everyone who'd be interested in this (andrea? jer?) already knows, but if you pre-order _lost in space_ from aimeemann.com it ships with a bonus single. making what's rumoured to be a boring record longer, so that's definitely a plus. ....on the other hand, the three tracks on the bonus single for the last death cab for cutie actually made me like the main record better. - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 08:57:02 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) On Thursday, July 25, 2002, at 08:17 AM, dmw wrote: > it may be that everyone who'd be interested in this (andrea? jer?) > already > knows, but if you pre-order _lost in space_ from aimeemann.com it ships > with a bonus single. making what's rumoured to be a boring record > longer, > so that's definitely a plus. The album is there for Real or WM streaming, so you can try before you buy. Aimee may be falling into the Partridge Syndrome - every song seems to have pretty much the same tempo. - - Steve __________ As for "encouraging people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil," there's only one prominent person trying to intimidate legitimate critics into shutting up about actions they feel to be both wrong and deeply un-American at present. He is, unfortunately, the attorney general of the United States. - Jacob Weisberg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:11:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, dmw wrote: > ....on the other hand, the three tracks on the bonus single for the last > death cab for cutie actually made me like the main record better. I thought they were better than the album, but in the end, nothing could turn my initial enthusiasm for the record into long-term interest. Whatever it was that animated their first two records -- I think it was the basslines -- was gone. a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 15:05:44 GMT From: dana-boy@juno.com Subject: [loud-fans] colorful blue grass covers (furia) Couldn't quite figure out a match for "colorless green ideas..." Oh well. Anyway, I was reading glenn's column about Dolly Parton's cover version of "Stairway to Heaven" and it reminded me to mention this, which I don't think has come up here: http://www.lutherwrightandthewrongs.com/thewall.php (links to the webpage of a bluegrass band who have covered Pink Floyd's "The Wall") They were going to (or maybe they already have appeared, I'm not sure) play this at Prospect Park, and I really wanted to go to see if they had a giant inflatable pig. The song samples don't sound all that exciting, but I'm the last person who should be passing judgment on bluegrass. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:03:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: [loud-fans] adaptive reuse from Fegmaniax: - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 08:52:02 -0400 From: Stewart Russell Only in Toronto for WYD: a bunch of earnest teens singing on the subway, to the tune of We Will Rock You: "We love, we love John-Paul II ...". I couldn't make this up. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:07:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, dmw wrote: > it may be that everyone who'd be interested in this (andrea? jer?) already > knows, but if you pre-order _lost in space_ from aimeemann.com it ships > with a bonus single. making what's rumoured to be a boring record longer, > so that's definitely a plus. And I do like the Flash thingy at the beginning of her website... Two questions: (1) Didn't the Aimee/Scott thing get mentioned in _Ice_? (2) Is whoever's posting as "slabix" at epinions.com here? Some nice reviews there... - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Any noise that is unrelenting eventually becomes music:: __Paula Carino__ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 12:18:41 -0400 From: "glenn mcdonald" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) > "if you don't like Loverboy, you're a fag" This insult, obviously, is backwards. But it so happens I was just listening to a Loverboy best-of in the car last night (but I'm not gay, and I have tapes of me and Sister Christian to prove it), and have these two observations: 1) I was stunned by how many of their songs I remembered, and in what detail, despite my not having had their records myself. I'm not saying that means their songs were good, but they were certainly indelible. 2) Wow was there astonishingly little talent on display. The lyrics were mundanely god-awful, but the unimaginativeness of the drumming, in particular, was downright impressive. Next up on my retro agenda, thanks to Jer's enthusiasm having convinced me to watch _Wet Hot American Summer_: Jefferson Starship's _Freedom at Point Zero_ and the first four reissued Foreigner albums... glenn ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 12:28:31 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, glenn mcdonald wrote: > Next up on my retro agenda, thanks to Jer's enthusiasm having convinced > me to watch _Wet Hot American Summer_: Jefferson Starship's _Freedom at > Point Zero_ and the first four reissued Foreigner albums... well. while we're revealing deep dark secrets, i still have enough of a fondness for the first foreigner album that i'm a little curious as to whether the reissue is a sonic revelation or anything. it was either the second or third lp i bought. at war with the world, - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:10:36 -0400 From: "glenn mcdonald" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) > i still have enough of a fondness for the first foreigner album that > i'm a little curious as to whether the reissue is a sonic revelation I don't have any other edition to compare it to, sorry. The only Foreigner album I owned as a kid was _Double Vision_, and even that got sold during an ultimately ill-advised "normal music" purge. I probably used the money to buy a Lords of the New Church record. But the reissues all *do* have bonus tracks... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:11:30 -0700 (PDT) From: "Joseph M. Mallon" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Dana Paoli wrote: > The Loud Family's "From Ritual to Romance" is reviewed in the new issue > of Time Out New York. I was going to refer everyone to the > loudfamily.com website, but I can't seem to find the review there, though > I'm sure it appears somewhere. Dana, how was Sue to get a copy of a magazine that came out today in New York and post it to the website before it hit the streets? Your snarkiness is inappropriate. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:28:10 EDT From: Boyof100lists@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) In a message dated 7/25/02 1:25:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Boyof100lists writes: > Miller's songs were > pep talks for those who came of age between New Order's "Blue Monday" in > 1983 and the Cure's 1992 single "Friday I'm in Love," an aimless > generation that was spinning off into the ether. Miller was forever > rallying the kids yet also giving up on them Perhaps my point was kind of missed in my emotional last post. I just get so annoyed with critics going for the generational bit. I listened to the Cure and New Order in high school, but, trust me, maybe one other person there did, and she ended up writing for Interview magazine (lucky her). We were friends (Kristi York). We HAD to stick together. To boldly assume that there is some sort of generational solidarity among my age group, or even among those with similar musical tastes makes we want to run for the hills like unfrozen caveman lawyer. It's complete rubbish. About the only commonality I find among my age group is cliquishness. There was no skunk weed at Woodstock for us. What did we have? Smart drinks at Lollapalooza?? If Scott was rallying US here, just look at how different all of us here on the list are. April is the cruelest month, in the .com wasteland (the servers are always down) - -Mark Staples, a.k.a. the emotional toothpaste, aimlessly spinning wildly off into the ether (maybe I should put on some Cocteau Twins, eh? Naw. Loverboy man, Loverboy!) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:22:07 -0400 From: Max Germer Subject: [loud-fans] pop pop pop (hopefully not-too-annoying post to follow): Being back on the list after a very long time off, I don't know if there are any new Loudfans in the Massachusetts area. If so, I offer three fun pop shows in the next two weeks: Tonight (I know, how's that for lead-time): School For The Dead and Lo-Fine. The former is a new band I'm in which sounds like a cross-between Robyn Hitchcock and They Might Be Giants. The songwriter, Henning, is also in a band with Chris Collingwood (FOW) called the Gay Potatoes. Lo-Fine features Bruce Tull, from the Scud Mountain Boys. In Northampton. Tomorrow night: The Fawns. New band #2. Like Beth Orton fronting the Modern Lovers. Easthampton. Sat., 8/3 The Maggies. Old band #1. It's our reunion show, after my two year absence from the band. Three full hours of music. Easthampton This will be the only bit of self-promotion I'll do here, promise. School For The Dead and my *other* new band, Spanish For Hitchhiking, are looking for people in the New England (and possibly New York) area to host a living room concert. We are not asking for any money, just a guarantee of at least 15 people and an understanding that this would be a *concert*, not background music for a kegger. E-mail me off-list for details. Merci, Max ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 14:29:26 EDT From: AWeiss4338@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] almost sorta actually on topic (but only almost) In a message dated 7/25/02 9:18:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dmw@radix.net writes: > it may be that everyone who'd be interested in this (andrea? jer?) already > knows, but if you pre-order _lost in space_ from aimeemann.com it ships > with a bonus single. making what's rumoured to be a boring record longer, > so that's definitely a plus. > > ....on the other hand, the three tracks on the bonus single for the last > death cab for cutie actually made me like the main record better. > > Already ordered, w/single. I've heard the extra tracks, they are good, but not as good as the album. I will say the album isn't boring, just listen to songs like High On Sunday 51. aimeemamm.com. Andrea ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:10:49 GMT From: dana-boy@juno.com Subject: Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) Dana, how was Sue to get a copy of a magazine that came out today in New York and post it to the website before it hit the streets? Your snarkiness is inappropriate. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just because your New York bureau let you down and you got scooped is no reason to get upset. Sue does a wonderful job on the website, and I fully expect that this will be an isolated lapse. I know that I plan to continue to turn to loudfamily.com for all the latest-breaking Loud Family news! But, your question does beg a question. Namely, how did *I* get a copy of a magazine that came out today in New York and post it to loud-fans before it hit the streets? Hmmmm, that does seem odd. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 12:15:58 -0700 From: "me" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) This sounds like the sh** people write about > Douglas Coupland (STILL) that gets up my crack. i'm sorry - i was laughing too hard to read the rest that post - i have a new fave saying. i'm surprised that i can't find this review online somewhere. i was hoping to send a link to someone, but no dice. i'm ont familiar with the publication - is it a part of the NYTimes, or is it separate? google hasn't helped much, by the way. and man, that gets up my crack. - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- - ----- Original Message ----- From: ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 15:29:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 dana-boy@juno.com wrote: > But, your question does beg a question. No, it doesn't. It may "raise a question" or "demand that a question be asked", but that's not what "beg the question" means. It's a term from rhetoric referring to a particular kind of logical fallacy. And I would bet that, as little as you probably care about this information, it's more than I (and others?) care that you got to zing Sue for some unclear offense on the website. aaron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:49:43 GMT From: dana-boy@juno.com Subject: Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) No, it doesn't. It may "raise a question" or "demand that a question be asked", but that's not what "beg the question" means. It's a term from rhetoric referring to a particular kind of logical fallacy. >>>>>>>>>> Actually, Joe's statement does beg a question, as far as I can tell. He essentially states that it's impossible for Sue to have posted information prior to TONY's street date. Further, he makes this statement knowing that I had already done so. In essence, his proof that Sue could not have posted the info is based on a knowingly flawed assumption that Sue could not have posted the info. It's as if he said "Sue could not do the thing you did, because it cannot be done." I could be wrong, but I believe that that is begging the question. And regardless, it was only a little zing. Let little zings lie, say I. Perhaps the fact that Sue can now cut and paste my typing will be of some solace. Just remember to delete the [sic], if I left it in!! - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:47:13 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) At 07:49 PM 7/25/2002 GMT, dana-boy@juno.com wrote: >Actually, Joe's statement does beg a question, as far as I can >tell. He essentially states that it's impossible for Sue to have >posted information prior to TONY's street date. Further, he makes >this statement knowing that I had already done so. In essence, his >proof that Sue could not have posted the info is based on a knowingly >flawed assumption that Sue could not have posted the info. It's as >if he said "Sue could not do the thing you did, because it cannot be >done." I could be wrong, but I believe that that is begging the >question. Actually, you *are* wrong. "Begging the question" means "basing a conclusion on a statement that itself needs to be proven true or false." And by your own logic above, the statement has already been proven false. Therefore, no questions are begged. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:55:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Joseph M. Mallon" Subject: Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 dana-boy@juno.com wrote: > Actually, Joe's statement does beg a question, as far as I can tell. > He essentially states that it's impossible for Sue to have posted > information prior to TONY's street date. Further, he makes this > statement knowing that I had already done so. In essence, his proof > that Sue could not have posted the info is based on a knowingly flawed > assumption that Sue could not have posted the info. It's as if he > said "Sue could not do the thing you did, because it cannot be done." > I could be wrong, but I believe that that is begging the question. Perhaps I should have said, "Since Sue does not have a subscription to TONY and does not live in the NY area, she could not have gotten the review on or before its street date. You, Dana, in order to get the review, most likely have a subscription to TONY and/or a friend who works at TONY, or some other method of obtaining it before street date. I wonder why you would use your ability to get the review on or before its steet date to take an unwarranted and unprovoked potshot at the website and, indirectly, at Sue, although it's not the first time you've done so." > And regardless, it was only a little zing. Let little zings lie, say > I. Why would you think slamming the website was necessary? What has the website or Sue ever done to incur such animus in you? Does your access to this small bit of information really make you feel powerful? That'd be really sad. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 17:00:12 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) In a message dated 7/25/02 1:56:09 PM, jmmallon@joescafe.com writes: << Why would you think slamming the website was necessary? What has the website or Sue ever done to incur such animus in you? Does your access to this small bit of information really make you feel powerful? That'd be really sad. >> And thus a zing becomes a slam. Did we learn nothing from the SALT treaties? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 14:00:43 -0700 From: "me" Subject: [loud-fans] tomorrow's your day! if you're a SysAdmin. http://www.sysadminday.com/ - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 17:14:03 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: [loud-fans] zing zing zoom hey dana, now that i think of it -- wouldn't you expect the review to be up on the website later than in the magazine, since the 125 records team would need to contact the copyright holder for the review and obtain permission to reproduce it? might explain the permanent absence of such, as well, o' course, cause there's no guarantee the copyright holder will grant such permission -- no "not unreaonably withhe;d" clause applies. just since i know you're a proponent of IP rights and all. ok ok everybody. deep breath. GROUP HUG! now, doesn't that feel better? - -- d. np fugazi _the argument_ (i don't seem to be able to make myself sick of this disc, no matter how much i play it. i think it (retroactively) may be my #1 of last year.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 17:40:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Sue Trowbridge Subject: Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying JRT456 writes: > And thus a zing becomes a slam. Did we learn nothing from the SALT > treaties? Since I know people on this list just don't get enough JRT456, I figured they'd enjoy this: http://www.mail-archive.com/audities%40binhost.com/2002-month-07/msg00488.html I wrote in the Loud Family press release that Alison had briefly been a member of The Bangles, but dammit, nobody bought it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 17:47:47 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re:Re:Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying In a message dated 7/25/02 2:33:12 PM, trow@interbridge.com writes: << Since I know people on this list just don't get enough JRT456, I figured they'd enjoy this: http://www.mail-archive.com/audities%40binhost.com/2002-month-07/msg00488.html >> Well, that's a start. For real fun, they can pick up the beginning of the whole sad affair at: http://www.mail-archive.com/audities@binhost.com/2002-month-07/msg00483.html (URL where troublemaking poster alerts the Audities list to an embarrassing item about members of their Own Private High School) Or for an aerial view, including where I jump in to correct a few weird assumptions, try: http://www.mail-archive.com/audities@binhost.com/2002-month-07/mail2.html And for real fun, hit the Audities archives for December '01 and look for postings which feature my name. Yeesh. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 18:32:24 -0400 From: Dana Paoli Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) I wonder why you would use your ability to get the review on or before its steet date to take an unwarranted and unprovoked potshot at the website and, indirectly, at Sue, although it's not the first time you've done so." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If memory serves, the first time I did so was when I noted the discrepancy between the loudfamily.com announcement that "Scott gets tons of mail so don't hold your breath waiting for a response" and the announcement that "for some reason Scott's not getting any mail, must be a server problem," which was officially voted funny by the appropriate committee. In response, of course, I got an indignant "how dare you insult my wife" email from Joe. So yeah, it's somewhat fun to tweak someone who can't take a whit of criticism. My bad. In my defense, I should point out that I *have* refrained from bringing up baseball trivia on the list Dirty laundry aired, I thank Stewart for correcting my misunderstanding of question begging (though I think that he's zinging me on a technicality) and I propose that we go back to insulting blind people or whatever it was that we were up to before. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 18:39:44 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) In a message dated 7/25/02 3:34:49 PM, dana-boy@juno.com writes: << and I propose that we go back to insulting blind people or whatever it was that we were up to before. >> Oh, yeah. You'd like us to carry on as if we haven't already learned what kind of people are named Dana. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/fun/rexmorgan.asp?date=20020610 (URL recently posted here which reveals what kind of people are named Dana...and also possibly reignites the whole pop/soda brouhaha) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:38:18 -0300 From: John F Butland Subject: Re: [loud-fans] colorful blue grass covers (furia) At 03:05 PM 02-07-25 GMT, dana-boy@juno.com wrote: >http://www.lutherwrightandthewrongs.com/thewall.php > >(links to the webpage of a bluegrass band who have covered Pink Floyd's "The Wall") > >They were going to (or maybe they already have appeared, I'm not sure) play this at Prospect Park, and I really wanted to go to see if they had a giant inflatable pig. Don't think there's a pig, but they do build the wall using haybales instead of bricks. >The song samples don't sound all that exciting, but I'm the last person who should >be passing judgment on bluegrass. Actually it's not bad at all - it does work best as a body of work, however, much like the original. And the bluegrass borg (a P2 expression) would not consider them to be *real* bluegrass because there are so many other influnces in there. best, jfb John F Butland O- butland@nbnet.nb.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 17:59:56 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 JRT456@aol.com wrote: > Oh, yeah. You'd like us to carry on as if we haven't already learned what > kind of people are named Dana. > > http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/fun/rexmorgan.asp?date=20020610 This would be so, so, much better if it weren't that one of my coworkers is a "Dana" - a female Dana, but alas a very much the opposite of this cartoon's Dana Dana. And I've never met the male Dana - so I have no idea whether he'd look good in fishnets or not. (I'm *assuming* fishnets here, based on compatibility with overall look.) Not being familiar w/the cartoon, I assume the titular MD is actually hiding in the closet with a video camera? - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::You think your country needs you, but you know it never will:: __Elvis Costello__ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:17:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Sue Trowbridge Subject: [loud-fans] Link featuring CUTE KITTIES!!! Dana writes: > So yeah, it's somewhat fun to tweak someone who can't take a whit of > criticism. My bad. It should be known that I am a very, very sensitive person with no sense of humor. That is because I am Swedish. If you'd ever seen any Bergman movies, you would know that Swedes are an extremely dour & humorless people. In fact, I've done some research, and it turns out that my condition is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, and if you continue to take sly digs at me, or the web site, I will have no choice but to sue you for millions of dollars. I'm pretty sure John Sharples would agree to represent me pro bono. Believe me, I'll have *lots* of witnesses!!! Yes, my husband may be a bit overzealous in defending me, but I've heard that you have a very attractive wife, Dana -- surely you know what it's like to want to protect the one you love from evil outside forces. Anyway, now that we've gotten this straightened out, I just know you will be content to continue using this list to take potshots at Scott & Gil (who are much, MUCH stronger than I am), but will leave me alone. Thanks, and have a great day! - --Sue P.S. Just to make ABSOLUTELY sure, I've put your address in my .procmail file, to direct any mail from you to /dev/null. I just know that will help me have a happier day, *every* day! But my friends will be watching you -- or should I say, "gathering evidence"!! P.P.S. To show there are no hard feelings, here is a very special link for you!!!!! http://www.ratemykitten.com/ If you love cute kitties, you will love this site!!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 21:35:33 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] not-too-annoying (ns) At 06:32 PM 7/25/2002 -0400, Dana Paoli wrote: >Dirty laundry aired, I thank Stewart for correcting my misunderstanding >of question begging (though I think that he's zinging me on a >technicality) and I propose that we go back to insulting blind people or >whatever it was that we were up to before. Which technicality was that, again? Oh, right, the technicality that the phrase doesn't actually mean what you thought it meant. Yes, that *is* a rather slim justification for a zing, isn't it? Dearie me... S NP: SILVER WEDDING ANNIVERSARY -- Destroy All Monsters ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 21:11:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Fleming Subject: Re: [loud-fans] zing zing zoom - --- dmw wrote: > np fugazi _the argument_ > (i don't seem to be able to make myself sick of this > disc, no matter how > much i play it. i think it (retroactively) may be > my #1 of last year.) As well you shouldn't get sick of it... it's a great record!! I'm not sure if it would be my #1 retroactively. I don't even remember my top ten of '01. Since hearing _The Argument_ in the store I work at (manager was off that day, mercifully) back in January, I've been moving progressively backwards through the catalog...much like how I obtained my Husker Du collection back in 1994. I'm at _Red Medicine_ now. Phil F. NP..... Hip Tanaka _Le Jihad_ (You gotta love a band who's glowing record review begins with "You know, I hate these fuckin' assholes!") Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 01:07:31 EDT From: Boyof100lists@aol.com Subject: [loud-fans] from the Orange Peels list True... A couple of weeks ago Mark Mothersbaugh (sp?) was interviewed here in Detroit by a local rock morning talk show... He talked about his recent film score work and dropped some very interesting tidbits about some hidden tapes. In the late 70's Devo didn't have a place to stay... till Iggy Pop allowed them to stay and record at his home. Apparently, tapes of Devo working on song structures were being recorded - - when Iggy Pop stormed the recording sessions on GOD KNOWS WHAT - singing over the beats, with the lyrics that would one day become "Lust for a Life". These songs along with many others are in a vault somewhere and not on my Discman.... I would kill to hear those tapes. KILL .mCr. ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #255 *******************************