From: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org (sheryl-crew-digest) To: sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Subject: sheryl-crew-digest V2 #175 Reply-To: sheryl-crew@smoe.org Sender: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-sheryl-crew-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk sheryl-crew-digest Thursday, May 27 1999 Volume 02 : Number 175 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Monitoring list mail? [Harinder_GREWAL@MCD.gov.sg] sales ["born slippy" ] Re: Monitoring list mail? [Mike Connell ] Re: Monitoring list mail? [Harinder_GREWAL@MCD.gov.sg] OFF: Re: Monitoring list mail? [Mike Connell ] My views on censoring and titleing [Sherylcrew@aol.com] Re: It's Sheryl's body [Paul Schreiber ] Guess what so did i and got funny looks ;) ["born slippy" ] Re: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! [RJettman@aol.com] Re: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! ["Sam" ] Re: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! ["Michael L. Rogers" ] Tour ed. TNMC ["Christina Clark" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:46:12 +0800 From: Harinder_GREWAL@MCD.gov.sg Subject: Re: Monitoring list mail? Sorry... further to my mail below, I think a better solution woudl be to title our posts aptly, so if you really dont like a topic, you dont have to read it. For instance, Tom, you responded to my post saying enough with the photos already. But it was titled "photos & T-shirt" so of course it's contents would include talk of the infamous photo. So, if the topic bugs you, dont read it (or ignore the photo bit and get on to the T-shirt part of the post). This is just a for instance, Tom, not scapegoating you or whatever. I'm pretty cool with you :) Another thing, the argument this morning (well, it was morning for me), had a subject header, not appropriate to the content, but consistent nevertheless. Anyone not interested in the flow of that debate could have easily deleted it as it came in. Just my two cents - apologies for the multiple posts.... harin Please respond to sheryl-crew@smoe.org @ SMTP To: sheryl-crew@smoe.org @ SMTP cc: sheryl-crew@smoe.org @ SMTP Subject: Monitoring list mail? Ok, the arguing on-list was not necessary, and I know we sometimes get off-topic, but frankly, I'd rather have a lot of irrelevant mail than have list mails monitored. Imagine the work, Lisa.... Discussion also becomes rather stunted, and you'll get several messages saying exactly the same thing, but senders dont know that, cos other's posts will not have been posted until u have a chance to let them through. Then depending on how frequently you let mail through, discussion will be limited. It'd become rather boring, frankly. Sure off-topics can be annoying, and I know that I've contributed to them too, but its so much easier for all of us to just delete the mails we dont wanna read than have them censored for us. That is the lesser of two evils, IMO. harin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 09:35:57 +0100 From: "born slippy" Subject: sales Hey about Sheryls album not selling well thats not true the album is selling about the amounts I mean like on the time scale as SC. so I don`t believe Sheryl done the shoot for that reason ( maybe in a state of forgetfulness she happened to put her bra on, done that many a times :) ) Ok my little cheese sandwich of the week for you ppls gottta go and do my English A level Mock ( edible woman suddenly becomes all to ironic with the Sheryl thang now ) Judith "People are going to see me with my clothes off"~Sheryl Crow The owner of the incredibly emm crap Sheryl Crow outlook http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palace/8589/TheSherylCro.index.html The Sheryl crow Voting Booth http://www.freevote.com/booth/judithbutlersc and if you are really bored checkout my home page at http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palace/8589/jb.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 06:06:49 -0400 From: Mike Connell Subject: Re: Monitoring list mail? Harinder_GREWAL@MCD.gov.sg wrote: >Ok, the arguing on-list was not necessary, and I know we sometimes get >off-topic, but frankly, I'd rather have a lot of irrelevant mail than have list >mails monitored. Imagine the work, Lisa.... Actually, in many cases it ends up being LESS work. When a list gets out of control as far as the volume goes a list owners' work can become nightmarish. Considering how much email came through THIS list yesterday, I can imagine Lisa's work may have increased dramatically. What happens is subscribers inboxes fill up (especially so on AOL, Juno and Hotmail accounts) and all email from thesheryl-crew list sent to filled accounts bounce back to the list-owner, who is Lisa. So, for instance if just ten accounts filled up this morning and 80 list posts still came in by 10pm tonight, and up to ten more eventually filled up, Lisa faces a possible 1,600 bounced emails going to HER, which would fill up her inbox (AOL account). It would be a nightmare for her. (all of which get routed through smoe.org, loading down the resources for the other 80 lists here at smoe.org) I run the Jewel list, and the last day I let it go unmoderated I had 4,800 bounces that day alone. The last extended period of unmoderation we had there, I was averaging over 1,200 bounces a day. So, ALL of you here that contributed to the problem yesterday, please think of the VOLUNTEERED effort Lisa and the owner of smoe.org put in daily, and how the senseless bantering and quick one-liner replies add up to more email for everyone and more work for Lisa. Mike - a smoe.org list owner P.S. Lisa, I have alternative ideas to help you here.....we'll chat tonight if I see you online :-) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 18:33:34 +0800 From: Harinder_GREWAL@MCD.gov.sg Subject: Re: Monitoring list mail? no, no, no, mike, dont suggest that for this list!!! like you (tried to) explain to me, the Jewel list is different cos its like huge, and i accepted your point. This list isnt... list volume isnt always large either. So Lisa may occasionally have to handle theproblems from bounced mail that I'm guessing dont happen too often (?), but with monitoring, she'd have to filter the mail every day, no matter how shes feeling, how busy she is or whatever. Lets not forget you have had to shut down the Jewel list when you go on holiday, Mike.... I think proper headings is the way to go, not monitoring.... Lisa - Thanks for all the trouble you take in upkeeping this list for us. I really do appreciate it :) harin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 06:57:33 -0400 From: Mike Connell Subject: OFF: Re: Monitoring list mail? harinder wrote: >no, no, no, mike, dont suggest that for this list!!! like you (tried to) >explain to me, the Jewel list is different cos its like huge, and i accepted >your point. This list isnt... list volume isnt always large either. So Lisa may >occasionally have to handle theproblems from bounced mail that I'm guessing >dont happen too often (?), but with monitoring, she'd have to filter the mail >every day, no matter how shes feeling, how busy she is or whatever. Lets not >forget you have had to shut down the Jewel list when you go on holiday, >Mike.... I think proper headings is the way to go, not monitoring.... I did not suggest she monitor the list. I only pointed out that how (at times) a monitored list can be less work. I also agree it's (monitoring) not necessary nor desired here. There are other ways to help the occasional problem, and the solution is not soley "proper headings"/subjects, although that WILL go a long ways in helping too, no question :-) The #1 point here is, is that people on all mailing lists have a responsibility to consider the other subscribers before they send a post that really has no business being ON the list. (such as many 'argument posts' and one-liner replies etc.) Mike :-) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 08:44:31 EDT From: Sherylcrew@aol.com Subject: My views on censoring and titleing hi, well I agree about titleing your e-mails properly (like I have done here) to show what is in your e-mail rather than replying on a certain comment that has nothing to do with the title, this way people can either read it or not. I do this with the Lilith fair stuff, because I dont want to read it because I live in UK and I can't go :( about censoring and monitoring the e-mails: this i obviously up to Lisa because witout her this wouldn't be possible but personally I think it would be nice NOT to censor because we would lose peoples honest views and ideas. This list is refreshing, we bicker but all in good humour (well I do anyway) so i think it would be a pity just to get straight facts about Sheryl the whole time and nothing else. Well anyway, thats MY view bye for now .TOM. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 07:45:16 -0700 From: Paul Schreiber Subject: Re: It's Sheryl's body Chris wrote: >At 10:51 AM 5/26/99 -0500, Michael wrote: > >>I have my Bachelor of Science in Journalism and Bachelor of Arts in >>English and both teach that it is only considered proper to capitalize >>the pronouns "Her" and "She" when referring to a diety. > >Too Bad They Didn't Teach You The Meaning Of The Word "Ungenerous". Maybe because it isn't even a word. At least not in English. >Naw. She's Just Rocks Our World. You mean "she," not "she's." later, Paul shad 96c / 3A CS / mac activist / eda / fumbler fan of / jewel / sophie b. / sarah slean / steve poltz / emm gryner / / x-files / buffy / dawson's creek / habs / bills / 49ers / t h i n k d i f f e r e n t. "why do you analyze it all?" -- Cicero, "The Wind and The Rain" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:06:24 +0100 From: "Sam" Subject: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! WARNING!!!!!! - DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DONT WANT TO KNOW ANY OF THE CONTENTS OF THE MAXIM ARTICLE! ok - whatever the arguements some of th pictures in the article were really cool - the one where shes in a slightly see-through balck top is very cool - whether her nipples show a little it doesnt matter - i mean im gay and i still went "WOAH HOW CUTE"... ....... then theres a series of photos of her doing summersalts on the rings (you know the olympic sport where gymnasts hold onto rings on the end of rope and spin around) and it looks SO COOL even tho shes in a camisole and panties!!!! then theres the imfamous see through top with knickers, but this time she is looking straight at the camera and smiling and she looks great, she looks well happy even if she is showing her nipples! Oh and the final big pic is her against a wall in an opne buttonless white shirt thingy - you cant see anything like her breasts, its just open and she looks nice! BTW her hair looks great short in these pictures :) anyway onto the article - the questions they asked her were the usual - stuff about the psychic, her album, her hair when she was a backing singer for MJ, whether she wants to act etc etc the conversation got to "so we cant ask you who youve slept with" in a joking way and she was pretty funny about it :) mentioned John Major (you non-UKers probably wont know who he is)!!!!!!!! All in all it was a pretty cool article for MAxim (well i always thought maxim was a bit dodgy and looking at tyhe rest of the contents of the mag i still believe it!!!! VERY HETEROSEXUAL! :) ) ill leave the rest for others to read sam (i just wanted to be the first to get it after all the talk about it) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 18:48:14 +0100 From: "born slippy" Subject: Guess what so did i and got funny looks ;) Well after being in a springy mood after booking me three weeks in the sun I thought what the hell I`ll buy the Maxin Mag well I brought ( 5 copies ) couldn`t hide hem under the pony weekly so they were in full view Sam right it`s a really good article and the pictures are good as well no I am happy with it and I get tips on how to be a sex goddess oh and how to perform the bicycle sex position hmmmm Judith "People are going to see me with my clothes off"~Sheryl Crow The owner of the incredibly emm crap Sheryl Crow outlook http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palace/8589/TheSherylCro.index.html The Sheryl crow Voting Booth http://www.freevote.com/booth/judithbutlersc and if you are really bored checkout my home page at http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palace/8589/jb.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 19:41:37 +0100 From: "J. O' Connor" Subject: Re: sweet child o mine Ahh, now that would be good. Then we non-US people could hear it. Louis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 13:56:42 EDT From: RJettman@aol.com Subject: Re: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! What issue was it? I just looked for it at Borders and they had the June issue with Shannon Dougherty on the cover...no Sheryl content :( By the way, I was reserving judgement on this rag until I saw it for myself, and it looks like a male version of Cosmopolitan....nothing like Playboy or Penthouse. In fact, the last issue of Cosmo my wife bought had more nudity in it than Maxim did....no big deal....at least, not to me. Rick ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 19:45:37 +0100 From: "Sam" Subject: Re: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! you cant miss it - it has a big picture of sheryl on the front she looks topless because theyve put a slip right over her chest - but you take it off and she isnt :) sam ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:07:30 -0500 (CDT) From: "Michael L. Rogers" Subject: Re: I JUST BOUGHT MAXIM! It is the July 1999 issue. However, Maxim has a US magazine and a UK one. The one you describe is the US00 release. You can go to this URL and buy one. It is an internet magazine shop that sells British magazines: http://www.britishmagazines.com/ You can get the issue here. It is currently on sale. - --Michael ****************************************************************************** "...And I hear them saying 'You'll never change things, And no matter what you do it's still the same thing.' But it's not the world that I am changing- I do this so this world will know that it will not change me." --Garth Brooks "The Change" ****************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:22:14 EDT From: SCrow816@aol.com Subject: OFF: My apoligies I apoligize to everyone on the crew for keeping on going about this whole thing if mike is willing to forgive and forget i am too. oh yeah does anyone know where i can get this magizine on South Philly PA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 20:24:17 +0100 From: "Richard Stewart" Subject: Re: Anything But Down Single in US? hasn't she already released that? - -----Original Message----- From: Riverwide3@aol.com To: sheryl-crew@smoe.org Date: 23 May 1999 01:07 Subject: Anything But Down Single in US? >Hi I was looking up Sheryl's albums at the Tower Records website and it said >she's releasing Anthing But Down as a single on 5/25/99. Does anyone know >about this? Will it be released in the U.S. or Europe? >Thanks! > >APrrsun >Riverwide3@aol.com > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:29:09 EDT From: SCrow816@aol.com Subject: Re: Anything But Down Single in US? yes i saw two different copies of it but the ones i saw are imports ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:34:10 EDT From: SCrow816@aol.com Subject: maybe no lilith for me(OFFISH) :-( i just found out that i might not be able to see lilith i might be on vacation in florida which really sucks i hate it that i might not be able to go i wanna see it i went last year and even though Sheryl wast there it was great and i remember that natily merchant forgot the words to one of her songs while she was singing Shawn ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:16:36 EDT From: ImSlug@aol.com Subject: Re: maybe no lilith for me(OFFISH) :-( You said that Natalie Merchant forgot her words? Is that a common thing, or do you think that's almost like an act, because she did it at her last concert. She does write her songs, so how can she forget them? Just wondering. And I am very sorry about Lilith. I just got my CD's today from preordering tickets. Can't wait to hear them. And I finally got "The Faculty" soundtrack and heard "Resuscitation". That was a great song! Jackie =Þ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:21:22 -0400 From: "Christina Clark" Subject: Re: Maxim(um) Sheryl pt. 2 I don't like the whole picture, both halves of it, but I feel a little better when Sam told me the other pictures were good and the interview was also good. Christina - -----Original Message----- From: Chris Ketchum To: sheryl-crew@smoe.org Date: May 26, 1999 10:44 PM Subject: Re: Maxim(um) Sheryl pt. 2 >At 04:46 PM 5/26/99 -0400, mlucas wrote: > >>Try this website for one of the Maxim magazine pictures of Sheryl. >> >> http://www.Keg.com/HyperNews2/get/daiapc41/19938.html > > >Thanks for the link! >Sheryl is gorgeous (duh) and the picture is excellent. >What I can't figure out is why those of you who are appalled because she's >showing a little boobie, not making a big deal about what's goin' on a >little farther south? > >Chris > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:32:13 -0400 From: "Christina Clark" Subject: Tour ed. TNMC Hey Crew, For one thing, stop this petty bickering, it's immature and frankly I am tired of opening 25 messages that are one liners. Next thing, does anyone own the limited tour edition TNMC? WIth the live Nashwille songs on it? Is it good? I just found it at a store and am just wondering if I should buy it, it's fairly expensive, but I know it is very rare. ANy input would be greatly apprectiated, Christina ------------------------------ End of sheryl-crew-digest V2 #175 *********************************