From: Digestifier To: Subject: Dead-Flames Digest #625 Dead-Flames Digest #625, Volume #48 Thu, 20 Oct 05 21:00:01 PDT Contents: Re: NBA Players Now Must Adhere to Dress Code (NDC) (Ben) Re: White House Indictment vigil(NDC) ("Everybody's Gonna Be Happy") verybody's Gonna Be Happy") Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" (Joe) 7/12/87 Dead/Dylan DVD(!!!) on Trader's Den ("Rupert") Re: Hey, Joe (and everyone else, too) . . . (Joe) Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" ("Rupert") Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... (Joe) So who should open for Phil on NYE? ("Rupert") Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... (Joe) Re: FEMA E-Mails ("scarletbgonias@hotmail.com") Golden Road Box Set (brian_todd@removethiscox.net) Re: So who should open for Phil on NYE? (bigchuck51@aol.com) Re: White House Indictment vigil(NDC) ("Carlisle") Re: FEMA E-Mails (kpnnews@yahoo.com) Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" ("Richard Morris") Re: Hey, Joe (and everyone else, too) . . . (kpnnews@yahoo.com) Re: FEMA E-Mails ("k sturm") Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" (crashedlevee@yahoo.com) Re: Republicans hate you and want you dead: the 10/20/05 edition (NDC) (joker4153@comcast.net) Re: Open Apology to the RMGD Women ("Richard Morris") Re: Open Apology to the RMGD Women ("k sturm") Re: So who should open for Phil on NYE? ("Richard Morris") ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" Subject: Re: White House Indictment vigil(NDC) Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 18:58:40 -0700 "Carlisle" wrote in message news:1129840847.405541.78130@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > I'll let you in on another secret for good material- > http://www.nationalreview.com/ > NR is against the drug war and is not as pro-business as the WSJ. > However, the magazine has a deep regard for the Roman Catholic > traditions a la the Buckley family. Still it's very entertaining, > erudite and suprisingly unorthodox in politics. > cc From that site: "The meetings with the senators are going terribly. On a scale of one to 100, they are in negative territory. The thought now is that they have to end...." I guess this woman isn't very impressive in person................ Even Leahy was impressed with Roberts' intellect and persona. No one seems to be impressed with this woman. The hearings ought to be a hoot. Early on I was saying all they have to go by is the hearings. If she's as unimpressive as she apparently has been in one on one meetings with senators, buh bye. EGBH ------------------------------ From: Joe Subject: Re: An update from college! (ndc) Date: 21 Oct 2005 02:00:10 GMT Somehow, "Nuns in Training Gone Wild" doesn't sound all that interesting. Joe ------------------------------ From: "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" Subject: FEMA E-Mails Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:03:31 -0700 I assume most of you have heard of this by now. The only FEMA guy in New Orleans, working at the Superdome, sent e-mails to Michael Brown (since he wasn't answering a phone) declaring the situation was beyong critical, that there was no food or water, and that people were dying. He pleaded for help. 3 hours later he got a response from Brown's press secretary telling him that Mr. Brown needed time to eat dinner, that the restaurants were crowded, that he needs much more than 20 or 30 minutes to eat. The Superdome guy responded with another e-mail telling them that he just finished a delicious MRE and used the hallway to go poop along with 30,000 close friends........... Unreal, yet its real. EGBH ------------------------------ From: Joe Subject: Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" Date: 21 Oct 2005 02:04:41 GMT Carl Sparndan wrote: > jgamp.com > JAGR at the Garcia AMPhitheatre > sat oct 29 > and don't forget the mystery cats too! > all you mysterogynists beware, it might be tied in with something having to > do with deborah koons and unfortunately the insufferable david glans and > wavy gravity will be there too. Ms Kelly, a good friend I met at one og the rmgd luncheons, tells me that the mystery cats are the Flying Other Brothers, but withour Batty Sless, cuz he'll be playing with Phil. But, that doesn;t matter. The Jefferson Starship are one hot namd, especially if the incendiary Darby Gould is with them that day. She's as good as Grace was, in her prime. Joe ------------------------------ From: "Rupert" Subject: 7/12/87 Dead/Dylan DVD(!!!) on Trader's Den Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:07:58 -0700 Yup, it's true. Mattman has done it again... http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13413 There goes my bandwidth for a while! ------------------------------ From: Joe Subject: Re: Hey, Joe (and everyone else, too) . . . Date: 21 Oct 2005 02:10:37 GMT DGDevin wrote: > The more-evolved-one spends a lot of time worrying about other people's > sexual orientation, you would too if you had trouble figuring out why you > can't seem to hang onto a woman for long anymore.... Get back to me when you've had a 20 year relationship. In the meanwhile, shut the fuck up and don't try to demean those who feel pain after a divorce. My pain is none of your fucking business, and if you keep it up, I'll go for your jugular, you Nazi sympathizer. Your politics are despicable, and apparently, so are your social skills. Now, fuck off and die. ------------------------------ From: "Rupert" Subject: Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:11:57 -0700 True 'dat. Joe, aren't you on vacation in Mexico? What the hell are ya doin' on usenet?!? I'm trying to find out about the layout of this amphitheatre thingy, with no help whatsoever from the "official" website, only half of which works. I'm trying to figure out where the best place is to set up the camcorder for the day. Hey Joe, I got great video of DNB at the Pumpkin Festival last Saturday, I'll have to burn ya a copy! ------------------------------ From: Joe Subject: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... Date: 21 Oct 2005 02:13:57 GMT Walter Karmazyn wrote: > The conservative in question has called for Bush's impeachment, referred > to his neocon supporters as brownshirts, was against the the invasion of > Iraq before it was invaded, is a strong opponent of the Patriot Act, > etc. I guess anybody who holds these opinions must be mentally ill and > insane, with a bit of UnAmerican to boot, ain't that right, Joe? Actually Walter, my bad. It sounds like his anti-psychotic meds finally kicked in, and he saw reality. So, let's just say that unrepentant conservatives all deserve to be imprisoned, disgraced, and removed from office. They've fucked up our world. ------------------------------ From: "Rupert" Subject: So who should open for Phil on NYE? Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:15:12 -0700 I'm thinking that the obvious choice is David Nelson Band! I mean, if Barry and Mookie are playing with Phil that night, why not sandwich-in a nice set of DNB for a couple of hours, first. Any other suggestions? ------------------------------ From: Joe Subject: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... Date: 21 Oct 2005 02:15:19 GMT JonP wrote: > If you represent the other side......Ill take the republicans... > JonP So, you admit to being mentally defective? What a surprise?! Joe ------------------------------ From: "scarletbgonias@hotmail.com" Subject: Re: FEMA E-Mails Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:43:23 -0700 Brownie's meal was a heck of a meal... Theresa ------------------------------ From: brian_todd@removethiscox.net Subject: Golden Road Box Set Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:45:15 +0000 Just picked up the Golden Road box set this evening from overstock.com for a grand total of $92.34, including shipping. It lists for $101.04 & there is a coupon for 10% off of $75.00 (expires 10/31), which can be found at the link below: http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?siteID=4HChz_7ECmA-77C.9MShj2xHr.1lkCgCVg&PAGE=STATICPAGE&PAGE_ID=2643&CID=80551&fp=F The coupon states that orders comprised solely of media are excluded, but all I ordered was the set and still received the discount. Bought the Beyond Description box in near mint condition last week at a local cd shop for $68.00. It lists for $96.08 at overstock.com Peace, Brian ------------------------------ From: bigchuck51@aol.com Subject: Re: So who should open for Phil on NYE? Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:47:03 -0700 The band that opened for Phil at Mardi Gras, I have brain lock and cannot remember their name (musta been the wine at the bebefit dinner, yeah thats it) Humphrey or Umphrey something I think. Crap, damn oldness creepin' up agin. later- ------------------------------ From: "Carlisle" Subject: Re: White House Indictment vigil(NDC) Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:49:47 -0700 Ray wrote: > Carlisle wrote: > > Ray wrote: > > > Carlisle wrote: > > > > Ray wrote: > > > > > Carlisle wrote: > > > > > > Carlisle wrote: > > > > > > > Ray wrote: > > > > > > > > http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007424 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ray > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good link. Regardless of your political perspective, the Wall Street > > > > > > > Journal is a great newspaper. The Weekend & Personal Journals are worth > > > > > > > their weight in gold. Even the pro-business Opinion section offers > > > > > > > differing and informative perspectives. I learned alot about economics > > > > > > > from Robert Bartley himself. The WSJ makes a good counterbalance to > > > > > > > most city papers. Although, it will probably dwarf most other news in > > > > > > > the quality, intelligence and content departments. Food for thought > > > > > > > anyway!! > > > > > > > > > > The WSJ's regular coverage is generally great - a high quality paper. > > > > > Their newspaper editorials are ridiculously conservatively biased > > > > > however - to the point that they are often either willfully distort the > > > > > truth or they don't know what they are talking about. Or, as the New > > > > > Republic amusingly put it, WSJ editorials are so extreme that they have > > > > > "the occasional capacity to rise above the routine moral callousness of > > > > > hack conservative punditry and attain a level of exquisite depravity > > > > > normally reserved for villains in James Bond movies." But again their > > > > > general, non-editorial coverage is first-rate. > > > > > > > > > > > I'll let you in on another secret for good material- > > > > > > http://www.nationalreview.com/ > > > > > > NR is against the drug war and is not as pro-business as the WSJ. > > > > > > However, the magazine has a deep regard for the Roman Catholic > > > > > > traditions a la the Buckley family. Still it's very entertaining, > > > > > > erudite and suprisingly unorthodox in politics. > > > > > > > > > > Sorry - can't go with you there. The National Review is a right-wing > > > > > rag that routinely grossly distorts the truth, knowingly, because they > > > > > don't know what they are talking about, and/or because they are so > > > > > blinded by their ideology that they don't even realize how distorted > > > > > their coverage is. It's like reading a collection of WSJ editorials. > > > > > > > > > > Ray > > > > > > > > You're obviously a very learned man, Ray. But to call NR a rag may be > > > > taking it a bit too far...You just don't happen to agree with most of > > > > what they are saying. > > > > > > No, the National Review is a rag. And it's not because I don't usually > > > agree with what they are saying, or just because they've declared Rush > > > Limbaugh to be the 'leader' of the conservative cause. It's because, > > > like Limbaugh, much of what they say is flat-out wrong or deceptive - > > > they are not a reliable source of information. Here's an example: > > > > > > The National Review, in their ongoing effort to smear White House > > > critic Joe Wilson, ran a 2004 article accusing Wilson of lying in his > > > now-famous 2003 NYTimes article questioning the Administration's > > > rational for going to war. Per the National Review: > > > > > > "But now Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV - he of the Hermes ties and > > > Jaguar convertibles - has been thoroughly discredited. Last week's > > > bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report concluded that it is he > > > who has been telling lies." > > > > > > http://www.nationalreview.com/may/may200407121105.asp > > > > > > This declaration is itself a gross distorion - the "bipartisan Senate > > > intelligence committee report" concluded no such thing. Only the > > > Republicans on the committee declared as much - the Democrats on the > > > committee refused to endorse that conclusion. > > > > > > The NR article continues: > > > > > > "In particular he [Wilson] said that President Bush was lying when, in > > > his 2003 > > > State of the Union address, he pronounced these words: "The British > > > government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant > > > quantities of uranium from Africa." > > > > > > This too is false: in his 2003 NYTimes op-ed piece Wilson did not say > > > that Bush was lying when he used those "16 words" in his 2003 SOTU > > > address. > > > > > > The National Review is lying, and it's such a flagrant lie that even I > > > am amazed at their audacity and blatent disregard for the truth here - > > > especially given the irony that this article of theirs is an attempt at > > > character assassination where they are trying to impugn someone else as > > > a liar. > > > > > > But hey, all's fair in love and politics, right? ### > > > > > > Disgusting. The National Review is indeed a rag. > > > > > > > Some people would claim that OpinionJournal.com > > > > is too biased conservative, but you've used them for quotes to further > > > > your arguments. > > > > > > OpinionJournal.com is not the same thing as WJS editorials - > > > OpinionJournal.com has a much wider range of voices than just the > > > notoriously right-wing WSJ editors. > > > > > > > You may get some good material from NR sometime. I'm > > > > not being factitious. Check this out-- > > > > http://www.nationalreview.com/12feb96/drug.html > > > > > > *Sometimes* - sure. Even a clock is right twice a day, as they say. > > > But in general they are unreliable as a source of information. > > > > > > Ray > > > > OK Professor, you site an example where NR stumbled. > > I could cite several more too - the National Review 'stumbles' (read: > lies) on a regular basis. And my what a coincidence that the NR > routinely 'stumbles' in such a way as to advance what is generally a > right-wing agenda. So site some more. ;> Yes they do have an agenda. So does the NYT, The New Republic and Rolling Stone. > > > I'll give you the > > benefit of the doubt here. Interestingly, you use the New York Times in > > your attempt to impugn NR. > > I've 'used' the New York Times here only in the sense that Joe Wilson's > Op-Ed article that the National Review was attacking was published in > there. Wilson's Op-Ed could have been published anywhere - that > wouldn't have made any difference about the FACT -- *not* opinion -- > that the National Review repeatedly lied when attacking said article. Lied?? I'm pissed! I'm gonna investigate this one. > > > It's not like I couldn't sit here all night > > and list the errors and if not downright fabrications that have come > > out of that fine paper. > > Which makes zero difference in terms of my 'using' the New York Times > here. Moreover, when the New York Times gets things wrong, unlike the > National Review they don't routinely get things wrong to advance a > specific left or right agenda - they get things wrong that advance both > agendas. You gotta be kidding. The New York Times is an illustrious paper, sure. But they too have their biases. > > > Yes, National Review is very biased. But still, > > they have to fact check like everyone else or they wouldn't be > > celebrating a rather distinguished 50th Anniversary this year. > > What makes you say that? Do you think that their 'leader' Rush > Limbaugh fact checks all of the misleading crap that he's been > shovelling out for decades too? If so, I have a bridge to sell you. > ("Sold, for one dollar, the Brookin Bridge!") FYI, their "leader" is William F. Buckley Jr. I'm not here to defend Rush. Thanks anyway. > > Also: if so, how do you think the National Review ended up publishing > the lies in the essay that I cited? And moreover has never corrected > them? Both of those assertions were and are easily demonstrated to be > wrong - all anyone had/has to do is read the source material. Honestly this is the first I've heard about it. I still don't know why this is as big of a scandle as it's turned out to be. Valerie Plame was not a covert agent in harm's way. The Wilson's did not keep it a secret that she worked for the CIA. Admittedly I'm not up in the minute details of Joseph Wilson. I will look closer. The whole Iraq thing is very disturbing. The Bush Administration wanted to topple the Saddam regime and was determined to build a case for war. Can we agree here? > > > Therefore, it should be taken as ONE source and not as THE source..Get > > me on record for saying that!! > > It's ONE source for distorted and misleading right-wing propaganda - > that much I'll agree with. There are indeed plenty of others. Name them..Name your sources! Ha. > > > Again, you do not agree with the general > > philosophy that the magazine was/is based upon. And that is why you are > > calling it a "rag". I'm sure you will somehow disagree... > > I disagree with the conduct of any purported news organization or > enitity that routinely grossly distorts information -- to the left or > to the right -- for political propaganda purposes. IMO the ends do not > justify the means. YMMV. Well, at least I know what YMMV stands for now! Thanks for the debate. > > Ray cc ------------------------------ From: kpnnews@yahoo.com Subject: Re: FEMA E-Mails Date: 20 Oct 2005 19:59:46 -0700 Everybody's Gonna Be Happy wrote: > I assume most of you have heard of this by now. > > Unreal, yet its real. Prove it. Links? Not that I don't believe you, but, you know, trust but verify. Jeez, did I just ask for one of those annoying links in a post.... Kurt ------------------------------ From: "Richard Morris" Subject: Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:03:32 -0700 "Joe" wrote in message news:3rr0lpFknkkvU3@individual.net... > But, that doesn;t matter. The Jefferson Starship are one hot namd, > especially if the incendiary Darby Gould is with them that day. She's as > good as Grace was, in her prime. shee-it. R. ------------------------------ From: kpnnews@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Hey, Joe (and everyone else, too) . . . Date: 20 Oct 2005 20:05:33 -0700 Joe wrote: > DGDevin wrote: > > > The more-evolved-one spends a lot of time worrying about other people's > > sexual orientation, you would too if you had trouble figuring out why you > > can't seem to hang onto a woman for long anymore.... > > Get back to me when you've had a 20 year relationship. > > In the meanwhile, shut the fuck up and don't try to demean those who feel > pain after a divorce. > > My pain is none of your fucking business. I honestly would never question peoples' pain. It's their thing. We should all back off when others have a bad day and just relax regardless of the past. I read your other posts, I am sorry it apparently didn't work out. My initial post was more poking fun at your "WTF" where-is-he-going comment about Cheney's wife. Kurt ------------------------------ From: "k sturm" Subject: Re: FEMA E-Mails Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:05:30 GMT wrote in message news:1129863586.761501.229950@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Everybody's Gonna Be Happy wrote: >> I assume most of you have heard of this by now. >> >> Unreal, yet its real. > > Prove it. Links? Not that I don't believe you, but, you know, > trust but verify. Jeez, did I just ask for one of those annoying > links in a post.... > > Kurt > I don't have a link, but I did see it on the news. They showed printouts of the emails, too. ------------------------------ From: crashedlevee@yahoo.com Subject: Re: "Jefferson Airplane Galactic Reunion" Date: 20 Oct 2005 20:06:04 -0700 I can tell you it's a mini Greek style theater. Real new seating that is bleacher style. Maybe seating for 500. A nice lawn above with a great look at the stage from anywhere. Nice stage with a great look at the city from the lawn. Parking is not a problem on John Shelley Dr. Top center at the start of the lawn is a great flat spot to set your camera up if you were thinking of that. I guess the place holds about 2500, maybe a little more. Good bathrooms. BYOB! coolers are okay.......It's free. ------------------------------ From: joker4153@comcast.net Subject: Re: Republicans hate you and want you dead: the 10/20/05 edition (NDC) Date: 20 Oct 2005 20:08:32 -0700 Very possible that a lot of people are too stupid to know what to eat (or drink, or smoke or ingest.) But surely that doesn't mean we should be able to sue. Hard to picture Mickey D's as an "attractive nuisance." Larry ------------------------------ From: "Richard Morris" Subject: Re: Open Apology to the RMGD Women Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:15:22 -0700 "Joe" wrote in message news:3rr01bFknkkvU1@individual.net... > RickNBarbInSD wrote: snip > It was a learning experience. In more ways than one. I learned that in the > 5 years since the divorce, I've had a fucked up priority, in that, all I > cared about was chasing women. I hope I learned my lesson. It sounds like you learned something valuable, and that is about not being too needy for a relationship. That will serve you well next time around. I am sorry it did not work out, though ... there is nothing pleasant about ending an intimate relationship. Richard ------------------------------ From: "k sturm" Subject: Re: Open Apology to the RMGD Women Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:15:06 GMT "Joe" wrote in message news:3rr01bFknkkvU1@individual.net... > RickNBarbInSD wrote: > >> Sorry to hear about all this Joe. Good luck workin' it out! > > Despite Psycho Sandy, I did have a memorable experience in Mexico. > > My best friend moved there after his divorce, and he is involved in > setting up an online virtual museum dedicated to the dying indigenous > cultures of mexico. > > He first lived in Mexico in the early 1970s, and started buying > "huipels" which are costumes worn by the native indigenous population. > He has had shows in museums here in the Bay Area, but now, in the age of > digital photography, he's not buying as many costumes; he's photographing > them instead. > > One day, we arrived in a tiny village in the Sierra Norte in the state of > Puebla, near Cuetzalan, and he asked an indigenous man wearing a t-shirt > if there was anyone in the village who still wore huipels. The man said > that only 5 women were left, and one of them was his 96 year old > grandmother. He invited us into his home to meet her. These people have to > be amongst some of the poorest on the planet, living in a house with a > dirt floor, with chickens wandering around inside, and with maize being > processed right before our eyes. The 96 year old didn't speak any Spanish, > only Nuatatal. I'd never met a 96 year old person before. And, she gave us > a fashion show. And, they fed us their tortillas that we'd seen being > made. > > That scene was repeated just about daily. I got to see a world that will > cease to exist in just a few years. A world that no other gringo has ever > seen. > > We got to see things no other American could ever possibly see. We went to > villages famous for weaving rugs, and they saw my friend, and hugged > Roberto, so pleased that he'd returned. We got to see handicrafts of all > sorts. And, when Bob got to talking technicalities of weaving technigues, > he'd arrange for village children to take Psycho Sandy and I hiking to > sacred sites. 3 children took us to the home of the Goddess of the > Mountain, a goddess of a spirit world. And, it was the height of the > wildflower season. > > My mind is completely blown. > > If this interests you, visit Bob's Mexican Textile site at > > http://www.mexicantextiles.com > > He's paying for all this out of his own pocket, so make a donation if you > can. He is documentating a world that will cease to exist. And, check out > his latest picture of the month...of Rosa, the 15 year old beauty queen > whose house we were invited into. > > It was a learning experience. In more ways than one. I learned that in the > 5 years since the divorce, I've had a fucked up priority, in that, all I > cared about was chasing women. I hope I learned my lesson. > > Psycho Sandy sure is beautiful, and I learned a lot about food and plants > from her. But, I chose to ignore her many character flaws, and incredible > self-absorption and selfishness. The blinders came off. I feel like > crying, not for her, but for me having wasted so much time, so many years, > obsessed with women. I've now had 4 relationships, post-divorce, that each > lasted 6 months. Enough already. I need to chase my own dream. That said, > this is the first one where I'm the dumper rather than the dumpee, so I'm > not quite as devestated. But still, to delude oneself into thinking they'd > found the love of their life, while only finding an imbalanced person is > quite a let-down. > > I'm being very honest in this post, and I hope for 2 things...that you do > visit Bob's site, and that you don't use my honesty to give me a hard time > because we disagree about politics. > > I'm not the only over 50 year old divorced person here, confused, unsure, > and at times, in pain. I've learned a lesson, I hope. > > And, again, knowing rmgd, I hope I don't regret this post. > > In fact, I hope it might serve as a lesson for you other single 50 year > olds who are also chasing your own tail. > > Back to reality, I have hundreds of amazing digital photos on CD. If > anyone cares, I'm on dial-up, so I could mail this CD and you could put it > online for any interested rmgd'er. > > Joe Yes, that's a nice website your friend has, Joe. It must have taken a lot of work. I'm sorry that things didn't work out for you. You're right, though, love usually finds us when we aren't actively searching for it, at least in my experience. Nope, you're not the only divorced person here or the only one who has shared their pain publicly. In fact, I was told that I do that way too often and that my telling you all what's going on in my own life and asking for support or sympathy or whatever from the other people here is as predictable as a soap opera on tv. I hope that you'll soon be feeling better about it all. Concentrate on the other things in life that make you happy and love will find you when it's meant to happen. take care, kathy ------------------------------ From: "Richard Morris" Subject: Re: So who should open for Phil on NYE? Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:16:24 -0700 "Rupert" wrote in message news:1129860912.760718.240000@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > I'm thinking that the obvious choice is David Nelson Band! I mean, if > Barry and Mookie are playing with Phil that night, why not sandwich-in > a nice set of DNB for a couple of hours, first. > > Any other suggestions? > Nope, I think you have a great idea! Call them fuckers and tell them what you expect! R. ------------------------------ ** FOR YOUR REFERENCE ** The service addresses, to which questions about the list itself and requests to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, are as follows: Internet: dead-flames-request@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames-request%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames-request You can send mail to the entire list (and rec.music.gdead) via one of these addresses: Internet: dead-flames@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames End of Dead-Flames Digest ****************************** .