|
Saturday, October 15, 2005 |
Welcome to the Level 42 Digest! Founded in 1993, this is a community of 469 fans of the band Level 42 and its music. The community interacts here via email, through many related web sites, and at periodic "Levelfest" gatherings held around the world. All subscribers are encouraged to participate and contribute new dialogue about their common interests. |
| Topics for Saturday, October 15, 2005 1. pink eye - Tom Foolery 2. Haunted Honeymoon - Andrew Goodwin 3. 42 Up - mikethepom |
| 1. pink eye |
||
| From: | Tom Foolery <grooveyardtom @ yahoo.com> |
|
| Date: | Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:07:02 -0700 (PDT) |
[top] |
| Could somebody define "socialist" for me? As used in this recent context, I'm a little confused. Is socialism the thing where the taxes are higher, but everybody gets decent health care and higher education opportunities, both of which cost the government so much that it doesn't have any money left over to start wars? I'm not sure AG really needed to highlight Lolita's experience. In case you missed it, he obviously knew she had mentioned it before. But these things don't happen unless someone brings up political points of reference, which I believe Lolita did. That's her right. But socialism? I'm not sure what you are getting at, unless you are trying to shed new light on "Mr. Pink." I've always believed that brief incursions into politics are appropriate for the digest, and more interesting, too. As long as you don't go attacking someone's intelligence, that is. -Tom T | ||
| 2. Haunted Honeymoon |
||
| From: | Andrew Goodwin <thenightfly83 @ yahoo.co.uk> |
|
| Date: | Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:44:32 +0100 (BST) |
[top] |
| > 1. Where have you been? > From: level43 @ juno.com > > Where have you been AG?! Lolita posted and article > written about her in the New Yorker that mentioned > her experience on 911. Yes. I was being ironic. You know irony - it's like silvery, only made of iron. > Don't you remember that article brought out the socialist attack dogs Bring back Senator McCarthy, that's what I say. > So called 'sideshow Bob' offered his point of view and > you trashed him and started calling him names (or at > least one so far). Well, actually I didn't, other than comparing him to Pat Robertson, which I would imagine in the context it was delivered he would probably take as a compliment. I took some of the points he made and responded to them, which I don't consider 'trashing' - it's called debate. If you don't believe me, read the Digest archive for September 7. Compare my response to the rather more succinct one which precedes mine. I can't remember the last time I 'trashed' someone, and find it really rather tiresome when lazy readers ascribe every response they find disagreeable to me. Sideshow Bob initially contributed one of the most repellent and distasteful pieces of writing it's ever been my misfortune to read on this Digest. Several people took issue with it, some of them very hostile, while my own reaction was mostly one of wry bemusement. His response to those reactions was a wild ramble of such myopic nationalism that it was impossible not to laugh. I mean really, look at this: "But you all can go to bed and not worry because you know that America will take care of its own (even if its not with the precision and expertise that you expect) and that no matter how much we are hated and resented, if you really need the USA and its resources, even if you don't have vast oil fields, George Bush or whoever is President will be there for you..." It was so hilarious that your own NRA loving, Commie-fearing tirade of the same day - concluding with the gloriously bizarre "I'm at the point now where I don't need europe for anything. I certainly can't find any of your products in stores here" - passed sadly almost without notice. Incidentally, regular viewers of The Simpsons will know that Sideshow Bob is one of the most refined and eloquent characters. So maybe I meant it as a compliment. Or maybe it's that, you know, metally thing. Or maybe I just couldn't think of another nickname apart from 'That bloke Bob'. > I think the funniest part is that you think you're brilliant. Do I really? Do you have any evidence for this wild assumption? Or could it be that you're simply trashing me? AG PS I'm certain Lolita is a) smart enough to have taken my line in the spirit in which it was intended, and b) perfectly capable of fighting her own battles - if indeed she deems there to be a battle worth fighting. ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com | ||
| 3. 42 Up |
||
| From: | mikethepom <mikethepom @ yahoo.com> |
|
| Date: | Fri, 14 Oct 2005 20:58:58 -0700 (PDT) |
[top] |
| Tom Foolery wrote: Speaking of something of the kind, I just finished showing "42 Up" to my high school psychology class, and I was wondering if this is the year of "49 Up?" Anybody know, or care? I care. And I'm reliably informed that "49 Up" is currently in production. Great concept and show. Looking forward to seeing the latest on Neil. Best ~ Mike (Sydney City Milkman) __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com |
||
| End of Level 42 Digest (web edition) | ||
Please note: you are viewing the web version of today's Level 42 Digest mailing.
This content was distributed via email to subscribers at approximately 10:00 GMT (5:00am EST/EDT)
this morning.
A/B Testing, Split Testing, and Multivariate Testing for Landing Page Conversion Rate Optimization Please note that by viewing or posting messages to the Level 42 Digest, you agree to be bound to the terms and policies located at the Terms Of Use web page.
|
||