patricia

I really wish someone had archived that K******opolis thread. That was some of the funniest shit I have ever read on a jazz BBS. I will never look at Miracle Whip the same way again. Well, Jim, knowing our thread-originator's ego, I'm sure he saved every word of the ongoing story. Why not PM him and ask.

I tend to be a little wary of any cleaning agent, or cleaning machine, that may change the makeup of the older discs I have. I can't be sure what they were made of and how a chemical could possibly change the vinyl itself, for the worse. Once that happens, the disc would be wrecked. My whole reason for cleaning them is to simply get the gunk off them, some of it visible, some of it not. Usually it's just common dust, which seems to respond to my clear hot water method, as well as does any actual chunks of unidentifiable material. I' m not concerned with sterilizing them. My whole reason for cleaning them is to be able to play them. Period. I'm not slamming machines, or cleaning solutions, but I'm not concerned with getting every single thing off the disc, just that they are clean enough to play.

I'm afraid that I'm low-tech and use the dreaded very hot, running tap water, getting the gunk off my discs, lay them out on a lint-free dishtowel and pat them dry with a paper towel. I then stand them on their edges, til they're completely dry. Seems to work quite well.

Kids! It is now official: I'm an old-timer. I remember when on double lps, record one had side 1 & 4, and the second lp has 2 & 3. It was a bummer when on Mountian Jam off of Eat a Peach, after the bass solo, you had to take the record off and put another one on! Music lovers had to go through hell back in the day. No wonder our butts are wider these days!!! I blame the remote controls for everything electronic, making our lives almost totally sedentary. Once you're sitting down, you don't have to get up and walk more than once or twice, all evening. Does anyone remember those characters in Li'l Abner who had evolved to the point that they had no feet and legs, just helecopter roters, imbedded in their scalps??

Just tell us where and when. Brilliant Coroners You, McDonough, are delegated to verify the identity of the deseased. No point in celebrating, if it's another Kenny, with a surname starting with a "G". That would be too cruel!!

Found, at my "buck a disc" source, discs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 of the Reader's Digest "Great Memories" releases. Only disc 7 is missing. They are in their lightweight paperboard sleeves, but no hard cover. The records themselves look like they have never been played. I don't know why I bought them, except that it was kind of interesting to have a collectiion of all the hits from 1944 right up to the seventies. The first record, side 1, ranges from releases, by the original artists, from 1944-1957. They are not all jazz, but I'll live with that. They are the hits from each year, arranged in groups of twelve on each record. The first, for example, has: Side 1 Rum and Coca Cola-The Andrews Sisters I'll Get By-Harry James Buckle Down Winsock-Benny Goodman The Atchison Topeka and the Santa Fe-Kate Smith Sentimental Journey-Les Brown, Doris Day on vocals BUT, when you turn that record over, it's side SIXTEEN!! So, they're meant to be stacked on the spindle [a capitol offence in my house, growing up] and played, one after the other. Each record is like that. Record 2 has Side 15 on the flip side and so on. I've never seen that before. I would guess that these were offered in the seventies, but still, at a dollar each a pretty good deal, I think. The records are those thin, light ones, after the manufacturers switched to Dynagroove. I find the weight of the records from the thirties and forties to have a more satisfying heft. But, maybe that's just me.

I think our thread-originator is bent on world domination and this thread was sapping his intellectual and physical strength. After all, he's not a young man and can't be expected to juggle as many oranges as some of us whippersnappers. His glory days are behind him and he is like the "old ones" in ancient times, relating experiences which are now legend. [OK, OK, he and I are close to the same age, but he has more rough miles on his odometer than I do ] SHOCK AND AWE, but not in the way that Mr Rumsfeld meant. No blood. No death. Just wide eyes, snickers and challenges. I miss that. BTW, welcome back, GROPE.

I was actually surprised that I recognized Masterhit's work as mirror-printing, still in my night-attire and groggy. What astounded me was that our thread originator was cut off at the knees by it. The post itself was, as we now see, not as volatile as his usual contribution and shouldn't have been as effective as a thread-killer as it appears to be. I suspect that there is an underlying factor of which we are unaware. But, as you say, cudgels and rapiers at the ready. Never humbled. Never awed.

Well, if it were the infamous "dwarf-tossing" that was going on, for people's amusement in drinking establishments, some years ago, I'd assume that the little people were being exploited. But, this is a lot more benign and yet, kind of smarmy. Millions gawking, while you, as a little person, are simply trying to find Ms/Mr Right. Strange.

Yes, I remember the K******opolis thread. Like much of satire, it was misconstrued frequently, and taken offence at, more often than you would think. But, you're right, made me guffaw.

The producers of this program's motives may be pure, but I wonder what audience they intend to attract. It has all the earmarks of a circus side-show. Without the *dwarf* vs. average-size aspect, it's just another Dating Game.

Absolutely. Cats trust NOBODY. They let you live in *their* house. Dogs are favour-curriers, with a few exceptions. The very qualities that we admire in dogs, their loyalty, their obedience, are their downfall. Few cats can be trained to do anything that they hadn't already decided, on their own, to do. The reason that cats are never used as guides for the blind is that no blind person relishes the idea of being dragged up on top of the cupboards in the kitchen for a nap. So, trying anything *funny* with them is an invitation to an flurry of claws and fur.

It makes one wonder, doesn't it??? Like how come the first girl on the left only has one cheek moving??? Probably practice. It does make her a little more unique than the other ladies.

Thank you rockefeller center and Jazzmoose. Yes. All the major issues. No subject undiscussed. Love this board!!!

There was a thread on cannibalism??

You guys!!!

Hokey Smoke, Bullwinkle! That would tie in with some men's reluctance to have their male pets neutered. My theory is that they identify with male dogs and cats and other male animals and that their ambivilance toward women, hence female pets is carried forward. This would be much the same as some men thinking that rape of women and girls is not so heinous as rape of men and boys is. Again, an identification and personalization of the victim with themselves.

An impossible task and one which would be reluctantly undertaken, considering that there were so many undercurrents, that defy explanation. The mind boggles.

Well, Brad, perhaps another thread will be started. I have to admit that the sheer volume of this one was amazing. A new poster would have to set time aside to read it and get up to speed, if that was really possible. A FRESH START, by our thread originator would be interesting, but I suspect, like the rest of us, he has a life which demands his occasional attention.

Impossible to disagree. I don't think that any thread, except the *pinned* ones have as many posts. Usually that's a good thing. No blood was shed, and serves were vollied, no matter what the comment was. Gotta love that.

I reluctantly must agree, Clint. But, it had the most varied subject matter of any thread on the board. Much like a gathering of friends, the wine flowed and the topics being discussed became other topics, at the drop of a beanie. I do hope that our thread originator merely slammed the IRON DOOR in a brief fit of pique and will reconsider his rather abrupt departure. We never know what will happen, but since he had limited his input to this one thread, he painted himself into a corner. A shame, but, what can you do??........ [and crickets].

Not like all of us. I've quite often thought of those who have more than one identity on the same jazz website as fractioned, unnessesarily. Probably more difficult for them to maintain the separate personalities they've established, than it is for us to bother to worry about it. Our handles here are all we are, along with our personalities established through our opinions as expressed through our posts. Sure, there is leg-pulling going on, but essentially this is who we are, to each other, for better or worse. I, of course, are much taller than I appear in print.

Which I would expect you to do. My other access is a different ISP. Although I guess I could have posted from both, I didn't see the need. What would be the point of juggling more than one handle?? Silliness.

I see. So if I registered with my main access-provider, I could also register with free ones, like hotmail and mail.com. I'm an uncomplicated person, and for me, that would be a certain path to "The Three Faces Of Eve". I hardly have enough imagination for one personality. Interesting though.

Oh, that's OK. I just thought it was somebody who is able to fiddle and diddle with our posts............and I was right. The mirror-printing was actually kind of cool, although I shouldn't have to think, quite that early in the morning. I wasn't ticked, just curious. I also thought that it was impossible for a poster to register more than once, from the same computer, because we have to give our ISP, but have never felt the need to. I'm also registered, for emergency purposes only, from my daughter's computer, at another address, with another handle, but have never posted comments from any but my own. So, onward............