At 4:13 AM -0400 10/7/01, GAmoore@... wrote:
>Maybe we need a L-0T-OT list. Or maybe we have to label some things in
>the OT list as "way OT" or just "OT".
Or maybe we need fewer Chiefs and more Indians.
In addition to everything else we fight about do we also have to
fight about what we are going to fight about?
When your band finishes a rehearsal or gig or session and goes out
for a drink do you tell anyone who is not talking shop to shut up?
If they give you their take on current events do you tell them that
you have other friends that you can to about that stuff with and you
don't want to hear about it from them? Do you forbid them to expand
on their theories regarding the strange correlation between sun spots
and red jelly bean production in the latter half of the 20th century?
*I* find it interesting to learn about the people I have been talking
to on the LUG. For example I find I have a new respect and interest
in logicbaby and am thankful that I have the chance to correspond
with real live Palestinian and see him as a real person with real
interests that I share rather than just another victim or protagonist
in another awful news story. Personally it has been a real help in
restoring my sympathy from the damage done to it by the news.
Off Topic is by nature a broader category than On Topic. It is
pointless to try to define it is it not?
We are living in interesting times and sometimes these *times* are
even more interesting for us than the latest mic or speaker. What
kind of people would we be if they weren't? I truly hope that that
changes soon. But until it does (and even after for that matter) I
think people should be allowed to speak about the things that are
heavy on all our minds without getting hassled by Frank Koistra.
--
Dennis Gunn
Mightyjohn@...
check out MIGHTY JOHN HENRY's album "hot air head"
info at
http://www.twics.com/~mightyjo/home.htmlMessage
Re: [L-OT] Re: logic OT- this message is very strange.
2001-10-07 by Dennis Gunn
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.