Reactions

[rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)]

Jimmy Fingerle responds to all those DIDS:

> Man alive, I am _OVERJOYED_ at the reaction to my asking for everyone's
> DIDs.  I really believed that most of you would list the box set as
> eight of the ten, just so you could demonstrate your commitment to the
> "cause".  I was wrong!

"Cause"?  I like Kate, but come on!  Love-Hounds doesn't enlist or draft
supporters.

I wonder, as you do, J., how many other Love-Hounds there are out there.
Mr. Moderator -- the floor moves for a roll call, if you please.

Somebody else using my name somehow bounced a piece of mail back to the
digest; perhaps it was bruce@munnari.oz.au or some such.  Good luck with
next try!  (Or perhaps that was the sound of Internet barfing...)

Bob Jones (jones@ohstpy.mps.ohio-stat) gets to answer the following
question in response to his post:

> Given a head start of about 1 year (in an inertial frame) and linearly
> accelerating at a rate of about g (=10m/s^2), you outrun photons. One
> side effect is you lose radio contact from the greatly redshifted
> signals sent out after you.

In what universe do you outrun photons?

Another apparent admirer of e e cummings, woj, writes

> just to be a pain, is elitism all that bad? as long as you do get snobbish
> about what you listen to ("KaTe is better'n mariah carey! nyah nyah!"), i
> do not think that elitism in music is a bad thing. i'd much rather like
> KaTe than the new kids for example. am i snobbish? no. am i elitist? well,
> maybe. but so what?

I kind of agree with you as long as that doesn't entail forcing your
opinions down someone else's throat, which I believe you were getting at.

> on the other hand, who's to say that the kew kids' goals for their music
> is more lofty than KaTe's?

I do.  And what, by the way, does smou stand for?