Re: Kate on Love-Hounds (Was: Re: the interpretive battlescontinue)

[Don <fastslow@idt.net>]

At 10:29 AM -0800 11-12-97, Mikael Jakonen wrote:
>Hi!
>
>lvermeer@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (Leslie Vermeer) writes:
>
>>Guys, guys, where's your (mandatory) KaTe Kontent? What's interesting to
>>speculate is whether *Kate* is a digest subscriber (this optimistically
>>assuming she looks at all)...
>>
>>Leslie
>
>This is a question that has come up before. And the last time
>it was asked the answer was this:
>
>If Kate Bush was a digest subscriber, the moderator would not
>tell us. Neither directly nor indirectly. It's a question of
>personal integrity.
>
>There's no reason to believe our moderator have changed his mind.
>But of course, we are still free to speculate...

If Kate's a digest subscriber, I'm disgusted. While it's not as bad as
reading the posts on rec.music.gaffa, I'd expect that her level of
committment would at least be high enough to get the posts as they are
coming out...like the 90(!) I got this morning.

- Don