BellGab.com Archive

The 'ethers' can accomodate an infinite number of carrier-waves. If one has a dial. Oh . . . but wait . . . nobody has a TUNER under their personal control, much, anymore. Right.  So, never mind. right. yah. Everyone is only a RECEIVER, with nothin' to say OVER AN INFINITE medium. Apologies.

So, all who read 'coastgab' are supposed to regard parody as serious critique? If C2C is a joke, then the joke of a joke means . . . what? What does a parody of a parody amount to? Or a parody of a parody of a parody?  Are critics 'wannabe' A.M. radio managers? And such is somehow beyond attainment? Why? This 'market' is PENETRABLE. One thing sticks out from the mouths of doers: mature people don't complain.  They DO!

Quote from: Do you think it was angels? on December 22, 2010, 01:49:17 AM
As a programmer, I can tell you that we never know when to quit.  Therefore software reaches a peak of perfection, and then it goes downhill as excessive features are tacked on, dragging it down with bloat. Don't be afraid to stick with classic versions.  Newer is not always better.

Sounds good. So . . . .  of older stuff extant, suggest what is still good, what is still functional.

Atari died today they say. Atari-Writer was . . . though inflated by an egoistic co-creator . . . amongst the best tools ever created by man and fully functional WITHOUT A MOUSE.  A tool never fully divulged or appreciated.  Bastardization wasn't perfected by ATARI people.  Today, a model scattered to the four winds perhaps, I think shall be born again.

Quote from: ericdxx on January 03, 2013, 01:42:31 PM
I think he is great but two things
1. It's annoying that the he says "ok" to everything.
2. He has to ask more follow-up questions. That he should learn from Art Bell. When Bell doesn't understand he is not embarrassed he asks the follow-up questions until he gets it.

I understand your annoyance, but personally can allow some latitude regarding his habit of saying 'ok' since he is under pressure as a 'fill-in host'. He's obviously balancing several things at once.  I respect all these guys on that level of working live radio.  It is not an easy thing to pull off. After all, it isn't simply being a talking head.  It is a multi-tasking operation. No one gets a job like that without having gone through some prior hurdles. Many hurdles.

<p> It isn't quite fair to compare any host 'post-Bell' to Bell.  After-all, even Bell could be quite 'annoying' sometimes. "Concision" or awareness of 'breaks' makes even the best host apparently 'rude'.  These guys or gals in radio are always looking at the clock.  I admit that Bell seemed inordinately unconcerned about this concision thing, yet he respected it. He danced around it like a ballet master does with 'x'es on a floor. Bell seemed utterly unafraid.  Where he got this power, no one seems to know, but none following him seem to have mastered this fearlessness with as much grace.

I can only guess, like genius in so many other fields, one is either born with it or not. Or, maybe, he knows someone or is friends with someone in ways others are not.  I doubt the latter being a factor, believe the former more likely.

It seems a pun, but is unintended: art is art. Da Vinci evinced genius impossible to be inculcated by his instructors.  He became a teacher in latter years, yet none ever equaled, nor ever after compared.  The 'spark' of genius was Da Vinci's alone evidently. Unless we are mislead in thinking what we call 'his' isn't.

In the same way, I think, in Bell, was a highly evocative, in-garrulous, patient and listening interviewer. An 'interrogateur' if you will.

Not always. Sometimes, he too, would interrupt at the most in-opportune moments . . . according to a listener's perspective.  The most interesting sentence might be in formation which a listener is hanging onto, waiting for another word when Bell would interrupt and insist on some prior point being more fully delineated.  And, guess what? the hanging point would remain hanging forever unfinished. I can hear the thousand heads banging against the walls near their beds on such 'peccadilloes' or minor sins. Yet, believe it or not, they did accumulate. Yes, indeed, even the great Art Bell began to accumulate an annoyed number of 'faithful' followers. Begrudging followers.

People grew highly annoyed at the number of 'breaks'. Length of 'breaks'. Awareness of Art's apparent lack of interest in his guests, etc.

We are practically unaware of the work involved in radio. Entertained once, entertained always is our rule.  The effort involved in enjoyment of radio work is almost nil in comparison to the amount of work involved in production. These people do, actually, earn their checks.

End of Part I

As far as 'not fit for purpose': what do we suppose is 'purpose'. It is very obvious what 'purpose' is for C2Cam.  I happen to agree with what I think you mean with regard to 'purpose'. 'Bizniz' and such are only sometimes conjoined. Where-ever or when-ever curiosity and thirst for facts and understanding bump up AGAINST BIZNIZ or MONEY-MAKING: guess which side has the better odds of winning here-to-fore and which side has the better odds or 'favor' in terms of INVESTMENTS?

The good, the honest, will not actually withdraw from their trend based on these 'odds' or the advise of these 'touts'. As a matter of fact, despite what they say about the numbers of their 'listener-ship', it is very tiny in comparison to the global population. Of COURSE they want the listening audience to believe THEY rule the world. Like a spark in some punk. Yeast in some dough.

Yeah. Right. You believe that. You buy that. Buyer beware.

Just how stupid are you? That's what's being asked. And they think they know the answer.

Yer really dumb. Really stupid.  Ha ha ha ha is what they're saying all the way into your orchard. No longer yours.

And what has happened here? One might ask?

How many times robbed ere one sees robbers in the distance?

Quote from: NoMoreNoory on January 19, 2013, 07:57:39 AM
Perfect summary, Valdez!

Not least because we had a week in which three guests came on the show, each of whom have written a book.
Monday - James Stein: The Paranormal Equation
Tuesday - Linda Stasi: The Sixth Station
Thursday - Russ Dizdar: The Black Awakening
Prior to this week, Simple Snooron had a week's vacation. And yet, on each night, it was evident that he had read none of them. Had not even familiarised himself with them. He didn't refer to them, offer a personal response to the work, challenge them - just nothing apart from the standard cue-card enquiries such as 'Did you enjoy writing the book' and 'Was there anything you came across in your research that shocked/scared you?'. It's very common to hear presenters say 'You'll have to forgive me, but I only got my copy of the book yesterday and I haven't been able to spend as much time with it as I would have liked.', which is fair enough. From The Idiot: nothing. Complete indifference.

Rude. Lazy. Arrogant. Shoddy. Incompetent. Amateurish. Not fit for purpose.

That's called schtick on the fly. It is definitely NOT amateurish. It is a well known and practiced method of what is called in the 'bizniz' a 'brush-off'. Insincerity, perhaps. Many might say dis-honesty. But if the aim is a 'brush-off', it can't really be called dishonesty. A 'brush-off' is a brush-off. What we might read 'between the lines' is what we get in this 'media'.  Pseudo-sincerity.  Groucho Marx would have been a great host for 'Coast-to-Coast-am'.  It is a like . . . how does the expression go? . . . shooting fish in a barrel? The 'best' in the biz must appear to be as idiotic as the subscribers who make the boat float. Or, like, DUH, the boat will sink. Tada! How bright do we need to be?

I had a point. Made a point. Looked at my point. Re-read my point. Didn't understand my point. Questioned my point. Argued with myself about my point. Got into a fight with myself about the point. Ended up too bruised to type my point. Still believed my point important, but then forgot what my point was. Erased everything I ever wrote about my point. But still think my point is correct or was correct, or will someday be correct. 
And ended up with the same as ever: what's the deal?

"I'm making money now, and yer paying for it.A.M."

I'm looking forward to all the people who are going to slow speech down and derive information from the little 'glitch' in this interview.  And how C2C is going to capitalize on the 'spookiness' of people's perception of the 'moving mouth' of the 'icon' of "Veronica" as viewed on C2C derived from Stasi's photos. This animation didn't last long. How cheap. BTW: of the two images provided, the right-hand image is the one extant. The other 'image' of the closed mouth "Veronica towel" is the 'phenomenon' presented there. This latter was what George claimed several e-mailers said 'moved'.   I believe it possible some did see such 'movement'.  A form of 'toggling'. Land-line connected viewers wouldn't see it. DSL viewers might have caught this . . . if they took the time to look at it. What a pathetic and desperate act.  I'd only advise anyone who saw 'the mouth move' to study "Mission Impossible" tv series. Yer 'chain' is being yanked.  Buyer beware.

Radio hosts of every stripe existed for some time before any organized method of control existed.  Once it was realized that 'talk' via radio could be a 'weapon', methods of control of frequencies or counter 'talk' or 'talks' proliferated. Blocking frequencies and standardization of channels became issues the general public simply didn't understand. The concern of the military was naturally defensive against this 'science' or 'radio'. The natural concern was to have fealty to the circumscribed delineations of borders.  'USA' versus 'Canada'; Canada versus Russia or the over-seas root of Canada: England.  Yet Russia is closer to Canada than England. Yet 'radio' abolishes distances. 'Talk' is deemed 'propaganda'. A 'war of words'. A war of 'philosophy of life'. Hmm.   Geographical variety. Thought-variety. Political variety.   Spectrum of options for choice: not allowed? What's the deal? Information is key. Is it not? Why is ability to kill anyone or any group able to freely think deemed the better form of 'choice'? Not that I think killing accomplishes anything.  A strange form of action. Self-killing. Hesitation seems to be the last resort.  As if 'power' begins to think: might have been wrong. Might have erred. Sometime now ruing. Ruing long past repair. Only alteration of time, itself, can fix what reflection now deems past actions, ill.  Memory, alone, such fix can fulfill. Ignoring that, all repair is nix. Then woe.

I'm thinking Bell wants to be left alone. I don't have a problem with his wishes.

So . . . this site no longer talks about what has been on a show just heard? It's 10/18-19/2012. What's this site about then? Just past shows? Why isn't there a category of 'tonight's show'? Can, someone . . . help me?

Er, well, I think it reasonable to entertain the idea that some very ancient element of life can exist in which memory obtains, enabling comparisons of past choices that, obviously, were not terminal but also not, necessarily, preferable.   If any action were truly terminal, there would be no memory. No regrets.

Who has not rued some action?  What conscious person hasn't thought: 'if only' they had not done this or that, how the outcome might be different? This ruing or regret is retrospective, based on memory and possession of new information, perhaps an expanded emotional knowing.

Nevertheless, we have this ancient saw: 'live, and learn'. This, if anything, puts 'learning' at a premium.  I think learning or expansion of personal knowing at a very high value.  And at basis, that is not intellectual. It is emotional. And, life, I truly believe, is at basis emotional.  And the nature of what life does the least harm to or attacks the least boils down to what works best.  And mutual love, I think, works best. I make no conclusions, but I'm pretty sure that any form of life that resorts to warfare or belligerence has pretty good odds of being sequestered and left alone. Run from.  Starved.

Now if life is 'all knowing' at the outset, how could such belligerence ever get a foot-hold? It must be elementary. Life learns the better mode.

Some portion, as of yet, have not. And if consciousness has anything to do with anything: would one not think, rather than doom such atoms of such motives to extinction, they might be taught into the greater bounty of present learning?

That being a position, the big question will obviously be: what is the majority? What the minority? The obvious answer is that ignorance, so far as conscious life is concerned, is by and far the majority.

Why? Because consciousness is a resultant, not a primal cause.  Life is primal. And life has no concept of 'sin'.  'Sin' is entirely a concept of consciousness.  Therefore, all war is about competition between forms of consciousness. Well, if time-space and matter-energy are infinite, why be cheap? The best form of consciousness will be that which is most hungry to learn, least vulnerable to attack or harm by seminal forms of consciousness and the least harmful to any seminal states or forms of consciousness.

Yet life is most primal. Exists before consciousness. The best consciousness is that which gives life the greatest freedom and does the least harm to it. 

Quote from: Jasmine on August 24, 2012, 09:15:20 AM
And yet they adamantly profess individuality and rationale whilst denying their responsibility and choices willingly made. Conscious deflection and genuflecting at the altars of a greater cause. Deviation and sociological deviance as social "norms" are subject to multiple definitions and subsequently violated, time and again.

Albeit I mourn and am outraged at the silencing of the voices of women both past and present, I find solace in the presence of the living and breathing anima and animus present in all humans. To a very real extent, the feminine archetype has been heard by ages past and today and tomorrow, through Paine, Jefferson and countless other men. The feminine voice is heard.

Yes.

Quote from: Jasmine on August 24, 2012, 08:20:03 AM
And, as often stated, discretion is the better part of valour.

My Achilles' heel (at times) is sound articulation. Most frustrating, I must say. However, if the listener or reader can correctly discern (and take the time to discern), then all the more satisfying, and all the more grateful am I.

I am, too.

Quote from: Jasmine on August 24, 2012, 08:17:09 AM
Like the ancient Romans and those long before them and after, when supplies of bread run low, glorious circuses (the quintessential euphemism) are created across the globe.

The honest record might be somewhat variant from this saw. Propagating a false report of 'dearth' can drive the value of common things up beyond their actual value. So a lie, by any form of reasoning or for any purpose, is still a lie.  A naive people will, by and large, react to and succumb to such lies rather than expend personal effort to confirm or dis-confirm them . . . to their detriment. Yet once burned, if they survive such a burn, will no longer be naive.  How amazing that naivety returns!  Former experience has somehow been subverted! The obvious suspects are: interference with oral knowledge; some form of 'education' denigrating such information. Ergo: dis-information or dissipative 'information'. Americans broke the back of English forces on "Kings  Mountain". This battle breathed a fresh breath of life into Washington and the American resistance to the arbitrary will of the 'crown'. Yet, how many American children know anything about this? What was the actual impetus of those people? In fact, they were not that keen on Washington.  The King's Mountain event might represent something more important than the modern-day myth as to what the "USA" is thought to be about.  It isn't about an apposite force of power, one good the other bad.  It might be seen to be about the uniquely human quality of disgust for being compelled. Being forced. Being enslaved. Enslaved by circumstances or the wills of equals.  We must object. We will always try to find something else, some escape. Some freedom.  Circumstances might make equals even do what eventually ends up enslaving both parties. Locke, Paine, Jefferson and all those people, including many unsung women thinkers and writers, saw this problem of momentum of prior practices that may have been 'reasonable' in earlier epochs, but which in light of understanding of greater resources than known before, were now defunct.   The same obtains today as obtained before.  If only we could humbly submit to the idea: we are learning and don't know it all. Yet the dogma of prior days has always been: there is an 'all knowing' state. How embarrassing. To think, even their deity, had to learn.

i think your thoughts are rational and also think 'rambling' thoughts are valuable.  the scope of what there is to consider and to judge or measure being as vast as what they are, 'rambling' isn't a fault, but practically obligatory . . . just to cover their scope.  I appreciate every word. I appreciate any word whatever. Pro or con. They inform my discretion.

To McPhallus:

So you think "pod-casts" may be the 'back-fence' or future of sharing info?  What is the ease of tuning into them or how does one to get them? . . . I don't even know what they are. What are they?

Quote from: McPhallus on August 24, 2012, 06:44:31 AM
Because it's background noise, a distraction.  Something that cuts out the silence that threatens to drown us in our own thoughts and internal dialogue.  And it's a common ground, something to talk about.  And, increasingly, an anachronism.

As for "free," there are podcasts for that, where literally anything goes.  At least as long as the podcaster is willing to do it for "free" since the commercial value may be limited. 

I'm in agreement about the idea that personal thoughts can be a 'trap'. Okay, how can anyone get out of such a trap via an intentionally manipulative maze? What if the 'alternative' of internal reasoning is simply a channel towards something your own conscience, otherwise, would not allow you to do?

Do you know anything about hypnosis? Propaganda?

Our national creation is not a simple story.  We know this because at one point we came face to face with the dichotomy of two streams of conscience and thought. One stream of thinking lead to a rationalization of separation from a 'Crown'; and the other saw slavery of human beings (or as they justified it, non-human beings) as a reasonable means for wealth . . . crown related or not.

Both streams of thought continue unto this day.

Both streams have their 'champions'.

Washington, Franklin and Jefferson envisioned an America in which all citizens had grounds enough to grow all they needed and trade and work based on the joy of creation and sharing. Their mortal enemy Hamilton, the foster-father of the Bushes and all the rich-sons-of-bitches wearing blue-suits and red ties wanting to remarry into british monarchy and repatriate into that system of the crown, have continued to push for slavery and class distinctions. A caste system.  One side wanted equal wealth and education highly disparate from the 'old world order', the other side wants the old world order to continue.

What happens?  The old world order adopts the phrase "New World Order".  A phrase once rebellious has now been co-opted and means the exact opposite. Confusion is the name of the game or the psy-ops game.

It amounts to the same thing: a limited intellect and limited emotional maturity reacts to an advancing consciousness.

I see no reason to be retributive.  I think it better to laugh. And to forget. Attention is food for a bad seed. To forget is the best form of forgiveness.  The cow of life has no idea who or even when someone broke her legs, one after the other. Modern internetters have one leg to stand on. Better use it to the best advantage and not be like what they hate.

There are not anywhere near enough channels for the hungry ears extant.  What has, HAS to happen is independent proliferation of voices with relevant information AND opinion so that the 'radio dial' can have a spectrum of choices as to both what they would LIKE to hear as well as what they do not like.  Otherwise there is no possibility of freedom of choice. There can be no 'selection' nor possibility of a 'vote'.

Right now, we have no 'vote'. We are restricted to a highly restricted spectrum that amounts to nothing more than deciding between evils.  Less evil, greater evil.  It still amounts to just evils as a spectrum. Or should I say a spectrum of just one opinion.  Left or right of a single limited scope of ideation?

For goodness' sake, we ought to have open channels for all possible voices, but instead we are reduced to 'closest matches'.

This is not what the USA is based upon. We were, once, brave. Devoted to a belief that kindness and justice and honesty could be a principle of a new culture. Yet some still maintain nothing of the kind can proceed without slavery. Imagine that. That's what's still going on.

I love the fact we are able to talk about an idiotic and obviously controlled medium. I like that we talk about it. What mystifies me is that, beyond mocking it for the joys of seeing how silly it is, we still think we're going to change it while still listening to it. Are you frickin' kidding me? But the answer will always be: what else is there to do? What else to listen to? As IF, by complaining, the enemies of free radio will EVER succumb to public dissatisfaction!  No! They are always going to ignore popular demand or desires since popular desires is for free information.   Free entertainment. Free energy. Everything free. People free.   Abundance. These people don't understand this urge. They only see limits on everything and taking advantage of limited resources and sequestering every resource for their limited population. The 'listeners' are a threat-factor. Factual information has to be reduced to doubtfulness or some dichotomy of 'beliefs' so as to dissipate any accumulation of awareness of being USED and abused.

'Nothing is a coincidence' is the preferential phrase of the current 'master'.   Meaning means no meaning and information has some meaning far back in time or some forward intention. Nothing to bother about, no reason to deduce anything local or current.  It's 'Divine will'. go with the flow.

Okay, then why listen to the radio?

Great link, and thanks for that. I'm not sure what your point is though. The big problem for chemists, biochemists and physicists is defining 'life'. Current practices of any of these fields presumes only three fundamental or primal factors: time-space, matter and energy. Creationists want to introduce 'intelligence' or 'pre-design'. Life or some aspect of reactivity that is neither 'brainy' nor 'non-selective' is never considered as a fourth possible primal factor. Neither created, nor destroyed.   Evolution has to begin with life or a selective reactor before any possible series of 'choices' can begin. This concept means that life learns.  The the question becomes: what allows learning? Some structure has to evolve that can preserve memory of past events for the sake of comparison and judgement or some means to avoid past mistakes. The results can mean many false starts and perhaps total extinction of any developed form. Yet as long as 'life' is a primal principle.  A rather stupid or non-intellectual principle, any possible process will begin again. The only hope for any evolved form is that that form can utilize energy-matter and time-space to preserve memory. Hence knowledge.  It wouldn't have any idea what went on ere such structures allowed it to know.  It is no 'original creator', but it could create once it got the basics down for continuance.

Not one suggestion for 'improvement' to a proprietary conglomerate is going to accomplish a single god-damned thing.  Pirate radio stations, alone, can fix this problem. Out of pocket endeavors to emanate a multitude of voices that cover the entire spectrum of reaction to the world and personal opinions as well as actual 'news' or facts.   I think our brains are already doing this, but for the mentally challenged or deaf who need a machine for any voice to be taken seriously, personal radio is the only way.  It's not like the 'ether' is going to be crowded.  Look, now-a-days, most radios don't even have a dial.  They have 'buttons' and they move only to the strongest signal. You can't even tune into 'white noise'. Oh, gee, don't even have a choice to hear gibber-jabber.  Only proprietary 'talk/propaganda' channels. Fine.  If that's what you want, that's what you get. No 'wilderness' in the infinite bands of radiation out there.  Just earthly emanated jibber-jabber with predictable breaks for more jibber-jabber. I laugh.

A radio host burping on the air tells me a lot about just how much he respects his audience.  And that's what that idiot did. Turned him off. Never going to listen to his crap again. What an idiot.

I just don't understand why whom-so-ever orchestrates this venue, should take particular pains to have repeats of
Art Bell's most booring and annoying shows on Saturdays followed up by that MOST BOOORISH chap Ian Punnit.

Like we really need the pain.

Week-ends are supposed to be joyous times, the stuff of rest . . . not annoyance.  Brief as they are, what we need NOT
is annoyances.  Is this entertainment?

Why? Why!? the hell make us turn the radio off?  OFF! Ignore it!?? Wipe it from memory?

I'll be listening to my recordings of bagpipes over which I have full control. As we also do of the
radio dial. And the on/off switch.

What is the idea behind making the latter preferable to the prior? How does that make money?

Quote from: Rico999 on August 26, 2011, 11:00:37 AM
Did anyone catch what the sick fuck Noron said during the "news" segment with regard to yet another gruesome story about a dead child?  The one I'm referring to of course, is the one where the family pet python escaped from it's "aquarium"to strangle a two year old in it's bed.

Then, Ralphie told us that while he likes pets, he personally wouldn't have a snake and that if you do, "yuh just gotta keep it locked in the "aquarium."

This guy really is beyond stupid.  And what's with the murdered/abused/mutilated child stories in the "news" all the time, anyway?  He's stupid, egotistical and SICK.

You are a front-loader, in my opinion.

You ask a question,  but your 'question' is a kind of propoganda.

Hey man! Catch the 'wave'.

BE a  bullshit artist if that is what you wanna  be! By all means!

I for one am not  buying it.

Take yer vinegar and drink to the fullest draft.

Until we can do  better, we ought not carp about the poor selection we
find at the market.

Do  better.  Be the  better radio host.

What? That's imposs?

It's easy to carp.

Is this 'coastgab' or 'carp-gab'?

We like your use of the term "numbnuts", an old Portland, Oregon expression.  Like 'DUH' (not DOH! as Matt Grenich, another
Portland-Oregoner who went to Lincoln High, uses it in his cartoon show "The Simpsons" . . . like, DUH!)

So your descent into criticism of Linda seems a little like: DUH PAL, she has to keep the money flowing and the typical
audience member of C2C WANTS to hear crap like that.  Like, when you're in the grocery line, and see The New Yorker, The
NY TIMES and then: ta da! THE WEEKLY WORLD NEWS!

Baby! That's ENTERTAINMENT!

So give me a break about knocking Linda.  She is A-grade numero uno on C2C, just like George, George Knapp and the other
hosts who sit in sometimes (NOT mr. REALLY BORING: Ian Pun(d)it.  You wanna carp? Carp about the stuttering eternal
parentheticalist Ian.

I LOVES LINDA.  She's Lovery.

When they cover themselves and don't do it as we remember the best version. This business of being "creative" with
a standard so that it cannot evoke the memories that go along with that song: ruins the song, doesn't evoke any
old memories, and creates a new B A  D memory. Sorry, whomever you are-so-ever: lost my fandom.

Great collection of photos and good writing description of it all.  I was there by reading it. Way cool!

Well, I do find the show surprising enough that I'm excited to find out where it is going tonight or any night I have the
time or energy to listen.  I work around the time it comes on, as a writer, my favorite hours of deep thought and some lightness
doesn't hurt and interesting subject matter doesn't hurt either.  If I go deeply into my work and the radio fades out in
my attention, you can be sure the topic isn't all that important . . . and that does happen more often than not.

Still, I wouldn't want not to be there.

And I have come to appreciate the positive aspects of George and the parts I can respect and even admire.  I see it as a lot
like grade school or even kindergarten where the new kid gets a little picked on or 'hazed' and finally the gange accepts
and needs the new kid.

I like George.  Like him and even need, yes I said need, to hear his voice atimes.  I like George Knapp, but wouldn't call
him right now my 'radio friend'.  George is because he's there.  If we don't like the way things are, we can keep silent and
grouse about 'the idiot' all we want, but if we haven't lifted a finger to inform our 'idiot's' discression: ?

So I write George, always have, with comments about the shows I've liked and the things I didn't.  We need to be  balanced to
get a balanced person's attention.  A RAVE LETTER LOOKS LIKE SHOUTING (you recall the internet courtesy tutorial right?)

I would like to see more discussions about topics, and keep the funny stuff about George as a different form of intertainment
and I admit freely anagrammy's page on that is VERY intertaining. . . (still trying to visualize a 'mean baby'.)

I like our discussions of topics.  And like I've written here  before, it is a huge site and exploring all the avenues and
byways and niches here is going to take a lot of time.  I'm fascinated by this site and hope it sticks around for a long time.

Roger