Errors-To: owner-tmbg-digest@tmbg.org Reply-To: tmbg-digest@tmbg.org Sender: owner-tmbg-digest@tmbg.org Precedence: bulk From: owner-tmbg-digest@tmbg.org To: tmbg-digest@tmbg.org Subject: tmbg-list Digest, Volume 43, Number 25 tmbg-list Digest, Volume 43, Number 25 Wednesday, 25 July 2001 Topics: TMBG: More Live Journal hoopla TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re:TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re[2]: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re[2]: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Re[2]: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla TMBG: Mink Car on cdnow Re: TMBG: Misheard lyrics Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re: TMBG: Mink Car on cdnow TMBG: Re: tmbg-list Digest #43-24 TMBG: Weird Dial-A-Song Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Re: TMBG: Misheard lyrics TMBG: Spinner.com TMBG: weird das TMBG: Dial-A-Song hackers - was Re: weird das TMBG: Re: tmbg-list Digest #43-24 Re: TMBG: weird das Re: TMBG: Dial-A-Song hackers - was Re: weird das TMBG: Why the world sucks Administrivia: For all administrative issues, such as change of address, withdrawal from the list, etc., send a message to the following address: ÁÁowner-tmbg-digest@tmbg.org The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors. tmbg-list is compiled with Digest 3.7b (John Relph ). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:01:56 EDT From: FreeMiniPops@aol.com Subject: TMBG: More Live Journal hoopla Message-ID: It appears that the real Flansy has turned up now: http://www.livejournal.com/users/johnflansburgh And, of course, there's still the the other Flansburgh at www.livejournal.com/users/john_flansburgh Don't forget the band of Dans, either! www.livejournal.com/users/bandofdans Linnell only made a few posts: http://www.livejournal.com/users/john_linnell Am I the only one really amused by all of this? Well, maybe... - - - A L E X ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:39:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Piontek Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Message-ID: <20010724133926.89301.qmail@web13807.mail.yahoo.com> --- Colleen Anne McClanahan wrote: > Alex: > | It appears that the real Flansy has turned up now: > | http://www.livejournal.com/users/johnflansburgh > > Personally, I don't think this one is real either. > I'm such the skeptic. Hehe. Despite everything and anything, I firmly believe that they are *both* real. -Adam __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:40:42 EDT From: PosterKid1@aol.com Subject: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <98.18141f9f.288ef0fa@aol.com> In a message dated 7/24/01 6:10:35 AM, KarinH writes: << I do think the Kid is reacting more violently on Linnell's behalf than Linnell himself would. >> Unless you know him well (and I'm not discounting that possibility), that is pure speculation on your part. Also, imputations of violence on my behalf are greatly exaggerated. <> You are reducing my argument to absurdity. My main point is the busybodyness involved in posting someone else's name to such a list. Mitch Harding writes: <> No, it is absolutely *not* a separate issue. In fact, it was precisely what I said. <> No argument there whatsoever. But what I'm saying is, what on earth possesses someone to take it upon themselves to gratuitously spread the information further? This is the real concern of my larger argument. Someone who does that is a busybody, pure and simple. Laurence Solomon's observation that Linnell might indeed be an agnostic was downright... Solomonic. Putting Linnell on the atheists list might be inaccurate in the first place: OK, he might not believe in capital-G God, but who knows, maybe he believes in something else. John Ferrer writes: <> If someone needs to have their religious convictions validated by a celebrity, I truly feel sorry for them. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:09:52 -0500 From: Mitch Harding Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <3B5D9DD0.DCAEA8BE@tmbg.org> >> I agree it might not be very polite to stop him on the street, given that >> they're not crazy about random fan interaction, but that's a separate issue. > No, it is absolutely *not* a separate issue. In fact, it was precisely > what I said. And I still feel it is a separate issue. In one case, Linnell is giving out information openly and knowingly to the public. In the other case, Linnell happens to be in public, but has not consented to an interview or even indicated interest in one. I can't see how you're equating them. > No argument there whatsoever. But what I'm saying is, what on earth > possesses someone to take it upon themselves to gratuitously spread the > information further? This is the real concern of my larger argument. > Someone who does that is a busybody, pure and simple. What makes this spread of information gratuitous when, say, having the Library of Congress online is not gratuitous? Of what nature must the information be in order to escape the classification "gratuitous"? Is it because it is data about an individual? If so, does it likewise follow that we shouldn't have published biographies? Should doctors, when being educated, not study so-called "case studies" about real patients? At what point does it become busybodyness? It's not clear to me. > Laurence Solomon's observation that Linnell might indeed be an agnostic > was downright... Solomonic. Putting Linnell on the atheists list might be > inaccurate in the first place: OK, he might not believe in capital-G God, > but who knows, maybe he believes in something else. That's true. But this is a different problem -- the issue here isn't whether publicly given information should be shared, it's to what extent must such information be confirmed before being made available. > If someone needs to have their religious convictions validated by a > celebrity, I truly feel sorry for them. Whether you feel sorry for them or not, most people look up to other people as they are growing up. Call them heroes, idols, guides, whatever. You can make is sound cheap by saying they're having their beliefs validated by someone else, sure. And if you feel sorry for them, fine. I think that's an overreaction. What's wrong with having someone you look up to? Mitch www.mitcharf.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:21:10 -0400 From: karinh@sterl.com Subject: Re:TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <3309173228@sterl.com> Hey, Kid, as you may have noticed, I was agreeing with you that it was a dumb, pushy, self-important thing to do. All I said in your direction was that you might have been over-reacting just a tad. Speculation and Reductions to Absurdity are my stock in trade. As a 2nd Degree Devil's Advocate, I am pledged to speculate and point out potential absurdities. The use of the word "violence" in this case does not refer to physical violence, but the strength of your reaction, so stop impugning me with accusations of imputations. My whole point was the sheer pointlessness of the basis of this whole argument. What possible impact could it have on anyone's life whether Linnell believes in a god or not? If that list had said that he liked Lionel trains, or Bavarian truffles, or Jim's Big Ego, it might have caused someone to experience something they might not have, otherwise. But no one's stand on the pros & cons of deities was affected one tiny bit. Except maybe mine, since if there is no god then my status as 2nd Degree Devils Advocate is probably pretty much obsolete.... Karin H ** FREE THE EXPO 67 ** ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Author: PosterKid1@aol.com Date: 07/24/01 11:40 AM In a message dated 7/24/01 6:10:35 AM, KarinH writes: << I do think the Kid is reacting more violently on Linnell's behalf than Linnell himself would. >> Unless you know him well (and I'm not discounting that possibility), that is pure speculation on your part. Also, imputations of violence on my behalf are greatly exaggerated. > You are reducing my argument to absurdity. My main point is the busybodyness involved in posting someone else's name to such a list. Mitch Harding writes: > No, it is absolutely *not* a separate issue. In fact, it was precisely what I said. > No argument there whatsoever. But what I'm saying is, what on earth possesses someone to take it upon themselves to gratuitously spread the information further? This is the real concern of my larger argument. Someone who does that is a busybody, pure and simple. Laurence Solomon's observation that Linnell might indeed be an agnostic was downright... Solomonic. Putting Linnell on the atheists list might be inaccurate in the first place: OK, he might not believe in capital-G God, but who knows, maybe he believes in something else. John Ferrer writes: > If someone needs to have their religious convictions validated by a celebrity, I truly feel sorry for them. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:21:11 -0400 From: "lees" Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <200107241221.AA324927752@megahits.com> Hasn't this rediculous thread gone on long enough? This is supposed to be a forum where INTELLECTUALS meet with other intellectuals. ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: PosterKid1@aol.com Reply-To: PosterKid1@aol.com Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:40:42 EDT > >In a message dated 7/24/01 6:10:35 AM, KarinH writes: > ><< I do think the Kid is reacting more violently on Linnell's behalf than >Linnell himself would. >> > > Unless you know him well (and I'm not discounting that possibility), that >is pure speculation on your part. Also, imputations of violence on my behalf >are greatly exaggerated. > ><that list is going to have people pounding on his door at 3 a.m.,>> > > You are reducing my argument to absurdity. My main point is the >busybodyness involved in posting someone else's name to such a list. > >Mitch Harding writes: > ><they're not crazy about random fan interaction, but that's a separate issue.>> > > No, it is absolutely *not* a separate issue. In fact, it was precisely >what I said. > ><to be top secret.>> > > No argument there whatsoever. But what I'm saying is, what on earth >possesses someone to take it upon themselves to gratuitously spread the >information further? This is the real concern of my larger argument. >Someone who does that is a busybody, pure and simple. > > Laurence Solomon's observation that Linnell might indeed be an agnostic >was downright... Solomonic. Putting Linnell on the atheists list might be >inaccurate in the first place: OK, he might not believe in capital-G God, >but who knows, maybe he believes in something else. > >John Ferrer writes: > ><presumably other Atheists, to see and say, "Oh, well cool, that guy's one >too.">> > > If someone needs to have their religious convictions validated by a >celebrity, I truly feel sorry for them. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:30:49 -0400 From: karinh@sterl.com Subject: Re[2]: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <517162581@sterl.com> Where in the bylaws of the list does it specify INTELLECTUALS ?? This is America, and the Internet. Neither one has any intellectual requirements for membership. And I haven't heard anybody call someone a big stinky poopy-head yet, so I think we're still within bounds... Karin H ** FREE THE EXPO 67 ** ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Author: lees Date: 07/24/01 12:21 PM Hasn't this rediculous thread gone on long enough? This is supposed to be a forum where INTELLECTUALS meet with other intellectuals. ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: PosterKid1@aol.com Reply-To: PosterKid1@aol.com Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:40:42 EDT > >In a message dated 7/24/01 6:10:35 AM, KarinH writes: > ><< I do think the Kid is reacting more violently on Linnell's behalf than >Linnell himself would. >> > > Unless you know him well (and I'm not discounting that possibility), that >is pure speculation on your part. Also, imputations of violence on my behalf >are greatly exaggerated. > ><>that list is going to have people pounding on his door at 3 a.m.,>> > > You are reducing my argument to absurdity. My main point is the >busybodyness involved in posting someone else's name to such a list. > >Mitch Harding writes: > ><>they're not crazy about random fan interaction, but that's a separate issue.>> > > No, it is absolutely *not* a separate issue. In fact, it was precisely >what I said. > ><>to be top secret.>> > > No argument there whatsoever. But what I'm saying is, what on earth >possesses someone to take it upon themselves to gratuitously spread the >information further? This is the real concern of my larger argument. >Someone who does that is a busybody, pure and simple. > > Laurence Solomon's observation that Linnell might indeed be an agnostic >was downright... Solomonic. Putting Linnell on the atheists list might be >inaccurate in the first place: OK, he might not believe in capital-G God, >but who knows, maybe he believes in something else. > >John Ferrer writes: > ><>presumably other Atheists, to see and say, "Oh, well cool, that guy's one >too.">> > > If someone needs to have their religious convictions validated by a >celebrity, I truly feel sorry for them. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:32:27 -0400 From: karinh@sterl.com Subject: Re[2]: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <1645025950@sterl.com> And anyway, the kid used the word "imputation", so your whole argument is moot. you big stinky poopy-head. ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Author: lees Date: 07/24/01 12:21 PM Hasn't this rediculous thread gone on long enough? This is supposed to be a forum where INTELLECTUALS meet with other intellectuals. ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: PosterKid1@aol.com Reply-To: PosterKid1@aol.com Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:40:42 EDT > >In a message dated 7/24/01 6:10:35 AM, KarinH writes: > ><< I do think the Kid is reacting more violently on Linnell's behalf than >Linnell himself would. >> > > Unless you know him well (and I'm not discounting that possibility), that >is pure speculation on your part. Also, imputations of violence on my behalf >are greatly exaggerated. > ><>that list is going to have people pounding on his door at 3 a.m.,>> > > You are reducing my argument to absurdity. My main point is the >busybodyness involved in posting someone else's name to such a list. > >Mitch Harding writes: > ><>they're not crazy about random fan interaction, but that's a separate issue.>> > > No, it is absolutely *not* a separate issue. In fact, it was precisely >what I said. > ><>to be top secret.>> > > No argument there whatsoever. But what I'm saying is, what on earth >possesses someone to take it upon themselves to gratuitously spread the >information further? This is the real concern of my larger argument. >Someone who does that is a busybody, pure and simple. > > Laurence Solomon's observation that Linnell might indeed be an agnostic >was downright... Solomonic. Putting Linnell on the atheists list might be >inaccurate in the first place: OK, he might not believe in capital-G God, >but who knows, maybe he believes in something else. > >John Ferrer writes: > ><>presumably other Atheists, to see and say, "Oh, well cool, that guy's one >too.">> > > If someone needs to have their religious convictions validated by a >celebrity, I truly feel sorry for them. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:38:19 -0400 From: "Father Bingo" Subject: Re: Re:TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: <9jk8cl$2taa$1@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Organization: Make Them Look > My whole point was the sheer pointlessness of the basis of this whole argument. What possible impact could it have on anyone's life whether Linnell believes in a god or not? Well... Linnell's. >If that list had said that he liked Lionel trains, or Bavarian truffles, or Jim's Big Ego, it might have caused someone to experience something they might not have, otherwise. But no one's stand on the pros & cons of deities was affected one tiny bit. The effect this "outing" has on others isn't the issue. Tom Cruise isn't suing everyone who says he's gay because he's afraid he'll sway some people. He's trying to protect his image. Look... religious beliefs are a touchy subject. I don't think anyone's going to argue with me over that. So he may have mentioned in a interview a while back that he didn't believe in a god. or The God. or whatever. But there's an inherent problem in the fact that it's only come up in one interview. How reliable is that piece? Hell, I read an interview with someone where he was talking about Flans wearing nail polish and saying he was gay. And what about all the articles that credit one or the other for singing one or another song? And writing "Istanbul?" I question the source, and therefore question the addition to the list. If it's not true, or if he doesn't celebrate it enough to continue publicly announcing it, then it is potentially damaging to his image. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:12:20 -0400 From: "Chrissy Rockwell" Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Message-ID: <9jka79$2v3e$1@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Organization: They Might Be Giants, Unofficially http://www.tmbg.org No they aren't real "Adam Piontek" wrote in message news:20010724133926.89301.qmail@web13807.mail.yahoo.com... > --- Colleen Anne McClanahan > wrote: > > Alex: > > | It appears that the real Flansy has turned up now: > > | http://www.livejournal.com/users/johnflansburgh > > > > Personally, I don't think this one is real either. > > I'm such the skeptic. Hehe. > > Despite everything and anything, I firmly believe that > they are *both* real. > > -Adam > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger > http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:24:53 -0400 From: scratch Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Message-ID: <3B5DAF65.A4E92CB7@the-pentagon.com> Organization: They Might Be Giants, Unofficially http://www.tmbg.org Oh, and I bet next you're going to tell me that Careless Santa isn't real. -scratch Chrissy Rockwell wrote: > > No they aren't real > "Adam Piontek" wrote in message > news:20010724133926.89301.qmail@web13807.mail.yahoo.com... > > --- Colleen Anne McClanahan > > wrote: > > > Alex: > > > | It appears that the real Flansy has turned up now: > > > | http://www.livejournal.com/users/johnflansburgh > > > > > > Personally, I don't think this one is real either. > > > I'm such the skeptic. Hehe. > > > > Despite everything and anything, I firmly believe that > > they are *both* real. > > > > -Adam > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger > > http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:26:18 -0400 From: "Marcus B" Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Message-ID: <9jkb4b$3062$1@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Organization: They Might Be Giants, Unofficially http://www.tmbg.org "Chrissy Rockwell" wrote in message news:9jka79$2v3e$1@ussenterprise.ufp.org... > No they aren't real But chrissy IS real :D ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:39:33 -0400 From: karinh@sterl.com Subject: Re[2]: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Message-ID: <2508278761@sterl.com> Well, if he is, he'd better not be one of them danged atheists.... Karin H ** FREE THE EXPO 67 ** ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: More Live Journal hoopla Author: scratch Date: 07/24/01 1:24 PM Oh, and I bet next you're going to tell me that Careless Santa isn't real. -scratch Chrissy Rockwell wrote: > > No they aren't real > "Adam Piontek" wrote in message > news:20010724133926.89301.qmail@web13807.mail.yahoo.com... > > --- Colleen Anne McClanahan > > wrote: > > > Alex: > > > | It appears that the real Flansy has turned up now: > > > | http://www.livejournal.com/users/johnflansburgh > > > > > > Personally, I don't think this one is real either. > > > I'm such the skeptic. Hehe. > > > > Despite everything and anything, I firmly believe that > > they are *both* real. > > > > -Adam > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger > > http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:45:20 -0400 From: "Jon" Subject: TMBG: Mink Car on cdnow Message-ID: <000a01c11468$691f5560$10450241@mshome.net> Mink Car is listed on cdnow.com you can make an advance order. really though, what's the point? It certainly won't be selling out anywhere when it hits stores! jon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:51:22 +0000 From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: TMBG: Misheard lyrics Message-ID: PR Mega: >In a message dated 7/22/01 8:00:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >scratch@the-pentagon.com writes: > ><< Wishnik is something John and John made up and put in the liner notes to >Then so they wouldn't scare their parents. The line is actually "Here's >hoping you don't Harbor a deathwish".>> > >Guess it's been a little too long since I looked at the Then liner notes. >Thanks, Scratch. The liner notes also say that a certain line in "Weep Day" is "who is now a hermit in a cave," when the word is almost certainly "Buddhist," not "hermit." Nathan _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:59:52 +0000 From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: TMBG: Re: They Might Be Atheists Message-ID: Lee Steel: >Hasn't this rediculous thread gone on long enough? >This is supposed to be a forum where INTELLECTUALS meet with other >intellectuals. To speak another language? Nathan _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:59:16 EDT From: Kaylum@aol.com Subject: Re: TMBG: Mink Car on cdnow Message-ID: <10e.2ce7ba9.288f49b4@aol.com> In a message dated 7/24/01 1:45:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mrbean63@home.com writes: > you can make an advance order. really though, what's the point? It > Actually, it might..depends on how many the store orders. If they don't expect a huge demand, they'll only order a few copies, so even if only a couple of people buy it, it could be gone by the time you get there. What I usually do is call my favorite record store the night before the release date and ask them to hold a copy for me. Kay ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:30:06 EDT From: HallOfEyes@aol.com Subject: TMBG: Weird Dial-A-Song Message-ID: <53.916c357.288f50ee@aol.com> Oh man...On dial a song right now it is just some guy talking... It sounds like he is talking to someone else over the phone or something. He is saying thingsl ike "I guess its recording.. i dont know... it skipped a song...." and then he says "If its recording go to http://www.angelfire.com/realm/pmvr..." It sounds like someone somehow got able to record his TMBG webpage plug onto Dial A Song.... Jordan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:08:05 -0700 From: "Lao M. Wach" Subject: Re: TMBG: Misheard lyrics Message-ID: <9jl01c$jni$1@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Organization: They Might Be Giants, Unofficially http://www.tmbg.org > No, no. It's that thing you see at night that hides in your closest and waits > until you're asleep. my chickens? wolfie haop hoap - kernal and tucky ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:40:39 -0400 From: "Bill Seybolt" Subject: TMBG: Spinner.com Message-ID: I listen to Spinner.com on a regular basis at work. Was listening to the New Indie section today and heard "You're Mom's Alright" a couple of times (over the course of 4-5 hours). Very cool. (You usually hear the guys on just the 80's Retro stations. ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:31:17 -0400 From: "Matt Breslin" Subject: TMBG: weird das Message-ID: I called dial-a-song today and heard the weird das message. I told Jish to call and we decided somebody probably broke in to the machine so we told TMBG dot. It's really uncool that someone would do this cause they could have deleted a current song and tmbg had just started putting up cool old songs and it would suck if other people started to try doing this do this also. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:31:38 -0400 From: "Marcus B" Subject: TMBG: Dial-A-Song hackers - was Re: weird das Message-ID: <9jleje$10rc$1@ussenterprise.ufp.org> Organization: They Might Be Giants, Unofficially http://www.tmbg.org The number repeated at the beginning is for "Dial A Song 2" some lame DAS clone.. geez.. the number repeated at the beginning is 1 330 376 7106.. call up and complain and get the REAL DAS back for the good old songs! The website is http://www.angelfire.com/realm/pmvr These people SUCK. Marcus ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 03:58:38 +0000 From: Mike Thompson Subject: TMBG: Re: tmbg-list Digest #43-24 Message-ID: <20010725035838.11293.qmail@venus.postmark.net> > >I would rather have people know that I was gay and jewish before >they started thinking of me as a christian. > Nice attitude to take. Real open-minded. You've managed to offend Christians (of which I am one), homosexuals, and Jewish people. Way to go. Mike -- "If the police find I've been operating a prisoner of war camp without a license, I'll get arrested!"--Siegfried, "Get Smart" My site: http://lavender.fortunecity.com/fullmonty/22/mywebpage.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:05:34 +0000 From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" Subject: Re: TMBG: weird das Message-ID: Matt Breslin: >I called dial-a-song today and heard the weird das message. > >I told Jish to call and we decided somebody probably broke in to the >machine >so we told TMBG dot. It's really uncool that someone would do this cause >they could have deleted a current song and tmbg had just started putting up >cool old songs and it would suck if other people started to try doing this >do this also. While it certainly SOUNDS like someone hacked the machine, is that even possible? Where is the machine kept, anyway? I'm pretty sure it isn't in Flansburgh's apartment anymore, but, wherever it is, would there be any way to change the message without actually breaking into this place and changing the tape? Or is there some other way to hack a phone machine? Nathan _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:27:14 EDT From: CallMeDoctorWorm@aol.com Subject: Re: TMBG: Dial-A-Song hackers - was Re: weird das Message-ID: <77.17fbfd77.288fa4a2@aol.com> In a message dated 7/24/01 11:33:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, marcusb@alltel.net writes: > The number repeated at the beginning is for "Dial A Song 2" some lame DAS > FYI, that number is for Akron, Ohio. As TMBG Ambassador to the State of Ohio (1-800-BUCKEYE for tourist information, (718) 387-6962 for Dial-A-Song), I officially say that I do not support this imitation DAS, and I am ashamed on behalf of my statesmen and women. Blame the Governor. Governor Bob Taft 30th Floor 77 South High Street Columbus, Ohio 43215-6117 Phone 614-466-3555 or 614-644-HELP governor.taft@das.state.oh.us Doc Rick Worm TMBG Ambassador to Ohio Note the DAS in Taft's E-mail address. He may be a part of this. ------------------------------ End of tmbg-list Digest #43-25 ******************************