2000 From: Digestifier To: Subject: Dead-Flames Digest #641 Dead-Flames Digest #641, Volume #48 Sat, 22 Oct 05 08:00:01 PDT Contents: Re: Ticket Scalpers/Companies SUCK!!! ("Millhaven") Re: drug tests for jobs (NDC) (Ben) Legion of Mary Permavine 3rd offer (thomasasmric@aol.com) Re: Webhosting advice? ("Don Bean") Re: Webhosting advice? (The Lord of Eltingville) Re: drug tests for jobs (NDC) (The Lord of Eltingville) Re: I feel weirded out this morning. ("Bradish") Re: I feel weirded out this morning. ("Bradish") Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? (The Lord of Eltingville) Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? (The Lord of Eltingville) Re: Ol' Max gets after Pat Robertson (The Lord of Eltingville) Re: The Best Hangover Movie ("Dave Kelly") Re: Ol' Max gets after Pat Robertson (band beyond description) Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? ("scarletbgonias@hotmail.com") Re: The Best Hangover Movie ("Carlisle") Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? ("Carlisle") Re: what should the United States do with combatants who don't belong to regular armies? ("Sparky the Wonder Dog") Re: I feel weirded out this morning. ("ck") SHN/FLAC DVD dialup freebie, no B, no P (band beyond description) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Millhaven" Subject: Re: Ticket Scalpers/Companies SUCK!!! Date: 21 Oct 2005 23:50:04 -0700 Schmoe wrote: > Buying tickets online sucks. It used to be great. Now with these automatic > brokers, we havn't got a chance. It sucks. > > I've scored plenty of good seats on TM online. The only thing is that the face value on premium concert seats is usually so expensive, I usually have to pass in favor of nosebleeds or take my chances in the parking lot. But I have nothing against ticket brokers. Just got a nice pair for a big show tomorrow from a ticket broker on Ebay for a dollar plus fed ex fees. So I hope they continue to find suckers to sell tickets at a massive profit to in order to subsidize my own concert tickets. ------------------------------ From: Ben Subject: Re: drug tests for jobs (NDC) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 23:50:44 -0700 On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 00:38:39 -0400, Brad Greer wrote: >On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 22:44:51 -0400, "Jeff Howe" >wrote: > >>"imsjry" wrote in message >>news:1129642229.933908.317700@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >>> >>> I didn't know there were any jobs these days where they DIDN'T drug >>> test. I think it is just a reality. The "go work somewhere else" advice >>> is just naive. >> >>Of course there are employers that don't require drug >>testing. Mine for example. I'm a software developer. >> >Yeah, working in software has some definite advantages. That depends. Certain skills are sometimes in high demand - other times not so much. There's a Chief Operating Officer of a company in Dallas that's actually trying to start a bidding war for me - he just doesn't know how to take no for an answer. Of course, I won't tell him to fuck off, just in case this whole drug test thing turns sour with the other company. He's already increasesd the original (pitiful) offer by 10K and added DBA to my title (I could give a shit about titles - they're meaningless- I usually don't even know what my title is) and said he'd put me on a sales team as well where I could potentially earn 20K in commissions, but I don't believe him. He also thinks I could move 1100 miles over a weekend without even an advance trip to scope out housing. I want some of whatever it is that he's smoking. ------------------------------ From: thomasasmric@aol.com Subject: Legion of Mary Permavine 3rd offer Date: 22 Oct 2005 04:13:18 -0700 Man I can't believe on one has jump on this one. these shows are killer. Great aud tapes from jerry moore!!!! Come on people!!!!! Thanks to Steve and Jason, I just finished burning these shows so it is time to offer them back up. First one to reply to me directly with a promise to continue the vine gets 'em. Legion of Mary (6 shn discs total) 4/6/75 : http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=6372 4/8/75: http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=14207 4/9/75: http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=14606 4/9/75: http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=4485 4/10/75: http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=14209 4/13/75: http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=4483 4/18/75: http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=4482 ------------------------------ From: "Don Bean" Subject: Re: Webhosting advice? Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:27:53 -0400 I use yahoo for reggaetraders.com... They just added alot of space and bandwidth too... I have tons more now than I ever use... Its a good deal and Im happy with yahoo small buissness... Bean "Rupert" wrote in message news:1129952927.253048.177590@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Hey now! > > I'm ready to start getting my website back online again, so that I can > put all of my cover art back up, and I'm wondering if anyone has any > suggestions for a good company to use. > > What I need: > > 1)Easy to use sitebuilding, without getting stuck having to pick some > pre-fab template. I tried a site earler this year that didn't happen to > mention that you had to use one of THEIR templates! I don't write code > or anything, so I need to be able to easily create the graphics in more > of a "drag and drop" setting. > > I need to be able to easily arrange a LOT of links to picture files, in > a neat and orderly fashion. On my old Geoshitties account, I had to > manually arrange all links, with no option of creating a table of any > kind. And if I created any pages offline, their software didn't want to > recognize it. > > 2)Lots of storage space, and enough bandwidth for a lot of people to > download large files (ie: dvd covers). > > > 3)Oh, and the ideal company would be cheap! > > If anyone out there has had any good experiences with webhosting, > please le me know. > > -Rupedawg > ------------------------------ From: The Lord of Eltingville Subject: Re: Webhosting advice? Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:39:25 -0400 Rupert wrote: > > Hey now! > > I'm ready to start getting my website back online again, so that I can > put all of my cover art back up, and I'm wondering if anyone has any > suggestions for a good company to use. > > What I need: > > 1)Easy to use sitebuilding, without getting stuck having to pick some > pre-fab template. I tried a site earler this year that didn't happen to > mention that you had to use one of THEIR templates! I don't write code > or anything, so I need to be able to easily create the graphics in more > of a "drag and drop" setting. > > I need to be able to easily arrange a LOT of links to picture files, in > a neat and orderly fashion. On my old Geoshitties account, I had to > manually arrange all links, with no option of creating a table of any > kind. And if I created any pages offline, their software didn't want to > recognize it. If you're going to be doing this as more than a hobby (i.e. this will be a business website), avoid using the online sitebuilder tools that most ISPs offer now. They're fine for posting family photos and the like, but they tend to look like they were put together with...well...free online sitebuilding tools that were provided by an ISP. Consider plonking down the money for a copy of Dreamweaver (http://tinyurl.com/8q4g6). It's not cheap, but it'll do anything you want and let you do it quickly -- while giving you professional-looking results (not surprising as it is what many professionals use). There are also *lots* of plugins/extentions available for download that add to its usefulness -- 2000 many of them being things that others have written and are offering to the Dreamweaver userbase for free. There are also many freeware/shareware html authoring tools that will do the job. Check out "http://www.tucows.com" and follow the links. Whatever you do...don't use Frontpage. It might look like a good idea while reading the box, but the pages it makes are filled with so much cruft that they load slowly and may not be compatible with browsers other than Internet Exploder -- not too surprising, given Microsoft's desire to control everything computer-related. Many professional web building apps actually have built in tools that fixe pages created with Frontpage so that the pages load faster and be more compatible with the rest of the world. That alone says a lot about Frontpage... > 2)Lots of storage space, and enough bandwidth for a lot of people to > download large files (ie: dvd covers). > > 3)Oh, and the ideal company would be cheap! Most cheapo accounts (under $10/mo) usually come with 10-100Mb of disk space. Once you start looking at accounts that offer 1-2Gb of space, you're getting into the $30-$60/mo range. I've had good luck with Assorted Internet (http://www.assortedinternet.com) in the past. One of my customers currently uses them and are quite pleased. They offer a variety of plans for individuals and small businesses. I currently use MediaMovement (http://www.mediamovement.com) for my own hosting. > If anyone out there has had any good experiences with webhosting, > please le me know. > > -Rupedawg ------------------------------ From: The Lord of Eltingville Subject: Re: drug tests for jobs (NDC) Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:43:00 -0400 Brad Greer wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 22:44:51 -0400, "Jeff Howe" > wrote: > > >"imsjry" wrote in message > >news:1129642229.933908.317700@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > >> > >> I didn't know there were any jobs these days where they DIDN'T drug > >> test. I think it is just a reality. The "go work somewhere else" advice > >> is just naive. > > > >Of course there are employers that don't require drug > >testing. Mine for example. I'm a software developer. > > > Yeah, working in software has some definite advantages. Not the least of which is a dress code that's usually satified by keeping your genitals covered. It's nice to be able to roll out of bed and put on whatever's closest and/or most comfortable before heading into the office. ------------------------------ From: "Bradish" Subject: Re: I feel weirded out this morning. Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:09:41 GMT "JC Martin" wrote in message news:vRa6f.315$te3.4967@typhoon.sonic.net... > in this cut-throat world we live in. I hear this term a lot. It's a cop out for the almost total lack of ethics in American business.It got me to start my own company and then take a few years off after I sold it. Got tired of the endless lying and attempts to cheat me. Otherwise honest folks will lie at the drop of a hat under the guise of being a "cut-throat" competitor. ------------------------------ From: "Bradish" Subject: Re: I feel weirded out this morning. Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:11:31 GMT "JimK" wrote in message news:lu9jl1h2n0c86c9c2rmh21k2rqbv1k08mc@4ax.com... >> >>ok , the suprise will be for the a-holes in the next world/life/existence >>etc... capce? Shame on them for giving you grief very unkind , veeery >>unkiynd. Anyway my friend has two Cream tix for Tuesday's show in sec 314 >>row E and will take face=$200.00 ea for them if you know anyone who might >>be >>interested in them speak up. >> > Couldn't get scalpers prices for them, huh? Fuck off, spammer. > > JimK I'm not up on the Cream ticket prices, but usually 300 sections are up top...and $200 is FACE value??!! Huh? ------------------------------ From: The Lord of Eltingville Subject: Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:53:08 -0400 Ben wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 21:34:23 -0700, Kelly Humphries > wrote: > > >Also sprach Ben : > > > >> Salem's Lot is allright - it stars David Soul and is based on the > >> Stephen King novel. > > > >Do made-for-TV movies count as B-flicks? > > Was that a made for TV movie? I dunno - I didn't see it when it first > came out - one of a handful of movies I actually read the book first. Yup. It was made for TV and, IIRC, it was the first made-for-TV movie that didn't suck. > >I guess by definition they > >would be lower-budget than the typical movie house fare. Anyway, that > >one was so scary, I was afraid to walk down the hall to go to the > >bathroom after watching it. Nowadays, I'd probably just laugh > >nervously.... ------------------------------ From: The Lord of Eltingville Subject: Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:52:01 -0400 Kelly Humphries wrote: > > Also sprach Ben : > > > Salem's Lot is allright - it stars David Soul and is based on the > > Stephen King novel. > > Do made-for-TV movies count as B-flicks? I guess by definition they > would be lower-budget than the typical movie house fare. Anyway, that > one was so scary, I was afraid to walk down the hall to go to the > bathroom after watching it. Nowadays, I'd probably just laugh > nervously.... That movie scared the shit out of my sister. It probably didn't help that I kept yelling, "OHMYGOD!!!!" at her whenever a vampire jumped out. She still glares at me about that if someone brings up the movie in discussion. Just one of the many advantages of being the older brother... ;-> ------------------------------ From: The Lord of Eltingville Subject: Re: Ol' Max gets after Pat Robertson Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:58:12 -0400 The Iron Muffin wrote: > > JimK wrote: > > Hateful Narc wrote: > > > >snip> > > > > I have friends in New Orleans. > > > > > > > > I find it impossible to believe that you have friends anywhere. > > Heh. I was just happy to see that his head hasn't exploded over the recent spate of events concerning the administration that was supposed to "restore honor and diginity" (or somesuch bullshit) to the White House... http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=19725 BTW, this week's 'toon is great: http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=19757 > > -- > The Iron Muffin > > DEAD FREAKS UNITE > > Who are you? Where are you? > > How are you? ------------------------------ From: "Dave Kelly" Subject: Re: The Best Hangover Movie Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:44:21 GMT Lord of the rings marathons?....reading verses from Little house on the praire? ........a friggin Melissa Gilbert MEET AND GREET!.... What HAPPENED to this chatgroup? How did MY thread get hijacked by the geek squad! You're ALL on double secret probation! Dean Sweet Pants ------------------------------ From: band beyond description <123@456.com> Subject: Re: Ol' Max gets after Pat Robertson Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 23:01:30 +0900 You didn't dispute any of the actual points of the article though. I have no argument that faith based charities do good work. I don't trust Robertson however. Never have. He's a hate activist. > > -JC just like Mark! -- Peace, Steve ------------------------------ From: "scarletbgonias@hotmail.com" Subject: Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? Date: 22 Oct 2005 07:22:15 -0700 Yeah, well little brothers can also do a job on their sisters. I remember me and my brother watching the Blair Witch Project in an 2000 old house that lived next to some deep woods and it had a basement just like the one at the end of the movie. My brother would go outside and rustle some leaves/branches and he would tell me to go stand in the corner. That move still scares the crap out of me. Theresa ------------------------------ From: "Carlisle" Subject: Re: The Best Hangover Movie Date: 22 Oct 2005 07:24:41 -0700 Dave Kelly wrote: > Lord of the rings marathons?....reading verses from Little house on > the praire? ........a friggin Melissa Gilbert MEET AND GREET!.... > What HAPPENED to this chatgroup? > How did MY thread get hijacked by the geek squad! > You're ALL on double secret probation! > > Dean Sweet Pants Sweetbac Productions!! How dare you?! What pray tell was more cool than a seven year old getting to meet Laura Ingalls back in 1975?! Oh forgive me, I forgot, you were going to Dead shows when you were in 2nd grade & were reading Joseph Campbell, Lester Bangs and Hunter S. Thompson. Obviously you were privy to a much cooler family and cultural environment than many others of us. My live music experience from the 70's consisted of Sonny & Cher, Ann-Margret, Wayne Newton, Florence Henderson, Tony Orlando & Dawn and that's just Las Vegas.(I wrote a letter to the Governor of Nevada petitioning for kids to be able to play slot machines.) All right there's my defense of Little House of the Praire..LOTR??!! Fast forward thirty years>>>got my mind blown again. Amazing stuff. You wanted a good hangover movie, right?! Your thread rocked! stay plush, Double Secret CC ------------------------------ From: "Carlisle" Subject: Re: What is a good "B" rated movie? Date: 22 Oct 2005 07:31:47 -0700 scarletbgonias@hotmail.com wrote: > Yeah, well little brothers can also do a job on their sisters. I > remember me and my brother watching the Blair Witch Project in an old > house that lived next to some deep woods and it had a basement just > like the one at the end of the movie. My brother would go outside and > rustle some leaves/branches and he would tell me to go stand in the > corner. That move still scares the crap out of me. > > Theresa That's one of the creepiest things I've read around here in dayzz, Theresa. Even the website freaks me out. I saw this low budget film again last month with my 12 year old nephew and we spent rest of the night perusing the Internet to prove to him that it was a hoax>>>But is it??!! ;-() http://www.blairwitch.com/ Just in time for Halloween! Creepy Car Whistle ------------------------------ From: "Sparky the Wonder Dog" Subject: Re: what should the United States do with combatants who don't belong to regular armies? Date: 22 Oct 2005 07:39:33 -0700 We get your (repeated) point--grtflmark--still you misread the Convention. The original querstion was written with the Convention in mind--which is why the term "enemy combatant" was used in the first place. And that "burn the piss out" remark seems pretty shrill to me. Also barking. Throw in moonbat. Btw, my impression is that warfare is not, on the whole, a series of satisfyingly sadistic episodes but very hard work in very difficult weather with long episodes of boredom punctuated by unanticipated episodes of extreme fear and knife-edge emotional spikes. Maybe the unit you served in was exceptional. OK--here is what the Convention, reprinted by you (thanks), actually says. The Convention does NOT make a distinction between national armies and terrorists or even national armies and "unlawful" combatants. It makes a distinction between "lawful" and "unlawful combatants." These "enemy combatants"--"unlawful" OR "lawful" can be regular army soldiers OR guerillas (your own post). It is NOT their formal organization that makes them "lawful" or "unlawful" but how they BEHAVE. So Al Qaeda in Iraq are "unlawful combatants" because of how they act (no "recognizable signs" and they don't "carry arms openly", don't conduct operations by "customs of war"--by blowing up children and worshippers in mosques, beheading civilians, descecrating corpses, etc.) I would argue that the contractors cited by Sean are, even if not formal Army with signs of rank, "lawful combatants." But we can see from the Conventions excerpt why the Bush administration believes that Al Qaeda is not "protected by the laws of war." They don't meet the requirements. Even giving them full Geneva protections would not, I think, make them start operating as "lawful combatants". These guys have their own motivations--I don't think they are reacting to U.S. behavior or imitating it. Burning prisoners alive to hear their screams, ya think? violates the rules of war. So, if that is what your ideal soldiers do then although "terrorists" really isn't defined for use by the Geneva Conventions, your soldiers would be "unlawful combatants." ------------------------------ From: "ck" Subject: Re: I feel weirded out this morning. Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 10:46:52 -0400 "Bradish" wrote in message news:7Uq6f.5144$BZ5.3641@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > > "JimK" wrote in message > news:lu9jl1h2n0c86c9c2rmh21k2rqbv1k08mc@4ax.com... > > > >> > >>ok , the suprise will be for the a-holes in the next world/life/existence > >>etc... capce? Shame on them for giving you grief very unkind , veeery > >>unkiynd. Anyway my friend has two Cream tix for Tuesday's show in sec 314 > >>row E and will take face=$200.00 ea for them if you know anyone who might > >>be > >>interested in them speak up. > >> > > Couldn't get scalpers prices for them, huh? Fuck off, spammer. > > > > JimK > > I'm not up on the Cream ticket prices, but usually 300 sections are up > top...and $200 is FACE value??!! > > Huh? > > > go here; http://www.thegarden.com/seating.html and check the concert/end stage seating. they have photographs taken from the middle of each section. 4000s are the upper section. 300's were $179.00 plus a $20.00 convenience charge plus if you chose two day UPS an additional $20.00 here's a scan of my ticket; http://members.roadfly.org/jehu/cream.JPG you can see the face value price. my friend bought these during the presale American Express Gold cardmember courtesy sale so figuring in his additional costs and his own courtesy charge he's asking $200.00 not an unreasonable pirce considering he made the effort to get these at 9 am online the moment they went on sale .. Even with a cable internet connection and having all the account info set up on the Ticketmatser account in advance these were the best seats obtainable in this price range. The lower seats were i think around $350.00 ------------------------------ From: band beyond description <123@456.com> Subject: SHN/FLAC DVD dialup freebie, no B, no P Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 23:57:38 +0900 8-8-82 9-5-82 1-24-83 2-1-83 5-26-93 5-27-93 All on one data DVD-R disc, so you'll need to have a DVD drive and know how to deal with SHN and FLAC files. Relevant info at archive.org. Thanks steve t for the last two shows. I'll take one dialup (preferably) person who'll be nice enough to reoffer these no B, no P, to others on the group who will do likewise. and so on, and so on.... e-mail me at b a n d _ b e y o n d _ d e s c r i p t i o n a ttttt y a h o o d ottttttttttt c o mmmmmmmmm (do what you must to e-mail me; note underscores) -- Peace, Steve ------------------------------ ** FOR YOUR REFERENCE ** The service addresses, to which questions about the list itself and requests to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, are as follows: Internet: dead-flames-request@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames-request%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames-request You can send mail to the entire list (and rec.music.gdead) 107 via one of these addresses: Internet: dead-flames@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames End of Dead-Flames Digest ****************************** . 0