hang on hang on hang on Ken and evryone, woooo there :)....
I for one get hounded for my emails that I send to my friends, the reason is
that when I write my emails as we all do, I tend to speak it out in my head as
I would if I was speaking to them in person but email never ever conveys this
and so everyone reads the email in their own style. So a sacarstic email unless
read in a sacarstic manner will be read in the manner of the person at that
time ,same with a serious email, sometimes if I am in a comical mood I can
mis-read them...
this sadly is a problem on emails, it will never go away so lets be too
jumpy,surley there are other things to worry about :)
your humbly
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Odeluga [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 10/08/2004 09:38
To: Robert Taylor; jason kenjar
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: (313) RE: do not hate on discogs
How about doing us all a favour Robert and pressing 'delete' before you
send
your ill-considered rude and sarcastic comments in the first place?
Doesn't
that apeal to your superior logical consistency which you are so
determined
to exercise on the foibles of er, an
***internet eamil list about techno music!***
How erudite!
The professorship is coming!
In person you are such a nice bloke. But on line ytou ain't half a
twat, I
can tell you.
Good day,
Ken
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Robert Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 10:28 AM
>To: jason kenjar
>Cc: [email protected]
>Subject: (313) RE: do not hate on discogs
>
>
>Excuse me for making another flippant comment which got taken way
>too seriously - I only meant it was sh!t in as far as inputting
>info and corrrecting misinformation - it's obviously a great resource.
>No need to attack me personally - if you don't like my style, press
delete
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jason kenjar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 8:20 PM
>To: Robert Taylor
>Cc: [email protected]
>Subject: do not hate on discogs
>
>
>Pardon me "Mr. taylor", but I dont see how somebody who spams the list
>daily with one or two quick sentences of over-simplified arrogant
>generalizations has the guts to call the discogs website "sh!t". Im
>just one of the many free users and am not affiliated with the site by
>any other means, but I still have to stand up for them if you feel it
>necissary to besmirch their name.
>
>Discogs has been very helpful to me in the past. I can only recollect
>a fraction of the many times I have found discogs to be totally
>helpful. Knowledge is power, and there is a lot you can learn if your
>are willing to spend some time researching discogs. its also totally
>free, you dont even have to be a member to search its information
>libraries.
>
>And is it so unthinkable and unforgivable that there would be spotty
>information about Basic Channel? I consider myself a fairly well
>informed member of the under ground community, and even i think all the
>basic channel records look alike. Artists like von oswald arent about
>advertising themselves nearly as much as you do for yourself.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Monday, August 9, 2004, at 09:36 AM, Robert Taylor wrote:
>
>> Discogs is sh!t and there's loads of inaccuracies.
>
>###################################################################
>##################
>Note:
>
>Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not
>necessarily represent
>those of Channel Four Television Corporation unless specifically
>stated. This email
>and any files transmitted are confidential and intended solely for
>the use of the
>individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have
>received this email in
>error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Thank You.
>###################################################################
>##################
>
>
>
