Steuart, I'm not sure what email client your using, but I can't begin to read your posts. It's text on text. I think your client is using DHTML, which none of my clients seem to do well with. Can you just send plain text? I bet there are a lot of us that have this issue. Mark Sottilaro "Liebig, Steuart A." wrote: > my question would be why music reviews in the Weekly (both > LA and OC versions) have to come across as so much 'better > than thou'? ** i don't know . . . didn't get that from these > . . . just my silly ol' opinion, though. normally, i like > reading music reviews, as a resource to check out new > stuff. with the OC weekly specifically, however, i've > becomed so disgusted, i've stopped reading 'em. i will go on > record as saying that OC Weekly's Buddy Seigal is a big ol' > a-hole, worthy of the Wynton Marsallis award if anybody > is...** don't have a clue about him. Of all the reviews, > the LA Weekly one stands out as someone who's trying to talk > as much about themselves as the band they are reviewing, > painting their narrow interpretation with childlike glee... > > > > artful representation of the cosmic vomit. > > ** well first off, he's trying (so you can decide if he > gets points for that). second off, i think that what he > means is that the band has something of catharsis about it > (i've had more than a few people say this after > performances). to me this is actually about how the music > hits him. contrast it with a pre-"review" of a gig that > someone wrote that basically talked about a private > conversation with one of the guys in the band about a crush > said musician had on another crit's wife - - whom he had > dated pre-marriage (something told in *confidence*). the > music or other players were *never* mentioned . . . never. > to me the weekly thing is damn near descriptive in > comparison. i admit to feeling a little put off by it on > first reading and then got the gist of it one second reading > . . . i bounced it off of one of the other guys in l. > stinkbug and he thought it was a very apt description of the > emotional nature of our performances (cd is live stuff).so . > . . to each his own, but a different viewpoint on it,stig > > Confidentiality Warning: This e-mail contains information intended > only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the > reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or > agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, any > dissemination, publication or copying of this e-mail is strictly > prohibited. The sender does not accept any responsibility for any > loss, disruption or damage to your data or computer system that may > occur while using data contained in, or transmitted with, this e-mail. > If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify > us by return e-mail. Thank you.