JSngry

http://www.vintagecardtraders.com/virtual/...n/54wilson.html

http://www.mjckeh.demon.co.uk/jc/cl-det.htm

Doris Troy Pete Malloy A.T. Leroy

Dutch Leonard Herman Leonard Chuck Stewart

Mascara Snake Zoot Horn Rollo Drumbo

Well now, that raises the issue of is this site screening their info in any form or fashion, and it doesn't seem to be. Which is why it gives me the creeps. It also raises the issue of whether or not the legal system is dealing in true justice or merely pandering to the current clime by taking a one-size-fits-all approach to any and all charges dealing with such matters. I think we know the answer to that one too. But... I live in a neighborhood where about a third of the people move in and out every few years, most often w/o getting too friendly with the "veterans". If "Gramps" was to move in, I'd like to know, not to bust his chops or ostracize him. Hell, I'd even smile and greet him as I passed him on the sidewalk. I just want to make sure that my kids didn't wander over there alone. Tell me that you wouldn't want the same.

I know that this will embarass him, but the reason that Dmitry doesn't have the obi for this disc is that he donated it to a charity auction which benefited poor homeless orphan baby children, where it fetched $57,000,000.00!!!

The statistics regarding pedophillic recidivism are not ambiguous. I'm all for treating the perpetrators with civil dignity, but until a way is found to make "rehabilitaion" a plausible possibility instead of an abstract talking point, I'm also in favor of having information at my disposal that allows me, not to get in their faces, but simply to keep my kids away from theirs. I see no malevolence whatsoever in that.

Iron Butterfly Steely Dan Steeleye Span

Well, we can take an all or nothing approach to the matter and assume that "protection" automatically and/or eventually leads to unpleasant extremes, or we can allow for the possibility that many people are actually able to use information responsibly w/o automatically and/or eventually turning into hardass cretins. Which approach do you think is more diginified as it pertains to one's core perception of "human nature"? Theory is nice but it's black and white. Life isn't, and that defintely applies to the part of it that concerns protection.

Snuffy Smith Stuff Smith Ann-Margaret

Are people who don't drive in a better position to design seat belts? Frankly, the kind of web site linked to gives me the creeps, since it's not "official" in any way. It's a privately operated site. If they screw up, who are they answerable to? What if a wrongful conviction is overturned, so they take care of that business? Or are they just putting people up there and leaving them there? This is not a matter for vigilantes, real or conceptual. But I do think that there is a place for such registries in some form or fashion. Our city police department maintains one, so such a site as Family Watchdog is at best reduntant to me. And yes, I periodically check it, not to start some shit, but just to know if there's anything I need to know. Pedophillia is as much or more of a "disease" as it is a crime, and there's no real cure. The recidivism rate is frighteningly high, and neither psycho- nor medical therapy seems to serve any lasting end in most cases. I'm certainly not looking to kill the carrier, but I'll be damned if I'm going to knowingly let my kids be exposed to the disease. We all want to protect our kids from diseases, don't we? So we need some kind of information. A complicated matter to be sure, but a sexual offense against a child is altogether different than a crime against property (or even against an adult). "Having paid your debt to society" is usually not the issue in these cases. Preventing the next debt from being incurred is. That's just the nature of this particular beast. If the kids know where not to go, then most of the time the game's more than half over.

MEMO? Geez, I thought it was a genetic flaw. That's what I tell LTB, and she acts like she wants me to believe that she believes it, so let's forget all this "memo" nonsense RIGHT NOW, please!

Nerves are indeed the enemy of the music, yet nerve is its backbone. Go figure that.

That would be Classics...

Point taken, but my POV is that almost everybody who's been good on Concord has been (or might well have been) even better somewhere else.

Tony Roma Adam Batman

Or maybe a lot of guys encounter the same few women, relatively and proportionally speaking. Look at it this way - Let's assume a group of twenty men and twenty women, each in a relationship with another. Let's also say that there's two women in this group who are "available" and eight of the twenty guys have sex with both of them, maybe just once apiece, over the course of two years, in addition to the sex with their regular partner. The other eighteen women and twelve men remain in comitted monogamous relationships for the same time. That's 36 different pairings among the group, but 40% of the men have had three partners, and 90% of the women have only had one. Of course, the other 10% of the women will have had nine partners in this time, but since they're only 10% of the women, is their activity considered "unusual", and therefore discounted, whereas the men's activity is considered "normal" because, after all, 40% is a rather "significant percentage"? Think about it - in this hypothetical (and not too far-fetched) example, isn't it most likely to be reported as "40% of men report having sex with three different partners in a two year span; 90% of women report remaining monogamous during the same time; Men MUST be lying!"? I think that's a quite plausible potential reporting of totally accurate data. Now, extrapolate this out over a longer time span and a broader population base. Are the men really lying, or are the researchers just not considering all the possibilities? This may have nothing to to with the particular story above, but my point is this - I'll believe anybody's statistics until somebody else can contradict them. Which usually takes about five minutes...

Indeed. Dmitry has always done me right. Sorry if the obi joke set poorly with you. That was definitely not my intent.

I've been hearing some cuts off that Swings Shubert Alley side on Music Choice's "Singers & Standards" channel, and I don't know if it's just that that's often what I put on to fall asleep to, but it seems like a really tasty piece of work. But too often (and for too long), Torme seems to me to have been the kind of guy who wore a tuxedo because he thought he deserved to wear one. And all that that implies. If you know what I mean.

And I you.

Yet it does raise the point - how many small American labels are going to have the incentive to reissue this stuff legitimately if the market's already been met by the thieves? I mean, yeah, we all say that we'll buy this stuff now and then buy it again when a legit version comes out, and we often/usually do. But for the cats on the business end, how do they know that we'll be willing to pay the price they need to get to keep afloat when we've already bought it for cheap from the pirates? I mean, is that Don Fagerquist side so badass that we'll buy it twice simply out of moral compunction? Look - almost all (all?) of Lonehill's studio material is booted off of a legit source. If it's expensive and/or difficult to come by, better to get a burn off of somebody, keep it to yourself, and then buy it for the first time when it gets a legitimate, accesible reissue. Somebody will get around to it eventually if they think that there's a market for it that they can hit. All Lonehill, et al do is reduce the chances that that market will seem viable.

One of my most favorites. Everybody came to play. It, Cornbread, and Sidewinder are my "Top Three" Lee BNs over the long haul. They're all good (or better), but those are the "special" ones to me.

That's a good start. Put some girls in it and we'll be cool.