RDK

Evidence? The thing is - and I know this will sound selfish and self-serving but so what - I'd rather not have people that sensitive even hanging around here. It's also a silly and incorrect statement: political commentary does not appear in every forum. Everyone is certainly more than welcome to hang out at the bar, toss some darts, and shoot the shit, but if you'e a teetotaler who doesn't like darts and bars... well maybe this isn't the place for you. In much the same way Jazz Corner isn't for me.

I'd pay money to see that. But I hear Berigan has two right feet.

You're flattering to include me on the list .... how much is the fare over the drink? Dunno if I can afford it. Heh. We can raise more than enough money by simply threatening a get-together in Chicago. How much would I pay to save the expense of going to that? Seriously, it's a great idea, but the logistics will be tough. I may already be in Chicago for a wedding in the Spring, but a second trip is out of the question.

Have had "Midnight Oil" for years and really dig it; haven't heard (or ever seen a copy) of the other Richardson. "Asia Minor" is one of my all-time favorite OJCs.

I'm not Jewish but my wife and kids are... which I guess makes me an honorary Jew. We lit the first candle last night, and tonight I hope to open my Hanukkah gift to myself: the Rhino San Francisco Sounds box. Happy Hanukkah (no matter how you spell it) to all!

Agree completely. Making it subscription only turns it into a private club, and you know what they say about any club that would have me as a member. Personally, I think it would be disastrous. I'm hesitant about a monthly Paypal sub as well simply because the fees would eat up a good percentage of the funds. Would be much better to donate the "full" amount once or twice a year. Obviously a "voluntary" contribution is necessary, but I'm always skeptical about seeing a "star" or something by any donors name to acknowledge that they're somehow "better" than the rest. I like the idea of a simple fundraising bar that displays the goal and current contributions. On the other hand, maybe the band can send out some mp3s of new music to anyone who contributes a certain amount. In general, though, it's unfair to ask newbies or the only-occasional poster to cough up the funds needed to keep this place afloat for the 50-60 of us who post "a lot." I'm also not averse to some advertising. Whatever happens, keep moderation to a minimum. Heavy-handed gorting would kill this place. As for changing the board's name, heck, it might be easier if the band changed its name.

Oh I want to, but I realize that wouldn't be fair to the community at large and would be rather dickish of me, I think. Jim, if nothing else, don't let this part of the equation bother you. I don't think anyone would feel any ill will toward you either way this plays out. It does sound like you could use a break, so perhaps you might consider simply handing over the reins, either temporarily or permanently, and let someone else run the board for a while. It looks as if there's enough support for the financial matters, but I understand the time commitment and strain on your personal life.

I don't even think the blow-ups were all that bad. Hell, my family is more dysfunctional than this place!

Gotta say, I don't usually pay much attention to post counts, but when the hell did Chuck hit 11K? His posting rate must have really increased after he started using smilies.

Chris, thanks for this by the way. I hope it's not needed, but it's reassuring to know that all our contact info is safe.

I'm not too worried about our ability to find another place elsewhere (or create a new one) if necessary, but I'd much rather find some way for Organissimo to stay in existence, even if Jim no longer wishes to run it. I'd hate to see all the posts and info gathered here over the years lost to cyberspace. Is it possible to keep the board database intact and simply transfer it all to another server? Or simply take it over from Jim?

But Allen, you're too smart for us, remember? I nominate Chris and Conrad to be co-mods of the Political Forum! Seriously, though, I've never thought that this board needed much moderation; I think it's more the administrative functions that are so time-consuming.

Exactly. We've done a pretty good (I'd even say great) job over the years self-policing ourselves with just the occassional moderation/warning/closure/etc. from Jim. One of the hallmarks of this board is Jim's light-handed moderation - coupled, of course, with the relative maturity of the posters. Even the last "tiff" seemed wildly overblown to me. We can all get along, so I don't think the moderation part of the board would be all that hard. The actual administrative work might be more time-consuming, but it looks like enough of us are willing to foot the bills. It would be great if we could remain here, with our "history" intact, even if Jim gives up the day-to-day operation of running the place.

Very, very sad news. I'm completely bummed out now, but while I hope that Jim changes his mind I fully understand his situation and offer him my gratitude and very best wishes - and money if that's what's ultimately needed. I can't begin to express how much I've learned and discovered here over the last four years, and how many friends I've made, whether "real" or cyber. Please count me in among those wanting to be included and/or willing to help in any way I can, either here or in a new "home" somewhere else.

The Potter's available on emusic as well. Listening now.

Welcome back!

1080 on a 42" screen works out to about 50-60 ppi (about half the resolution of a high-end computer monitor). It has generally been observed that the human eye resolves differences in ppi up to about 300 ppi. So I would expect that you could see a difference - I certainly do on mine. But as always your best bet is to go to a good store that has the TVs set up properly and find out on your own. In NYC, I've found that the audiophile shops are the best places to go for comparing TVs (although naturally the bargains are elsewhere). Those numbers may be correct but they don't take viewing distance into consideration. Most (all?) HDTV displays are of a fixed pixel design, so you'll have the same number of pixels on a 1080 display whether its a 20" computer monitor or a 60" plasma - so you'll have more ppi on a smaller device. But while you might read a computer monitor from 18" away, it's unlikely you'll watch your HDTV from that distance. This might help... http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/vie...calculator.html

Don't forget the Complete Verve For Lovers Collection.

Isn't it a moot point by now? Aren't most new sets "full" 1080p resolution? When I bought mine (a 56" DLP) about 16 months ago, you could still buy 720p/1080i sets. Either way, I wouldn't sweat not having 1080p on a 42" set. You probably wouldn't notice it.

Is the RIAA eq of a modern phono amp applicable to older 78s?

Putting it like this, I'd have to say I favor the "middle" period. Tommy is, hands down, my favorite Who album, though Who's Next comes close. As for their early period, I generally find the Who to be a better "singles" band (a view I know isn't widely shared). But something like Meaty, Beaty, etc. proves my point I think. In any case, I find Sells Out to be a bit overrated. I do like Who Are You quite a bit, but it came out at a very impressionable time for me; still, I think it's underrated. After that, things are very hit-or-miss, and by then Pete did his best work on his solo albums. I think Pete's an exceptional song writer and don't think he's really gotten his due for that (much like Ray Davies). His Scooped albums of castoffs and outtakes help to show his brilliance.

The point isn't that nothing can happen if nothing is observed. The point is that the act of observation can alter the course of future events. This has been proved beyond any reasonable doubt through Bell's Experiments and subsequent, similar experiments of greater sophistication. As the article correctly points out, a crucial open question is "what constitutes an observation?" I tend to take a far more broad view of what constitutes an observation than what Krause takes, but I must admit that this is based on my own personal bias and not on scientific evidence. In any event, I think the article must have somewhat distorted the views of Krause (who is a well-respected physicist), as the article makes it sound like the evolution of a system subsequent to observation is deterministic, which no one has ever claimed. What really happens is the probabilities of future events are altered (the exception is if one performs continuous measurements, which is not the case here). In other words, at most we increased the probability of the demise of the universe in 1998. So, the universe suffers from "stage fright?" Our watching it turns it into a "shrinking violet," maybe? *gasp* Everybody, quick, close your eyes!! Sounds more like a "shy bladder" to me.

Aren't these still in print on CD? And the current SoD sounds just fine to my ears (though I am not an audiophile). Perhaps it will sell more copies if it comes out in a Rudy Van Gimmick edition. Guy (Not addressed at you Guy) but why is it that everyone is so eager for Rudy to do his thing on yet another CD reissue but then give Hoffman shit for doing a (reportedly) really spectacular job on LP reissues? Maybe the way to finally get the "Trainwreck" session issued is on audiophile LP.

I emailed AMG about this yesterday, and to their credit I received a response from them in less than 24 hours....

Congrats Paul!