From: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org (alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest) To: ammf-digest@smoe.org Subject: alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest V1 #115 Reply-To: ammf@smoe.org Sender: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest Friday, July 17 1998 Volume 01 : Number 115 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Moxy Tshirts [starfox@Bacon.Eggs.And.NOSPAM.nationwide.net] Re: greetings from Alberta! [dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin)] Re: greetings from Alberta! [dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin)] Re: greetings from Alberta! [dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin)] Re: The Best [dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin)] Re: 21+ shows [em ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Jul 1998 05:03:15 GMT From: starfox@Bacon.Eggs.And.NOSPAM.nationwide.net Subject: Re: Moxy Tshirts JustaBNLfan wrote: : Dont you think that is a little much!? I boght the blue one, with the : definition of Moxy Fruvous on the back... It may be a little overpriced, but only by about 5 bucks. Most concert T-shirts range from $15-$30 anyways. And the Definition T-shirts are high quality, and the artwork probably cost quite a bit to print. : *Sigh* I dont mean to whine but....... its pricey eh? :( Perhaps, but remember who it's going to support. :) I think it was money well spent. :) Starfox "Wearing my Definition T with pride. :)" - -- Starfox starfox (at) nationwide dot net "We each pay a fabulous price, for our visions of paradise." - Rush "Mission" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 11:45:34 GMT From: dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin) Subject: Re: greetings from Alberta! On 16 Jul 1998 21:28:21 GMT, dot0926@aol.com (Dot0926) wrote: >no, human nature (according to me at least) is a system of beliefs that all >human commonly share, every single one....it clearly doesn't and cannot exist. Why should it be a system? Why not just a quality inherent in all of us? Example given: if you're hungry, truly hungry, and you haven't been that hungry before, you'll do a LOT to satisfy your hunger. You will do whatever it takes, it's an instinctive thing, a survival thing. Another, more societal example: I simply don't believe there's one completely alturistic person on this planet. Richard Dawkins, in his book _The_Selfish_Gene_, talks about that quality as a genetic predisposition to make sure one's genes (the only really long-lasting thing we have) are passed on. I usually take that to a more mundane level and assert that you can't point out a person to me that has NEVER selfishly wanted something and done anything they could to get it. Think, hungry baby in the middle of the night. Is the baby going to be considerate and let the poor parents sleep til the morning? No, of course not, the baby hasn't been taught the social tenet yet, and of course s/he can't get out of bed and get food, so s/he'll scream at the top of her/his lungs. rambleramble... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vika [VEE-kah] Zafrin Patron Saint of Caffeine dacilen at bu dot edu aka Coffee Fru "You and your hula dance of culinary delight..." -ceecee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 11:54:52 GMT From: dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin) Subject: Re: greetings from Alberta! On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 21:59:39 GMT, wahrend@my-dejanews.com wrote: >Well if the stickers don't prevent anyone from buying the records, why have >them at all? Why not? The stickers are an expression of someone's opinion. As has already been pointed out, at the very least the stickers get [some] kids and parents talking. >If it were human nature then all parents would have an inherent desire to >protect their children from the outside world, not just most. How do you know that they don't? Whether they act upon it or not is a different matter - but how do you know that they don't have an inherent desire to protect their children from the outside world, whatever that may mean to the parent? >The stupid belief that by >keeping your kids ignorant they are somehow going to be able to keep out of >trouble... just ignore the problem and it will go away This is precisely why I _like_ the idea of the warning stickers. They get people thinking. Sure, there'll always be a percentage of the population that will refuse to think (or is unaccustomed to it) and just blithely prohibit their kids to buy the Evil Records. But this is why we are split up into generations: if you are such a person, and your kid is prompted by the outside world to start thinking, the kid will come up to you and challenge you on this point. Then, you'll have to face the music, and in some cases, admit that you were wrong (and don't I know how hard that can be! my father and I have had more conversations-turned-arguments/fights than I care to think about... in the end, he respects me more, not less.) My point is, it's not just up to the parent's ignorance. There's always a cure for ignorance, and if you're lucky, you (the kid) are at least part of it. >"wild" Bill (dr. evildude, not to be confused with dr. teeth from muppet show) *LOL* SillyBill. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vika [VEE-kah] Zafrin Patron Saint of Caffeine dacilen at bu dot edu aka Coffee Fru "You and your hula dance of culinary delight..." -ceecee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 11:39:43 GMT From: dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin) Subject: Re: greetings from Alberta! Richard said: >>Neither do I believe that a *falsefied* system of security via censorship is >>worth >>sacrificing freedom. But neither do I believe that freedom of expression is a >>Good >>Thing in all circumstances. I just get uncomfortable when anyone puts >>themselves >>in an absolutist position on anything, be it something I agree with or >>something >>or don't. I believe freedom of expression is a Good Thing. But freedom to >>agressively express a belief that hetrosexual Caucasians are the pure >>master-race >>and everyone else should be exterminated? And nora said: >but that is the whole point of freedom of speech. the very basis of free speech >is protecting unpopular views. if all anyone ever said was nice or pleasant, ..... >should they be saying such ignorant and terrible things? of course >not, i wish that they would all just shut up and learn something, but are they >protected under free speech? yes they are. the only way to counteract their >power of speech is to have the opposition (aka us) be even louder. I don't think that was Richard's point. He said that what he didn't like was an _agressive_ way of expressing your views - the example he gave, I believe, alluded to the Nazis. He wasn't talking about freedom of speech. >my logic (if you can call it that), actually, it's more of an observation, is >that most people look at the way the world is, see the corruption and evils and >resign themselves to the status quo, even joining in the madness, because its >simply "the way things are and we can't do anything to change it, so we might >as well join the party". I am still trying to understand how that ties in with the original warning-sticker argument... >im sure im going to get an argument for this one, but i believe that "human >nature" is an exuse that people made up to blame their own fixable flaws on. >instead of working on improvement, they just say, it's human nature, what can >you do? I do believe there are some qualities inherent in humans, and not all of them are positive. Most of the time *I* remember human nature brought up in this discussion, it was in the context of "this is how we are, and it isn't always good, but we can't just close our eyes to it - this is what we have to work with." As opposed to "ah well, we're just bad, let's party." >i just want to remind everyone that the punching/smacking/whatever bodily harm >you can think of metaphor is merely that. in no way do i support someone's >right to punch someone in the face (or anywhere else for that matter). that is >not a freedom guaranteed by the constitution ( although it would lead to some >interesting situations if you think about it, but i digress), merely a person's >right to verbally (not physicly) express his or herself. once you take it to a >physical level, everything changes. Exactly. But I'm confused: you're pro-freedom of speech but *against* someone expressing their views on an artist's work via warning stickers? Especially if we're talking about a merchant who has his/her business' integrity (whatever he/she perceives that as) to protect? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vika [VEE-kah] Zafrin Patron Saint of Caffeine dacilen at bu dot edu aka Coffee Fru "You and your hula dance of culinary delight..." -ceecee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:10:53 GMT From: dacilen@bu.edu (Vika Zafrin) Subject: Re: The Best On 16 Jul 1998 23:53:26 GMT, wrote: >hello Hey! Another Slav on alt.music.moxy-fruvous? Dare I believe my eyes? Oh. Wait. He cross-posted to a bunch of groups. *sigh* Silly person. Ah, well. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Vika [VEE-kah] Zafrin Patron Saint of Caffeine dacilen at bu dot edu aka Coffee Fru "You and your hula dance of culinary delight..." -ceecee ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 08:18:04 +0000 From: em Subject: Re: 21+ shows KPFruhead wrote: > > >5) Just show up and see what happens. >Sometimes the person working the > >door is actually a nice person. Imagine that. > > Good point Chad! That was my expirence with the Bowery Ballroom show... All I > heard from them on the phone was nobody under 21 at all. I showed up anyway > (with parents, of course), and they didn't even look at me, just let me right > in. I thought about doing that with the Bowery Ballroom show, but it's not so easy for me to get to New York that I'd be willing to go there and then not be able to get in. I'd try it at a show in Boston, but that's about it. Until I'm 21, of course. em - -- ===> s t r a n g e p e r s o n @ h o t m a i l . c o m <=== ------------------------------ End of alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest V1 #115 ********************************************