// This is a long digest. Not many posts, but lots of words.
// First up, a long-time NanciNetter takes me to task for censoring
// the digest. I have posted a short reply.
// Then it starts getting even better, with another NanciNut offering
// to give away books!!! Bill Peete tells us about the annual 
// tape exchange, and we have various and sundry other notes.
// Enjoy... [BP

_________________________________________________________________


Subject: NN: Freedom of Speech on the NanciNet (or "Bring on the Flames")
   From: "Bob Lem" (august1974@hotmail.com>

I have to admit I have a bit of a problem with the Digest.  Having not 
posted in a long time, I wondered if this was worth coming out of lurk 
for.  I feel it is.  I also have to admit that I skip reading most long, 
moralistic posts in the digest myself and, thus, this action is out of 
character for me, so I apologize for any lack of tact in the 
presentation of my particular viewpoint, understanding if this post is 
also ignored by many of the other NanciNetters.  Finally, I also believe 
that this won't make it to the Digest.  Will I come to regret this?  
We'll see.

In the second-last edition of the digest, #98B15, our new list manager 
admitted to editing a NanciNetter's posting stating that "any list that 
includes Marilyn Manson won't make it to the digest".  My objection 
seems obvious, but I'll state it for the record.  Put simply, I think it 
was an extremely biased act and reeks of the worst kind of censorship.  
So just mentioning someone the list manager personally doesn't like 
means that it won't make it to the digest?  The objections to the 
notions that the persona of said artist seems to represent are quite 
valid.  But I might be interested in seeing that particular list.  I 
also might be interested in objecting to the inclusion of that artist on 
the list or, conversely, concurring with a fellow NanciNetter on a very 
unpredictable musical selection considering the dominance of 
country/folk in the taste of this list.  As a NanciNetter, I was given 
none of these options and my only means of recourse are to state my 
piece as I am now doing or to do nothing at all.  Moreover, censoring a 
posting merely because of a difference in musical tastes; because of a 
difference in ethical viewpoints with that NanciNetter or with the 
recommended artist's public, or even private, persona; I think such 
censorship is even more inflammatory than the simple inclusion of the 
debated artist's name and album title and is just plain wrong.  Another 
point which I am partially ashamed to have to make is that it opposes 
the tenet of free speech which our Western societies purport to hold 
rightful above almost all else.  A question:  By excluding that list, 
who was being saved?

In another twist of contradiction and in the same edition of the Digest, 
the list manager appends another list with his editorial opinion of 
Lucinda William's latest release and, in the next Digest tells us that 
"Okay -- my favorite of recent years is Kathy Mattea's "Good News."   
HUH?  From such contradictions, it becomes very apparent that there is a 
real imbalance in the freedom of expression on the list.  Am I the only 
one who gets pissed off when a police officer tickets Jane & Joe Average 
for running a red light but turns on the siren and the flashers to do 
the exact same thing and gets away with it "because I can"?  Please 
think about it.

Granted that, since we didn't receive the entire posting, I have no idea 
if maybe the NanciNetter was attacking the tastes of others, or even 
personally attacking some person or group directly.  In such cases, yes, 
these postings should be edited and/or excluded from the Digest.  If 
that was the case, I applaud our list manager for performing a very 
important and necessary function for the list.  Going out of one's way 
to verbally assault a person is inherently bad, divisive and the root 
cause of a lot of harm.  Best to keep that stuff as far away as 
possible, I agree. But if that wasn't the case with this posting, what 
was the point?

I have to say that every correspondence I've had with Bill in the past 
up to this point has been extremely cordial and good-natured, and I hope 
that it remains that way.  I also hope that anyone who thinks that all 
of this is a personal attack on Bill Page will look again at the point I 
am trying to make.  This entire treatise has to do with something he 
did, not the person he is.  I firmly believe that Bill is doing a 
wonderful job, and just made a bad judgement call, maybe because of his 
new responsibility to the NanciNet.  Far from being the end of the 
world, there is nonetheless a danger in not calling such things to 
attention.  If you were to ask me what I think about Marilyn Manson, I 
would have to say, "Not much."  However, it strikes me that there is a 
greater principle at stake and I had to voice my thoughts.

I look forward to hearing any responses, retorts, (notification of the 
cancellation of my subscription to the NanciNet Digest - YIKES!), or any 
further thoughts and opinions on this subject.  To keep the NanciNet 
focused, I ask that you please E-Mail me your response personally at the 
address below unless it has specifically to do with the NanciNet.

Many thanks for allowing me to state my feelings.  Again, great job, 
Bill, and forgive me if I come off a little harsh.

Bob Lem in Thunder Bay
august1974@hotmail.com



_________________________________________________________________


Subject: Re: NN: Freedom of Speech on the NanciNet (or "Bring on the Flames")
   From: Bill Page (bpage@scctel.com>

Bob Lem wrote:

> I have to admit I have a bit of a problem with the Digest.  
(snip>
> In the second-last edition of the digest, #98B15, our new list manager
> admitted to editing a NanciNetter's posting stating that "any list that
> includes Marilyn Manson won't make it to the digest".  My objection
> seems obvious, but I'll state it for the record.  Put simply, I think it
> was an extremely biased act and reeks of the worst kind of censorship.

Bob has a legitimate point. I would note that the original of the post went
through the regular (i.e., unmoderated) list without being interrupted or
edited. Those of you who read it saw a post that had 4 different "top ten"
lists, two of which I personally found objectionable. So I excised, no, I
censored that part of the list. I could have noted that the post was being
trimmed because it was too long (which it was), or because the extra lists were
in no way Nanci=related. Could have, but I took the smart-mouth way instead. Not
too good judgement, maybe.

Since then I've had two other postings that I had trouble personally putting in
the digest, partly because of length, partly because they really stretched the
limits. In each of those cases I replied directly to the author asking for their
own edited version to put in the digest. 

I dunno. There's little doubt that Bob is right about the fact that I made a
decision to censor something. I have, though, in the few instances when I have
changed the original post, put an editorial comment into the digest that noted
the edit. Yeah, I could have just not put that posting into the digest, since it
went so far afield. And I might should apologize to the sender...I'll have to
think about it.

Bob also noted:

> In another twist of contradiction and in the same edition of the Digest,
> the list manager appends another list with his editorial opinion of
> Lucinda William's latest release and, in the next Digest tells us that
> "Okay -- my favorite of recent years is Kathy Mattea's "Good News."
> HUH?  From such contradictions, it becomes very apparent that there is a
> real imbalance in the freedom of expression on the list.  

I don't see this as either a contradiction or an imbalance...you all knew when I
took over the list that I would add editorial comments from time to time...it's
not inconsistent with the past regime. 

Bob then suggested:
> I look forward to hearing any responses, retorts, (notification of the
> cancellation of my subscription to the NanciNet Digest - YIKES!), or any
> further thoughts and opinions on this subject.  To keep the NanciNet
> focused, I ask that you please E-Mail me your response personally at the
> address below unless it has specifically to do with the NanciNet.

Actually, I also look forward to the discussion, and would suggest that it NOT
go through private emails, but takes place on the list (unless you're gonna use
really ugly words about me...send those directly to me!)

There is an alternative to the moderated (i.e., edited and maybe censored!)
digest. I can set the parameters of the list to do an automatic digest...all I'd
have to do is handle the bounces. Those of you on the Dar Williams list have a
good example of what that digest would look like. Certainly is easier for me,
but it changes four years worth of digest flavor. 

Your neophyte (and not always too friendly) list manager,

Bill

_________________________________________________________________


Subject: NN: NanciNet music book giveaway
   From: Michael Wilt (handofgrace@yahoo.com>

Griffsters,

This is kind of a goofy post in which I'll try to give away some music
books. Please bear with the details; I'm only trying to give some
stuff away and have some fun while I'm at it, but without the process
getting out of hand.

I am in possession of a single copy of each of the dozen music &
songwriting related books listed below. I'd like to make these books
available, at no cost, to my fellow Griffsters who could use them as
intended or give them as gifts to friends who could use them. If you
are interested, here's what you should do:

1. Send an email to me (not to the NanciNet) with the words "music
book" in the subject line. In a paragraph, tell me which book you'd
like, and why: for example, you're a working musician playing local
clubs on the weekends and need some new material; you direct a church
choir and could use it next Easter; you are a fledgling songwriter who
needs help; you need some new material for your volunteer gigs at the
nursing home.
   My preference is to give the books to folks who are, one way or
another, "working in corners," rather than to folks who are seeking
souvenirs of a favorite artist.
   I've given brief descriptions of the books and their retail prices
below. All are paperback. Please do not ask for additional
information; I won't have time to answer.

2. Include your postal address in your email to me. If I choose to
send you a book, then I can send it on its way, but I will email you
to let you know it's coming.

3. If I send you a book, I ask this in return: Send me 2 or 3
postcards of "the sights" in your home area. Also, if you are a
musician, professional or otherwise, I'd love to receive a photo of
yourself in musical action. I'll send you my postal address when I
email you per number 2 above.

4. Why am I doing this? Well, I've got these books here that I'd like
to put in the hands of people who can make them sing, so to speak,
rather than see them go to waste. And in the process I'd like to have
the fun of putting some faces and places together with names on the
NanciNet.

5. I'll decide who gets what on Sunday, November 22nd, so get your
licks in by then.

Here's the list of books:

1. How to Write a Hit Song: The Complete Guide to Writing and
Marketing Chart-Topping Lyrics and Music, by Molly-Ann Leiken; 9.95.
2. How To Have Your Hit Song Published, by Jay Warner; 14.95.
3.The Working Drummer: Valuable Tips and Advice for Drummers at Every
Professional Level, by Rick Van Horn; 14.95.
4. Rhyming Techniques and Strategies, by Pat Pattison; (for
songwriters); 10.95.
5. The Manhattan Transfer Songbook; includes Birdland, Body and Soul,
Route 66; 24 songs total; 14.95.
6. The John Lennon Connection; includes Give Peace a Chance, Imagine,
Instant Karma; 15 songs total; 12.95.
7. Big River: The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; (Songs from the
Broadway show) words and music by Roger Miller; 9.95
8. Tracy Chapman: Crossroads (Piano, Vocal, Guitar); 14.95.
9. Tracy Chapman: Tracy Chapman (Piano, Vocal, Guitar); 14.95.
10. R.E.M.: Automatic For the People (Guitar, exact transcriptions
from the album, in both tab and standard format); 19.95.
11. Indigo Girls: (Piano, Vocal, Chords); includes Closer to Fine,
Blood and Fire, Tried to Be True; 10 songs total; 14.95.
12. David Fanshawe: African Sanctus; vocal score (for soprano solo,
mixed chorus, instrumental ensemble, and pre-recorded tape); 9.95.

So there you have it. I hope these will be of interest to some folks
out there. Send email to me at: handofgrace@yahoo.com

Michael "I'm a bookaholic and I refuse to recover" Wilt


_________________________________________________________________


Subject: NN: top ten
   From: Toni Hoepf (hoepf.1@osu.edu>

For what it's worth, here is my top ten in no particular order.  I'm not
sure if Jonatha Brooke is 97 or 98 but I saw it on a couple other lists
so decided to include it.

 1. Nanci Griffith-OV2
 2. Lucinda Williams-Car Wheels On a Gravel Road
 3. Dolly Parton-Hungry Again
 4. The Horse Whisperer soundtrack
 5. Randy Scruggs-Crown of Jewels
 6. Susan Werner-Time Between Trains
 7. Billy Bragg and Wilco-Mermaid Ave.
 8. Jonatha Brooke-10 cent Wings
 9. Treasures Left Behind-Remembering Kate Wolf
10.Cowboy Junkies-Miles From Our Home

  I'm having fun checking out other lists and making notes to myself
about cd's to check out.  Thanks.

  Toni



_________________________________________________________________


Subject: NN: Holiday Tape Exchange
   From: Bill Peete (billpeet@cruzio.com>

Howdy Folks,

For each of the last three years, we've held a "Holiday Tape Exchange" that
turned out to be a lot of fun. If anyone is interested in doing the same
thing this year, you may participate by letting me know, and then making a
100 (or 90 if you prefer) minute tape of some of your favorite *NON* Nanci
tunes. For the high-tech folks with CD recorders, I think it would be okay
to substitute a cd for a tape. 


If you'd like to participate this year, reply to this message, by December
6, 1998. When replying, be sure to change the address from:

	nanci@world.std.com 

to:

	billpeet@cruzio.com

In other words, private e-mail, so's not to clutter up the list. A simple "I
want in" is sufficient. I will confirm your entry by replying with a simple
"ok". 

As in previous years, I will toss all the participants names into my Nanci
"Flyer" hat and will draw names to determine who gets who's tape. Witnesses
will be present. Within a few days, of December 6, I'll post one public
message that tells you who to send your tape to.

Holiday Cheers,

-bill "stayin' warm in his fine new jacket" peete


_________________________________________________________________


Subject: Re: NN: NanciNet Convention - YESSSS!!!!
   From: david lidz (dlidz@who.net>

Virginia (ginrosej@bellsouth.net> wrote:

"Hi all, just out of curiosity, I did a very limited search to see if there were
any
places in and around Franklin where we might meet, not too far for some f**k
singer-songwriter who might live in the area to come pay a visit."

To which I say,

"YESSS, Virginia, there really IS a Santa Claus"

and methinks it's YOU!!!

Comes forth Virginia, Titania-like and with magical dew-drops breathing life
into this
withering hair-brained scheme!!!

YES VIRGINIA YES VIRGINIA
YES! YES! YES!

I was afraid that this nutty little discussion of ours had sputtered out -
nobody taking
it seriously, but now Virginia has come along and actually worked on it, checked
into
where we might do it, places we might stay (now all we need are some ideas for
world
renowned coutry/f**k singers we might like to invite), and well,

it's a-LIII - YEEEEEEEEEEEVE!!
it's a-LIIIIIIIIIIII - YEEEEEEEEEEEVE!!

I'm in, I'll be there no matter what, with or without famous f**k singers, tell
me what I
can do to help, or maybe we should put together some kinda cyber-committee -
ahh, but
before I get too far and lathered up and excited, maybe we should kinda conduct
a poll,
y'know, what d'y'all think, and let the skeptics, realists, pragmatists, etc
chime in, and
yes I know it's a long long long long long shot that we'd actually get the
famous f**k
singer who would be our first choice to show up, yes of course I know that, like
DUUU-uhhhh, but who knows, nobody, that's who, one never knows, stranger things
have
happened and that's not the point anyway...

Okay, so i'll just shut up now and wait for responses, see who's interested in
going,
who's interested in helping coordinate, and who thinks it's just a plain dumb
idea and
that I should sit down, shut up and get some work done.

Yes, that's what I'll do, real calm-like with reservation, rationality,
sensibility,
careful contemplation and due measure etc., no chompin' at the bit, jumpin the
gun, flyin'
off the handle, tiltin' at windmills here - no way, no how!!

so, lemmeknowwhatcyathink,
david "my lance, please, sancho" lidz

_________________________________________________________________


Subject: NN: Kate Campbell fans in St. Louis? (no Nanci content)
   From: mthompso@peabodygroup.com (Mark Thompson)

Any Kate Campbell fans in the St. Louis MO area?  I have an extra free pass to
her concert this Thursday night (11/19).  E-mail me at mthompso@peabodygroup.com
if you're interested.

Mark Thompson

Subject: Re: NN: WOOLWORTH'S IN AUSTIN
   From: "Charles E. Stefl" (charleystefl@worldnet.att.net>

Woolworth's was on the northwest corner of 6th & Congress.  Buses heading
south and west still stop on this same corner, but there's no more vanilla
coke, no popcorn machine,  and no more digging through a record bin and
finding a record for 69 cents that you've always wanted all your life.

Steve Makarsky wrote:

> Afternoon, NNetters:
>
> Sadly, the Woolworths in Austin is history... But if memory serves, the
> Woolworths wasn't quite at the corner of 6th & Congress, but about 1
> block east along 6th Street... But since it's been sometime since I was
> on 6th St & I was usually too busy wetting my whistle on Lone Star &
> Shiner Bock, I COULD be mistaken...
>
> Steve "UT sure was a haze" Makarsky

_________________________________________________________________


Subject: NN: Lists
   From: j.davis@virgin.net (j.davis@virgin.net)

All these lists make very interesting reading to me over in the UK.  I
reckon that it shows, amongst other things, that you lot buy an awful lot of
CDs each year!  For what it's worth I rate Lucinda as far and away my 'best
buy' for 98 (thanks for the recommendation on the digest) followed by OVOR
Too.
As I'm coming over to the States in a couple of weeks I hope to take
advantage of your CD prices so meantime I shall be eagerly combing the
digest for suggestions!  I must have missed any information about Cry, Cry,
Cry which is cropping up a lot, is it a compilation, film score, or what?

Missing my first Nanci UK tour for a few years for various reasons but hope
everyone has a great time at the gigs.

May all your troubles be small ones.

John Davis

_________________________________________________________________
Questions about NanciNet?  Send e-mail to bpage@scctel.com