179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes
Search · subject · body · from · to
Advanced search
reset

← archive index

(idm) tinnitus to noise ratios

1 message · 1 participant · spans 1 day · search this subject
1997-09-16 06:00objet @ (idm) tinnitus to noise ratios
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
1997-09-16 06:00objet @Aran wrote: > It's not the initial posts which piss me off, it's the people who > reply to
From:
objet @
To:
Date:
Mon, 15 Sep 1997 23:00:33 -0700
Subject:
(idm) tinnitus to noise ratios
permalink · <341E2080.6D1E@mindspring.com>
Aran wrote:
quoted 3 lines It's not the initial posts which piss me off, it's the people who> It's not the initial posts which piss me off, it's the people who > reply to the list thinking we all care how smart you are(n't). > You can still be helpful, just be helpful quietly.
is this self-reflexive? for Aran then later wrote:
quoted 1 line I digress.> I digress.
I don't know what's worse: non-IDM threads, or anti-non-IDM thread retaliations. Contrary to Aran (apparently) I've found the tinnitus thread to be more than just interesting -- it also reflects a very healthy degree of listmember- community responsibility, something too often in short supply. As for "signal to noise ratios" on the list? Well, I think that the tagline to Irene's thoughtful & useful post says it all:
quoted 2 lines "Incomplete without surface noise"> "Incomplete without surface noise" > - Autechre
=-=-=-=signifier over signified signing off=-=-=-= & P.S. -- thanks to all who responded privately (and publically!) to my 68030 CDR question!