179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes
subject “new skam website” → 35 results
DateFromSubject
2002-04-0813:53Reading, John RE: [idm] new skam website
what's this then? http://www.skam.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail…
2002-04-1000:50omz Re: [idm] new skam website
>np:Phonem:Ilisu (would anyone argue that the design work for Morr…
2002-04-1001:40Reading, John RE: [idm] new skam website
You are right . I'm full of crap. Crazy fonts don't…
2002-04-0813:57thorsten Sideb0ard RE: [idm] new skam website
its a fortnightly video magazine... not the label -thor On Mon, 8…
2002-04-0700:44Aster X Prodax [idm] new skam website
skam has a new website up with streaming mp3 tracks of a…
2002-04-0919:27Reading, John RE: [idm] new skam website
>i can't believe that this debate is even happening on >a…
2002-04-1012:15matis Re: [idm] new skam website
asterprox@attbi.com wrote: > i can't believe that this debate is…
2002-04-0919:52Static Beats Re: [idm] new skam website (point of a sleeve)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Miller" > > Or just have a…
2002-04-0818:59Re: [idm] new skam website
on the real, the old site, the one with the green light…
2002-04-0818:38Christopher Miller Re: [idm] new skam website
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 Dan John baited: > Ummm... you're kidding…
2002-04-0812:41henrik str.mberg Re: [idm] new skam website
At 21.15 -0700 02-04-07, lysaabi wrote: >Ummm... you're…
2002-04-0921:21Randall Roberts Re: [idm] new skam website
George Williamson wrote:
2002-04-0821:18Randall Roberts Re: [idm] new skam website
Kinda like the Designers Republic gibberish that Warp relies on? I can…
2002-04-0823:14ugly and mean Re: [idm] new skam website
--- Dan John wrote: > Alright... I commend record labels for…
2002-04-1017:34carcus Re: [idm] new skam website
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, omz wrote: > >np:Phonem:Ilisu (would anyone…
2002-04-0922:16Reading, John RE: [idm] new skam website
> > The difference is that we're not looking to the music for…
2002-04-0918:13vis-you Re: Re[2]: [idm] new skam website
> They've done some brilliant design, as well (Towa Tei), and if…
2002-04-0917:28Randall Roberts Re: [idm] new skam website
Greg Smith wrote: <
2002-04-0922:31RE: [idm] new skam website
if you are dealing with a style of music that is primarily…
2002-04-0803:57Dan John Re: [idm] new skam website
Alright... I commend record labels for making 'outside of the box' websites…
2002-04-0916:07George Williamson Re: [idm] new skam website
> Function figures into a record sleeve in a very simple way, one…
2002-04-0919:06dj pie Re: [idm] new skam website
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Randall Roberts wrote: > George Williamson wrote: > >
2002-04-0915:42alan r lucas Re: [idm] new skam website
can you give a few ferinstances of completely illegible tDR sleeves? i…
2002-04-0919:15Christopher Miller Re: [idm] new skam website
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002 Alan R Lucas wanted to know: > can…
2002-04-0922:21Randall Roberts Re[2]: [idm] new skam website
Ditto here. I cram the box with stuff I like that might…
2002-04-0919:46Randall Roberts Re[2]: [idm] new skam website
DR doesn't do all the Warp releases; they've just done…
2002-04-0919:25Re: [idm] new skam website
i can't believe that this debate is even happening on a…
2002-04-0919:26Re: [idm] new skam website
i can't believe that this debate is even happening on a…
2002-04-0919:26Re: [idm] new skam website
i can't believe that this debate is even happening on a…
2002-04-0804:15lysaabi Re: [idm] new skam website
Ummm... you're kidding, right? If not, please tell what you think…
2002-04-0923:26EggyToast RE: [idm] new skam website
At 06:16 PM 4/9/2002 -0400, you wrote: >I'm…
2002-04-0918:26Static Beats Re: Re[2]: [idm] new skam website
In contrast to my previous email I'd say that (although I…
2002-04-0818:54Greg Smith Re: [idm] new skam website
on 4/8/02 2:18 PM, Randall Roberts at Randall.Roberts…
2002-04-0921:49alan r lucas Re: [idm] new skam website
I guess that's one thing that i've never really though…
2002-04-0923:09EggyToast Re: [idm] new skam website
At 07:25 PM 4/9/2002 +0000, you wrote: >i can…