From: Stella Maris Area: Mundane To: Ali Katz 31 Jan 94 16:23:00 Subject: Confusing, Isn't It. UpdReq Hmmmmm, I wonder how frequently this *particular* question has been asked? . 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Stella Maris Area: Mundane To: Julian 31 Jan 94 16:26:00 Subject: _mystical Qabalah_ UpdReq "cart before the equine creature"? I think Gentle Friend (you recognize *that* name, don't you?) has an even better phrase for it: putting the cart before the force. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Farrell McGovern Area: Mundane To: Grendel Grettisson 27 Jan 94 11:53:48 Subject: Metaphysical UpdReq On Jan 19 15:48 94, Grendel Grettisson of 1:343/56@Fidonet wrote: >> Failure to do so after repeated warnings can >> eventually result in your being barred from these echos. If >> you have any problems with this, then respond in the Mundane >> echo. GG> I wish you would tell the people posting in Metaphysical GG> this. If they get META, they should be getting this echo too! ttyl, Farrell 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Farrell McGovern Area: Mundane To: John Machate 27 Jan 94 11:54:40 Subject: Metaphysical UpdReq On Jan 20 20:56 94, John Machate of 93:9810/11 wrote: JM> Sysops should be held responsible for people posting in JM> read only areas, my understanding was that if a user wanted JM> to post an article in metaphysical he was to give it to the JM> sysop or ask the sysop for temp write access to compose JM> the article. NO ONE can post in the Meta echo on my JM> system... JM> JM> Am I mistaken in my thinking? No, but I work on a three strike system...if the person posts off-topic, they recieve a first waring via here...the second time they need a warning, I send it here, and then either e-mail the sysop, or mention it in Pagansys. Third time, I ask for their posting access to be suspended from the echo for a period of 30 days. ttyl, Farrell 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Farrell McGovern Area: Mundane To: Grendel Grettisson 30 Jan 94 18:02:14 Subject: Metaphysical UpdReq On Jan 25 15:02 94, Grendel Grettisson of 1:343/56@Fidonet wrote: GG> I should have phrased that "I wish you would have told the GG> people posting in Metaphysical when they did it." There GG> have been messages there for several weeks and you were GG> nary to be seen. That's all. It seems to be in order now GG> though. Again, sorry, but I had both a vacation & super busy time at work...no matter how hard some of us work at it, we still end up doing more work than we want... ttyl, Farrell 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Farrell McGovern Area: Mundane To: Mark Drake 30 Jan 94 18:04:54 Subject: Read Only? UpdReq On Jan 26 21:42 94, Mark Drake of 93:9500/5 wrote: MD> There is nothing wrong with my compliance, on my BBS, except for me, MD> the sysop, it is a READ ONLY echo, I was just trying to make a point MD> that except for the first week, there had been very little except MD> chit-chat. As I have seen very little in the way of magazine style MD> posts in the last month or so, if you feel the need to cut my feed to MD> these three, feel free. I would rather you didn't as I enjoy some of MD> the posts here and in MagicNet, and I am led to believe that it is a MD> trio, all or none. It is, and I had the opertunity to have a vacation, and just before that, had been working 60 hour weeks. So, things were not as closely monitored as they seem need to be...but I do have a job, and I do need the occasional vacation to preserve what little sanity I have left.... MD> At the time I had posted the above message, I had just read 50 or so MD> messages, and, I believe that 2 or 3 were of the approved style. Silly MD> of me perhaps, but I presume that the system that was letting users MD> post chit-chat has been dealt with. Of course, what come to mind is, MD> why was I tromped on, simply because I addressed a message to you, MD> when two to three weeks of chit-chat went by with no apparent notice MD> by you. I don't think it was that high...I have the past 3 months online, and will check the numbers. ttyl, Farrell 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Valkyrie Area: Mundane To: Ali Katz 30 Jan 94 04:00:00 Subject: Confusing, Isn't It. UpdReq AK> Hi, Valkyrie, AK> I wasn't going to push my luck by asking this in R/A, but ... what's a AK> FAQ, some sort of new Anglo-Atlantean Rite? Sounds pretty esoteric. Hmm AK> ... Flight, Awakening, and Shapeshifting ... ? (F)requently (A)sked (Q)uestions. I *kept* asking people what they meant by that term...I guess they thought I was joking... I found it explained in a book on InterNet. But there *is* the deeper meaning often found in anacronyms which occur *fastidiously* *answering* *queries* which no one thought to ask until the answer was manifested. The esoterically bound set of FAQ, it will be noted, is often invoked by beseiged moderators, with the additional suggestion related to the FF combination which invokes a curse on those that don't take advantage of FAQ benefits and continue to petition the powers that be for what should be obvious... Blessings of the Anglo-Atlantean High Ones... VHmmmm. What does my signature manifest? Maybe I'd better go back to the mystical magnetically encoded files and see.... SLMR 2.1a Follow your nose, it always knows... Toucan Sam 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: David Arnold Area: Mundane To: Atomik Dog 30 Jan 94 20:19:00 Subject: The Illuminatus Trilogy/LOOMPANICS UpdReq > I was wondering if anyone here knows where I can get a copy of the > Illuminatus Trilogy? Store in the SF Bay area, or an address for a > company that might sell it mail order (e.g. LOOMPANICS, don't have thier > address tho). It'd be very much appreciated, I've been wanting my own > copy for about 4 years now. try Bound Together Books at 1369 Haight St. they have a good pagan/occult section. they just might have it; i know they have several R.A. Wilson and Crowley books. if they don't have it, they can probably special order it. btw: Loompanics Unlimited, P.O. Box 1197, Port Townsend, WA 98368. Bound Together also orders regularly from them. david 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Ace Lightning Area: Mundane To: Rose Dawn 27 Jan 94 10:46:48 Subject: Re: TUNES! Rec'd UpdReq RD>Wowsers--never tried that one! The great stereo experiment occurred soon >after I moved in with my (now ex-) husband. We had a completely empty >apartment, save for a bed, a dresser than my former connec' gave me, and my >dinosaur console stereo. It was a crummy neighborhood, where we could get >away with a lot (one feature I do miss now that we're Girlz N The Burbz >I don't think it did anything much for my chakras, but it reminded me of >those beds in cheap motels where you slap a quarter in the slot and >v-v-v-v-v-ibrate, while diggin' your tunes synchronously. It >was...interesting! Just keep in mind my caution about some of the *less* enjoyable side effects of pumping large amounts of low-end bass into your abdominal cavity; unexpected excretory functions (your intestines and bladder get extremely irresponsible). RD>Oh heck, not all us "Generation Xers" are ignorant of the customs of our >forebears, LOLOL!! I know it was called Mary Jane. Haven't you heard any of >those jokes about Rastafarian nuns--Sister Mary Juana & all? Hehehe. I thin >the song, though, has the woman named Mary Jane 'cuz it's sort of a >grrrrl-next-door name and rhymes with 'pain.' #Last dance with Mary Jane, >one more time to kill the pain...I feel summer creeping in, and I'm tired o >this town again.# The song itself is pretty unremarkable, though catchy an >with a nasty enough edge to be intriguing, it's the VIDEO that's bizarre! K >Basinger co-stars as a corpse. It's screamingly funny! She sure makes a pretty corpse! (Life is a song cue...I'm thinking about the line from "Cabaret"..."But when I saw her laid out like a queen,/She was the happiest corpse I'd ever seen!") RD>Hard living has been good to Rod--I think he sounds better NOW than he did >way back when. I love the Stones music, but I never really did 'get' the >Mick-thang. Maybe it is a generational doo-dah? I never had much of a "thang" for Mick myself. But he does have a patent on that strut. Some comedian once described Mick as moving "like a rooster on acid". (I'm in a really perverted mood today: If Mick and Steve Tyler were both bisexual, and decided to kiss each other on the mouth, how much force would it take to break the suction?) >Willie Nelson--YES! He's >absolutely amazing. I still have to catch my breath every time I hear "If Y >Can Touch Her At All." "Angel Flying Too Close To The Ground" should have >warning label slapped on it! Oh mama...I'm the world's greatest Willie Nelson fan, and you've just pushed one of my buttons! If "Angel Flying Too Close To The Ground" blows you away (as it does me)...try his version of the ole Hank Williams Sr. tune, "I'm So Lonesome I Could Cry". Or "Your Song". Or "Bridge Over Troubled Water". Or "Wind Beneath My Wings". Or...oh, somebody stop me! >Bonnie Raitt, yep, Tina, no question. Is there >such a thing as 'ladylike strutting?' If so, Emmylou Harris has made it an >art form. Have you ever seen such a beautiful creature in your life? She's >breathtaking. She could be an *anti* hair coloring Poster Woman. ;> Yeah, I love her attitude! Basically, she says, "Well, I'm over 40, and this is what Nature chose to do with my hair; who am I to argue?" Of course, with those cheekbones, she could shave her head bald and still look great (not like S(k)in(h)ead O'Connor, or the diet lady!). What a fragile-sounding voice from such a strong woman. >Thanks >for the "Travelling Willbury's" ref...one of those stoooopid things that >would've bugged me after a while. ;> Well, I've worked in the "biz"....and I have a mind full of useless but amusing information; it's just the way my head works. SLMR 2.0 I know everything...but I'm sworn to secrecy! 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718