Monicas Dude

Richard Burton

unread,

Feb 7, 2002, 7:24:50 PM2/7/02

to

I WANT MONICAS DUDE BACK

tantrum over

John Howells

unread,

Feb 7, 2002, 7:25:42 PM2/7/02

to

"Richard Burton" <ric...@rburton63.freeserve.co.uk> writes:

<I WANT MONICAS DUDE BACK

We ALL want Monica's Dude back. The guy in the white house now is
intolerable.

--

John Howells
how...@punkhart.com
http://www.punkhart.com

J.Roemer

unread,

Feb 7, 2002, 7:44:12 PM2/7/02

to

Hi
where is Monica ?
--
Ciao & By
Juergen

+++ There ain't no limit to the amount of trouble women bring +++
******************************************************
URL: http://home.t-online.de/home/j.roemer
E-Mail: mailto:J.Ro...@t-online.de
Germany
******************************************************

"John Howells" <how...@punkhart.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:aWE88.727$1F2....@sea-read.news.verio.net...

J.Roemer

unread,

Feb 7, 2002, 7:45:29 PM2/7/02

to

why ?

"J.Roemer" <J.Ro...@t-online.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:a3v713$qhn$04$1...@news.t-online.com...

ramblin man

unread,

Feb 9, 2002, 6:38:03 AM2/9/02

to

Who cares. It's a pretty poor site.

"J.Roemer" <J.Ro...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:a3v73g$2lh$06$1...@news.t-online.com...

Anne Thrax

unread,

Feb 9, 2002, 12:00:28 PM2/9/02

to

As opposed to yer favortie site, the one that says that John Hammond
Sr. was both Dylan's producer and the guy who recorded such albums as "So
Many Roads." The one that passes on your crap about "GoingGoingGuam" being
previously uncirculated stuff. The one whose owner cuts and pastes big chunks
of text from other sites, then denies it in whiny posts on rmd (and objects
when people point out errors on his site, and seems to have at least two
different sources/dates for so many 1960s tapes.) The one that won't tell
you which high-priced comercial boots are dishonestly packaged copies of
long-circulating fan recordings.
Look, Marky-boy, we all know what your agenda rilly, rilly is.

St. Annie

http://www.zfree.co.nz

ramblin man

unread,

Feb 9, 2002, 8:22:40 PM2/9/02

to

Miaow.

"Anne Thrax" <anne_...@zfree.co.nz> wrote in message
news:3c65...@zfree.co.nz...

MC66

unread,

Feb 10, 2002, 11:15:25 PM2/10/02

to

"ramblin man" <m...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in news:vS798.14684$H9.1931207
@news1.cableinet.net:

> Who cares. It's a pretty poor site.

I think it's a pretty good site.

But it would be pretty worthless without the commercial boots that are
slammed within.

If you take the commercial boot info off the site, excessive bandwidth
hits would no longer be a problem, guaranteed!

ben

unread,

Feb 10, 2002, 11:39:24 PM2/10/02

to

in a perfect world every bob bootleg would only be reffered to by its
date. you would say 9-03-65 and people would instantly know you are
talking about the hollywoodbowl show in 65, with buick and everything...

but thats not how the world is...people have trade lists that say "we
have a lion" and you are supposed to know they are reffering to
09-03-65. we need a site like monica's to tell us these things...

and all those retarted early 60s comps with a few songs from a few
dates...thats just retarted but they are common. we truely need monica
to help us organize our boots...

Bill

unread,

Feb 11, 2002, 12:09:53 PM2/11/02

to

This is simply incorrect. The traffic reports for the Angelfire site
consistently showed that the "unabridged" pages -- those including
both commercial boots and fan projects -- were much more heavily used
than the "standard" -- principally commercial boots -- pages.

Bill

MC66 <fligh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<xzH98.67151$6o2.4...@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...

Anne Thrax

unread,

Feb 11, 2002, 6:35:56 PM2/11/02

to

Well, another charming one-word response from Mister "music4trade."
Ya seem to get off on sending crude, dismissive messages to women in this
group, don't ya. Relationship issues, or just another tiny, limp . . . .

St. Annie

http://www.zfree.co.nz

MC66

unread,

Feb 11, 2002, 7:21:35 PM2/11/02

to

monic...@yahoo.com (Bill) wrote in
news:b431cfee.02021...@posting.google.com:

> This is simply incorrect. The traffic reports for the Angelfire site
> consistently showed that the "unabridged" pages -- those including
> both commercial boots and fan projects -- were much more heavily used
> than the "standard" -- principally commercial boots -- pages.

That proves absolutely nothing.
I like fan projects and love commercial boots, so I click on abridged to
see it all cause it's more complete.
Almost all of the time I'm looking up the real deal.

If you got rid of the unabridged pages, & split it up into two sections:
1. commercial boots
2. fan projects
you'd see the difference.

Anyways, congrats on a nice website, I use it often.

MC