Re: [-empyre-] video killed the radio star
- To: soft_skinned_space <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: [-empyre-] video killed the radio star
- From: Chris Ashley <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:38:29 -0700 (PDT)
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=keX3n8ViyIiKrAYbGIBIgcdxd9D3rvNq3WLrComsRIpMwN8nYCiVmnRwywr5UE3PqYJjPQW+rGO92Ga3URb5oyIXLp03Z/tQueLvzB7H/L/ZzYHK6z5yUsYDVdBYeDhsGedGTbmBqHIQsPeoUxqVYOHPZokpkjXDCShVU5X5XzQ= ;
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- Reply-to: soft_skinned_space <firstname.lastname@example.org>
--- email@example.com wrote:
> > Why do you say, "elementary content alteration"?
> > Do you mean "elementary content" ro "elementary
> > alteration"?
> i was trying 2 convey that blogging offers a method
> of shifting [altering]
> loadings placed on emphasising the "validity"
> options of elementary content [ie
> primary source material, whether that b acknowledged
> media content or
> personalised opinion]?
OK, I've read that like three times and I'm going to
move on. Maybe it's just me.
> > And how on earth do you write so consistently with
> the "." and "+" and all that?
What, you want me to read all that to get the answer
to a simple question? Geez.
BTW, there is no way to convey in my reply here the
joking tone of my voice- except with cute smilies,
whic I don't do- so please trust me, I'm poking back
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and