Subject: [removed] Digest V2001 #358
From: "OldRadio Mailing Lists" <[removed]@[removed];
Date: 11/8/2001 2:18 PM

To: <[removed]@[removed];

    ------------------------------

                                The Old-Time Radio Digest!
                                  Volume 2001 : Issue 358
                             A Part of the [removed]!
                                     ISSN: 1533-9289

                                     Today's Topics:

      OTR Restoration                       [ "stephenjansen" <stephenjansen@emai ]
      Duffy and The Lone Ranger             [ "John DiMezzes" <jadm1@[removed] ]
      Anticipation of TV on OTR             [ "Ed Ellers" <ed_ellers@[removed]; ]
      Re:Was OTR more restrictive that we   [ Kenneth Clarke <kclarke5@[removed]; ]
      Produce it on NPR                     [ Henry Howard <hhoward@[removed] ]
      Preacher that healed using [removed]   [ "Ted Kneebone" <tkneebone1@[removed] ]
      Radio sound when I was a [removed]       [ "Ted Kneebone" <tkneebone1@[removed] ]
      Re: World Series                      [ Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; ]
      Re: HS Resurfaces                     [ "J. Pope" <jpope101@[removed] ]
      A Tech Question                       [ "Dave Marthouse" <dmart@[removed] ]
      Radio preacher                        [ "David L. Easter" <david-easter@hom ]
      Re: WOTW B/CAST NOT APPROVED BY H. G  [ "Dave Walter" <fredallenfan@hotmail ]
      Epic OSR                              [ "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@ ]
      My two-cents on MP3 quality           [ Bryan Wright <bswrig@[removed]; ]
      Rule of thumb message correction      [ "Henry Brugsch" <henry@listentohear ]
      OTR to TV Disappointment              [ dougdouglass@[removed] ]
      HADACOL                               [ Bill Beard <wnbeard@[removed]; ]
      Re: Fibber McGee's Radio Picking Up   [ Wboenig@[removed] ]
      Right on, mr. Administrivia           [ hal stone <dualxtwo@[removed]; ]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 20:08:01 -0500
    From: "stephenjansen" <stephenjansen@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: OTR Restoration

         What a great bunch of posts about audio restoration and mp3 vs tape!  I
    have been enjoying all of the comments, sitting back a bit while letting my
    own opinions solidify.
         I have dealt with audio as an "extreme hobby" for about 13 years now.
    It's always been a challenge to "improve" existing audio - there is a VERY
    thin line between actually enhancing sound and degrading it.  Each of us has
    different ideas of what "sounds good", and it takes years of practice to
    tweak intelligently so everyone can enjoy the results.
         And of course, there are those who will say that their tweaked version
    is a vast improvement over the original, and those that say they would
    prefer the unadulterated original historically-correct material.  Both views
    have their own merits, and their own drawbacks.  Both views are utterly
    correct.
         I think that the source material is the ultimate deciding factor in
    audio quality.  A multigenerational tape copy will have none of the clarity
    of an original electrical transcription disc.  Anyone restoring audio from a
    tape source is already working at a disadvantage, as far as optimum audio
    quality goes.  Nothing wrong with working from a tape source, of course,
    it's just that it's lineage is probably unknown - was it a direct-from-disc
    dub?  or was it a 15th generation copy made on off-brand cassette tapes on
    crummy no-name equipment?  Who knows?  There's no way to tell.
         I believe a more important point to make in the entire discussion is
    this: include as much information as you possibly can about your source
    material.  Mp3 offers ID3 tags which allow the inclusion of information in
    the mp3 file itself, not just a header or folder name.  Encode your mp3's at
    HIGH quality (192kbps/44hHz), later, anyone can shrink them (and reduce
    their audio quality) to fit more on a cd.  But it's best not to start at a
    low quality level because it can never really get any higher.
         Those who source from ET's will always have better sound, as long as it
    is a quality transfer.  Those who offer dubs direct from discs proclaim it
    proudly, most of those who do not, tend to keep quiet about it.
         Even though I LOVE to tweak the audio on my OTR, much of this stuff is
    "audio mythology" - watching little lights on audio equipment instead of
    just LISTENING for the [removed] nobody who listens later sees any of
    those little lights.  They just get to hear the show.
          The REAL thing that matters is that show.  Not the recording minutiae.
    I'll take a crummy low-quality mp3 played thru a tiny 2-inch speaker, and
    enjoy the daylights out of it.  Even poor-sounding OTR is GREAT.

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:32:07 -0500
    From: "John DiMezzes" <jadm1@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Duffy and The Lone Ranger

    Hello, I am new to this group, so I hope you will indulge me with a
    question.  While paging through a reference book, I came across a picture of
    Ed Gardner and Brace Beemer supposedly rehearsing for a DUFFY'S TAVERN show.
    The air date, it said, was Feb. 2, 1943.  I searched unsuccessfully through
    the many sites listed on the OTR pages.  Does anyone know where I might get
    a copy of this show?  Thanks.

    John

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:32:48 -0500
    From: "Ed Ellers" <ed_ellers@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Anticipation of TV on OTR

    Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; wrote:

>     But we HAD television in 1939, although it was limited to the NorthEast
>     and a few other major cities.  And although the hours per week were
>     reduced as the war went on, most of the few stations were still on the
>     air at the end of the war.

    NBC and GE started TV broadcasting to the public in 1939, but it took a bit
    longer for others to join them.  The stations operating at the time of Pearl
    Harbor -- all of which were still in existence at war's end -- were NBC
    (WNBT), CBS (WCBW) and Du Mont (W2XWV, later WABD) in New York, Zenith
    (W9XZV) and Balaban & Katz (W9XBK, later WBKB) in Chicago, Don Lee (W6XAO)
    and Paramount (W6XYZ, later KTLA) in Los Angeles, Philco (W3XE, later WPTZ)
    in Philadelphia, and GE (WRGB) in Schenectady.  Some of these didn't go
    commercial until 1942 or later (WPTZ in 1942, WABD in 1944, KTLA in 1947)
    but were offering programming to the public under experimental licenses;
    Zenith never went into commercial operation and W9XZV was eventually forced
    off the air.  There were some other experimental licenses that were either
    not put into operation until after the war (such as W8XCT, later WLWT, in
    Cincinnati) or never used at all.

    One new station actually went on the air *during* the war -- WTTG in
    Washington was allowed to start tests shortly before V-E Day, using gear
    that was ready before Pearl Harbor.  Nobody noticed until they put up a
    slide announcing V-E Day in place of their test pattern; then they got a
    call from the Navy asking what was going on.

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:33:20 -0500
    From: Kenneth Clarke <kclarke5@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re:Was OTR more restrictive that we thought?

    Thanks John Henley for your informative response
    to my question regarding Eddie Cantor.  It made me
    wonder, however, what kind of control the sponsors and
    censors had when it came to the content of the OTR
    radio shows which were broadcast.  Censors and sponsors
    must have had a certain amount of control over what
    was said on  these programs.  If this was true, didn't
    that place restrictions on some of  the more topical
    performances?  Would it have placed greater restrictions
    on performers creativity as well?

    Were there certain standards and practices which were
    in place and what were they?

    What kind of control did the sponsors have over the programs
    they sponsored?

    Were these controls (from censors and sponsors) any more
    restrictive then than those which are in control today?  I'm certainly
    no prude, but I doubt most of the stuff which gets broadcast on
    todays radio and television would have been approved by these
    people during the days of OTR.  True or not?

    Kenneth Clarke

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:34:04 -0500
    From: Henry Howard <hhoward@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Produce it on NPR

    Owens wondered:

>      As I was watching I couldn't help but wonder what an excellent vehicle
>     that would be to produce on NPR radio today.

    Unfortunately Ownes, NPR will cease NPR Playhouse in September 2002.
    Currently there are only 29 stations that broadcast any of the segments per
    week.

    Henry Howard   - Producer  -  Board Member The Atlanta Radio Theatre Company
         henry@[removed]       770 923 7955
    [removed]   [removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:34:24 -0500
    From: "Ted Kneebone" <tkneebone1@[removed];
    To: "Old Time Radio Digest" <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Preacher that healed using [removed]

    Several people have asked the name of the preacher that told listeners to
    put their hands on their radios to be healed.  From memory, I call up the
    name of A. A. Allen.  Don't know where he broadcast from but I will make a
    guess that it was KXEL, Waterloo, Iowa.  That station had several preachers
    doing strange things and selling strange things.  Like crosses that glowed
    in the [removed] so forth.

    Ted Kneebone
    1528 S. Grant St., Aberdeen, SD 57401 / 605-226-3344
    OTR:  [removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:18:43 -0500
    From: "Ted Kneebone" <tkneebone1@[removed];
    To: "Old Time Radio Digest" <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Radio sound when I was a [removed]

    I agree with Max.  We are indeed fortunate to have decent recordings of many
    of the programs we heard as kids.  I remember trying to hear my favorite
    shows thru a fog of static, someone's electric razor, the ignition system of
    a Ford and many other unidentified sources.  In fact, I wonder how I ever
    became a real fan of classical music!  My sources on weekdays were several
    low-power stations: WOI, Ames, IA, WCAL, Northfield, MN, KUOM, Minneapolis,
    MN, and KUSD, Vermillion, SD.  Even on Sundays I sometimes tried to hear the
    New York Philharmonic and the NBC Symphony broadcasts thru this static haze.
    But no matter how bad it was, I stuck with it until Ben Grauer announced
    that Maestro Toscanini had retired to the [removed] next week.

    Ted Kneebone
    1528 S. Grant St., Aberdeen, SD 57401 / 605-226-3344
    OTR:  [removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:20:17 -0500
    From: Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re: World Series

    From: nicoll <nicoll@[removed];

> >     They even piped the games into our grade school over the intercom.

    Ain't that sumthin'!  We had to sneak our listening in with an earphone
    with the wire under our shirt or threaded thru our sleeve while we
    leaned our head on our hand.  Of course that was in the transister radio
    era of the late 50s and after.

> >     Maybe this was because the school was in the St. Louis area - 1942 -
> >     Cardinals vs. Yankees.   :>)   Will Nicoll

    Since I grew up in the New York City area (Teaneck, New Jersey) we
    ALWAYS had teams in the series, so it wasn't as big of a special deal.

    In the pre-transister radio era, my father had a tube type battery
    operated Emerson portable.  As I was really a New York Giants fan,
    rather than a Yankees fan, when the Giants got into the 1954 series I
    talked my father into letting me take the Emerson to school.  But since
    there was no earphone jack I could only listen in the schoolyard during
    recess.  (And even if there were, back then they only made huge
    headphones, not hidable earphones.)  But battery portables were still
    fairly uncommon then, so it was a big deal to even have it out on the
    schoolyard.

    Then hal stone <dualxtwo@[removed]; HAD to write:

>     (And to top off the fun filled day, following the meeting, my wife
>     and I made it back to the hotel in time to turn on the TV and watch
>     the DIAMONDBACKS clobber the Yankee's in game 6 of the World series.
>     AND WE ALL KNOW WHO WON GAME 7. Go D'backs!!!!)

    Oh, STUFF IT, Hal.  (See what happens when we discuss politics,
    religion, baseball, or mp3s.  All the daggers come out.) :-)  Youse guys
    were lucky.  Wait'll next year.  We'll back youse guys into a
    cactus--we'll call you thornbacks.

    Michael (Yankee fan by default--de fault of dem Giants moving West)
    Biel  mbiel@[removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:20:43 -0500
    From: "J. Pope" <jpope101@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Re: HS Resurfaces

>     But does she mention that I got a reprieve, and eventually defended my
>     Country admirably.

        I'm very sorry, Mr. Stone; I'll have to remedy that.  As I recall, you
    did make some truely heroic inroads into the piles of paperwork which the
    chaplain dumped on his new clerk.  Then, of course, you were off overseas
    - to Newfoundland, Canada - where you bravely defended us from those
    Japanese bombers flying over the north pole.  Our country owes you a great
    debt, sir!

>     I think she's miffed because she wanted the part of "Archie" instead. :)

        Certainly.  Everyone (especially you!) knows that redheads have more
    fun ;)

    Jennifer

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:19:16 -0500
    From: "Dave Marthouse" <dmart@[removed];
    To: "Old Time Radio List" <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: A Tech Question

    Hello,

    One of the things I'm interested in the field of OTR is the news programs
    such as The World News Today from CBS and related shows.  I know that the
    mode used to relay reports from overseas back to the us before the advent of
    cable, fiber and satellite was shortwave.  I've got a few technical
    questions for those who have been engineers during radio's golden age.  What
    mode was used for the overseas reports, am/ssb etc?  I know that network
    reporters had to arrange with foreign radio authorities to feed their
    reports back to the states.  Were the feeds on standard shortwave broadcast
    frequencies, 25, 31, 49 meters etc or did they use the utility bands?  In my
    collection I have a few CBS newscasts where you hear the cue from new coming
    out of a speaker on the other end when the engineers switched a split second
    early to the overseas feed.  Was there a single talk back frequency used to
    feed the network program from New York to the reporter in the field?  Did
    they use this frequency for talkback from the producer or director in the
    control room at the network?  I'm in the radio business and tend as we all
    do take modern technology for granted so I'm interested in a few tech
    tidbits of how it was done in radio's golden age.  I hope that this question
    isn't to esoteric.  Thanks in advance for any information on this topic.

    Dave Marthouse N2AAM
    dmart@[removed]
    [removed]

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:21:52 -0500
    From: "David L. Easter" <david-easter@[removed];
    To: "Old-Time Radio Digest (E-mail)" <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Radio preacher

>     Tim Taylor wrote: My wife remembers a radio preacher who had listeners

    touch their radios as certain moments so he could heal them. This was the
    1940s. Anybody know who this might be?<

    While I don't know the name of the referenced preacher in the 1940s, I do
    remember one of my high school social studies instructors (Baltimore
    suburbs, c. 1961) who had a recording (current at the time) of a West
    Virginia radio preacher doing the same thing. He instructed his listeners to
    place their hands on the radio and the "manna from heaven" would flow
    through him to them.

    My teacher created this image, reminiscent of OTR, for the class: Why would
    God sent his "manna from heaven" by some godly manner to this preacher, just
    to have it flow into a microphone, through wires, tubes, etc., out to the
    antenna, through the air, into another antenna, wires, tubes and finally a
    radio cabinet (which, incidentally was insulated from all of the above) to
    get to a listener? Why not just send to directly?

    David L. Easter

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 23:21:58 -0500
    From: "Dave Walter" <fredallenfan@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re: WOTW B/CAST NOT APPROVED BY H. G. WELLS

    "Owens Pomeroy" <opomeroy@[removed]; writes about [removed] Wells' initial
    disapproval of Howard Koch's adaptation of "The War of the Worlds" for "The
    Mercury Theatre On The Air":

>     There was no law suit filed - however, due to the fact that sales of WOTW,
>     one of Wells' lesser-known novels, skyrocketed immediatly after the
>     broadcast.

    It was actually one of his _lesser-known_ items at the time?? Interesting.
    Are there any numbers available concerning sale figures pre-broadcast and
    post-broadcast?

    There was also that noted meeting of [removed] Wells and Orson Welles in the
    studios of KTSA in San Antonio circa early '41 (the exact date escapes me at
    the moment). I recall the two men sounding genuinely fond of one another
    on-air, even if the idea of getting the two into a radio studio may have
    been more curio than legitimate news. Is there anything to indicate that
    Wells had actually heard the aircheck or read the Koch script of the Welles
    production in the intervening months?

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 05:21:40 -0500
    From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Epic OSR

    Owens Pomeroy points out that the TV movie or miniseries could have been
    produced at much lower cost as a radio show, citing the costs of the TV
    Band of Brothers.  He then asks,

> >     Does anyone think this would be feasible with other TV series into

    radio?  <<

    Years ago, NPR did a radio version of Star Wars.  Lux Radio Theater had
    radio versions of many movies.  Thus, it's feasible.  Is it practical?
    That's an entirely different question.

    What makes the question interesting is that, to quote a TV show, "We have
    the technology."  So, the question is more likely why such things aren't
    already in the works.  And the answer is return on investment.

    Suppose somebody actually produced such a show/series.  Where and when
    would it be aired?  And, more important, how could anyone induce a
    significant audience to tune in to it?  Nowadays, to the vast majority of
    the audience, it would have to compete with all the broadcast and cable
    TV, plus videotape/DVD recordings -- and without any visuals.  To those
    brought up without OTR or equivalent, it would be an _extremely_ hard
    sell.  I suspect that any audience share would be minuscule.

    Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 05:22:40 -0500
    From: Bryan Wright <bswrig@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: My two-cents on MP3 quality

    Hi, all.

    I've been following the thread of using MP3 for OTR recordings with some
    interest, and decided I'd put in a few words of my own.

    For a long time, I've avoided MP3 because of the seemingly poor quality when
    compared to many of my cassettes and reels, and because listening to MP3
    meant standing by my computer through a whole show. Now, I realize that
    MP3's actually can sound pretty decent, and my new RioVolt has made
    listening away from the computer possible.

    Some have pointed out that the "digital revolution" has been a great way of
    spreading the hobby and making more shows easily available to everyone.
    Others have claimed that the generally inferior quality of MP3's has done
    more harm than good by widely circulating poor audio copies. As one who met
    all his trading buddies and learned about SPERDVAC and other OTR clubs
    online, but who's always stuck to cassettes and reels, I'm not sure which
    view to take.

    Recently, I bought a RioVolt and a little gadget (a Griffin iMic) which
    allows me to hook any audio source to my USB-based Mac computer, and I've
    discovered the "joy" of MP3 technology. I've begun converting many of my
    cassettes, reels, and OTR LP's to MP3 CD's. Unlike most other OTR MP3
    collectors, I started out encoding all my MP3's at 128[removed] mono
    for excellent sound. I still do. Of course, as many others have pointed out,
    an MP3 sounds only as good as the source material. I beg to differ. Although
    the "standard" 32/22 format may not reduce the frequency range of the
    original recording, I find that often it introduces artificial-sounding
    "digital artifacts." These can be subtle or overpowering (depending on the
    equipment used to encode the show). Even at 64/44 I can still detect some
    digital artifacts. While 128/44 mono may seem excessive to most, I consider
    it necessary to preserve the sound of the original source as accurately as
    possible, to prevent any further degradation of sound. Digital MP3
    technology has allowed us a way of storing 12 hours of virtually CD-quality
    (mono) sound on a standard CD-R, but most people still want more on a disc,
    and so, compress shows further to fit up to 50 hours on a disc. I've long
    believed in the saying "if you're going to do something, do it right," and
    so, if I'm going to spend the time to encode MP3 files, I want them to sound
    as good as possible. With the ability to copy an MP3 show a hundred times
    without any loss in fidelity, now the responsibility comes to encoding the
    show right in the first place. Once encoded, the MP3 will sound basically
    the same no matter how many generations it goes through.

    With hard drive storage becoming greater and greater and the advent of DVD-R
    technology (even CD-R), I'd sure like to see OTR MP3's reflect that. While I
    doubt that many would agree on such a "high" standard like 128kbps mono,
    maybe more could encode shows at, say, 64kbps.

    For several years, I hosted my own weekly OTR show on a local FM station and
    gained an appreciation for the sound quality possible in OTR. There were
    many shows I couldn't broadcast because the quality was too poor. Over the
    past forty years, the greatest contributor to poor quality has probably been
    the tape dubbing of dubs of dubs of dubs, etc. Now, the biggest problem is
    the desire to fit many many shows on one disc, leading to very low MP3
    encoding rates, and generally poorer quality. We have the opportunity to
    step-up the quality of circulating OTR through better MP3 encoding. And with
    the prices of decent CD-R's what they are, even at 128kbps/44kHz mono, I
    figure I'm still only paying about 2-5 cents per show (25 shows per CD with
    blank CD's costing $.50 - $[removed])!

    I suppose I'll climb off my little soap box now and go back to "lurk" mode
    :) I really enjoy the posts here--I've learned so much. Thank you all!

    BTW, if there's anyone else here who would be interested in trading
    "high-quality" MP3 CD's, please contact me off-list: bswrig@[removed]

    Happy listening!
    Bryan Wright

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 06:15:36 -0500
    From: "Henry Brugsch" <henry@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Rule of thumb message correction

    Just to set the record straight, and I am sure most folks hopefully will be
    aware, when I said 16000khz, it cam out to be 16mhz, [removed] 16 megs in the old
    way of doing things which is a bit high methinks. Should have been 16khz, or
    16kc in the old familiar way
    Apologies for that.
    The platform on which Audio Catalyst is win-95 and 98.
    Hopefully this clarifies issues.

    --
    MAILTO:HENRY@[removed]
    [removed]
    g0gku/k1hbj

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:16:28 -0500
    From: dougdouglass@[removed]
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: OTR to TV Disappointment

    My father enjoyed "Life With Luigi" and was eager to see it on TV. How
    disappointed he was when Rosa, Pasquale's rotund daughter, didn't look
    as he always pictured her.
    ---Doug

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:17:36 -0500
    From: Bill Beard <wnbeard@[removed];
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: HADACOL

    Who remembers the HADACOL  craze?
    What shows did they sponsor. ??
    My memory escapes me.

    Bill Beard

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:17:22 -0500
    From: Wboenig@[removed]
    To: [removed]@[removed]
    Subject: Re: Fibber McGee's Radio Picking Up Old

    Broadcasts
    Approved: uyDjd7sF

    First, Jer51473 wrote:

>     I seem to recall that some years ago there were reports or claims that
>     signals had been picked up of programs that were from years past that were
>     still moving in the universe and it may be that signals never stop

    traveling.

>     Does anyone have any info or theories about this or heard of such?

    The Ken Piletic responded:

>     Yes, Jim Jordan did - many years ago.  There was a FIBBER MCGEE
>     AND MOLLY episode in which McGee found an old radio in the attic
>     and tuned in "old" programs using the same principle that Jerry mentioned.
>     This program was broadcast in the 1950's, and the "old" programs were
>     from the 1920s and 1930's.

    And now I chime in with:

    The show to which Ken refers was not an actual episode of FM&M, but rather a
    special broadcast produced by NBC to celebrate its 25th anniversary.  The
    show aired on November 16, 1951 and was hosted by Jim and Marian Jordan in
    character as Fibber McGee and Molly.  The premise of  Fibber's radio picking
    up old broadcasts was NBC's way of playing shows that they had aired over the
    previous quarter-century.

    Wayne Boenig

    ------------------------------

    Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:18:09 -0500
    From: hal stone <dualxtwo@[removed];
    To: <[removed]@[removed];
    Subject: Right on, mr. Administrivia

    [removed] Posted

>     [ADMINISTRIVIA: Again, folks, I must ask that if you are going to reference
>     compouter software, you note the operating system it runs under.

    YEA!!! Give 'em heck C. S.

>     Not everyone  on this list uses an OS produced by that company currently
>     trying

    to settle acourt case with the Feds;

    Boo! Microsoft! Don't be [removed] names.

>     I know there are Macintosh, linux, and other OS users on this list.  --cfs3]

    Charlie, you will be happy to learn, that while having dinner with some of
    the REPS gang last week, of the 5 guys present, 4 of them cheered when I
    mentioned I was a Mac user. The other poor guy took a lot of flack. He He!

    Hal(Harlan)Stone
    Jughead

    --------------------------------
    End of [removed] Digest V2001 Issue #358
    *********************************************

    Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
      including republication in any form.

    If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
       [removed]

    For Help: [removed]@[removed]
    To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]

    For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
      in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]

    To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]

    To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]