socks

Hi walking and welcome! Bone and plastic nuts - you should be able to tell the difference - try tapping the nut lightly with something solid, like a small screwdriver. The bone will feel and sound more solid, where the plastic will have a slighly softer 'twack' when you tap it. Also, if there's a ding or such in the nut plastic will have more of a 'mooshed' look where the plastic is kind of pushed out or in, and a bone will have a cleaner looking indentation to it. You might also loosen the strings and see how the slots have been filed - bone will tend to look cleaner and the wear will look smooth, plastic hmmm, less clean. The density check, tapping it, should do the trick though. Less expensive guitars generally don't have a bone nut on the headstock, but that's hard to pin down. Some will, so you never know. If it 'sounds' and feels kind of dead, it's plastic. Which is a fine material for a nut, I've found. Durable, replaceable without spending an arm and a leg. They do wear more if you use a heavier guage string, but if you're using 009's or 010's in the light range and play off and on, they'll do fine. I do tend to think a bone or similar material nut sounds better, gives the string a cleaner, solid point of termination there. Any nut will sound bad if the slot isn't filed and set properly to the string guage you're going to use. So if yours is set up for say, an .011 set or heavier and you switch to extra lights the tone will sound weaker and you may even get deadness and rattles. That will require a new nut, likely, or the old one's slots filled and refiled. I've had it done for 40.00 and up, but about 40.00 would be right here in my area. They should advise you of any filling needed in the slot cut in the neck headstock where the nut goes, if that's needed. Normally they just take a stock nut blank and work it to fit the slot you have. But if it sounds good the way you have it - it sounds good.

Hi Chas, is the wood itself dented, or is the ding just into the finish itself? I found This RG550 Is is it like that but white, with the clear finish? I'd think you'd have to match the finish, and then lightly sand and clear out the dinged area into a small oval or circular shape, and start putting thin coats of clear over the spot, taking it out just over the edge of the spot. Sand with light sandpaper, very fine grit or something comparable and apply several think coats until it's covered. Then using the fine grit paper, sand and wet with a spray bottle to apply water to the area, keeping it covered with water. Work slowly, repeat until the entire area is back down to the surface height of the surrounding area. Then buff out the body to get a match. Caveat - I've never done it myself to complete success. I worked on an acoustic top once and got a good result but always felt I could see the difference in the finish, when light reflected directly on it. So.......a visit to Ye Old Guitar Maker Shoppe, or a finishing shop of some type might be the path to go. :) Maybe a local luthier or electric builder could do the trick.

Not specifically, Pond. WTH wants to talk to intelligent people here, not morons. I thought it might be worthwhile to see exactly what a moron is, or at least how they're defined in the dictionary. It's an interesting use of the word. F'instance, here's where I took it - by definition there could be actual morons posting here that could be defined as such, by the older medical definition, which I had a vague recollection of, don't ask me where from. But it's probably not being used that way here. We could in fact have morons by that definition posting here though, but if that was the case it would be pretty cruel to eliminate them from the discussion for that reason alone. It would probably be more reasonable to identify them as such and find a place for them to discuss these matters at their intelligence level, that of children. Contrasting "intelligent" with that definition of "moron" in such a harsh way would be pretty rough in other words, IMO, since the person does have intelligence - that of a 7 to 12 year old. They should be communicated with accordingly if that's the case rather than pushed aside as if they're doing something wrong. They're not, they're functioning at their intelligence level. I wouldn't make fun of or abuse a person like that, and I'm sure most of us here wouldn't. So what is a "moron" then, in this context, as I'm sure WTH wouldn't be identifying people here as being mentally retarded for their age and thus criticizing their judgment and actions as if they could be responsible to function at a higher level. I'll assume it's the other definition - someone stupid, a dunce, someone stupiified. Folded into that are a lot of other things, as we see by what the other words mean. Basically it's a put down, an insult. So why would an insult be thrown out at someone in the context of this discussion? That's a good question. Disagreement doesn't qualify it. But disagreement definitely tends to pull this kind of behavior out of people, any of us, all of us, at times. I was in the car today, and got held in the middle of an intersection today, while a car in front of us turning left was stopped, waiting to finish the turn. A car coming the other way into the intersection and trying to get through got stuck and tried to go around them, and then sort of wiggled their way around the front of my car, which was fine. It didn't bother me, they were entitled to do that if they wanted to get through, there was nothing the car turning, or I, could do as some people were crossing at the light when they weren't supposed to, the kind of thing that happens a lot. So the guy in the car is wiggling his way through, in a hurry and pizzed off at everybody and honking - behind his closed window - obviously yelling at first the car turning, then me when he gets next to passing by me, and waving his hand in the one finger salute. He wizzed on past us in a dither. There were 3 guys in my car, and one - him - in his. So if he'd stopped and registered that complaint directly to me, I'd have been inspired to turn a little and block his way, get out of my car and bust open his window, drag him out and shove him up against my car while the other two guys held him and I .... Oh wait. It was nothing. Over in a minute, and Mr. CrankyPants went on his way and that was that. It was funny more than anything else, and not worth even wasting my time on, and knowing this one little bald guy behind his closed locked door felt tough enough to honk and raise hel l like that meant nothing really. I guess he was just having a bad day. We on the other hand, went on to have a great day. Selah.

Moron: A stupid person; a dolt. Psychology. A person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive. Dolts! dolt: A stupid person; a dunce. dunce: A stupid person; a dolt. stupid: 1. Slow to learn or understand; obtuse. 2. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes. 3. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake. 4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied. 5. Pointless; worthless: a stupid job. Stupid, stupified dunces, dolts and morons!

*spit* There's a new Sheriff in town, boys...

They're ba-ack...

Go back? Sure. Definitely. Anytime now. Absolutely. Oh if only I could. Maybe I can! Yeah, maybe! just maybe! That would be great. What a great idea. Yes! Oh yes oh yes oh yes!!! It would be better than ever. Things would finally be back to normal, in fact, they'd be even more normal than they ever were, I'm sure of it.

Hmmm...there are two kinds of opinions, at least - A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof. A judgment based on special knowledge and given by an expert: a medical opinion. An opinion expressed can be either, both, or a combination I would think. It could be based on expert knowledge, but not substantiated in detail at the time it's given. A person could say "it's my opinion that it was warm today, but not so as to be uncomfortable, it felt quite comfortable". No temperature is quoted, no description of the person's activity levels, what they wore or did, or what time they did it. That doesn't make it any less "true". It is, in fact, true for the person that said it. They are an "expert" giving their "opinion" on what the temperature felt like to them today. There will be people who disagree - "it felt muggy to me, kind of hot", and that could indeed be true, it may have been "muggy". So the weather is whatever it is and people react to it differently. I could tell the person all day long "it WAS HOT and HUMID, and it was 83 degrees", and the reasonable response would be "fine, if you say so, but I didn't feel hot". And that's that. IMO, opinions are and can be very valid. It isn't valid to view them as "they're just opinions, so what, they don't mean anything". They can mean a lot, if discussed and considered. Why does a person have the opinion they do. Why do the feel a certain way about something? It can beworth finding out.

I don't think steroid use will account for the ability Bonds has to see and hit the ball. His "eye" and abiliity to evaluate pitches, pitchers and their styles and patterns, as well as to take advantage of the unexpected - all of that comes from years of work and training and being in the game. His body strength and conditioning would relate to how hard he can hit the ball yes, but it also plays more into his long term health I would think, staying healthy and able to play. I read a few years ago his Dad was talking about how he'd worked with Barry in hitting practice - one of the things he'd do with him - they'd load up a pitching machine with numbered balls and Bonds would practice trying to see the numbers on the balls, and for a stretch look to hit just the evens, then the odds. Also - baseball history shows you don't have to have strength to hit a homerun - Dimaggio comes to mind there, he didn't have exceptional strength. Overall to get your singles and doubles as well as homeruns, it takes other skills too. Giambi is an example of steroid use gone awry I think - he ballooned up, hit good for a season there, and then his hitting took a dump. I don't know for sure but it didsn't seem like he was as committed over the long haul to developing himself. Bonds is big but doesn't have that pro-wrestler "Hulk" look. He looks like a man who trains aggressively. I would guess, just my opinion - that steroids may have helped him some but not over the long haul. Best hit I saw him take was a few years ago, at Pac Bell - he hit one out towards McCovey cove, and literally swung the bat through the ball, breaking it and shattering it in half, one piece flying out on the field and the other still in his hands, and it went out of the park. Absolutely the most incredible hit I've ever seen. That hit represented a "very" hard swing and impact, no question, but I think it was also just "one of those things", that might happen once every million hits or something. Bats break all the time, but don't break in half and the ball go out of the park. :)

Yah, the site is bu'ted. Broked. Unworking. The VPster loved gospel quartets, It certainly wasn't a "stealing" of that sound, quartets are quartets. Gaithers, Blackwoods, all of that kind of stuff and he did talk about it quite a bit for a spell there. Had a group called the Brauny (sp?) Boys up at Rome City at one point, probably around 1978, and they performed in the chapel. They carried a pianist, bass player and drummer. Were pretty good as memory serves. He talked about the Mills Brothers too, which caught my ear, as they were popular on TV when I was a kid and I always liked their smooth sound. ("Glow Little Glow worm, glimmer, glimmer...") That gospel quartet sound really has a texture using the tight 3 part harmony with a bass part, and every quartet has to have a good bass singer to really cut it, along with a strong tenor. They can sound gritty or smooth. It's not really my bag but I do like the sound, too. JN learned a tune by a group, can't remember the name but they were pretty well known it seems like, an older group, and their guys came in I remember. Fuzzy memory but I do recall their recordings had a good guitarist on it, they incorporated a bluesy sound in the music and their guitarist had had a nice sound that was easy to pick up. I remember we knocked the music out pretty quickly, and the guy came up to me and was clearly surprised I learned it so quickly and sounded just like him, "how're you doing that?" It was pretty straightforward blues lines, and the guy had played it nice and smooth with a little bite to it. Not hard to copy, and it figured into what we could do, no problem. Highway, the Victors (ya gotta just love that name, uh yeah) did sound good. At the start there was a guy named Tom W, who had to back out just a month or so after they started. The guy could sing his butt off and was one of the funniest people I can remember. Way off the chart in the humor department. As they developed over time I thought they sounded really good.. It was an interesting period there. I couldn't compare that vocal smurfing Way Prod's doing on the videos to anything resembling the gospel quartet tradition. It's just bland "harmony" with little or no dynamics.

Interesting. The video won't load anymore. http://www.theway.org/ also comes up server not found. The dancing wasn't that bad was it? Did a search of the words "the way international" and the first four pages of results were links to other sites writing about the Way, got tired of looking for them. Tried "feeling lucky" and that definitely didn't go to the Way's site. This must be how they defiine "prevailing".

He's all gone now...

Yohn Yay...

5 star Generals...

Hill, can you clarify what you mean by "negative filters"? I'm taking that to mean a predetermined view. A filter that what's seen is seen through. I'm sure I have some, can't speak for you or anyone else but most people do I think. I'd like to think mine collect the light coming in and give me a clearer view of what I'm seeing. That would be ideal anyway. Experience forms a filter. Although experience isn't always reliable it can form the basis for observing something as it is, as it occurs naturally and without intervention or interference. F'instance, your opinions are based on a collection of experiences that lead you to view Geer that way you do. Compared against the standards you've chosen, you've come up with an evaluation of what you've experienced and observed first hand. So you write they were good. Still they're what you observed and experienced, so they account for the total of what you have to personally work with. They're not everything about the subject that can be known, they're what you've known for a period of - was it 2 years? Using you as an example if you don't mind, we could now say we have some information that was collected by personal experience and observation that can be included with other information. We know there has to be more. The years before, after as well as other information that could be collected by others during the same time periods. For your purposes, what you have may be enough for what you need or as far as you're inclined to look for. But if you were working with any other material you might want more. Past performance is a critical ingredient when looking at the current state of a person I think. I know that the bible teaches that we are "new" in Christ, forgiven, in grace through Christ, those things, yes. Still, everything that we are "right now" is the net result of everything we've been up till now. My understanding of what the bible teaches in terms of God's grace and forgiveness for sin doesn't mean that it changes the quality of life that has come prior to it. It does in terms of how God will evaluate it, but it doesn't change the actual texture of it, the events, actions, substance of our lives. To my mind the popular attitude of "living in the now" or in the "moment" where the past and future are ignored isn't really possible. Living in the "now" is really living in the past, as I am exactly what I've done and been up to this point. Look in a mirror as a "new man" or woman in Christ and we see what God has MADE us.What Christ has DONE. Past tense. "Saved", now, the result of the past. I could be cursing God though, at this moment. Would that be the intended result of God's goodness? No. Living in the moment, at it's best, would be a forward moving action, I think. A brief intersection in awareness where a person looks to what they're going to "Be". In a phrase, the future has a past, and it's right...now. To me that makes what I do now very important. It's just common sense really, but I think common sense gets missed sometimes when people try to find their way through bible teachings on the new life in Christ and being a Christian. We read the past is "dead", yet in this life it is far from dead, it's what makes us who we are now. What we choose to do next is where there's life, since we can't go back and relive the past. It would be nice if we could, have a sort of "undo" feature, but we dang! we really don't. So if the question is "where's Christ Geer NOW", I'd answer generally, I have no idea. We know who Geer IS, he's the sum total of his past. Who he is becoming - ? Dunno. Some current information to include with what's know from the past would go a long way towards telling that. Really, though, I have my own fish to fry and I struggle with that. Butt Socks, etc. There's a LOT coming up.

True NAW. Maybe a caption should read "No Gays were harmed in the making of this video". "Yet." Indeed, it's odd, strange, bizarre and weird. They say that fish don't know that the reflection in an aquarium glass isn't another fish. They think it's actually another fish. Maybe they see themselves and think they're actually other people, and are amazed that so many new people always show up. I dunno. It's hard to figure. The two women have a kind of June-Cleaver-On-Butch look. The guy - hard to say. This is why some of us aren't meant to dance. In private, where there's little risk of anyone getting hurt, fine. But in public where innocent eyes and minds may view ... no.

This appears to be a misguided attempt to reach out to the Gay community, admirable on the one hand but clearly missing the mark on the other.

LNM - I met him while visiting the fellowships in New York. Capacity over the years - Way Corps and while on staff at the Way Nash. So far you've gotten a butt and an answer. I'm about ready to receive a Love Offering here. Anything you'd like to share?

Hill, couple of points - "personality disorders" - interesting topic to this thread. Having met Chris in 1970 and known him off and on for about 15 years plus, I think he had a lot to overcome, from his youth to adulthood. It's difficult to really know what a person deals with inside, what pressures past and present guide and forge their development but I always thought Chris had a lot to deal with in that category. Even as a young man he was uncomfortable in casual social settings, quick to criticize and ostracize those around him, eager to regiment. Regimented activity often replaces natural interaction for people who feel vulnerable and at risk. They protect themselves by trying to control their environment, even the most mundane and trivial. Focusing on trivial activity and developing protocols for everything reduces the amount of thinking and rethinking if you will, that a person has to do. So in one way it accounts for his behavior over the years, his approach to a Christian life. The Chris of the 80's was in over his head, to put it mildly. But that was a long time ago. What he's doing now, I have no idea but I do have a great deal of sympathy for his situation with Barbara and her health. Last I heard she was ill, and I would wish that on no one. I hope they've found a life together that gives them some peace and purpose. This does relate to the topic of finding a church or place to fellowship with other Christians and to learn and contribute in. One of the things sorely needed is mature Christian pastoring, the consistent and loving partnership with others who will actively watch over the participants and look out for their interests, both as a community and as individuals. This involves more than teaching, and in fact may not include teaching at times. It's a human, one-on-one participation in life, day to day, over time. Rather than interceding at specific points it's ongoing, where the relationhip is, at best, natural and in the flow of events as they occur. That's a key ingredient to look for in a church and why, I think, many churches can be chosen from. It has less to do with what's spoken from the lectern and more to do with what's done. It may be that Chris has come to some maturity in his life at this point, I'd hope so. "Classes" are of little interest to me, regardless of how they're presented. Of the people I've spoken to who take these classses, they seem nice enough but tend to be legalistic nit-pickers, keenly interested in criticizing what others do and teach. Not all of course. But that's where I think the pastoring element comes in. Where you have loving men and women who put the others' interests first and genuinely seek to help others, it shows. Many churches offer that as a result of the time and training they require of their pastors before they're turned loose on a church. Ex-Way groups can have people who mean well, usually, but simply have never had or taken the time and effort to be trained that way. There's little breadth of learning or experience, so much of what's learned is self-generated with little particpation from others. This can easily allow a person to head off in a wrong direction with no one there to see or know, let along guide and help them.

You guys are the best! You bring meaning and direction even when I myself, socks, have trouble finding it. johnj, my apologies for derailing this thread somewhat in what may appear like a cheap grab for attention and some free marketing mileage for my new(est) endeavor, the Butt Socks, but since excatiski stumbled so innocently on it I sensed destiny blowing my way. In hindsight I'd still have to say though, it seemed the right thing to do. This is no doubt due to the fact that I'm not only the inventor of the Butt Sock, I am also a user! Improved hindsight is just one of the many benefits regular wearing produces. Sorry, I'll say no more. Hilton's people are on the line and if she got wind that I've blown the cover on this - well, I think she's suffered enough. But I can say that the B.S. itself will be available to GS'ers in various sizes and colors, at a drastically reduced price - NO! Wait! Make that - absolutely free! and at no cost to anyone, ever! In fact, B.S. will be offered ONE TIME ONLY in a special franchise arrangement to the first 100 respondents!!! Think of it - your own opportunity to carve out of a piece of the American Dream...and with a product that actually HELPS PEOPLE!!! All of this and more will available soon for a minimal Setup and Geo-Fee of 3,999.00 US, a small amount really when you consider all that you're going to get and I, socks, guarantee that you're really going to get it once you get online with this new B.S. !!! Not to worry, there's no charge for the product itself, as I intend to keep money out of this. If you're tired of working for someone else, seeing bills pile up, and hearing the same old stuff over and over STOP HERE and mark your calendars!!!! Help is on the way! As a Certified Seller of B.S. you will be able to offer this incredible new product, in a package that sells itself. The Butt Sock is so good it makes good look bad. And at this price there's no reason everyone can't be a C.S. for B.S. !!!! It's almost too good, really. I'm surprised I'm doing it, but it's the least that I, socks, can do and doing the least I can is what life is all about isn't it? Speaking of this thread, I don't know where Chis Geer is. I wanted to make a contribution before I get back to this important work I've undertaken (but it's happy work, really).

Eggsalant question Kevlar. Butt Socks are going to be the latest new fashion craze, and will be worn by the biggest names in show biz, come late summer. That is if we can get Paris Hilton on the runway as planned and telling her story. Butt Socks will be the story of the year. Full coverage for the hiney, just where we all need it most! Butt socks were, are, the reason that Paris Hilton was able to make such an incredible turn around these last few weeks. Although kept secret - until now! - I was able to sneak in a pair of this new clothing-technology to Ms Hilton during her long and tortuous stay in jail, hoping against hope that she would respond to my instructions and wear them for a full 24 hours. Lo and behold, she did! and was almost immediately cured! Like badly applied paint her problems quickly peeled away, and she immediately began to show improvement. In her case she was so far gone that there were actual side effects - hallucinations, some goiter activity, diarrhea, burning in the urine, and a few other things too personal to mention here. This accounts for some of the dislocated memories she has, as seen on her Larry King interview where she described how she "read the bible a lot" while in jail, but when asked her favorite passage she appeared distant and couldn't quite remember. It's not her fault!!! The awesome power of the Butt Socks had such a powerful effect on her it will take some time for all of the pieces to come back together. Literally, a mental and emotional "reboot" of her system. This is normal and expected. Unfortunately she used the instructions as a place mat for one of her meals and it was destroyed due to the excessive dribbling of soup - an unusual reaction to the Butt Socks, but as we've seen Ms Hilton had a LOT of healing to do and thanks to the Butt Socks and a little love, she's gotten what she needed! The instructions contain essential information for "Post-B.S." syndrome and how to best handle it. A full blown national ad campaign is forthcoming but I'm trying to be considerate of Paris's fragile condition.

HI Ajern, your point is well taken. The variations we bring to anything guarantee that each one of us will have different views of the same thing, even when we agree on our understanding of whatever it is. The variables aren't in the thing considered, they're in us. One of the things I've learned reading GS is that this is in fact very true. For many years everyone in the Way said they were "likeminded", yet I read differences all the time here in how people understood the same things, the same teachings, etc. This from a time when there was supposedly "agreement". Sometimes (and I don't mean this disparagingly) it seems we weren't even hearing the same things, yet we were. There is unity of the "spirit", where what's shared is part of the same thing - the spirit of God. There can be an "equal-soul"ed quality to life but right there we're not sharing the same thing. If the soul signifies what each of us have that makes up our own lives, they're very different. That's my impression, at any rate. The very nature of our lives and relationship with God and Christ is individual and is maintained individually. The relationship we all have as a "body" is maintained by a consistent thing - God in Christ in us. We can agree on lots of things I think, as long as we agree that we'll be different. We can each pray, love, learn. Maybe the slogan for "agreement" should be "Can We Get A Little Space Here Please!"

For the sake of discussion, I wanted to butt in here. I agree that the point of "moving on", from a new starting point or "new birth", is basic to the Christian message Paul teaches. It's what he experienced himself. That experience isn't given a lot of specific detail, but you'd want to count the time from the incident on the "Road to Damascus", to the point in Acts where we see Paul and Barnabas going out from Jerusalem to visit churches. Between those two points is several years, 13 - 17 by estimation. During that time it's safe to assume that Paul went from one extreme viewpoint on Christ and His teachings and followers, to another. In fact, his teaching from that point on is based on what it means to be a follower of a "risen" Christ. So, my impression is that Paul's change was huge. Paul "went blind" after what happened when He saw Christ. It strikes me as a head-on collision at high speed with a brick wall, concussion included, figuratively speaking. But maybe not so figuratively really. Paul had many years to work through whatever he needed to. Was he married? If so, we never read about his wife or any family later. What about his friends, companions? New ones, a new life literally. Overall the message of Paul's teaching was always informed by who he'd been, I think. Today in our religious world I think we tend to see a recognition of sin, who we 'were" with a rush to become something "new". So often the people who have the strongest and simplest view of their faith are those who have experienced a deep, tangible "deliverance" in making that passage. There's a clear focus - a person is on their last leg, end of the line, all cards played and Christ enters their life and they see another way, a new beginning, "deliverance" immediately or over time. The difference between "that" and "this" is recognized and easy to articulate. There's no question about what was wrong or about talking about it, recognizing it. That's the way it seems Paul approached his new life. What he'd been may have been difficult to look at considering his new direction but he did so.

First "job" of sorts was ridin' on the daily Milk Truck that used to drive through our neighborhood. I was a wee tyke, and I remember one summer the guy asked if I'd help out on his run, so I jumped on and made some deliveries for him and got milk in return. That summer when he'd come through I'd jump on board if he needed help, couple days a week. I vaguely remember how cool it felt coming home with a couple bottles of milk, "Hey! Check it out!" :) That and mowing lawns. Lawns was a biggie. My first paying gig as a musician, I was 13, at my high school's Freshman dance at the start of the year. Threw together my first band and we each made a buck, one dollah, $1.00 per person. Since we didn't expect anything it was pretty cool as the priest (catholic school) handed us all a buck during the break.

The ground is thirsty. Apparently GS has identified the true course of this thread - up top it says "Stop Satan Now' I had no idea spelling was THAT important!