socks

Check it out - 4 chords, maybe more. And they gotta nice bass player! The video someone did, of the song, in a video!

On the plagiarism - A simple search brings up a lot of resources that are directed to teachers, students and academic applications. Interesting. If I say "I don't care how he got it, I'm just glad he did so I could get it", about PFAL, or whatever, I'm missing a big point. That's like a guy robbing a bank and taking off with bags of dough. You meet him and happen to mention you could really use some money. He gives you a grand, just like that. You don't know where he got it, you're just glad you're getting the grand. Then you see him on the News, and realize he's a thief. So - let's leave that example where it is. It's hypothetical, nobody needs to say what they'd do with that grand now that they realize it belongs to the depositors of the bank. Move it over to say, information you've been given now, that you really needed and believe you benefitted from. You can't give back information. It's in your brain, right? Put that fork down, leave it alone. It's like the money - if you've spent it and then you find out where it came from, what to do? (no answer required here, please). Back to the information - the easiest thing to do, simplest, the least in fact, would be to recognize that it was gotten by wrong, even illegal means. Next IMO would be to take a second look at what it is - there may be other discrepanies, inconsistencies in it. Jesus is often seen as kind, forgiving and extremely "easy" on sin, doing wrong stuff. He was in a certain way - He preached and practiced great forgiveness and patience towards others and what they did , right or wrong. Yet, He also preached an extremely heightened sense of right and wrong, while He was at it. To Jesus, adultery wasn't just about 2:00 am in some bar and hiking off with somebody. He taught that to look at another and lust after them was wrong. The thoughts, the heart, was the ground he surveyed. I like to think, Jesus looks on the heart. He sees my heart, He knows my real heart like no one else can. He sees the real Me. What does He see? While grace in Christ is our currency we do have to look at how we spend it. If He died to release a debt, how do I spend this new found wealth? My point - Jesus drew the finest of lines in regards to how God views us and our actions, to the point that there's no wiggle room, yet acted on our behalf in light of that. How much wiggle room do we want to allow? There's more than enough to go around if we want to shoot for the lower levels of the ladder. How high did VPW shoot for when he incorporated and collated all of these other people's materials into his own? While teaching that man's basic spiritual problem is the "integrity and accuracy of the Word". Maybe the biggest question to me has the most obvious answer - what did he think he'd lose by not accurately crediting others in specific instances of repetition, those he learned from and whose materials he directly used? Think about it - what's to lose, or to gain, by doing that?

The Playjerism topic is coming round again. Short refresher - Whad id it eggsackly? A brief definition. From anudder site: Two kinds of plagiarism There are two kinds of plagiarism, and Turnitin aims to root out both. The first kind of plagiarism is from published materials. The original is openly published in some form. The original source might be a book, a newspaper, a television program, CD-Rom, a discussion list posting or a web page. Somewhere, a record exists and it is—at least it was— openly available. The plagiarist found it, and so too might anybody else looking for the same information. In this regard, however, note that Turnitin seeks matches only on the Internet. It does not claim to seek among printed, broadcast or other materials; it searches only the Internet. As more and more students turn to the Internet for their information, this may not, at first glance, be too much of a drawback to the subscribers (Canadian students…, 2001; Lenhart, 2002). Plagiarism of this first kind is traceable. It might take a long time, but because the material was published it should be possible to find the original. However, even Internet sources can be difficult to track down. Search engines search only a fraction of the Internet. Some search only the World Wide Web. Different search engines find different hits, and no single search engine finds everything (Notess, 2002). A lot of valuable material is found on what has become known as the Invisible Web. Sherman and Price (2001, p. 57) define the Invisible Web as: “Text pages, files, or other often high-quality authoritative information available via the World Wide Web that general-purpose search engines cannot, due to technical limitations, or will not, due to deliberate choice, add to their indices of Web pages.” This includes material that is openly available on databases that are free to the end-user. Invisible web pages can often be found easily – but not by the general search engines. Unless one can work out which resources were used or replicate the actual search, re-finding the originals may be nigh impossible. Moreover, many web pages are unstable, here today and gone tomorrow, especially pages published by the mass media. Online journals make their latest pages available, but past issues may be available only to subscribers, or may disappear altogether. Some online journals constantly update their pages. The URL remains but the article vanishes, replaced by another. Plagiarism of the second kind is from unpublished materials. These could be personal diaries and letters, a friend’s homework, even one’s own work originally written for a different teacher last year. Also included is unpublished material passed along a network or fraternity, from one friend to another, from one year to another. This is the form of plagiarism discovered in a well-publicized case at the University of Virginia in 2001, when more than 120 students were suspected of plagiarizing from the same material over five years. Because unpublished work is not openly available, it may be impossible to track down the original material which has been copied and plagiarized.

The Burrito Incident

Congrats!!!!

ex10, you've hit on a tru-ism. David and Paul, while commonly sited as examples in this context, are not examples. There's a major difference and I think the learning is completely missed if not seen correctly. Let's say for a second there never was a David or Paul. That they're composites, or just the subjects of "stories", that have a message. What's the message? There's many, I'm sure. One would be - that a man or woman can change, they can go from one extreme to another. One bad, one good. God can bring a person from one end of the spectrum to another. In Paul we have a person who's described as no threat to anyone - unless you disagree with him. He goes from hating certain kinds of people to being one of those people and comes to understand that there's more to life and faith than the religious views he'd once held. David - much richer back-story. We have a great image of David - then we find him completely overwhelmed by lust, to the point he destroys others lives to get what he wants. Time passes. When confronted, he changes. He can't change the damage he's done but he can change the man he's going to be and we're told that's what he did. Whatever the story we have on VPW, he died in the midst of his own turmoil. Sad for him, and for others. There's no confrontation, no acceptance, no change we know of. The Way continues on, downhill, for many years. What it's all about today I don't know, but we do know that for the decade after he died, it got no better and only worse. It's a bad comparison. With VPW there's no turnaround, it ends badly.

Lookin' for tunes? In the Pop world, some Gold Standard Artists: (mostly older stuff here) The Beatles - ya gotta have some Beatles. Help!, Revolver, Rubber Soul, the White Album. A sampling of these albums will surely be good listening. Chuck Berry - where to start? 4 or 5 Berry tunes, Johnny B. Goode, Roll Over Beethoven, Maybelline, School Days, Memphis, No Particular Place to Go. The Stones - I like the early stuff more. Not Fade Away, Oh Carol, Around and Around, All Over Now, Satisfaction. After "Gimme Shelter", I'm sure there's good stuff, but I'm not that familiar with it. Simon and Garfunkel - The Boxer, I Am A Rock, Mrs. Robinson, Feelin' Groovy, Cecilia. James Taylor - Fire and Rain, Carolina In My Mind, Up On the Roof, Johnnie Comes Back, Up On the Roof, Whenver I See Your Smiling Face More recently, geez....a lesser known name you might enjoy - Steve Bruton, kind of a funky James Taylor. Norah Jones, first couple albums. I like guitar instrumentalists, and Joe Satriani and Eric Johnson are two all-around fav's. Try Eric Johsnon's Ave Musicom and/or Venus Isle CD's. Joe Satriani, get "The Crush of Love" single if nothing else. That's off the top of my head, not sure if it's where you'er going or needin'. You're sure to get more. :)

The Chromonica 64...

T-Bone, ya got me going on the 3000. I was messing with the Reverse effect, and Delay settings. YOW! It's really nice. Just met myself coming back!

My daughter and I were walking through a woodsy section of Cal Berkley, California on Friday and along the way we saw your cousin I think. He was skeetering along this section of ivy, diggin' for food and I mean he was on a mission. He was dealing. Diggin', rootin', eatin'. Every once in awhile he'd turn to us as we followed him, look us over like "Are you food? If you're not food, keep moving!" and then go back to work. At one point he disappered into the ivy bed and we figured he was gone, then suddenly he literally jumped up about a foot in the air and came running out to the edge, back at it. Dunno if it was lunch or dinner but he looked happy. I'm glad he wasn't armed.

God is good always. :) Yeah! About 11 years ago, an event occured while I was on a vacation with my family, that was one of the most meaningful things to ever happen "to" me or for me. Afterwards while thinking about it over and over the words "Good is where you find it" floated through my thoughts and they stuck, like a ton of bricks. So much so it brought me to tears again and again. The simplicity of those words was powerful, and they have remained as a kind of proverb for me. Sometimes, not all the time, but sometimes the very thing I'm needing or looking for is right in front of me, or around the next corner or closer than I know at the time. I'm not recognizing it, but Good is coming, God is at work, life is moving forward... Seeing it I might think "you're not supposed to be here!"..."that's not supposed to be that way!"... and miss it or ignore it. Sometimes though those kinds of things can't be missed, they're so plain. They simply are what they are, and the who-what-when-where isn't even a factor. There's no question about it being good and what I need. All that remains is to thank God, acutely aware that Something Good has come my way. Me! Least of all me, but most of all me. Why not me, y'know? :) And why not, most of all, you? :)

Hi Katz and Kiddeez! Invisible One, waddya got? I'm always interested. :) imsunny2, if you've had some time to read this weekend, I hope you're enjoying it! I found Armstrong's writing to be easy to read and hope it's the same for you. Easter's on it's way! I was at a service this morning and it was great, looking from remembering Jesus's death towards what's to come - next! I was going to say, not sure what others have planned but participating in an "Easter Sunday" service with others is a powerful experience for us, and if there's a place with family or friends you can go I'd encourage it. Theology aside, slightly, someplace where you can celebrate the Resurrection with others - can't beat it. I was reading an online interview/discussion between Bill Moyers and Karen Armstrong, on PBS. This quote string hit me as they discussed certain kinds of "religion" - ARMSTRONG: Yes. Yes. Well, this is ... this is bad religion. Compassion is not a popular virtue. Very often when I talk to religious people, and mention how important it is that compassion is the key, that it's the sine-qua-non of religion, people look kind of balked, and stubborn sometimes, as much to say, what's the point of having religion if you can't disapprove of other people? And sometimes we use religion just to back up these unworthy hatreds, because we're frightened too. MOYERS: Fear? ARMSTRONG: There's great fear. We fear that if we're not in control, other people will cut us down to size, and so we hit out first. From the beginning, violence was associated with religion, but the advanced religions, and I'm talking about Buddhism, Hinduism, monotheism, the Hebrew prophets, they insisted that you must transcend this violence, you must not give in to this violence, but you must learn to recognize that every single other human being is sacred. MOYERS: That's what we're taught when ... growing up, you know, Jesus loves the little children. All the children of the world, red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight. Jesus loves the little children of the world. But as soon as they grow up, they go for each other's throats. ------------ I value the level of discussion that goes on here at GS, where different ideas are set forth with enthusiasm. I'm glad to see we don't "go for each other's throats", while speaking our convictions. I'm not trying to speak for everyone, but I do believe that at the base level we all recognize that each person is, if not "sacred", equally important and valued in God's eye. If there is purpose to life we all stand to benefit from pursuing it as best we know and can and helping others if we can.

Cool. The first chapters "In the Beginning", "One God", "A Light to the Gentiles" and "Trinity: The Christian God", deal with the meat and potatoes of the history of Judaism, Jesus's life and the development of doctrine. If you want to get right to the stuff about Jesus Christ and the early years after His death, start with "A Light to the Gentiles". Because the idea of Jesus being God in some form or fashion deals with well, who or what God is, the history of Judaism is interesting in the birds eye view Armstrong gives as she brings it up to the "Light" chapter. The information is stated sort of conversationally, describing what was done, thought, said, written, etc. Her statements on Paul's "Christianity" aren't new but are interesting to consider, putting Paul into the history. For me it provides a different kind of context to view things I'm already familiar with plus lots of new stuff I'm not. I think-and then I'll stop! -that this kind of read puts a lot of meat on the plate of what we have in the Bible's New Testament, in a very digestible form. Armstrong recounts and recognizes that in the history of the earliest followers of Jesus a lot of crazy things started happening. (and later too). The first and second generations of followers came to develop their understanding and belief of who Jesus was. What we have today in Western Christianity could be said to be much different than what the Bible actually says, and in the Bible itself is a collection of writings that span many many years. She doesn't write everything from the view "and somebody wrote that this and this happened but of course they were lying or are nuts". The human quest to know God and to be given insight from God is recognized and looked at in a balanced way, or so it seemed to me. Enjoy.

blarney, welcome!!! That tune is great, and his rendition is very cool. I ran across it and posted it here awhile back, and I'm really glad to see it again. It's really captures the sweetness of the song. Thanks! You're in good company, friend! Look foward to whatever you share, when you can. That pedal sounds like fun. That model really does have it all, for a digital modeler and effects unit. Hard to not get into experimenting with possibilities. It's got the Reverse effect too, so with 7 effects to stack - yow! Glad you enjoyed that tune, T-Bone! Some good music came out of the 80's. McLaughlin's a great guitarist to be sure. I particularly enjoy his passion and concentration. The only albums I ever listened to a lot were the Mahavishnu Orchestra and the "Johnny McLaughlin, Electric Guitarist" stuff. Great stuff.

My pleasure. I hope you enjoy that book. Please - share what you're thinking, considering, learning as you have time.

Roy-man. You reminded me of something - way back when, on WayDale, I started surfing around and found a discussion board, very old one, that I decided to post to. It was just a general discussion-community. People from all over the world, no religious connection or basis at all, just a discussion board and a very active community. They had a writing board, and people would post their stories, etc. The moderator of the Writers forum was a writer, pretty good as I recall, working on a novel. So after awhile I posted the first part of a story I'd been working on. It was sort of comical, and as I found out very "American", in that the whole basis for it was built around characters I styled after Disney and other comic charactiers, like Mickey and Minnie Mouse, and Tom and Jerry. They worked for a "Korporation", Kompany that produced technology and video game systems. The title was "Kudos". So I post it, like a parent showing their first child's picture, hoping to get some good feedback and even more that people would like it. I liked it, but it wasn't exactly Shakespeare. Just my stuff, right? Well, got some good feedback, some friendly criticism too. Couple people really liked it. No biggie. Then the Forum moderator got to it and ripped it a new one. Said it was incomprehensible to anyone that wasn't American, that it made no sense. Which was probably one of it's weaknesses, true - but I wasn't writing a novel for publication, just having some creative fun-time. Well, they panned it. Bad. No good. Other comments to the effect that it, in a word, sucked. Big eggs. Some response form others came back to that, saying "Whuuuuuut?????" and there was a little tiff going for a bit between a couple posters who had a history on the board. And I got emails saying "don't feel bad, the Moderator does that to anyone new who's stuff is liked". So I responded and pret' near soon bowed out off the board. Kept emails going with a couple people for awhile. But that was that. I didn't really feel bad, but I didn't see why or how a "Writers Forum" would benefit from the Moderator just ripping a new contributor like that. Figure - if they're such an accomplished writer, why attack a guy just trying stuff out? And - I did send the story out to others and got some good feedback, based on what it was, not what it wasn't. And one of our own contributors here reminded me that to write is to edit - take out some of the dead weight, stay on the story. Good criticism, kindly, considering they've got a bona fide Black Belt in writing. Differnt strokes fo' different folks. What're ya gonna do, y'know? Don't sweat it, GS digs ya!

Hello imsunny2! Here's a book I'd highly recommend - you can buy it at Borders and Barnes and Noble bookstores, or online at amazon.com. Title - "A Hiistory of God", by Karen Armstrong. It's very readable, thought provoking and is worth the time. It won't answer your question one way or the other, but it covers the ground on the development of 3 religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It covers a lot on the 'triune' God concept, the "trinity", the "divinity" of Jesus Christ, when and where those concepts came from - lots of stuff. It doesn't preach an opinion, but there's lots of information. This type of reading has helped me to get a better grasp on where the doctrines we now have today came from, and how. It was very comforting reading, for me. And rest easy. Really. I have felt as you do, and I don't want to give the impresssion I'm past it or beyond it but I know I can always pray my heart to God, and yes to Jesus Christ, as my savior and simply tell them what I'm sure they already know - "I need help here". Who better to say that to? :) If I were to answer the question straighforwardly, I would simply say that Jesus Christ, the son of God, has the divine nature of God, and was born by God's own plan and purpose to be His Son. He completely fulfills the purpose of God to come to mankind and show His face in our lives. They are "one", and as Jesus said when we've seen Him we've seen the Father. They're a real pair. :) John 1 starts out with " in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God"....pondering that it became apparent to me one day that there is that distinct separateness to them in the way that's stated. "Was with God..." .... being "with" God isn't the same as "being God". The fact that Jesus is described as the the living "Logos", implies in itself that He isn't literally "the same", rather I see it (and this could even fit into some trinitarian thought I think) He is a uniquely connected part of God. The fact that it's mind-spinning isn't a bad thing, from a certain perspective. God is - uh, slightly difficult to picture in one easy sound-byte. Yet God can be seen in a simple act of love from another person, or in the teachings and actions of Jesus. Are those God? In a way yes, but in a very big way, no. They're the expressions and manfestations (general English use of the word there) of God. There's a lot to consider, I encourage you - you're on the right track. If we don't ask the question how can we get an answer? (that book - it's great, get it if you can).

Wordwolf, great point. I've been listening to a CD of a teaching done by a John Turner, at the church we go to locally. Didn't hear it that day but got the CD. He covers some of material related to Jesus, the Rabbi/Teacher, briefly. It's an aspect to consider when considering who Jesus was and what He did in his day, how he interacted with others and what they would have thought of Him. His qualifications were established by his knowledge of their scriptures, indeed. He would have studied and committed the Talmud to memory and if He followed the pattern of training of a Rabbi (as shown in that example of Him being in the temple discussing it at a young age) He would have spent His whole life in it. The way questions and answers come up through the gospel records was typical. A point of doctrine would be posed, what does this mean, how does this work, and questioning and answering, discussing and learning would follow. For Jesus to come up from no recognized Rabbi would have been significant too. The logical question would be, where did you study? Where did you learn this, who's your Rabbi? We know His answer to that. And He answered as one having "authority", His answers weren't one of many possibilities, He's recorded as speaking definitively - "this means that", "I am this", "God is that". The way He got students too - He chose them, and they came to Him over time. The following of Jesus as a Teacher in his day would have been unique, if a person chose to follow His teaching. Any adult would have already not chosen a religious career, so to speak. That was done from a very young age. It's no wonder that His group of followers, what we might call today His "church", was viewed as questionable by other Rabbi's and religious leaders. "Who's this rabble you've assembled, we've never heard of any of them, or you for that matter". It definitely would have been intriguing. His "Talmudin" were regular folks, guys and gals. I was thinking in relation to your thread point Mr. Hamm, of qualifications today that people bring. In a basic way this does apply to any "Christian" endeavor. Jesus Christ is the central figure, the "Rabbi", Teacher a Christian chooses to follow. Someone doing that shouldn't look to say, His example and determine they can go off on their own and do their own thing. The point of being a follower of Jesus Christ is pursusing His teaching, closely. He's the "leader", the one who's "school", class, questions and answers His followers are committing to embrace. Whether it's considering what He taught, did, "what would Jesus do", or who He is today to me, it's always the same. #! qualification that needs to be identified in a Christian "leader" is, are they truly a follower of their Teacher, ie, Jesus, their "savior". What does that person teach, refer to, "lead" someone to? In Jesus's day, He could say "I'll teach, you listen, I'll take your questions and give you the answers, we'll talk and discuss and come to the point you learn and believe". He's the "Rabbi', the Teacher. That's where all roads lead to. It may not be easy, but it's not complicated when I look at it that way. To some "leaders" - I think - that's a little too nebulous, too vague, too "so not now". There's a need to fill in the silence we experience sometimes with activity, exercises, things we can do to make that more tangible. But there's never any real "silence" for a student in the presence of their Teacher. Every moment is one of learning and fulfillment, both of purpose and personal satisfaction. That can definitely be a distraction, all the activity that gets cooked up. Either Jesus is the Teacher, there's "Christ in us", and we're learning what that means and how to live that way, or He's not and we're not. If He's not and we're not, if we're doing something else, fine. We're choosing another Rabbi/Teacher, a person and their "ministry" for instance. But again it's simple - if there's some sort of "ministry" it has to be one that serves to enhance and contribute to our relationship with Jesus Christ. We literally don't "follow' anyone else over anyone else. There can be only "One". :)

Thanks again! I told the wif' about this thread and she got a big smile. When she smiles her eyes go places I need to be. It's always worth it. Gave her this song I wrote, "How Could I have Known", and she liked it, which is like getting paid in cash. Tall dough. Well, got a new timecard. Starting over is so...nice.

There ya go, T-Bone! Let us know how it does when you get it. I got the guitar version for my daughter when she was at Musicians/Guitar Institute, and she loved it. It's here at the house now, and I have to say it's "all that" and more. Been listening to a lot of Level 42 the last few days, speaking of bass. Mark King was the bass player and King is god on the song "Something About You". What do you think of that tune? The bass is so...so, on the bottom and in the pocket. Chas must have a thought on that tune. The earth moves in that bass line of his, IMO. Great song. Boon Gould, guitar in Level 42. He does a very tasty solo in that song too. I bought it the year of, want to say, 86, the last ROA we went to. Drove up in an RV, the family on wheels. Had that playing the whole time it seemed. Aaaah. Chuck Norris can't use stomp boxes, read it in a Guitar Player interview. When Norris uses a stomp box, kangaroos in Australia fall over and the Tower of Pisa moves a degree.

Happy Birthday to Mr. Flatpicker! The Doc is in the house! Good to see you too act2! Morning everyone, hope the day is filled with good things of note! :)

Easy with that wrench, Mr. Lingo! Owtch!!! P.A.'s and amp - biggest difference is the kind of preamps they have - the preamp in a guitar amp is built to a guitar's range of sound and a P.A.'s preamps will be (or should be) built to reproduce a wider range of sound, like voices, guitars, etc. etc. They'e very similar but can be very different based on the design. Ussssssually a guitar amp has one preamp stage, even if it has two or more inputs. That prevents it from taking two signals, like say two guitars, very well. A P.A. will have a preamp for each channel so that it can handle that one input, be it a mic, guitar or whatever. So ussssssssually, the sound from a P.A. will be cleaner and truer, and more of an accurate reproduction of what the original input sounds like, with some tonal adjustments possible too usssssually, like bass, treble, midrange breakdowns or snazzier equalization available. Some of that has to do with the amp stage, the part that makes it louder. A P.A. should have a good amount of "headroom" in it's capacity, so you don't have to push it to it's limit. Doing that produces things like overdrive, distortion. In a guitar amp, that's a desirable thing for some kinds of sounds, so a lot of guitar amps are modelled and set up so that when you crank that puppy it gets a little mud in it, which even in small doses can do nice things to a guitar's sound making it sound fuller, "beefier". A P.A., if operated within it's limits, is designed to prevent that. Wattage in a P.A. might be 200 w or more, lots more. An amp does great sound at 20 - 30 watts, less is more. An amp can always be mic'd and put through a - P.A. to make it louder, and ideally without effecting the sound of the original amp sound. I guess I should have suggested try a couple different kinds of amplifiers - some are made for acoustic guitars and have tone adjustments better suited for that. Whatever you play through you want to limit the amount of tone tweedling you do so you can hear how the guitar sounds as it really is, but louder. (although volume itself changes the tone, so I dunno...it's a merry-go-round)

Thanks again, ex10, and everyone. You're all really swell! We're @ 36 and counting. The band 'Orleans' have a song with a lyric written by John and Johanna Hall. It's about a relationship, and one line in it goes - 'Sometimes I can't tell where I leave off and you begin, anymore' Says it all. 'Preciate it. :) I hope everyone has a shot at what we've got, and more. I don't know what it is, but if it comes in different colors and sizes, there's sure to be one that will fit perfect for you.

Thanks TommyZ, and all. We're happy. :)

Awwww. Well, thanks! and God bless y'all!