WordWolf

It's a busy season. I'll be out of touch next week. He's probably offline doing other stuff THIS week-or at least this minute.

Jason Patric Lost Boys Keifer Sutherland

"Superman-the Movie." Lois to Superman when he catches her in mid-air. "Easy Miss-I've got you."

Mark Wedloe Roo John Dexter Slinky Lloyd Davis Michael Thorpe

i'm up? Ok, I was thinking of something before, let me remember.....

*wild swing* The Truman Show??

*really wild swing* Alice in Wonderland????

I'm pretty sure you're right. They sounded like those to me on first hearing them, as well. And I've already noted how the Lone Ranger and the Green Hornet were invented by the same writer and said to be related.

I think Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton remarried, but I can't name their movies.

The only one I knew was JB, but since Googling's allowed after several days, we have Miranda Cosgrove Despicable Me Jason Segel

*wild swing* "Cavalcade of Stars"?

*wild swing* "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane"?

I'll watch it eventually. Reviews were split and compliments were muted, so I've been warned the movie's got plot holes.

Eliza Doolittle and Professor Henry Higgins. "And where's that soggy plain?"

I have very little to say on the subject. So, this will be quick. I know there's a few Jews who make a point of being buried in a specific cemetery because they believe that The Resurrection will start there and this will save them some time. They also won't have themselves cremated because they need their bodies intact. My thinking is that my body won't be intact at the time unless it happens when I'm alive or immediately after I die. So, there's no qualitative difference I see between being reconstituted from ashes vs being reconstituted from decomposed matter all in one spot. So, I'm thinking cremation is far more sensible for me. From a scientific perspective, how I'm buried seems to make no difference, and financially, it makes sense to use the cheapest method-which, again, is cremation. That's all I've got.

rfr's had a few threads specifically about her. Here's a few more: "Rosalie Rivenbark the pimp" "Who is Rosalie Fox Rivenbark?" "Ten Years of Rivenbark."

Thiese are some thoughts I have at the moment. A few threads reminded me that it's good to point some things out from time to time. I think it's a good time to point these out. Naturally, any poster's free to ignore this post- it's my thoughts and not an official ANYTHING. Ok, so the posters have come to a consensus that we don't really have to be polite towards each other. (I asked.) However, even if they don't want to be, it helps to at least know when what they're saying is likely to hurt someone's feelings, so that it's entirely intentional if they do so. That means thinking about the actual words we use. Most posters here don't post here with words that are considered racial epithets. They're aware which words will carry those meanings, and choose not to use them, for whatever reason they choose to refrain. There's plenty of words that can hurt people. Some are LIKELY to hurt people, and some are a stretch-but someone can choose to take offense at it anyway. In the case of the latter, there's not terribly much we can do-since lists of THOSE words change a lot, so what's a normal, inoffensive word one day may suddenly be on someone's list 2 days later. There's actually some of those words GSC or twi-specific. People never-been-way would view these words in a different fashion than people who have survived twi or its offshoots (Momentus jargon counts also), as well as words that have become common in being used to hurt ex-twi'ers. One common technique here- especially common among those who wish to elevate vpw to divine status and cover up his felonies, sins and shortcomings- has been to come up with excuses to DISMISS posts they don't like. Inconvenient facts arrived? Let's find a pretext to ignore the post, then we don't have to deal with the content. I've attempted, as time has progressed, to be very calm when posting-returning later to reply to something to ensure I don't react instead of refuting. So, it was obvious when one vpw fan responded to calm, reasoned posts from me by calling them "angry." Calm post after calm post were called "angry" or synonyms. This allowed that person to even skip reading the post, and gave them an excuse to move along without addressing a single point. Other posters pointed out that this was just in their imagination- I prefer to look back and see what was in the previous post that was so good, they had to misdirect people from the content because they couldn't address it. (This became useful to me in the long run.) Another person (or the same person) used a different approach. I pointed out that vpw was either unaware of something when he made a certain decision, or he was aware of it- and outlined what was wrong in either case. They replied by calling me "the devil." If I'd known then what I learned later, I would have known the previous point was irrefutable, at least by them, and expanded upon it. In my case, many of the words won't hurt- whereas for many other people they would, and that's why some people claim they've lurked. Comments on posters exposing twi sometimes contain claims that they're "angry" or the equivalent. That carries a lot of baggage here- in the context of the GSC, responding to the exposure of vpw's criminal or immoral practices by saying the exposer is "angry" or emotional rather than address their points, that strongly suggests the replier is a big fan of vpw and looking to whitewash his past of his rapes, his molestations, and all his other evil deeds rather than discuss them when they come up. There's plenty of other words that can be used, each with twi baggage, ex-twi splinter baggage, or GSC-specific baggage. I saw another example where someone wanted to silence a similar comment by invoking Momentus jargon. It's certainly possible for someone to ACCIDENTALLY hit on these words and use them- in which case, they should be made aware they can set someone off-or several someones off- when they do. That way, if they offend someone, they can do it intentionally rather than by accident.

The best part of the magazine- and we knew it on the field- was the GMIR articles. Those stopped completely when lcm drew his "line in the sand" at HQ, and, apparently, nobody qualified to write the articles fell on their faces before him to worship his as-inine self-image. So, the section went permanently missing. It looked like the entire Research Dept walked off-or were kicked out. Magazines after that were HEAVY on FILLER- lots of HUGE images, LOTS of photos, nice, big print. You could squeeze the actual content of an entire magazine into a few pages in a small font- and even less if you skipped the articles that were stealth advertisements- with all the competent people walking off, twi kept trying to trick people into showing up and replacing them. A talk on "Word in Culture" was ENTIRELY about "how to write an article for the magazine", and articles on the programs were all oriented towards encouraging applications at the end of the article.

There WAS a WKRP sequel show. Jennifer ran the office, and people kept thinking she was a BRAINLESS blonde and talked over her head. Les Nessman had a band-aid in the first episode, and they decided to make a running gag of it for the series. Dr Johnny Fever was Johnny Caravello, but also Johnny Midnite, Rip Tide, Heavy Early..... Venus Flytrap was Gordon SIms, who fled Vietnam to preserve his sanity. Mr Carlson was a World War II combat veteran.

It WAS WKRP. The show used real music by real artists, and it was a pain to try to get the rights for all the real music for DVDs and so on.

This TV show seems to have done better in syndication than in its original run. It was popular enough to justify an attempt at a sequel TV show with the cast returning. The office, naturally, was run by the supposed eye-candy receptionist. One character always had a band-aid visible in each episode. One character almost never used his real name- but had lots of alternatives. One character saw combat in World War II- but you'd never imagine it looking at him on the show. One character never used his real name because he deserted the US Army during the Vietnam War- while in the field. Finally, there was a perfectly logical, real-world reason why the show had problems being rebroadcast years later.

I'll start them in a few days. Maybe after that, posters who did the more casual posts in the other threads can rephrase them or repost them for the appropriate years.

I know one movie that included "Spirit in the Sky", and a different one that included "Bohemian Rhapsody."

Ok, that was Nick Lowe's "Cruel to be Kind." FREE POST!

No third name? But how can I feel confident about whether or not it's Julia Roberts?