Re: Schmuck?

Did it again. That was supposed to go to Paul personally. What the
heck, he deserves the public praise. But sending it to the list makes
it look like I was singling Paul out for special praise, when actually I
just thought he could use the personal encouragement. I think just as
highly of Graham's and Dave K's abilities; it's only that they aren't
usually as eager to jump on things as Paul is.

And no, I'm not going to name who I think insists on being stuck in the
ditches of sloppy thinking. Lord knows I spend enough time there.
Always grateful for a helping hand.

With regards to all,
--
David J. Finnamore
Nashville, TN, USA
http://personal.bna.bellsouth.net/bna/d/f/dfin/index.html
--

1st grade, 1901:
See Spot. See Spot run. Run, Spot, run!

1st grade, 2001:
C:\spot
C:\spot\run.exe
RUN spot\run.exe

Hi David,

> I'm not going to name who I think insists on being stuck in the
> ditches of sloppy thinking

I assumed you meant me.

But I don't mind.

I have my _own_ interpretation.

- Jeff
;-)

--- In tuning@y..., "J Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> > I'm not going to name who I think insists on being stuck in the
> > ditches of sloppy thinking
>
> I assumed you meant me.
>
> But I don't mind.
>
> I have my _own_ interpretation.
>
> - Jeff
> ;-)

It's OK. I've called 135-7911 and the Tuning Police are on the
way. 8-)>

Hey, I enjoyed your posts about aleatoric tunings. I, too, have found
that any tuning can reward a persistent and sensitive approach to it.
But I feel more comfortable within a logical tuning structure. It
makes me think I'm doing something that makes sense, whether or not
it's true!

David Finnamore

> I feel more comfortable within a logical tuning structure. It
> makes me think I'm doing something that makes sense, whether or
> not it's true!

Bless you Brother David for this confession.

- Jeff