I received and read my first digest. It's more than what I had expected. Thanks.
Kerney Lee
Netsurfer Digest has got to be the coolest e-zine on the Net, sucksucksucksuck. Hehe, no really, it is great, pointed me to a number of sites that I might never well have heard of!
Regarding Cosmopolitan's site, hasn't it been up for awhile now?.
Douglas
Could be. We don't only use the latest greatest. We also use those that stand the test of time. - LN
I wanted to thank you for pointing to me with "Ginger's Diary" in the just-after Pearl Harbor Day issue (NSD 2.39). Unbelieveable responses! Grown men crying, people wanting more - I couldn't believe it.
You guys do good work! I go through every issue item by item. Thank you and keep it up!
Betty Leonard
All I can say is a simple, "Thank You". I look forward to each issue of Netsurfer Digest and have learned over time to read every word of the entire digest.
Is there an easy way to go back and re-read those early issues that I may have just skimmed over in the past?
I wish you prosperity and health in 1997, because I would like to see you around for a long time. You bring a broadbrush insight into the Internet not found elsewhere and I hope you get the credit and rewards you deserve for your efforts. I will try to do my small part in the background as one of your faithful and loyal subscribers. Thanks, again.
Bill Courtright
Ummm, gosh. Back issues can be read at our home page or retrieved via FTP. - LN
Just wanted to drop you folks a line to tell you that you've created the best e-mag around. Thanx and keep 'em coming....
Alan Eldredge
I just wanted to stop by and say "thanks" for a great service and Web site! Keep up the great work. Live long and prosper ;-)
P.S.: I can't be sued by a Vulcan, can I???
Alan Browning
No, but maybe by Paramount, or Gene Roddenberry's estate. - LN
Official Corporate Greetings and Salutations, from the Robon Publicity OverNode(tm)!
News of your inclusion of Robon Corporation in your "Netsurfer Digest" has finally filtered up through the vast Robon Publicity hierarchy. We are well pleased by this honor! Under normal circumstances, this official message would have arrived mere seconds after your posting - or perhaps several hours before. Recently, however, Robon Corporation has been experiencing distortions in the Asynchronous Non-Time Interface through which we communicate - the ANTI-Web(tm). (As you will be aware, Robon Corporation's main corporate functions are now located slightly outside normal time and space, the better to serve our customers across all possible world-lines.) We apologize for the delay.
Live long, Netsurfers! And remember - Life Is Upgradeable!
Robon Corporation - 01.20.2007
Greetings from sunny Spain. :)
I haven't been to the Web site about software viruses (real and hoaxes) but in your article (NSD 3.02) you said the Ghost virus was a hoax. It really existed, for the Atari ST. The virus only had a minor effect: it reversed the directions of the mouse pointer when the computer was on for more than an hour.
Let me congratulate you for the magazine. It always includes interesting things.
Jordi Espunya
Love the NSD. 'Nuff said.
George Myers Jr.
Anything in particular this time? - LN
The writing is always snappy, personable - I feel like there are smart/witty people behind these words - and there is this, too, that comes through: "We know what we're talking about, and you should trust us."
And heck, I do.
George Myers Jr.
Well, you can fool some of the people some of the time.... - LN
I have to tell you that this is the best service I receive. You always manage to send interesting sites. I just wanted you to know how much I appreciate this. Thank you very much.
Judy Creech
I like what you guys/gals do. The Net is far too large for any one person to see it. I spend a large amount of time looking, but you cut down my search time a lot with your links and stories about "whatever". HTML is the only format that really does your publication justice. I love it. Keep it coming.
Mike Servis
I'd like to say that I really enjoy NSD. Every issue is usually jam-spanking-packed with sites that are truly unique and very interesting to me. Thanks muchly, and keep up the work.
Jason Valentine
Hey I just wanted to let you guys (gals) know that I love your publication! It's the best thing that arrives in my mailbox! Keep up the good work!
Renae E. Rost
Your little mistake may have caused you tsuris ("Whoops", NSD 3.04), but it was hardly noticable here in my weekly receipt of your Digest. As far as I am concerned you are doing a mitzva for a landsman helping me to find some Hinternet treasures mixed with the drek in that vast vasteland. Shalom and todah from Jerusalem.
Name withheld by request
Interesting sites on your latest NSD. Shtetl-speak indeed!
Don Nyveen
Thanks, Dad. - LN
I really like Netsurfer Digest. It's great stuff! I am very surprised that I can get such informative and good magazine just via e-mail. But I've got a problem with your e-zines chapter. You do not give the necessary information for people without Web access. How do I subscribe to the magazines?
Holger Flick
Usually, we will give subscription information for e-zines, but most of those we cover don't mail their issues. Instead, they just keep a Web site. If that's the case, all we can give is the URL. - LN
This is mostly (or maybe entirely) a letter of praise for Netsurfer Digest. I read it every week. It's one of my favorite on-line publications. I like the content a lot, and I like the format too.
I especially want to mention the format - on format I have to rate you guys higher than just about any other online publication. That's because NSD even looks good on Lynx. I do some of my surfing on Lynx. So don't ever change. Heavy graphics is not information; you don't need heavy graphics to do interesting stuff.
Your content and your writing style are superb.
Eric Schechter
Just want to say that it has been too long since I let you know how much I appreciate the Digest.I usually come away finding at least one gem in your weekly pages. I guess I just wanted to say keep up the good work, and I am hoping for your continued success.
Bob Piechocki
I find your newsletter one of the most valuable and interesting of the few that I subscribe to. Please keep it up.
Ed
I just want to give you an "atta boy" for the info I get from Netsurfer. I always seem to bookmark a bunch of stuff. Thanks again.
Kyle W. Jeske
Woof! - LN
Imagine my surprise when I opened up NSD 3.05 and found a link to my very own SCA inside. Having been a member for many years, I was tickled inside to see it being covered by you. Just one question, though. How did you hear about us?
Matthew Davidson
I've known of the SCA for years. I'm a geek, too. Probably, I was clued in by one of my fellow D&D-playing friends in high school or college. I've also been to three or four Renaissance faires. I found the Web page through an SCA member. He suggested his own Kingdom's page. While I found that lacking, he linked to the main SCA page, which I thought was neat enough to be included. - LN
I'm glad I found Netsurfer Digest.... I print out the Digest and pass it around the office and several of the computer illiterates ask me to pull down "stuff". So far I've converted three folks to life on the net....
Ozzie
Thanks for all the wonderful info in Netsurfer Digest. I look forward to it every week!
Bill Robbins
My compliments to you on your Digest. I find it always well written, both in the material and technically. It's a rare issue that doesn't have several items of great interest. Keep up the great work!
Dave Crook
Everyone says keep up the good work, or something similar, as if we're about to keel over.... - LN
I just needed to tell you that I think that NSD 3.07 was one of your best! I really enjoyed it and found the links really cool. Please congratulate your entire staff at Netsurfer Digest for me.
Paul Croy
Just a note to say I appreciate Netsurfer Digest. I especially like the format of just titles and then titles and content repeated.
Since mine is more of a business orientation, I would like to see more in that area, but still read faithfully anyway. KUTGW
Pete Smith
There it is again. Is there something someone's not telling me? - LN
As a long-time subscriber, and admirer, of Netsurfer Digest, I was both surprised and appalled at the tone of the recent item on the FBI wiretap needs (NSD 3.02).
Rather than a constructive editorial comment on the site, this item seemed to reflect a pre-existing bias. Apparently, you think it webwise and PC to react vehemently on any issue to do with privacy. The very fact that you feel free to publish such a statement belies your attitude. And it's not like these statistics were leaked to you from some classified document - they're on the FBI site!
>From my perspective, the potential damage of "improper" wiretapping is completely overshadowed by the potential damage that can be done by the drug dealers, terrorists, and assorted other villains the FBI is seeking to protect us from.
Jacques Jolie
Please read the article again before reading the following response.
What bias? We said, essentially, "here's a doc, here's some stats." I don't see a vehement reaction. Of course, it's in the sardonic Netsurfer style, but other that that, I don't see any subjective judgements here. What statement are you talking about, exactly?
As far as potential damage goes, American legal/constitutional history and tradition tend to err on the side of private rights. I suspect most thoughtful Americans (that is not a slight) would argue against your position. - LN
After reading your description regarding the memo released by FBI Assistant Director Kalstrom, it is clear that you did not read the memo and that you have no real knowledge concerning wiretaps and the ability to wiretap by federal and state law enforcement. I am a state law enforcement officer and I have conducted numerous wiretap investigations. Some of these have been cooperative investigations with the FBI.
The law enforcement community does not want to be able to "tap your phone at the drop of a hat." It's simply not true.... Let me tell you from experience, it is not a pleasant investigation to preside over, but they have been extremely effective in investigating international terrorism and organized crime organizations.
It is extremely frustrating to see a description like yours. It would have been nice to see a more even-handed description. Or, if you're going to present a one-sided point of view, at least be accurate.
J. Walker
I think confusion arises from our phrase "the FBI wants to be able to tap your phone at the drop of a hat." It is not the same as saying "the FBI wants to tap your phone at the drop of a hat." We meant that the FBI wants the ability to easily initiate a phone tap to be retained in phone systems, not that they want to listen in on your conversations with your Aunt Heather on a whim. - LN
I only use Netscape, so I cannot say if this is valid on other browsers, but going back to the top of the page after following a link is not hard. I just hold the right mouse button and use the "Back" menu item. No need, for Netscape users at least, to add more code and an explict back button.
Love the lists. Thanks.
Burch Seymour
I just read a letter on your site from a reader who wants links to the top of the page below each item. That is okay but I usually use the [Home] and [End] keys to go to the top and bottom of the document. You'd be surprised how many people don't know about this. It works in Mosaic and Explorer. I'm not sure about Netscape.
Anthony E. Greene
It works in Netscape on my Mac, too. - LN
I`d like to ask you about the difference between the .html and .txt formats of Netsurfer Digest. I`ve subscribed for the .html one, but I just don`t know in what sense it is better than the .txt version.
bubu
The basic difference is that the HTML version comes with built-in links. If you use a browser as your e-mail program, it's very easy to use because the links arrive live. You can also save the HTML document and then open it in a browser to view it.
The text version is identical to the HTML version, except it's just plain, unformatted text. The links are not normally clickable, though some e-mail programs (like my Eudora Light 3.0 for Mac) do recognize all URLs, even plain text ones, so that even the text version's URLs are converted to live, clickable links. - LN
After reading through your mailbag, I couldn't help but make a comment or two, and an observation.
As to the problems related by "Pegasus Mail" users, those problems are due either to user stupidity (RTFM), or screwy poppers on the various ISPs. I've subscribed to your Digest since its inception (or just about), and have enjoyed it using everything from "NetMail" (now defunct) to Eudora to Pegasus. And each reader displays your HTML version flawlessly. I've used Pegasus Mail since version 1.5 (it's now 2.52), and have NEVER encountered a Digest problem.
As to the various requests (complaints?) about a lack of links back to the index at the top, have these people never heard of a "back" button? Works beautifully when reading single articles from the index. And if more than one article is read (after leaving the index), the "Go" selection (or "History" in IE3.0) always displays a link back to the index. Why can't people simply learn to use their software, rather than expecting everyone to cater to their particular lack of initiative?
Ah well... I relinquish the soapbox. Many thanks for your EXCELLENT publication.
Catherine Harper
I enjoy receiving your online reports, but I have one minor criticism. I don't understand why you always place commas and periods outside of quotation marks. I have not found any reference book that advocates this placement. All the writing courses I've been involved in (including the one I teach) always state, emphatically, that periods and commas always go inside quotation marks. Just thought I'd ask.
Mike Alvarez
Placing punctuation outside of quotation marks is a British style. As I personally am Canadian, and solely responsible for NSD's style, I feel free to borrow and apply American and British traditions as I see fit. If a period is part of a quote, I'll use it inside quotation marks, but I'll never put one in with a title.
One interesting tidbit is that Canadian newspapers generally go with American spelling (color/colour, etc.), as do I. But I refuse to spell catalogue as catalog, dialogue as dialog, etc. (see my sig below). That sort of bastardization was introduced by Andrew Carnegie near the beginning of the 20th century along with other spelling "improvements" in a plan to Americanize the language. - LN
NSD 3.02 came to me as a text document. Did wonders for Microsoft Internet Mail, it is in proper font and links look nice, etc. Subsequent versions have come as HTML however, and look their strange selves (large fonts, etc.) Why, how, or by what planet alignment did I get the text version? Is there a way I can continue to get the text version? Will I get a raise this year?
Now that we've dealt with those simple matters I wish to thank you for your e-zine (quite useful on many occasions). Much appreciated.
BTW, when is MIME coming? This might be 'just the ticket'.
Dave Glenn
We could tell you by which planet alignment you got the text version, but then.... To continue to get the text version, you need a chicken, two goats, and some baby oil. Oh, and you'd better memorize Leviticus - you _will_ be tested.
Will you get a raise this year? Not if your boss finds out about that last step.
The heck if I know when is MIME coming. I just work here. Arthur? - LN
I've looked into this and the writing is on the wall, or rather in your
browser. Most new and updated e-mail raders now come with the
capability of displaying HTML directly, with no fancy MIME attachment
neccesary. You basically give them a "Content-Type: text/html" as one
of the mail headers and they know what to do with the rest of the file.
So that's what we're doing, mostly because in the long term it's really the
right thing to do. If you look at the headers of this issue
you'll see that they look the same as what you'd get from (say) Netscape's
In-Box Direct publications. This is going to become more and more common,
especially with the e-mail capabilities in new versions of Netscape
Communicator, Explorer, and Eudora.
To see an example of how all this works, and if you have a Netscape browser save the Digest e-mail message in a file (with headers intact) and look at it with Netscape Mail's "File ->Add Folder" command. You'll see what I mean. - AB
Just to redeem Pegasus Mail, as it seems that no one enjoys it. I just received the latest issue of NSD (3.02) and I double clicked on it. Pegasus Mail told me that "This mail contains information meant to be viewed on a web browser," and asked me if I would like to view it as plain text or use a Web browser. I chose the browser option, and a perfectly formatted NSD appeared on my monitor. I think maybe people who complain about problems with software should consider their own personal erroneous configuration, rather than blame perfectly stable software that makes Eudora look featureless. Someone has to defend Pegasus. =)
Thanks for a great online publication!
Amer Mallah
I also have noticed that Pegasus adds an extra character to the address links when Netsurfer is saved to file. I use the DOS editor, highlight the character, select SEARCH from the menu, then CHANGE. Leave the CHANGE TO field blank and then select CHANGE ALL.
The extra character is sent to byte heaven. The extra character happens to be smiley face. Weird.
Gary Pike
Following your item on Corel's new Java product, I visited their Web site to download it. Clicking download took me to a registration page. I filled it in only to learn that the submit button didn't do anything! I was stuck at a dead end. Other links to pages with e-mail addresses on them didn't come up. The joys of electronic commerce! Give me a secretary over the phone any day....
Jim Lane
While I mostly agree with your editorial comments about the AOL lawsuit, I have to say that AOL has always been arrogant in dealing with subscribers. They switched people to the higher priced plan without consent and they were very slow in upgrading their modem pool a few years ago, so access was slow and download times long. And you can't do any account management online. You have to call them. When I called I was on hold for an hour.
People should vote with their feet and move to a new provider, but AOL should realize they are a *service* provider. It would have been trivial for them to look at my usage pattern and move me into the light use plan. But no, they put me in the $20/month unlimited use group.
Well, you get the idea. Thanks for listening.
Burch Seymour
While I am not an AOL subscriber (thank goodness) I think your editorial comments in NSD 3.03 were incorrect and miss the point.
What AOL has done is oversold their services in much the same way as Jim Bakker (PTL fame) oversold the time-share units in his fiasco. Bakker knew he had a limited number of units and yet oversold them many times over. Most folks in this country along with a Federal judge decided that wasn't just "shoddy service" but was in fact, false advertising.
AOL knew in advance that a large-scale TV ad campaign coupled with offering unlimited access would cause their service to existing customers as well as new ones to suffer greatly. And yet in the quest for more revenue they tossed logic (and good business practices) to the wind.
While I have a disdain for ridiculous lawsuits, what AOL has done in widely advertising and promoting a service that they so obviously can't deliver is most deserving of this legal action.
Jeff Davis
My point - which I should have stated more clearly - is that ALL ISPs oversell modem lines. They have to. AOL just provided three times fewer modems per capita.
AOL had to know in advance the slowdown their advertising practices would produce, unless they're total idiots, but it's still not illegal. - LN
I think it is more akin to purchasing a pass for as many free movies as you want each month but being unable to use it because the theatre is always full. While it may just be stupidity to get into that situation, for the company to continue to promote the sale of even more free passes borders on "false advertising".
By the way, while we may disagree on AOL's culpability in this matter, I really love Netsurfer Digest and recommend it frequently to my audience. Keep up the great work!
Jeff Davis
I disagree that AOL is guilty of bad service, not fraud. I know of many cases in the past where friends have been bilked by AOL. That is why I will have nothing to do with it.
A ration of 25:1 is intolerable. AOL's actions belie its greed and contempt for subscribers.
The FCC should set standards for online access. If a company cannot provide a certain level of access at peak times, it should be chastised in some financial way, such as freezing the formation of new accounts until access is acceptable.
Too bad you take the side of a greedy online service rather than the public users you send your magazines too.
Fred Barnes
The best way AOL can be chastised is by losing its customers. They should vote with their dollars. How can you think I took the side of AOL when I recommended that AOLers leave the service and find a nice local ISP instead? Intolerable, unethical, inconsiderate - yes, but I just don't think that what AOL has done is illegal. - LN
Just a note to say (a) thanks for taking the time and trouble to put the digest together and (b) I think you were quite right to include an editorial "aside" about AOL. I've never been one to indulge in AOL-bashing (although Heaven knows, some of its users really do ask for it!) but something as ludicrous as this really does deserve a comment - and you'd be superhuman to resist!
Peter Kemp
I love Netsurfer Digest, but I disagreed with your comment "As an aside, did you know that the Bible nowhere forbids premarital sex?" in NSD 3.05.
The Bible is quite clear on the issue, from the Old Testament (Exodus 22:16 states that if a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife) to the new (I Cor 6:12-20).
Don't forget what a scandal it was that Mary was found to be with child - before the time of coming together with Joseph, even though they were engaged. (Matt 1:18 ff.)
Eric E. Cohen
Exodus 22:16 - OK, so you marry a virgin you sleep with - but it doesn't forbid it the way it does if you sleep with an animal (you die). Or you can always sleep with a non-virgin, who are usually easier to sleep with anyway (hey! just like high school!).
I Cor 6:12-20 - This is closer to the point, but I wouldn't say it "forbids premarital sex". It's Paul's advice, and while he clearly disapproves of fornication, and of prostitutes, the passage does begin with the preamble: "For me there are no forbidden things, maybe, but not everything does good." I think the text is being clear that this is advice rather than law. The notes in my New Testament say Paul's advice is specifically directed at libertines who felt that sex was as necessary for the body as food and drink.
Matt 1:18 ff. - I'm not arguing that premarital sex is and was frowned upon, just that it's not forbidden. It's not forbidden here. - LN
What do you think about Deuteronomy 22:13-21? It talks about a husband who thinks his wife may not be a virgin upon marrying her. If she is found not to be a virgin... stoned to death. Pretty forbidden to me.
Eric E. Cohen
OK, you win, in a roundabout way. Let's see - girls get stoned, guys pay shekels. And with what a shekel is worth these days.... - LN
To set the record straight, the Bible does have numerous passages strictly prohibiting sex outside of marriage. The term used is "fornication", which has always been defined to be sexual intercourse between two people who are not married. Passages include Acts 15:29, 1 Cor 6:12-20, and others.
You should not mislead your many readers by making unfounded and unresearched comments, especially on subjects that are very precious to so many people in this immoral age that we live in.
David Hall
Here's my problem with Acts 15:29. It is not the word of God, it is a description of the letter written by apostles and elders which was sent to Antioch. Although the letter is in the Bible, and it recommends against fornication, it is not the word from on high forbidding the sex.
I would not say my comments are "unfounded and unresearched". I've studied the Bible in elementary school, high school, and college - a total of nine years of formal study, and many more informal hours.
After reading NSD 3.05, I was very displeased at the use of "fuck" in the description of the Bible Facts Homepage.
I am not displeased at having this site mentioned, but I do not appreciate seeing this type of language where anyone, including children, can see the use of these words. I can limit access to the site, but not what I receive in my in-basket.
If I continue to see such vulgarities I will have no choice but to cancel my subscription and let your sponsors know your choice of text offends me.
Dave Pucklavage
Sponsors? We have sponsors? - LN
I do not mind you including the Bible Sex Facts Home Page for us to look at, cause it includes a warning for parents. However, I was very disappointed in the short comments you used to introduce this subject. I did not appreciate the word "fuck" in several sentences. Would you enjoy reading an e-mail message with the word "fuck" with your 12-year-old daughter?? Very disappointed!!!
Buster Wright
Well, it was only one sentence, unless you count the parentheses as another sentence, but I don't want to quibble, really. Disappointments noted. Every bit of feedback helps. - LN
It is the policy of Netsurfer Digest to practice rigorous neutrality by being equally disdaintful of all creeds, beliefs, and other memetic spam. I should add that the child argument really pisses me off. I find it to be a cowardly intellectual justification for the pet peeves of way too many narrowminded bigots. That argument is loosing it's force among the hypocrisy with which it is so often used. Somehow I doubt seeing the F-word will forever warp a child, unless of course the parents have already royally fucked up the poor kids upbringing. Besides, I refuse to dumb down the Digest to the appalingly low level of discourse thought appropriate for children.
Hmmm, would it have helped if we used the Biblically correct word begat instead? Let's see, "Begat memetic spam!" - naaah, doesn't have the same ring somehow. Maybe on a T-shirt... - AB (clad head to foot in asbestos pasties)
Recommended Reference: "The F Word", Jesse Sheidlower, Editor © 1995, Random House, New York ISSBN 0-679-44573-0
Just a short note to inform you that your recent Christian bashing in Netsurfer Digest is not appeciated. I have unsuscribed because of it. Pity, I had thought your reviewers were more professional then this.
Kevin Wessel
I presume you mean the "Demon Possession Handbook..." and the "...And the Bible Sex Facts Home Page" articles in NSD 3.05. I don't think anything here is negative, except talking about how the latter page handles AIDS. But that's not Christian bashing. In fact, since yours was the only letter we received accusing us of bias, I think we are innocent of your charges. - LN
I am a faithful and generally content reader of Netsurfer Digest; however, as a librarian I am somewhat confused as to what to make of the annotation in NSD3.06 entitled "A Classic a Day Keeps the Librarian Away". Reading the books on this site makes librarians obsolete? Reading the books on this site allows one to escape those nasty librarians coming around and requiring you to read what you don't want to? Or, what?
Keith Morgan
It's the product of a recurring nightmare I had as a child that included evil librarians, me, and swizzle sticks.... Nah, seriously - it was just a poor attempt at a punnish headline. No meaning, really. - LN
Since I am a librarian, I was not pleased with the heading "A Chapter a Day Keeps the Librarian Away". Are there benefits to be gained by avoiding librarians, or are you just going along with the stereotypical image of the librarian? When was the last time you were in a library? Librarians today promote books and reading and also the use of the Internet. They make it possible for a great number of people to access the Web so that there will be readers for pages such as yours. Take a look at the March issue of Internet World for the ways that school librarians are using the Web.
Please exercise a little more thought before putting in these little humorous gems about librarians or any other profession.
Linda Bertland
Ah, how my heart breaks. I've been an enthusiastic Netsurfer subscriber for
more than a year and I talk up your newsletter to everyone who's into
discovering new sites. And now, alas, you mock my profession! Now, I can
understand eluding your local public librarian if you've built up some
hefty fines (heck, I'm on the run right now!
In all seriousness, librarians are a great group of people and they are
some of the most enthusiastic Net contributors and users. Librarians are
doing great work with organizing the Net, searching the Net and gleaning
useful info from the Net. They're not prune-faced enforcers who stamp
library books. OK, most of 'em aren't. ;-) Much like teachers, we get
advanced degrees and small paychecks-- and lots of abuse. C'mon, Netsurfer!
Librarians deserve better than that!
Pamela Bachorz
It is the policy of Netsurfer Digest to never piss of librarians and to
worship the ground they walk on. Really, it is. Nevertheless, we mock
everyone equally. - AB
No women on NY Rock (NSD3.06)? I guessed you missed Blueberrie Spy, NY
Loose, Phoebe Legere, Shove It, Fluffer, Paris By Night, Jayne County, and
me, Didi Delicious. I write a monthly column that you probably missed while
your head was up your ass.
Didi Delicious
Our writer responds: Hells bells, little upstarts. I did try to find
some, but I guess I couldn't see too well through my bum cheeks. - KB
FYI, Gary Sandy played Andy in WKRP. He appeared a year ago in the Theater
League (a national theater group) production of The Goodbye Girl.
Monte Schachner
In your review of NY Rock (NSD 3.06), you wrote, "Sadly the only female we
found was the unrocklike Jenny McCarthy (if Archie comics ever became live
action, wouldn't she make a great Betty?)."
There was a live-action Archie television movie, about five years ago, on
NBC. The setting was Riverdale, about ten years after everyone had
graduated from Riverdale High. The Betty character wasn't memorable, IMHO.
Jenny McCarthy would be a better choice, if a new movie were ever produced.
Ed Floden
I'm kinda curious about the percent rises given for numbers of hosts and
numbers of domains on the Net.
A rise from 488,000 to 828,000 domains seems to me like almost 70 percent
increase, not the 41.06 that you mention. The latter is the rise expressed
as a percentage of the figure we are now at, which don't make much sense -
i.e. one apple to two apples is a 100 percent rise, not 50 percent.
Similarly, the 12,881,000 to 16,146,000 rise you give as 20.22 percent, I
make out to be 25 percent.
No great shakes, just thought the figures looked even better this way, and
someone somewhere will no doubt quote your figures....
Simon Chapman
It was late, I divided the wrong numbers, what can I say. I should know
better after untold years of math. Really, we're not totally
math-illiterate around here, just when it really counts.... - AB
Address your letters to
editor@netsurf.com.
Or a Rock Columnist...
The Guy Who Played Andy Travis
The Irrepressible Jenny
Some of Us Even Know Calculus
Publisher: Arthur Bebak
Editor: Lawrence Nyveen
Letters and signatures edited for clarity and brevity.
NETSURFER DIGEST © 1996 Netsurfer Communications, Inc.
All rights reserved.
NETSURFER DIGEST is a trademark of Netsurfer Communications, Inc.