From lee13 at uillinois.edu Mon Nov 1 06:30:16 2004 From: lee13 at uillinois.edu (Lee, Shawn) Date: Mon Nov 1 06:30:20 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Chicago performance Message-ID: > Wonder if anyone else on the list here caught the Chicago Joe Frank performance tonight? I was also at the Chicago performance. I was not attending the Third Coast Audio conference. I drove up to the city from downstate Illinois just to see Joe Frank. It was an extremely entertaining show, but yes, a bit on the quick side. I had met Joe Frank years ago at his KCRW studio so his unadulterated voice was not so distracting to me. His signature background music was there. Without that, it would have been a very un-Joe like performance. Some of us stayed afterwards to try and greet Joe and get an autograph, but we were quickly shooed out of the theater by the woman who introduced Joe before the show and I guess was the main coordinator for the Third Coast Audio conference. She was a bit rude to us, in fact. I wasn't surprised Joe wanted to retain his privacy. Other than that minor letdown, it was a grand evening. --shawn From mrosan at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 20:27:14 2004 From: mrosan at sbcglobal.net (Max Rosan) Date: Mon Nov 1 20:26:40 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] re: a few dollars more In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.1.20041030151013.037f35b0@127.0.0.1> References: <6.1.2.0.1.20041030151013.037f35b0@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <41870CA2.9080908@sbcglobal.net> Well, we have certainly seen a lot of different viewpoints posted here. Of them, those that pertain directly to Joe Frank's productions are hypotheses based on the poster's opinions. I too have opinions, but I would be interested to hear Joe's viewpoint. Hey Joe, are you "out there"? Dave Dyer wrote: >I certaintly didn't mean to imply that Joe ever made piles >of money, or that he's greedy. More likely, at least for his >radio work, he's gone from subsistance income to no income. >However, net of expenses involved, the subscription scheme >isn't going to improve his balance sheet in the short run, >and will hurt in the long run. I'm firmly in the camp that >believes that music (or Joe Frank) sharing creates a larger >audience for the offical product. > >_______________________________________________ >Joe Frank Mailing List >joe-frank-list@armory.com >http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > > > From marek at telgarsky.com Mon Nov 1 20:51:10 2004 From: marek at telgarsky.com (Marek Telgarsky) Date: Mon Nov 1 20:51:17 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: joe-frank-list Digest, Vol 17, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: <200411011200.ac02210@deepthought.armory.com> References: <200411011200.ac02210@deepthought.armory.com> Message-ID: <4187123E.50309@telgarsky.com> Hi, I caught the performance, and honestly, was a little disappointed. His delivery, especially towards the end, was uneven. He seemed to get nervous and stay that way. Also, the material was too dark for me. I much prefer the surrealist sequences to the "I'm thinking about committing suicide" stuff. The show in LA was much better. There was no annoying lit up "EXIT" sign 3 feet from Joe's head. The stage was darker. It seemed like Joe was more comfortable. I don't remember the material being as ultra-dark. The audience seemed more into performance art than the Third Coast crowd. Joe's timing on the video-synced oration was better in LA too. The dancer was more into it in LA... here the first couple of times she came out I got the vibe that she wanted to get off the stage asap. Dunno.... Marek joe-frank-list-request@armory.com wrote: >Send joe-frank-list mailing list submissions to > joe-frank-list@armory.com > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > joe-frank-list-request@armory.com > >You can reach the person managing the list at > joe-frank-list-owner@armory.com > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of joe-frank-list digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. RE: Chicago performance (Lee, Shawn) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 08:30:16 -0600 >From: "Lee, Shawn" >Subject: RE: [joe-frank-list] Chicago performance >To: "Joe Frank Mailing List" >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > >>Wonder if anyone else on the list here caught the Chicago Joe Frank >> >> >performance tonight? > >I was also at the Chicago performance. I was not attending the Third >Coast Audio conference. I drove up to the city from downstate Illinois >just to see Joe Frank. It was an extremely entertaining show, but yes, >a bit on the quick side. I had met Joe Frank years ago at his KCRW >studio so his unadulterated voice was not so distracting to me. His >signature background music was there. Without that, it would have been >a very un-Joe like performance. Some of us stayed afterwards to try and >greet Joe and get an autograph, but we were quickly shooed out of the >theater by the woman who introduced Joe before the show and I guess was >the main coordinator for the Third Coast Audio conference. She was a >bit rude to us, in fact. I wasn't surprised Joe wanted to retain his >privacy. Other than that minor letdown, it was a grand evening. > >--shawn > > >------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Joe Frank Mailing List >joe-frank-list@armory.com >http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > > >End of joe-frank-list Digest, Vol 17, Issue 1 >********************************************* > > > > From BILLMILOSZ at aol.com Tue Nov 2 00:25:13 2004 From: BILLMILOSZ at aol.com (BILLMILOSZ@aol.com) Date: Tue Nov 2 00:25:24 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] RE: Joe Frank in Chicago Message-ID: <99.504c95fb.2eb89e69@aol.com> I've heard reports from a few people who came to see Joe Frank report that they were treated rudely by Johanna Zorn (director of Third Coast festival). I suggest you email her- she's jzorn@thirdcoastfestival.org I should think this to be inappropriate and bureaucratic behavior. I think she owes apologies to all those she felt moved to treat with something less than ordinary respect and dignity. I don't know her, but in her defense, she's running a week-long series of events and was no doubt really very frazzled. She probably had a million things going on, a million things going WRONG and a million people wanting things from her, whether or not she's in a position to provide them. It's no excuse and she should apologize graciously if she's big enough, but I do see how this sort of thing can happen. I've also learned that a million things went wrong in preparation and so on for Joe's performance and that any time he & his staff had planned for meet & greet were consumed by headaches beyond number. (You could have fooled me, I thought it all went quite smoothly and hung together well, but I suppose that behind the curtain there could have been an angry mob of rustic villagers with burning torches, pitchforks and cudgels, only being held at bay by the superior firepower of Joe and his staff..... but thanks to the professionalism of the performers involved we never knew it....) FROM: lee13@uillinois.edu I was also at the Chicago performance.? I was not attending the Third Coast Audio conference.? I drove up to the city from downstate Illinois just to see Joe Frank.? It was an extremely entertaining show, but yes, a bit on the quick side.? I had met Joe Frank years ago at his KCRW studio so his unadulterated voice was not so distracting to me.? His signature background music was there.? Without that, it would have been a very un-Joe like performance.? Some of us stayed afterwards to try and greet Joe and get an autograph, but we were quickly shooed out of the theater by the woman who introduced Joe before the show and I guess was the main coordinator for the Third Coast Audio conference.? She was a bit rude to us, in fact.? I wasn't surprised Joe wanted to retain his privacy.? Other than that minor letdown, it was a grand evening. --shawn? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041102/493509a5/attachment.htm From MarkwP3096 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 00:57:41 2004 From: MarkwP3096 at aol.com (MarkwP3096@aol.com) Date: Tue Nov 2 00:57:57 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] RE: Joe Frank in Chicago Message-ID: In a message dated 02-Nov-04 12:27:46 AM Pacific Standard Time, BILLMILOSZ@aol.com writes: I've heard reports from a few people who came to see Joe Frank report that they were treated rudely by Johanna Zorn (director of Third Coast festival). I suggest you email her- she's jzorn@thirdcoastfestival.org I should think this to be inappropriate and bureaucratic behavior. I think she owes apologies to all those she felt moved to treat with something less than ordinary respect and dignity. I don't know her, but in her defense, she's running a week-long series of events and was no doubt really very frazzled. She probably had a million things going on, a million things going WRONG and a million people wanting things from her, whether or not she's in a position to provide them. It's no excuse and she should apologize graciously if she's big enough, but I do see how this sort of thing can happen. I've also learned that a million things went wrong in preparation and so on for Joe's performance and that any time he & his staff had planned for meet & greet were consumed by headaches beyond number. (You could have fooled me, I thought it all went quite smoothly and hung together well, but I suppose that behind the curtain there could have been an angry mob of rustic villagers with burning torches, pitchforks and cudgels, only being held at bay by the superior firepower of Joe and his staff..... but thanks to the professionalism of the performers involved we never knew it....) FROM: lee13@uillinois.edu I was also at the Chicago performance. I was not attending the Third Coast Audio conference. I drove up to the city from downstate Illinois just to see Joe Frank. It was an extremely entertaining show, but yes, a bit on the quick side. I had met Joe Frank years ago at his KCRW studio so his unadulterated voice was not so distracting to me. His signature background music was there. Without that, it would have been a very un-Joe like performance. Some of us stayed afterwards to try and greet Joe and get an autograph, but we were quickly shooed out of the theater by the woman who introduced Joe before the show and I guess was the main coordinator for the Third Coast Audio conference. She was a bit rude to us, in fact. I wasn't surprised Joe wanted to retain his privacy. Other than that minor letdown, it was a grand evening. --shawn Interesting takes on the Windy City show. Things often go wrong but it sounds like it went fairly well. A Joe Show isn't your normal event given the gestalt that surrounds it. I'm just glad to see he's still out there doing his thing. Best regards, Mark Palasits San Francisco, CA (formerly of Chicagoland) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041102/126aab26/attachment.htm From Jargonym at aol.com Tue Nov 2 01:01:21 2004 From: Jargonym at aol.com (Jargonym@aol.com) Date: Tue Nov 2 01:01:32 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: joe-frank can NOT be free Message-ID: <13e.5309201.2eb8a6e1@aol.com> In a message dated 10/30/2004 1:00:50 PM Central Standard Time, joe-frank-list-request@armory.com writes: > Joe's work was all public, or at leat 95% of if was, due to the > dilligent efforts of his fans, who collected, stored, and supplied > bandwidth to distribute it. When he left KCRW, Joe Frank specifically asked that we stop posting MP3 files, as it was clear that it hurt his sales. Since the MP3 trading has stopped, he's sold more CDs. That's pretty simple to comprehend. So, while in some kind of nebulous "long run" Joe Frank may gain from people trading his product without compensating him for it, in the "short run" he has rent to pay and $75 an hour for engineering at 10-20 hours per show as well as other costs- cost of any actors he uses, etc. So if you think he should pay to produce these programs somehow out of his own pocket for your continued entertainment and enlightenment, without any remuneration from the listeners, then I'm sure you'd agree to come over once a week to clean my apartment for FREE (no pay) because in the "long run" you'll make money. That's how it works, right? Kind of a "Karmic trickle-down theory" - a cross between Ronald Reagan and the Dali Lama. I think for young artists who just want to distribute their work to become better known, and who have day jobs anyway, that "free MP3" model is great. But for anyone who's made the commitment to focus their energy ENTIRELY on their art, with no "day job" to fall back on, I don't see how the current day-to-day expenses get paid by "in the long run" economics. You know, if someone is a PROFESSIONAL artist, in any media, then that work is ALL THEY DO, because it takes ALL THEIR ENERGY to do it properly. If you have someone like me who paints but who is really a CAB DRIVER, that's called "AMATEUR." I'm not willing to make the LEAP INTO THE ABYSS of doing painting full time, because I'm afraid I'd become homeless within a month..... probably a well founded fear, but still, if I were to REALLY commit myself, I'd take that step. Joe is a PROFESSIONAL, and if you feel his work is valuable and fine then why would a few dollars matter to you? After seeing him live, and listening to him 24 x 7 here on this pirate station (I understand the pirate has Joe's permission- ) I am going to buy as much Joe Frank stuff as I can. I am also going to write letters to NPR and tell them they ought to give direct, unqualified support to Joe! (FYI Joe Frank is still being heard at 87.9 FM here in Chicago 24 x 7, no announcements or interruptions. The signal area got a little larger too it seems, I heard it at Fullerton and Cicero the other day and also it could he heard sporadically in the near-north suburbs of Evanston and Skokie.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041102/1d4b7483/attachment.htm From BILLMILOSZ at aol.com Tue Nov 2 15:36:26 2004 From: BILLMILOSZ at aol.com (BILLMILOSZ@aol.com) Date: Tue Nov 2 15:36:40 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Video streams for members at JoeFrank.com Message-ID: I just watched "The Perfect Woman" one of the video shorts that Joe Frank did for Playboy's "Inside Out" series in ~1992. What a riot! Perfect Joe blend of surreal riotous humor, exaggerated angst and an inner, ironic truth. It's one of the October premium items, there is a video among the November premium too. I have a broadband connection and it played perfectly; it's Windows Media which is pretty compressed and I think it might play OK on a 56k dialup too, but maybe not- try it and see. My only complaint: would have been nice to have a higher bitrate available for those of us with broadband connections, this stream was ID'ed as "windows media LO" so my guess is the web techs at JoeFrank.Com encoded multiple bandwidths (as is available with the Windows Streaming Media Server) but are only offering the lower bandwidth stream. Maybe this saves expense on the hosting end, if so then it's a compromise I can live with because it looked OK. I'd just like to see more detail if possible, but you certainly get the whole story and feel from the 100k stream. The writing is just great, and to see Joe translated to the screen really "works" - I wonder why Hollywood hasn't made more use of Joe's stories on the silver screen or on TV. Because they're a bunch of idiots and Philistines, I guess, who wouldn't know quality if it bit them in the ass. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041102/97e799c1/attachment.htm From rholland356 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:50:06 2004 From: rholland356 at yahoo.com (Robert Holland) Date: Wed Nov 3 19:51:38 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] re: a few dollars more In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.1.20041030151013.037f35b0@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <20041104035006.32068.qmail@web13810.mail.yahoo.com> It is easy to believe that sharing another's work is in your best interest when you have never lived from your own creative energies. Try it sometime and you'll soon sing a different tune... Pay the man! He created some great work, and just because you can use technology to defeat the laws of supply and demand, it doesn't make it right or honorable. Robert --- Dave Dyer wrote: > > I certaintly didn't mean to imply that Joe ever made > piles > of money, or that he's greedy. More likely, at > least for his > radio work, he's gone from subsistance income to no > income. > However, net of expenses involved, the subscription > scheme > isn't going to improve his balance sheet in the > short run, > and will hurt in the long run. I'm firmly in the > camp that > believes that music (or Joe Frank) sharing creates a > larger > audience for the offical product. > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From rholland356 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:54:07 2004 From: rholland356 at yahoo.com (Robert Holland) Date: Wed Nov 3 19:55:40 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.1.20041030010154.03702250@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <20041104035407.11969.qmail@web13811.mail.yahoo.com> Rubbish, Dave. Joe's work was broadcast, but never in the public domain. He and his heirs will retain copyright for quite a long time. I like it that Joe is leveraging the technology that others used to share his work. He's asked those who shared and collected to please cease and desist from distributing the recordings, and certainly to refrain from transcribing his work into written scripts. Robert --- Dave Dyer wrote: > > Joe's work was all public, or at leat 95% of if was, > due to the > dilligent efforts of his fans, who collected, > stored, and supplied > bandwidth to distribute it. All at no cost (and no > income) to > Joe. But it did keep the flame alive, and the > sometimes inferior > technical quality and/or censored for airplay > versions served to > tease fans into buying real copies on CD. > > Lets be charitable and say that Joe is in a dry > spell in his > creative career, and is trying various means to cash > in > on his glory days, when he had an audience of > millions. > > His live performances are great (so I've read here) > but play > to those who remember his radio work. This > subscription > plan is another way to extract a little more cash > from his > ageing fan base. I don't see either of these things > as > career advancing moves. Sadly, I fear his remarks > upon > receiving the lifetime achievement award will prove > accurate. > > I have no idea if joefrank.com is being created by > well paid > professionals or another cadre of devoted fans, but > I can't > imagine that this subscription plan will generate > enough income > to justify a realistic account of the expenses > involved. Meantime > it has succeeded in making joe's work a lot less > acessable. > That can't be good for the long run. > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From achavez382 at worldsavings.com Fri Nov 5 12:09:50 2004 From: achavez382 at worldsavings.com (Chavez, Aaron, ISD) Date: Fri Nov 5 12:09:58 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Message-ID: <0CD46960DF5B9A4EA4BF0A1C5ED015FA02EC3F0D@sa1ems5.worldsavings.com> I can't speak for Dave, but what his message correctly stated was that for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available and trade was sanctioned...he didn't say 'public domain'. It is no longer publicly available and trading, while no longer sanctioned, has now fallen into that legally and morally grey domain of 'fair use'. I comply out of respect for his wishes, not for respect of copyright. Although these are in effect the same thing, I don't believe he ever said 'cease and desist' in this forum. Perhaps those that were running the swap sites could offer a different perspective. It would sadden me to think that they were approached with anything more than a friendly email. At one point, I suggested to the list the possibility of transcribing shows as a joint effort among the members. My motivation was to make his work even more accessible. At the time, his web site was static and hadn't offered anything new is quite a while. While there was a little enthusiasm, most expressed concerns about Joe's wishes. He cleared up any questions with another email to the list asking that we not do that as they figured into some new work that he was pursuing. It seems he was referring to his revamped web site. If the debate here is whether file sharing and derived works are legal, I really don't care. If the argument is that Joe Frank will lose money if they are allowed, I agree, I think he would. But do I think he is losing money because fans are copying and distributing his material, I say no, they care too much about his ongoing success. Aaron Chavez -----Original Message----- From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf Of Robert Holland Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:54 PM To: Joe Frank Mailing List Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Rubbish, Dave. Joe's work was broadcast, but never in the public domain. He and his heirs will retain copyright for quite a long time. I like it that Joe is leveraging the technology that others used to share his work. He's asked those who shared and collected to please cease and desist from distributing the recordings, and certainly to refrain from transcribing his work into written scripts. Robert --- Dave Dyer wrote: > > Joe's work was all public, or at leat 95% of if was, > due to the > dilligent efforts of his fans, who collected, > stored, and supplied > bandwidth to distribute it. All at no cost (and no > income) to > Joe. But it did keep the flame alive, and the > sometimes inferior > technical quality and/or censored for airplay > versions served to > tease fans into buying real copies on CD. > > Lets be charitable and say that Joe is in a dry > spell in his > creative career, and is trying various means to cash > in > on his glory days, when he had an audience of > millions. > > His live performances are great (so I've read here) > but play > to those who remember his radio work. This > subscription > plan is another way to extract a little more cash > from his > ageing fan base. I don't see either of these things > as > career advancing moves. Sadly, I fear his remarks > upon > receiving the lifetime achievement award will prove > accurate. > > I have no idea if joefrank.com is being created by > well paid > professionals or another cadre of devoted fans, but > I can't > imagine that this subscription plan will generate > enough income > to justify a realistic account of the expenses > involved. Meantime > it has succeeded in making joe's work a lot less > acessable. > That can't be good for the long run. > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Joe Frank Mailing List joe-frank-list@armory.com http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list ***************************************************************************** If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately. The contents of this e-mail do not amend any existing disclosures or agreements unless expressly stated. ***************************************************************************** From matthewshepherd at hotmail.com Fri Nov 5 12:31:40 2004 From: matthewshepherd at hotmail.com (Matt on Hotmail) Date: Fri Nov 5 12:31:04 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public References: <0CD46960DF5B9A4EA4BF0A1C5ED015FA02EC3F0D@sa1ems5.worldsavings.com> Message-ID: There was a very definite request to a member of this newsgroup, which was then copied to the newsgroup, to no longer post MP3s for downloading / file-sharing. Not taking a position one way or the other -- just clearing up that particular question. - Matt http://www.man-man.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chavez, Aaron, ISD" To: ; "Joe Frank Mailing List" Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:09 PM Subject: RE: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public I can't speak for Dave, but what his message correctly stated was that for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available and trade was sanctioned...he didn't say 'public domain'. It is no longer publicly available and trading, while no longer sanctioned, has now fallen into that legally and morally grey domain of 'fair use'. I comply out of respect for his wishes, not for respect of copyright. Although these are in effect the same thing, I don't believe he ever said 'cease and desist' in this forum. Perhaps those that were running the swap sites could offer a different perspective. It would sadden me to think that they were approached with anything more than a friendly email. At one point, I suggested to the list the possibility of transcribing shows as a joint effort among the members. My motivation was to make his work even more accessible. At the time, his web site was static and hadn't offered anything new is quite a while. While there was a little enthusiasm, most expressed concerns about Joe's wishes. He cleared up any questions with another email to the list asking that we not do that as they figured into some new work that he was pursuing. It seems he was referring to his revamped web site. If the debate here is whether file sharing and derived works are legal, I really don't care. If the argument is that Joe Frank will lose money if they are allowed, I agree, I think he would. But do I think he is losing money because fans are copying and distributing his material, I say no, they care too much about his ongoing success. Aaron Chavez -----Original Message----- From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf Of Robert Holland Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:54 PM To: Joe Frank Mailing List Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Rubbish, Dave. Joe's work was broadcast, but never in the public domain. He and his heirs will retain copyright for quite a long time. I like it that Joe is leveraging the technology that others used to share his work. He's asked those who shared and collected to please cease and desist from distributing the recordings, and certainly to refrain from transcribing his work into written scripts. Robert --- Dave Dyer wrote: > > Joe's work was all public, or at leat 95% of if was, > due to the > dilligent efforts of his fans, who collected, > stored, and supplied > bandwidth to distribute it. All at no cost (and no > income) to > Joe. But it did keep the flame alive, and the > sometimes inferior > technical quality and/or censored for airplay > versions served to > tease fans into buying real copies on CD. > > Lets be charitable and say that Joe is in a dry > spell in his > creative career, and is trying various means to cash > in > on his glory days, when he had an audience of > millions. > > His live performances are great (so I've read here) > but play > to those who remember his radio work. This > subscription > plan is another way to extract a little more cash > from his > ageing fan base. I don't see either of these things > as > career advancing moves. Sadly, I fear his remarks > upon > receiving the lifetime achievement award will prove > accurate. > > I have no idea if joefrank.com is being created by > well paid > professionals or another cadre of devoted fans, but > I can't > imagine that this subscription plan will generate > enough income > to justify a realistic account of the expenses > involved. Meantime > it has succeeded in making joe's work a lot less > acessable. > That can't be good for the long run. > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Joe Frank Mailing List joe-frank-list@armory.com http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list **************************************************************************** * If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately. The contents of this e-mail do not amend any existing disclosures or agreements unless expressly stated. **************************************************************************** * _______________________________________________ Joe Frank Mailing List joe-frank-list@armory.com http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list From MarkwP3096 at aol.com Fri Nov 5 13:29:42 2004 From: MarkwP3096 at aol.com (MarkwP3096@aol.com) Date: Fri Nov 5 13:29:51 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Message-ID: <30.64d7ab4f.2ebd4ac6@aol.com> In a message dated 05-Nov-04 12:12:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, achavez382@worldsavings.com writes: I can't speak for Dave, but what his message correctly stated was that for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available and trade was sanctioned...he didn't say 'public domain'. It is no longer publicly available and trading, while no longer sanctioned, has now fallen into that legally and morally grey domain of 'fair use'. I comply out of respect for his wishes, not for respect of copyright. Although these are in effect the same thing, I don't believe he ever said 'cease and desist' in this forum. Perhaps those that were running the swap sites could offer a different perspective. It would sadden me to think that they were approached with anything more than a friendly email. At one point, I suggested to the list the possibility of transcribing shows as a joint effort among the members. My motivation was to make his work even more accessible. At the time, his web site was static and hadn't offered anything new is quite a while. While there was a little enthusiasm, most expressed concerns about Joe's wishes. He cleared up any questions with another email to the list asking that we not do that as they figured into some new work that he was pursuing. It seems he was referring to his revamped web site. If the debate here is whether file sharing and derived works are legal, I really don't care. If the argument is that Joe Frank will lose money if they are allowed, I agree, I think he would. But do I think he is losing money because fans are copying and distributing his material, I say no, they care too much about his ongoing success. Aaron Chavez Interesting take on things, Aaron. I'm not quite sure what to think about this. I have paid many hundreds of dollars for Joe's work and I do believe he deserves to be paid for his work as an artist. Obviously, there are varying points of view here. So much the better. I just hope Joe keeps on with his mission, whatever it may be. We'd all be poorer if he didn't. Just my two cents, is all. Best regards, Mark W. Palasits San Francisco, CA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041105/179a238f/attachment.htm From BillMilosz at aol.com Fri Nov 5 14:34:39 2004 From: BillMilosz at aol.com (BillMilosz@aol.com) Date: Fri Nov 5 14:34:50 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Here is the letter from Joe Frank re: MP3's Message-ID: <7EB53E37.3302C48C.0AC03AB1@aol.com> Here's the letter Joe sent via EMAIL It's posted on: http://www.1amsoftware.com/JoeFrank/ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:55:20 -0700 From: joseph@joefrank.com To: webmaster@techfreakz.org Subject: Joe Frank streaming Hello, For over ten years, I.ve been able to allow fans to stream my shows on their web sites and produce MP3s offering them as a free download. Unfortunately, this practice is now inimical to my ability to move forward. I can no longer afford to give my work away while continuing to pay actors, creative collaborators, mixing studios, technicians, etc., for new projects. In order to raise money for this new work, I must ask you and others to remove my shows from your web sites and instead encourage people interested in my programs to come to my site. With your support, I will be able to offer new programs as well as projects which have never before been available - short videos, films, transcripts and high quality MP3s. Additionally, I'll be able to stream every radio program I.ve produced. Any suggestions you have for ways in which my site may be improved, or hopes concerning work you.d like to see posted, are welcomed. I would very much appreciate your cooperation, and thanks for your support over the years. JF 4.4.03 From achavez382 at worldsavings.com Fri Nov 5 15:21:23 2004 From: achavez382 at worldsavings.com (Chavez, Aaron, ISD) Date: Fri Nov 5 15:21:29 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Message-ID: <0CD46960DF5B9A4EA4BF0A1C5ED015FA02EC4204@sa1ems5.worldsavings.com> Mark W. Palasits wrote Interesting take on things, Aaron. I'm not quite sure what to think about this. I have paid many hundreds of dollars for Joe's work and I do believe he deserves to be paid for his work as an artist. I just hope Joe keeps on with his mission, whatever it may be. We'd all be poorer if he didn't. Just my two cents, is all The MP3's that I collected during the trading heyday are of varying quality. I have yet to pay for any CD's from the source, but I do subscribe to the site to get a fix and decide which ones I want to buy (not having memorized the catalog). Having listened to him for a few years, it's time I pay up. But, really, what do you all do when you want to introduce Joe to a virgin? Refer them to the site? Give them your original to borrow or a 'backup'? A mono AIFF to discourage copying? Aaron Chavez Berkeley, CA (work furloughed in San Antonio, TX) -----Original Message----- From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf Of MarkwP3096@aol.com Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:30 PM To: joe-frank-list@armory.com Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public In a message dated 05-Nov-04 12:12:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, achavez382@worldsavings.com writes: I can't speak for Dave, but what his message correctly stated was that for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available and trade was ***************************************************************************** If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately. The contents of this e-mail do not amend any existing disclosures or agreements unless expressly stated. ***************************************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041105/b5c48623/attachment-0001.htm From joefranklist at amalon.com Fri Nov 5 15:23:17 2004 From: joefranklist at amalon.com (David Gutierrez) Date: Fri Nov 5 15:23:12 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public In-Reply-To: References: <0CD46960DF5B9A4EA4BF0A1C5ED015FA02EC3F0D@sa1ems5.worldsavings.com> Message-ID: <2520.67.83.148.67.1099696997.squirrel@67.83.148.67> This is true. The "cease and desist" is actually available here, here I used to host Joe's programs: http://3113.com/joefrank/IMPORTANT.TXT It was such a gentle "cease and desist" that I didn't realize what it was until it was discussed on this list a few days later. I just thought Joe had decided to write me a nice email. Dave > There was a very definite request to a member of this newsgroup, which was > then copied to the newsgroup, to no longer post MP3s for downloading / > file-sharing. > > Not taking a position one way or the other -- just clearing up that > particular question. > > - Matt > http://www.man-man.org > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chavez, Aaron, ISD" > To: ; "Joe Frank Mailing List" > > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:09 PM > Subject: RE: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public > > > I can't speak for Dave, but what his message correctly stated was that > for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available and trade was > sanctioned...he didn't say 'public domain'. It is no longer publicly > available and trading, while no longer sanctioned, has now fallen into > that legally and morally grey domain of 'fair use'. > > I comply out of respect for his wishes, not for respect of copyright. > Although these are in effect the same thing, I don't believe he ever > said 'cease and desist' in this forum. Perhaps those that were running > the swap sites could offer a different perspective. It would sadden me > to think that they were approached with anything more than a friendly > email. > > At one point, I suggested to the list the possibility of transcribing > shows as a joint effort among the members. My motivation was to make > his work even more accessible. At the time, his web site was static and > hadn't offered anything new is quite a while. While there was a little > enthusiasm, most expressed concerns about Joe's wishes. He cleared up > any questions with another email to the list asking that we not do that > as they figured into some new work that he was pursuing. It seems he > was referring to his revamped web site. > > If the debate here is whether file sharing and derived works are legal, > I really don't care. If the argument is that Joe Frank will lose money > if they are allowed, I agree, I think he would. But do I think he is > losing money because fans are copying and distributing his material, I > say no, they care too much about his ongoing success. > > Aaron Chavez > > -----Original Message----- > From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com > [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf Of Robert Holland > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:54 PM > To: Joe Frank Mailing List > Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public > > Rubbish, Dave. > > Joe's work was broadcast, but never in the public > domain. He and his heirs will retain copyright for > quite a long time. > > I like it that Joe is leveraging the technology that > others used to share his work. He's asked those who > shared and collected to please cease and desist from > distributing the recordings, and certainly to refrain > from transcribing his work into written scripts. > > Robert > > --- Dave Dyer wrote: > >> >> Joe's work was all public, or at leat 95% of if was, >> due to the >> dilligent efforts of his fans, who collected, >> stored, and supplied >> bandwidth to distribute it. All at no cost (and no >> income) to >> Joe. But it did keep the flame alive, and the >> sometimes inferior >> technical quality and/or censored for airplay >> versions served to >> tease fans into buying real copies on CD. >> >> Lets be charitable and say that Joe is in a dry >> spell in his >> creative career, and is trying various means to cash >> in >> on his glory days, when he had an audience of >> millions. >> >> His live performances are great (so I've read here) >> but play >> to those who remember his radio work. This >> subscription >> plan is another way to extract a little more cash >> from his >> ageing fan base. I don't see either of these things >> as >> career advancing moves. Sadly, I fear his remarks >> upon >> receiving the lifetime achievement award will prove >> accurate. >> >> I have no idea if joefrank.com is being created by >> well paid >> professionals or another cadre of devoted fans, but >> I can't >> imagine that this subscription plan will generate >> enough income >> to justify a realistic account of the expenses >> involved. Meantime >> it has succeeded in making joe's work a lot less >> acessable. >> That can't be good for the long run. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Joe Frank Mailing List >> joe-frank-list@armory.com >> > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list >> > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > > > **************************************************************************** > * > If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify > the sender immediately. The contents of this e-mail do not amend > any existing disclosures or agreements unless expressly stated. > **************************************************************************** > * > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > From MarkwP3096 at aol.com Fri Nov 5 19:25:24 2004 From: MarkwP3096 at aol.com (MarkwP3096@aol.com) Date: Fri Nov 5 19:25:31 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Here is the letter from Joe Frank re: MP3's Message-ID: <42.5c942591.2ebd9e24@aol.com> Bill - Thanks for passing this on. Makes sense to me. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041105/98bb26b6/attachment.htm From rholland356 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 00:02:20 2004 From: rholland356 at yahoo.com (Robert Holland) Date: Sat Nov 6 00:03:55 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public In-Reply-To: <0CD46960DF5B9A4EA4BF0A1C5ED015FA02EC4204@sa1ems5.worldsavings.com> Message-ID: <20041106080220.36538.qmail@web13806.mail.yahoo.com> I introduced a newbie to Joe by sending him to the live performance in LA. You would think that with all the college radio stations around the country and on the web, Joe Frank could find some airtime. Maybe Joe Frank fed at the trough of KCRW for too long! On the other hand, it seems to work for Harry Shearer, who puts all his work on his site. Although, Shearer's work has a one-week shelf life... --- "Chavez, Aaron, ISD" wrote: > Mark W. Palasits wrote > > > > Interesting take on things, Aaron. I'm not quite > sure what to think > about this. I have paid many hundreds of dollars for > Joe's work and I do > believe he deserves to be paid for his work as an > artist. I just hope > Joe keeps on with his mission, whatever it may be. > We'd all be poorer if > he didn't. Just my two cents, is all > > > > The MP3's that I collected during the trading heyday > are of varying > quality. I have yet to pay for any CD's from the > source, but I do > subscribe to the site to get a fix and decide which > ones I want to buy > (not having memorized the catalog). Having listened > to him for a few > years, it's time I pay up. > > > > But, really, what do you all do when you want to > introduce Joe to a > virgin? Refer them to the site? Give them your > original to borrow or a > 'backup'? A mono AIFF to discourage copying? > > > > Aaron Chavez > > Berkeley, CA > > (work furloughed in San Antonio, TX) > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com > [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf > Of > MarkwP3096@aol.com > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:30 PM > To: joe-frank-list@armory.com > Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio > public > > > > In a message dated 05-Nov-04 12:12:21 PM Pacific > Standard Time, > achavez382@worldsavings.com writes: > > I can't speak for Dave, but what his message > correctly stated was that > for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available > and trade was > > > > > > > > > > ***************************************************************************** > If you are not the intended recipient of this > e-mail, please notify > the sender immediately. The contents of this e-mail > do not amend > any existing disclosures or agreements unless > expressly stated. > ***************************************************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From BILLMILOSZ at aol.com Sat Nov 6 01:56:20 2004 From: BILLMILOSZ at aol.com (BILLMILOSZ@aol.com) Date: Sat Nov 6 01:56:29 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Message-ID: <8d.1913f6fb.2ebdf9c4@aol.com> In a message dated 11/5/2004 5:22:36 PM Central Standard Time, achavez382@worldsavings.com writes: > But, really, what do you all do when you want to introduce Joe to a virgin? > Refer them to the site? Give them your original to borrow or a ?backup?? > A mono AIFF to discourage copying? > > Well there are a number of free streams on the site now. Five programs are available to anyone for free -but you do have to sign up as a "free subscriber" and then log in. While this might be a little confusing to some, there ARE 5 programs available in full to act as an introduction. Maybe the Joe Frank website people can make the free shows a little easier for people to hear- it's just a little confusing on http://joefrank.com/shows.html where it says "In addition, we're currently uploading samples from every Joe Frank radio program. They will be available to everyone FREE OF CHARGE and should help you identify shows and choose which programs you wish to hear. Sign up to be a subscriber and select the "Samples" subscription." - instead they could just put a link that says "SOME SHOWS AVAILABLE FREE - CLICK HERE" which then takes the visitor to a page where it explains, "if you want the free sample shows you have to fill out the form", rather than lead everyone to the SUBSCRIBE page and offer the "sample" subscription. Some folks aren't going to read the FAQ or understand that there is such a thing as a "free subscription" - it would be better to just tell visitors, "register- fill out this form- and give yourself a username and you can hear the free stuff." IMHO -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041106/5392da1a/attachment.htm From bobl at 1amsoftware.com Fri Nov 5 16:30:02 2004 From: bobl at 1amsoftware.com (Bob Lee) Date: Sat Nov 6 07:29:15 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public References: <0CD46960DF5B9A4EA4BF0A1C5ED015FA02EC4204@sa1ems5.worldsavings.com> Message-ID: <012301c4c397$c37ccab0$6112060a@IBMBOBSX30> Aaron, I would do pretty much what I would do with anything I wanted to share. I would share a copy. I did for many years, copy on cassette tape as many shows as I could remember to tape. Every sunday morning at 11:00 am, right after Harry Schear. As we all know, sitting through a Joe Show just one time is usually not enough to grasp everything. Personally I found when I lived in Los Angeles, many times I would pop in a Joe show during my morning drive.. Even though I had heard it before, I was still entertaining. If someone was in the car with me, They got to hear it. If they wanted a copy of it, I would share it. But then came the internet, and the concept of sharing, took on a entirly new meaning, as it was no longer me giving you a much beloved tape to introduce you to the artist, I was now able to publish the entire 10 years of the mans work, for thousands of people to enjoy. What the hell... thats what I did, my server got hit with 10's of thousands of hits. Joes were being download as fast as I could put them up, Fans from all over the globe dusted off their tape collections burned MP3 sent them to me to publish... and napster was alive and well.... So, everyone has to ask themselves what is the right thing to do now... personally I cut down my sharing to the level I did before the internet. These days with Joe seeming to be over the KCRW fiasco and looking for an income stream which will allow him to continue his work I can only say..Support his work, It does your soul good to do the right thing... what and how you feel the right thing is. Only you can say.. Bob Lee bobl@1amsoftware.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Chavez, Aaron, ISD To: Joe Frank Mailing List Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 6:21 PM Subject: RE: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Mark W. Palasits wrote Interesting take on things, Aaron. I'm not quite sure what to think about this. I have paid many hundreds of dollars for Joe's work and I do believe he deserves to be paid for his work as an artist. I just hope Joe keeps on with his mission, whatever it may be. We'd all be poorer if he didn't. Just my two cents, is all The MP3's that I collected during the trading heyday are of varying quality. I have yet to pay for any CD's from the source, but I do subscribe to the site to get a fix and decide which ones I want to buy (not having memorized the catalog). Having listened to him for a few years, it's time I pay up. But, really, what do you all do when you want to introduce Joe to a virgin? Refer them to the site? Give them your original to borrow or a 'backup'? A mono AIFF to discourage copying? Aaron Chavez Berkeley, CA (work furloughed in San Antonio, TX) -----Original Message----- From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf Of MarkwP3096@aol.com Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:30 PM To: joe-frank-list@armory.com Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public In a message dated 05-Nov-04 12:12:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, achavez382@worldsavings.com writes: I can't speak for Dave, but what his message correctly stated was that for quite a while, Joe's work was publicly available and trade was ***************************************************************************** If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately. The contents of this e-mail do not amend any existing disclosures or agreements unless expressly stated. ***************************************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Joe Frank Mailing List joe-frank-list@armory.com http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041105/76bad8e5/attachment-0001.htm From shiro at uclink4.berkeley.edu Sat Nov 6 13:03:15 2004 From: shiro at uclink4.berkeley.edu (Erik Shirokoff) Date: Sat Nov 6 13:03:20 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public In-Reply-To: <8d.1913f6fb.2ebdf9c4@aol.com> References: <8d.1913f6fb.2ebdf9c4@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041106210315.GA1127@berkeley.edu> If you ask me, requiring that people subscribe in order to listen to the free samples is counter productive. It may be a decent way to convince exiting fans that subscribing is a good idea, but it's likely to serve as a barrier to recruiting new fans. One could make the case that the former is their goal at present, however they're bound to exhaust the pool of existing fans in time. Perhaps I'm unusual, but when someone sends me a link to some site I've never heard of and it requires a free subscription to view even a sample of their content, I walk away. Even with spam protection in the form of throw-away email addresses, it's usually just too much hassle to register for content before one has any idea whether it is worthwhile. If someone sent me to joefrank.com, and I had never heard his work, chances are I'd leave without registering. On the other hand, if they had a couple of free streams available and easy to find from the front page, the casual visitor might stick around long enough fall for Joe's work. But then, there certainly do seem to be a lot of web sites out there which require free subscriptions. Can't imagine what they get out of it, except mailing lists stuffed with bogus addresses and the ability to force the 2% of us who usually surf without cookies to let them track our adverts. Hardly seems worth it to me. - Erik On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 04:56:20AM -0500, BILLMILOSZ@aol.com wrote: > Well there are a number of free streams on the site now. Five programs are > available to anyone for free -but you do have to sign up as a "free subscriber" > and then log in. While this might be a little confusing to some, there ARE 5 > programs available in full to act as an introduction. > > Maybe the Joe Frank website people can make the free shows a little easier > for people to hear- it's just a little confusing on > http://joefrank.com/shows.html where it says "In addition, we're currently uploading samples from every > Joe Frank radio program. They will be available to everyone FREE OF CHARGE and > should help you identify shows and choose which programs you wish to hear. > Sign up to be a subscriber and select the "Samples" subscription." > > - instead they could just put a link that says "SOME SHOWS AVAILABLE FREE - > CLICK HERE" which then takes the visitor to a page where it explains, "if you > want the free sample shows you have to fill out the form", rather than lead > everyone to the SUBSCRIBE page and offer the "sample" subscription. Some folks > aren't going to read the FAQ or understand that there is such a thing as a > "free subscription" - it would be better to just tell visitors, "register- fill > out this form- and give yourself a username and you can hear the free stuff." > IMHO From LBlockD at aol.com Sun Nov 7 18:19:19 2004 From: LBlockD at aol.com (LBlockD@aol.com) Date: Sun Nov 7 18:19:31 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: joe-frank-list Digest, Vol 17, Issue 7 Message-ID: <6b.37a4d990.2ec031a7@aol.com> I am someone who has an intimate knowledge, and involvement, in the work of Joe Frank. So I would counsel the breathless audiorate (my word) to not place so much faith in the public way. Joe is no capitalist trying to suck your money from you if you care to be nourished by his creative output, but an artist whose work is not supported by the Eisners and Weinsteins and other networks of America who bring you shit for free. Joe is a bit like Mr. Gurdjieff, who could buy an old rug and fix it and make a life for his followers in a strange city, complete with a nice paprika chicken. But the followers must be willing to give what needs to be given to support the teaching. Send as much as you can to wherever you can find the Frankian paradigm, or, if not, then burn him down like all the rest of the false gods you've run from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041107/495d7967/attachment.htm From jfreeman at threeofus.com Sun Nov 7 19:26:31 2004 From: jfreeman at threeofus.com (Joshua S. Freeman) Date: Sun Nov 7 19:10:39 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: joe-frank-list Digest, Vol 17, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: <6b.37a4d990.2ec031a7@aol.com> References: <6b.37a4d990.2ec031a7@aol.com> Message-ID: Nicely spoken Larry ------ Joshua S. Freeman jfreeman@4ofus.net 75nbwayirvonhud On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 LBlockD@aol.com wrote: > I am someone who has an intimate knowledge, and involvement, in the work of > Joe Frank. So I would counsel the breathless audiorate (my word) to not > place so much faith in the public way. Joe is no capitalist trying to suck your > money from you if you care to be nourished by his creative output, but an > artist whose work is not supported by the Eisners and Weinsteins and other > networks of America who bring you shit for free. Joe is a bit like Mr. Gurdjieff, > who could buy an old rug and fix it and make a life for his followers in a > strange city, complete with a nice paprika chicken. But the followers must be > willing to give what needs to be given to support the teaching. Send as much > as you can to wherever you can find the Frankian paradigm, or, if not, then > burn him down like all the rest of the false gods you've run from. > From JonMcintyr at netscape.net Mon Nov 8 11:38:08 2004 From: JonMcintyr at netscape.net (Jonathan McIntyre) Date: Mon Nov 8 11:38:14 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Message-ID: <23F9CFBE.76F191D0.0BCE757D@netscape.net> yeah, me to. thanks.) Matthew Hawco wrote: >hello > >that's good.. > >send a copy here please :) > > >matt > >>From: Erik Shirokoff >>Reply-To: Joe Frank Mailing List >>To: Joe Frank Mailing List >>Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public >>Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 01:34:01 -0700 >> >> >>The article seems to have disappeared completely from the web site. >> >>I've got a copy of the page from 2004-05-01. If anyone wants it, let me >>know. I'm not posting it to the list just in case Joe has a compelling >>reason to want it gone. >> >>You could make the case that by posting something online one is inviting >>its eternal public survival, and I'd happily agree demanding that people >>not post archives of a web site is unreasonable. At the same time, if Joe >>wants the page eliminated, I'm not inclined to annoy him by adding a copy >>to the mailing list archive for all eternity. It would certainly piss me >>off if a fan made copies of everything I wrote online and reposted it years >>later. (There are certainly benefits to working in a field which doesn't >>generate fans.) >> >> >>- Erik >> >> >> >>On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:24:16PM -0700, Beau Gunderson wrote: >> > Tried in vain to find the article on joefrank.com about him getting >>fired >> > (it was more about the other woman fired by Seymour but it was pretty >> > informative) but it's not there anymore! I even checked the Wayback >>machine >> > but it wasn't on there either. I remember it being linked from the front >> > page, anybody else know what I'm talking about? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _____ >> > >> > From: joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com >> > [mailto:joe-frank-list-bounces@armory.com] On Behalf Of >>BILLMILOSZ@aol.com >> > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 11:09 PM >> > To: joe-frank-list@armory.com >> > Subject: Re: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public >> > >> > >> > >> > To fsedghip@yahoo.ca - you raised some very interesting ideas, I found >>your >> > post thought-provoking. Obviously you took some time putting that >>together. >> > >> > As I consider the issues you raised, many of which impact all of us as >> > consumers of electronic "art" (music, film, literature, etc.) I want to >> > make a few observations. >> > >> > You mention ThisLife.Org - Ira Glass's THIS AMERICAN LIFE program which >>is >> > carried on NPR and originates at WBEZ in Chicago. There is an exact >> > parallel here, Joe Frank used to have a radio "home" at KCRW in Santa >> > Monica, and they supported him with some money, maybe some >>administrative >> > help and also provided a studio and gear, etc. But Joe and KCRW had >>some >> > kind of falling out, if not a falling out then at least a parting of the >> > ways. I'm not sure what it was all about, except I know Joe is unhappy >> > about something which he may have experienced as betrayal or some other >> > negative action by KCRW or it's management. I can't find any info about >>it, >> > all I've heard / read /seen from Joe on the issue is, "Oh, let's not go >>into >> > that, let's just move on." I don't know what went wrong, but KCRW DOES >>seem >> > to have retreated from any position of leadership they may have had in >>terms >> > of free speech and the arts, and they seem to be getting more >>conservative. >> > Maybe it's all that money- I've read that KCRW raises more $$$ than any >> > other NPR affiliate. >> > >> > In any event, Joe Frank doesn't have a "patron" in the same way that Ira >> > Glass does at WBEZ, so he can't offer all his stuff for free. It USED >>to be >> > online for free at KCRW, but those days have passed. (Maybe Ira Glass >>should >> > pay some royalties to Joe, after all he learned his craft as an intern >>on >> > Joe's show- some of the This American Life programs even use some of >>the >> > same music used in Joe Frank programs..... but actually I doubt if Ira >> > Glass & CO have money laying around in great heaps.) >> > >> > Maybe we all need to writing our congressmen to have Joe declared a >>living >> > national treasure and have his work supported by a lifetime federal >>stipend >> > or something, but you know all that security might take the edge off his >> > work. ;-) >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Joe Frank Mailing List >> > joe-frank-list@armory.com >> > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Joe Frank Mailing List >>joe-frank-list@armory.com >>http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Joe Frank Mailing List >joe-frank-list@armory.com >http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > -- http://www.kucinich.us/banners.htm __________________________________________________________________ Switch to Netscape Internet Service. As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register Netscape. Just the Net You Need. New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups. Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp From BILLMILOSZ at aol.com Mon Nov 8 13:12:17 2004 From: BILLMILOSZ at aol.com (BILLMILOSZ@aol.com) Date: Mon Nov 8 13:12:25 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: make Joe's radio public Message-ID: <76.45a6aa4a.2ec13b31@aol.com> In a message dated 11/8/2004 1:40:33 PM Central Standard Time, JonMcintyr@netscape.net writes: > >>I've got a copy of the page from 2004-05-01. If anyone wants it, let me > >>know. I'm not posting it to the list just in case Joe has a compelling > >>reason to want it gone. > >> Yeah send me a copy also. Thanks billmilosz AT aol.com <=anti spam measure -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041108/a9b56c7f/attachment.htm From Peisithanatos at aol.com Mon Nov 8 17:58:04 2004 From: Peisithanatos at aol.com (Peisithanatos@aol.com) Date: Mon Nov 8 17:58:09 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Re: joe-frank-list Digest, Vol 17, Issue 7 Message-ID: ... mad props to Larry Block for the Gurdjieff reference! Not many folks are up on Gurdjieff's legacy nowadays! Hegesias -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041108/695d6bbc/attachment.htm From Peisithanatos at aol.com Mon Nov 8 18:52:38 2004 From: Peisithanatos at aol.com (Peisithanatos@aol.com) Date: Mon Nov 8 18:52:45 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] Chicago performance Message-ID: <1e1.2f078003.2ec18af6@aol.com> I, too, attended Joe's performance here in Chicago... however I was not disappointed in the slightest; it was everything that I expected and then some! There was a lot of humor... but it was dark in the classical Joe Frank sense (that bit about Suicide where he talked about lining up behind the cows at a Slaughter house! Come on now: That's pure brilliance!). Sure, it seemed a tad short; but, really, that's the highest compliment a performer can get (always leave the audience wanting more!).... "Also, the material was too dark for me. I much prefer the surrealist sequences to the "I'm thinking about committing suicide" stuff." Maybe I'm just a fruit-loop, but the darker elements in Joe's work have always appealed to me in a special way. I guess if you've lived through feelings of that nature it strikes a more resonant chord within your soul. And, again, Joe dealt with the suicide concepts in a masterfully humorous way during the performance. Few men can accomplish such a delicate feat! And, on the real, this is JOE FRANK that we're talking about here. I don't think that Joe's work can ever be "too dark". It simply is what it is, and, if you dig it, you dig it like a preacher digs the word of God! Joe's versatility is unbelievable, too. No matter what comes to your mind, I guarantee you that you'll be able to find material in Joe's body of work that is reflective of those thoughts. His work is all-encompassing in a mind-boggling way. And, in my opinion, he touched upon a little bit of everything during his performance here. Parts of it were dark, and parts of it were uplifting; parts of it made me laugh till my ribs were sore, and parts of it made me sob like a colicky baby. It was brilliant, and it was provocative, and it was enthralling. I was entertained in a way that only Joe Frank has the capability of entertaining me in, and I couldn't have asked for anything more. "I had never seen Joe Frank in person before, and I found he looks far older than I expected based on his voice and the other pictures of him I've seen. He looks old but he doesn't look dilapidated, though; not that appearance is all that important, but it is part of the overall impression. He looked rather distinguished, really." I should hope that I'll look that good at Joe's age! I'd already seen all of the commercially available footage of Joe (Playboy Videos, his brief cameo in "The Game", etc.), so I wasn't surprised at all by his appearance. I loved his gear -- Suit Jacket, T-shirt, White Sneakers! The man's got impeccable class, and cuts a rather dashing figure (the group of ladies sitting across from me remarked, after the show, on how sexy Joe looked! I was like, "Aww, yeah! Joe's a pimp!" haha!). "One thing I didn't like- the sound guy miked Joe wrong, in my opinion. It was nice crisp audio but sounded a little "thin" to really have that "Joe Frank dark" sonic color." I'm not a sound-guy, or anything... but what I figured was that Joe was simply going for a more natural, subdued sound (kind of like you hear in some of his phone conversations). So, while it didn't sound like the classic "Cocktails Before Dinner" style Joe Frank voice, I thought it was very effective in an entirely different way... very organic and natural. He sounded phenomenal! Tara Nicole Hughes was a real firecracker, fellas, let me tell you! Boy was I happy each time she came out! haha! Geez Louise! And Ed Valfre was smoking over those tracks (classic Joe Frank music!). I was really impressed with his playing. He really tore those tracks up! It completed the whole mood that Joe's r eading evoked so nicely! In a nutshell (the nutshell of one fan's personal opinion) Joe Frank's performance in Chicago was brilliant beyond words. Indubitably the greatest live event (of any kind) that I've ever had the pleasure of attending. By the grace of Allah -- please, please, PLEASE -- may Joe Frank return to the Windy City again some time soon to bless us all with his inimitable works-in-progress! Hegesias -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.armory.com/pipermail/joe-frank-list/attachments/20041108/ef03673f/attachment.htm From arrigo at vision.caltech.edu Tue Nov 9 08:10:35 2004 From: arrigo at vision.caltech.edu (Arrigo Benedetti) Date: Tue Nov 9 08:11:43 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] new show Message-ID: <4190EBFB.7010906@vision.caltech.edu> Just in case you haven't noticed, there is a new show on www.joefrank.com entitled Duplicity. -Arrigo From mckeever_bpm at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 08:31:42 2004 From: mckeever_bpm at yahoo.com (brian mckeever) Date: Tue Nov 9 08:33:15 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] new show In-Reply-To: <4190EBFB.7010906@vision.caltech.edu> Message-ID: <20041109163142.94134.qmail@web20922.mail.yahoo.com> does it have Larry block, jack kornfield etc. . .? --- Arrigo Benedetti wrote: > Just in case you haven't noticed, there is a new > show on > www.joefrank.com entitled Duplicity. > > -Arrigo > > _______________________________________________ > Joe Frank Mailing List > joe-frank-list@armory.com > http://www.armory.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/joe-frank-list > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From arrigo at vision.caltech.edu Tue Nov 9 10:00:55 2004 From: arrigo at vision.caltech.edu (Arrigo Benedetti) Date: Tue Nov 9 10:01:12 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] new show In-Reply-To: <20041109163142.94134.qmail@web20922.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041109163142.94134.qmail@web20922.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <419105D7.6010300@vision.caltech.edu> brian mckeever wrote: >does it have Larry block, jack kornfield etc. . .? > > no, it has monologues by Joe, more in the style of Somewhere Out There. very good material indeed! -Arrigo From innadadadavida at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 09:50:54 2004 From: innadadadavida at yahoo.com (innadadadavida) Date: Sat Nov 20 09:52:28 2004 Subject: [joe-frank-list] videos on sale Message-ID: <20041120175054.39121.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> FYI, has volumes 3 & 4 of their old "Inside Out" anthology series on sale for $5. (Each has Joe Frank/David Rapkin material.) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com