> Please, I didn't put any personal comments in my statement, and I'd > appreciate it if you kept yours out as well. I'm not saying it's bad, or > good, merely stating that there is a huge range of opinions on teh subject > of techno, and one person's view of what techno is, can be completely > contrary to someone els's. > yeah but this isn't what brendan was saying
> Looks like you are an example of your very own statement, except you put > personal slander in your mail :\ > where? > Seriously,you can't begin to classify techno by categories, > yes you can. > On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, john harvey wrote: > > > it is unbelievable how so many people on this list take things completely > > the wrong way, and totally out of context, the statement below being a great > > example. > > > > > > > The key phrase in that being "stuff that Brandan Nelson thinks is good > > > techno". Sorry, but there may be other people with differing opinions out > > > there. Just because you think something isn't techno, doesn't mean it is > > > or isn't. Techno is as techno does. > > > > what the fu*k are you on about? > > > > its obvious to anyone with a tiny brain that brendan didn't mean anything > > like what you're attempting to imply. > > > > > > >
