<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for dubdobdee</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/dubdobdee/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/dubdobdee/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:02:39 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/481967156</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/481967156#comment-42126003</link><description>&lt;p&gt;While I'm not entirely unsympathetic with the claim that the work is "combination intervention&amp;amp;responses", i wonder how sympathetic rod would be with the argument that his fact-checking blog commenters should therefore be sharing his paycheque &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:02:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/475922622</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/475922622#comment-41881400</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Solo card-games -- solitaire, patience etc -- date back to the early 18th century. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2010 08:25:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/450220995</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/450220995#comment-40007425</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It seems to be back --- and was in fact still available in cache if you clicked through but didn't refresh. But for about 24 hours pitas users  were being deflected to a "no one owns this domain? do you want to?" standing page. I assume it was just a forgot-to-pay-bills error, such as yr correspondent is himself very prone to. Tomorrow I shall back up all archives properly, just in case. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 07:45:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/450927462</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/450927462#comment-40007284</link><description>&lt;p&gt;winter pineneedles!  NOM NOM NOM&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 07:42:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/441433726</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/441433726#comment-39367323</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"if certain people make logical arguments and pay heed to apparent counterevidence and make surprising or counterintuitive arguments that they then try to explain" -- is the last bit ("surprising or counterintuitive arguments") a dealbreaker though? If you had to choose between "logical + heed-paying to counterevidence + counterintuitive arguments" and "logical + heed-paying to counterevidence", which would you tend to favour? I definitely favour the former, because i think surprise is a good thing, but am beginning to think this is becoming a habit that villains are gaming... Contrarianism has become a pervasive shtick within punditry; sometimes truisms are boring yet true, however intriguing it is to waste time following up counter-arguments (not that this will stop me)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:00:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, A lot of the people who read a bestselling novel,...</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/320622629#comment-28763592</link><description>&lt;p&gt;yes as you know i am VERY suspicious of generalised claims like this: many professional reviewers watch or listen to or read FAR TOO MUCH with a view to writing about same in a way that maintains their marketshare in a very competitive context&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;there are here two very obvious axes of judgment-clouding: the first is massive jadedness (plus only a mentalist has seen 10,000 movies); the second is instrumentalisation (plus if habitual shortcuts become blind spots, so can the ways you train yrself to counter yr habits) &lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:53:11 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Totally Wire&amp;#039;d</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/309700663#comment-27659166</link><description>&lt;p&gt;no new york -- no wave generally -- is counter-subway-screech music&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;also: metal machine music -- bright pop treble drone!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 08:48:11 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, Music And Theory</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/191596520#comment-16916389</link><description>&lt;p&gt;grrr i've actually told SR to his face that cook put MJ on the cover not me: obviously his entire career and critical shtick is based on not really listening to stuff properly but, while this was a tremendous move that i WISH  could take credit for, it was r.d.cook not me&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:50:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, Scott Plagenhoef on Sgt Peppers'</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/183562368#comment-16244293</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Probably because I first encountered SP as my parents' music, and enjoyed their enjoyment of it as grown-ups with kids, I've always been fascinated and impressed by the LP's refusal to confuse the POV of the elderly with conservatism -- SP takes the old school model of the "album", as in a collection, of sheet music or stamps or photos, with a song for EVERYONE, and blows it up into a snapshot of all society, full of excitiment and tension and contention and hurt; where the gap between grandeur and the mundane is exactly not absolute&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;conceptually i think it's extraordinarily smart: where it falls down is -- of course -- the music, which is much more a mixed bag &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 06:35:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, Dylan Christmas Album Tracklist</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/181948442#comment-16181296</link><description>&lt;p&gt;xmas songs that became fixtures since dylan in the uk = by slade and by greg lake&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;however maybe not standards: not sure anyone has ever covered em -- assuming dylan hasn't&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:13:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, The Decade In Pop</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/172907727#comment-15485568</link><description>&lt;p&gt;boo what a let down! &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:48:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, Chuck Eddy Pokes The Boomer Beehive</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/172165569#comment-15424048</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"If Woodstock, the movie, or the soundtrack did not get you excited than it is you who need to be replaced." &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:52:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blue Lines Revisited, aceterrier:


 via meatsack | comicallyvintage |...</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/172021511#comment-15413314</link><description>&lt;p&gt;beard drawn on in blue pen! &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:53:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Realtime Kills* Ideas</title><link>http://tomewing.tumblr.com/post/169208610#comment-15255734</link><description>&lt;p&gt;when you say it's predilection more than structure, isn't that the same as saying it's swots vs blots rather than schoolroom vs hallway? schoolroom/hallway is structure&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;as a professional editor i say it's structure -- this doesn't mean it is structure, it means structure is what editors get to work with, in the belief it makes a difference to the conversation: structure of senteces, structure of paragrahs, structure of pieces, structure of the published outlet as a whole -- these we have power over; predilections we have to take as a given, the untouchable input &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dubdobdee</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 05:45:17 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>