join together in the group/lifehouseSun Dec 7 12:12:12 PST 1997

["Martin L. Houser" <MHOUSER@PGH.LEGENT.COM>]

>Don't look down on the alt.music.who posts as the product of musical 
>ignoramases...look at as an opportunity to share the skull full of trivia 
>and opinions each of us has about the Who. What better use do you have for 
>the fact 
>that you know the names of all the Who's parents! :)

i have to agree with chuck.  and, having recently joined the list and 
considering myself about 'medium' in the range of who-knowledge among list 
participants, i wouldn't mind a bit broader range to the emails.  a lot of 
the postings seem rather esoteric.   i enjoy the list, and DON'T want to 
encourage idiotic emails, but i would like to see some broader discussion.  
and shouldn't anyone with a sincere appreciation of the who be welcome? :^)

on another subject, in the condemned "lighthouse" (i can see the cover art--
the four of them relieving themselves at the base of a lighthouse) post:

>   to as the Lighthouse project.  Apparently, it was going to be a story 
>about   a kid who sold his soul to the devil to play rock n' roll.  A little

is this true?  i got the impression somewhere that lifehouse revolved more 
around the search for a perfect, pure, unifying musical note (or something 
along those mystical lines).  what was the lifehouse idea?  (hope this isn't 
too base a question.)  

which reminds me of another point: a FAQ file on the who would be an 
excellent way to  deaden the impact of newbie barbarians clammoring at the 
gates of thewho@cisco.com.  as cheryl said, "Basic [Who] Training".

no flames intended,

marty

"rock needn't turn you into an idiot"--p.t.
 
keep the list

p.s.  it breaks my heart to see the daltrey shows floundering.