Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice5.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!cord!ihnp1!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!rdz
From: rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: Rolling Stone
Message-ID: <701@ccice5.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Feb-85 13:02:25 EST
Article-I.D.: ccice5.701
Posted: Tue Feb 26 13:02:25 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Mar-85 04:24:18 EST
References: <1855@pucc-h>.UUCP> <30800038@uiucuxc.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Central Engineering, Rochester, NY
Lines: 19

> 
> Well, you probably like Cindy Lauper, Loverboy, etc.
> If you like Rock 'n' Roll, you buy Rolling Stone.
> If you like stupid pop- (which many people think is Rock 'n' Roll),
> then stay away from Rolling Stone magazine.  Its that simple.
>  
> 	 Rob Cook

Funny, I remember Rolling Stone giving Cindy high marks for here album.
They must have had a new writer that used to work for Circus. [:-)].
In all seriousness, come off it!  I've been reading Rolling Stone, off
and on, since its first year of publication.  It blows with the wind
just like every other music publication.  The fact that you may have
just discovered it recently doesn't mean it has always looked this way
or always will.  It's that simple.

BTW, just what this net needs.  Another "critic" with all the answers.

	*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***