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 ***