Unsubscribe
Matthew P. Messbarger
Graduate School of Library & Information Science
University of Illinois
323.420.4026
[log in to unmask]
________________________________________
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of ARSCLIST automatic digest system [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 9:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ARSCLIST Digest - 31 Jul 2013 to 1 Aug 2013 (#2013-213)
There are 13 messages totalling 660 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Dr. Stamler
2. Artur Rubenstein Movie 1940s? (2)
3. CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history (8)
4. Preliminary Schedule - Cultural Heritage Archives Symposium at the Library
of Congress
5. Unstrange Phenomena #78 "The Flat Things"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:12:45 -0700
From: Paul Stamler <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Dr. Stamler
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl Pultz <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 10:25 AM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Dr. Stamler
Thanks to http://www.epi.umn.edu/cvdepi/essay.asp?id=142 I know a bit of the
story of Dr. Stamler. A hero. If there's ever a proper judicial review of
current domestic spying, his case will be important precedent. Best wishes
to him.
-----
Speaking for my dad, I thank you for the good words. I'll relay them to him -- at 93+, he's still very active and kicking.
Peace,
Paul
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 22:39:24 -0600
From: Roger Kulp <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Artur Rubenstein Movie 1940s?
=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
Could somebody identify this film? When was it done and for whom? Was it me=
ant to be released for movie houses? Unfortunately the original credits and=
opening are both chopped off.The date of 1977 given at the beginning is ob=
viously not when it was made.I had never seen the multi-panel painting ill=
ustrating Rubenstein's life at 16:51.Is there a picture anywhere showing it=
in detail?The trio footage starting at 49:22 is nice=2Ctoo. Roger http:/=
/www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3ktr1SSlLjM=0A=
=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 08:43:43 -0400
From: Steve Greene <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
JRF would certainly be able to recreate the coils and the ferrite mounting
of the heads. Quad video heads are mounted (four of them) on a rotating
headwheel assembly running on a floating air bearing. Renovating those
headwheels involves specialized jigs and precision machine tooling that
would be probably within JRF's capabilities, but non-trivial (and probably
non-economic) to re-create from scratch.
Steve Greene
Audiovisual Archivist
Office of Presidential Libraries
National Archives and Records Administration
(301) 837-1772
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Roderic G Stephens
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> "Subject: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to pres
> Tom Fine wrote:
>
> "Subject: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
>
>
>
> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57596237/library-of-congress-races-to-preserve-tv-history/
>
> Question about one "fact" stated in the story, by an LOC employee -- there
> is really only one guy who works on the heads for Ampex 1" machines, and
> he's in his 80s?
> -- Tom Fine"
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> My take on this is that perhaps the "one guy" should be working with
> someone that has the technical expertise to learn the ins and outs of the
> Ampex 2" quad VTR plus, isn't a company like JRF Magnetic Services able to
> recondition VTR quad heads?
>
>
> http://www.jrfmagnetics.com/index.html?JRF_mainframe=/JRF_replacement_heads.html
>
> Or, this site lists a number of companies that still do 2" quad work:
>
> http://www.labguysworld.com/VTR_Links.htm
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 08:32:43 -0500
From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Artur Rubenstein Movie 1940s?
The Mendelssohn Trio portion is a film titled "Million Dollar Trio" if
memory serves. This may be an assembly of shorter films.
joe salerno
On 7/31/2013 11:39 PM, Roger Kulp wrote:
>
>
>
> Could somebody identify this film? When was it done and for whom? Was it meant to be released for movie houses? Unfortunately the original credits and opening are both chopped off.The date of 1977 given at the beginning is obviously not when it was made.I had never seen the multi-panel painting illustrating Rubenstein's life at 16:51.Is there a picture anywhere showing it in detail?The trio footage starting at 49:22 is nice,too. Roger http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ktr1SSlLjM
>
>
--
Joe Salerno
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 09:03:07 -0400
From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
If the skill set to maintain quad video players is really almost died off, let's hope the LOC is
prioritizing transfers and concentrating on news/actualities and documentaries/non-fiction before
they work on the likes of "I Love Lucy." That does not seem to be the case as presented by the CBS
News report.
I don't see why the LOC is in the business of preserving commercial TV shows in the first place. The
current owners of "I Love Lucy," for example, seem to view this product as profitable since they
have it for sale in multi-DVD sets right now. Just about any "classic" TV dreck is shown in re-runs
all over cable TV, again benefitting the copyright owners. So why are the taxpayers expending any
money or effort to digitize this material? What's next, the race to save the decaying "Survivor"
episodes?
Commercial "entertainment" is NOT history. It may be dated cultural artifacts, but it is not as
important as real historic video, movies and sounds. In 1000 years, it will matter if there is
footage of the Kennedy assassination or the moon landing and its coverage by media outlets around
the world, this will matter to historians and history (if humans have managed not to self-extinct by
then). Episodes of "I Love Lucy" will not matter. In fact, they don't matter today except as
junk-food entertainment for the nostalgic. I say the same, BTW, with regards to old radio content.
It's much more important to preserve FDR fireside chats than to worry about episodes of "The Lone
Ranger." One could make the same argument about recordings of historical live music performances
(should be preserved by the LOC, but with copyright releases so they are available to those paying
for their preservation) vs commercially successful "hit" products (should be preserved on the dime
of the copyright owners, with their right to make money from them as long as the copyright lasts).
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Greene" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
> JRF would certainly be able to recreate the coils and the ferrite mounting
> of the heads. Quad video heads are mounted (four of them) on a rotating
> headwheel assembly running on a floating air bearing. Renovating those
> headwheels involves specialized jigs and precision machine tooling that
> would be probably within JRF's capabilities, but non-trivial (and probably
> non-economic) to re-create from scratch.
>
> Steve Greene
> Audiovisual Archivist
> Office of Presidential Libraries
> National Archives and Records Administration
> (301) 837-1772
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Roderic G Stephens
> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> "Subject: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to pres
>> Tom Fine wrote:
>>
>> "Subject: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57596237/library-of-congress-races-to-preserve-tv-history/
>>
>> Question about one "fact" stated in the story, by an LOC employee -- there
>> is really only one guy who works on the heads for Ampex 1" machines, and
>> he's in his 80s?
>> -- Tom Fine"
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>>
>> My take on this is that perhaps the "one guy" should be working with
>> someone that has the technical expertise to learn the ins and outs of the
>> Ampex 2" quad VTR plus, isn't a company like JRF Magnetic Services able to
>> recondition VTR quad heads?
>>
>>
>> http://www.jrfmagnetics.com/index.html?JRF_mainframe=/JRF_replacement_heads.html
>>
>> Or, this site lists a number of companies that still do 2" quad work:
>>
>> http://www.labguysworld.com/VTR_Links.htm
>>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 14:07:20 +0000
From: "Gray, Mike" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
Comment on the following:
... 'historical live music performances should be preserved by the LOC , but with copyright releases so they are available to those paying
for their preservation ...'
I can speak only for the VOA collection at LC. The terms for recording musical performances by VOA stated that their use was solely for non-commerical transmission overseas, excluding Canada. Each artist and interested party granted a gratis waiver to VOA under those conditions. Neither VOA nor LC can speak to any rights in these performances because they don't own them. We should be grateful to LC for accepting and preserving the VOA donations when other Federal institutions at the time did not.
Mike Gray
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 10:39:43 -0400
From: Steve Greene <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
Tom,
The LoC has a much broader mandate of preserving the "cultural climate",
including commercial entertainment.
Fortunately, the National Archives (and my organization within NARA, the
Office of Presidential Libraries) has had its own preservation program for
two-inch, that has included a large volume of (DC-centric) news and public
information programming. Presidents since LBJ have been recording off-air
video of programming of interest to the Administration. We have also been
preserving large quantities of Presidential campaign advertising on
two-inch. Like most federal agencies, we face a difficult budget climate
today, which challenges our ability to continue large-scale preservation
programs.
Steve Greene
Audiovisual Archivist
Office of Presidential Libraries
National Archives and Records Administration
(301) 837-1772
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> If the skill set to maintain quad video players is really almost died off,
> let's hope the LOC is prioritizing transfers and concentrating on
> news/actualities and documentaries/non-fiction before they work on the
> likes of "I Love Lucy." That does not seem to be the case as presented by
> the CBS News report.
>
> I don't see why the LOC is in the business of preserving commercial TV
> shows in the first place. The current owners of "I Love Lucy," for example,
> seem to view this product as profitable since they have it for sale in
> multi-DVD sets right now. Just about any "classic" TV dreck is shown in
> re-runs all over cable TV, again benefitting the copyright owners. So why
> are the taxpayers expending any money or effort to digitize this material?
> What's next, the race to save the decaying "Survivor" episodes?
>
> Commercial "entertainment" is NOT history. It may be dated cultural
> artifacts, but it is not as important as real historic video, movies and
> sounds. In 1000 years, it will matter if there is footage of the Kennedy
> assassination or the moon landing and its coverage by media outlets around
> the world, this will matter to historians and history (if humans have
> managed not to self-extinct by then). Episodes of "I Love Lucy" will not
> matter. In fact, they don't matter today except as junk-food entertainment
> for the nostalgic. I say the same, BTW, with regards to old radio content.
> It's much more important to preserve FDR fireside chats than to worry about
> episodes of "The Lone Ranger." One could make the same argument about
> recordings of historical live music performances (should be preserved by
> the LOC, but with copyright releases so they are available to those paying
> for their preservation) vs commercially successful "hit" products (should
> be preserved on the dime of the copyright owners, with their right to make
> money from them as long as the copyright lasts).
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Greene" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 8:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
>
>
>
> JRF would certainly be able to recreate the coils and the ferrite mounting
>> of the heads. Quad video heads are mounted (four of them) on a rotating
>> headwheel assembly running on a floating air bearing. Renovating those
>> headwheels involves specialized jigs and precision machine tooling that
>> would be probably within JRF's capabilities, but non-trivial (and probably
>> non-economic) to re-create from scratch.
>>
>> Steve Greene
>> Audiovisual Archivist
>> Office of Presidential Libraries
>> National Archives and Records Administration
>> (301) 837-1772
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Roderic G Stephens
>> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>>
>> "Subject: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to pres
>>> Tom Fine wrote:
>>>
>>> "Subject: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-**18563_162-57596237/library-of-**
>>> congress-races-to-preserve-tv-**history/<http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57596237/library-of-congress-races-to-preserve-tv-history/>
>>>
>>> Question about one "fact" stated in the story, by an LOC employee --
>>> there
>>> is really only one guy who works on the heads for Ampex 1" machines, and
>>> he's in his 80s?
>>> -- Tom Fine"
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**__
>>>
>>>
>>> My take on this is that perhaps the "one guy" should be working with
>>> someone that has the technical expertise to learn the ins and outs of the
>>> Ampex 2" quad VTR plus, isn't a company like JRF Magnetic Services able
>>> to
>>> recondition VTR quad heads?
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.jrfmagnetics.com/**index.html?JRF_mainframe=/JRF_**
>>> replacement_heads.html<http://www.jrfmagnetics.com/index.html?JRF_mainframe=/JRF_replacement_heads.html>
>>>
>>> Or, this site lists a number of companies that still do 2" quad work:
>>>
>>> http://www.labguysworld.com/**VTR_Links.htm<http://www.labguysworld.com/VTR_Links.htm>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 12:21:16 +0000
From: Don Cox <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
On 01/08/2013, Steve Greene wrote:
> Tom,
> The LoC has a much broader mandate of preserving the "cultural
> climate", including commercial entertainment.
>
One could think of "I Love Lucy" as a tribal ritual. When the Americans
are extinct, or are a small vanishing remnant, the history of their
culture and customs will be of great interest to anthropologists.
You can't predict what will be valuable to historians. But there is a
good chance they will be more interested in popular culture than in the
names of Presidents.
And you have to save a hundred things to be sure of having the one you
want.
> Fortunately, the National Archives (and my organization within NARA,
> the Office of Presidential Libraries) has had its own preservation
> program for two-inch, that has included a large volume of (DC-centric)
> news and public information programming. Presidents since LBJ have
> been recording off-air video of programming of interest to the
> Administration. We have also been preserving large quantities of
> Presidential campaign advertising on two-inch. Like most federal
> agencies, we face a difficult budget climate today, which challenges
> our ability to continue large-scale preservation programs.
>
Regards
--
Don Cox
[log in to unmask]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 13:44:14 -0400
From: Arthur Gaer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
If the productions and rights being preserved at taxpayer expense only =
had the copyright length that they were *originally created under*--i.e. =
for anything on 2" video 28 years (or 56 with renewal)--I'd have much =
less problem with those productions being housed at the LoC.
I know that then opens up the whole morass of state vs federal audio =
recording copyrights, lengths, underlying songwriting rights, etc. =20
I'd make those 56 years from creation, too. Plenty of time to get money =
back or make a killing, plenty of opportunity for the public to still =
gain public domain access when some of the public is still young enough =
to care.
Unfortunately the commercial interests and political power of a few very =
large companies desiring to keep an ongoing revenue stream from a very =
small number of continuing profitable audio/video/books/films they =
happen to have acquired over the years makes that revision politically =
impossible.
However, the current situation, which means a book published during the =
presidency of Chester Arthur has a greater chance of being in print =
today than one published during the time of Reagan, goes to show just =
how disruptive to our cultural patrimony the current copyright situation =
has become
=
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/the-hole-in-our-coll=
ective-memory-how-copyright-made-mid-century-books-vanish/278209/
I believe the situation for audio recordings is far worse.
Arthur Gaer
On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:06 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> =
wrote:
> Whatever, I think that's the job of those wanting the taxpayer to =
preserve their productions. Give it to the LOC with a blanket release, =
with the known intent to be wide, no-cost distribution via the LOC's =
website at the earliest possible time. Otherwise, it's just a boondoggle =
where the taxpayers are bearing the cost and getting zero benefit. It =
gets worse than that. What about the LOC's own in-house recordings of =
poetry and music, made in their own auditorium? Where are those sounds? =
Locked away, for the most part. They should be online, available to all =
Americans. And, LOC-produced anthologies should never be out of print =
(and I really think that you shouldn't have to pay for a copy if you =
actually pay income taxes).
>=20
> -- Tom Fine
>=20
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video =
history
>=20
>=20
>> On 7/30/2013 6:57 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>>> I am especially concerned if public TV stations like the one =
mentioned
>>> in the piece (the producer of the program on Mississippi blues
>>> musicians, hosted by BB King) are not releasing copyright on their
>>> in-house productions. If the taxpayer is to pay for preserving these
>>> items, there should be universal access to them!
>> Just so, but copyright clearance on any music contained in the =
programs complicates their re-release.
>>=20
>> Peace,
>> Paul
>>=20
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 14:12:14 -0400
From: Donald Clarke <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
Another DC is absolutely right. In the 1950s my mother was a Democrat in =
all her attitudes, but she voted Republican because she thought she was =
supposed to. (It could have been the other way around; that's not the =
point.) I Love Lucy was what she liked, what she enjoyed, part of who =
she was: a lower-middle-class housewife in Kenosha.=20
Donald Clarke
On Aug 1, 2013, at 8:21 AM, Don Cox wrote:
On 01/08/2013, Steve Greene wrote:
> Tom,
> The LoC has a much broader mandate of preserving the "cultural
> climate", including commercial entertainment.
>=20
One could think of "I Love Lucy" as a tribal ritual. When the Americans
are extinct, or are a small vanishing remnant, the history of their
culture and customs will be of great interest to anthropologists.
You can't predict what will be valuable to historians. But there is a
good chance they will be more interested in popular culture than in the
names of Presidents.
And you have to save a hundred things to be sure of having the one you
want.
> Fortunately, the National Archives (and my organization within NARA,
> the Office of Presidential Libraries) has had its own preservation
> program for two-inch, that has included a large volume of (DC-centric)
> news and public information programming. Presidents since LBJ have
> been recording off-air video of programming of interest to the
> Administration. We have also been preserving large quantities of
> Presidential campaign advertising on two-inch. Like most federal
> agencies, we face a difficult budget climate today, which challenges
> our ability to continue large-scale preservation programs.
>=20
Regards
--=20
Don Cox
[log in to unmask]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 11:44:50 -0700
From: Roderic G Stephens <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history
I may be wrong, but the opening title section of the "I Love Lucy" with the=
two of them smoking the sponsor's cigarettes was "integrated" into the ori=
ginal show (I used to do that on "The Danny Thomas Show") on the 35mm level=
before=A0sophisticated video editing began. =A0The add agencies would pay =
for "integration" of their bumpers, commercials, etc. into each episode. =
=A0All of these early series originated on film with the "Lucy" show having=
begun the 35mm=A0film=A0three-camera technique "in front of a live audienc=
e" (we used to laugh about that phrase, a "dead" audience was to be dreaded=
, but could happen). =A0When reruns began, the old commercials were edited =
out and new ones would take their place. =A0I'm guessing=A0that that cigare=
tte opening was transferred to=A02"=A0video tape via telecine as part of on=
e complete film show. =A0If anyone has better knowledge please add it to my=
=A0recognitions, since I only dealt with film at the time. =A0Earlier while=
working
at ABC-TV in Hollywood, "The Lawrence Welk Show" was recorded on "quick ki=
nes" or=A0kine-scopes and "bicycled" all over the U.S. on film. In addition=
while I was there=A0(circa 1950's)=A0ABC was at the time called the "film =
network", since all of its series shows were delivered on film to the ABC H=
ollywood studio (35mm and 16mm) to be shipped via film cases to the various=
stations. =A0Again, the summer reruns employed a number of editors and ass=
istants to do integration,and I was one of the lucky ones.=0A=A0=0A=0A=0A__=
______________________________=0A From: Don Cox <[log in to unmask]>=0AT=
o: [log in to unmask] =0ASent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 5:21 AM=0ASu=
bject: Re: [ARSCLIST] CBS News on LOC efforts to preserve video history=0A =
=0A=0AOn 01/08/2013, Steve Greene wrote:=0A=0A> Tom,=0A> The LoC has a much=
broader mandate of preserving the "cultural=0A> climate", including commer=
cial entertainment.=0A> =0AOne could think of "I Love Lucy" as a tribal rit=
ual. When the Americans=0Aare extinct, or are a small vanishing remnant, th=
e history of their=0Aculture and customs will be of great interest to anthr=
opologists.=0A=0AYou can't predict what will be valuable to historians. But=
there is a=0Agood chance they will be more interested in popular culture t=
han in the=0Anames of Presidents.=0A=0AAnd you have to save a hundred thing=
s to be sure of having the one you=0Awant.=0A=0A> Fortunately, the National=
Archives (and my organization within NARA,=0A> the Office of Presidential =
Libraries) has had its own preservation=0A> program for two-inch, that has =
included a large volume of (DC-centric)=0A> news and public information pro=
gramming. Presidents since LBJ have=0A> been recording off-air video of pro=
gramming of interest to the=0A> Administration. We have also been preservin=
g large quantities of=0A> Presidential campaign advertising on two-inch. Li=
ke most federal=0A> agencies, we face a difficult budget climate today, whi=
ch challenges=0A> our ability to continue large-scale preservation programs=
.=0A> =0A=0ARegards=0A-- =0ADon [log in to unmask]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 15:23:46 -0400
From: Bert Lyons <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Preliminary Schedule - Cultural Heritage Archives Symposium at the Library of Congress
The American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress is happy to
announce the preliminary schedule for the upcoming symposium=97Cultural
Heritage Archives: Networks, Innovation & Collaboration=97to be held
September 26-27, 2013 at the Library of Congress in Washington, DC:
http://www.loc.gov/folklife/events/culturalheritagearchives/schedule.html
Biographies and abstracts for all presenters and moderators are accessible
from the preliminary schedule, but they can also be accessed directly from
this link:
http://www.loc.gov/folklife/events/culturalheritagearchives/bios.html
You can also find information for visiting the Library of Congress here:
http://www.loc.gov/folklife/events/culturalheritagearchives/visitorinfo.htm=
l
The symposium will be free and open to the public, but registration is
required. You will be able to register through the symposium website (
http://www.loc.gov/folklife/events/culturalheritagearchives/index.html)
beginning in mid-to-late August.
Bertram Lyons, CA
Folklife Specialist / Digital Assets Manager
American Folklife Center
Library of Congress
[log in to unmask]
www.loc.gov/folklife
&
Consulting Archivist, Project Manager & Dissemination Coordinator
Association for Cultural Equity
Alan Lomax Archive
[log in to unmask]
www.culturalequity.org
&
Editor
International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives (IASA)
[log in to unmask]
www.iasa-web.org/iasa-publications
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 21:32:04 -0600
From: Roger Kulp <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Unstrange Phenomena #78 "The Flat Things"
http://tinyurl.com/k3l6dav =
------------------------------
End of ARSCLIST Digest - 31 Jul 2013 to 1 Aug 2013 (#2013-213)
**************************************************************
|