Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!drivax.UUCP!liberato@drivax.UUCP
From: liberato@drivax.UUCP (Jimmy Liberato)
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Subject: Re: Rolling Stone reviews, Sinead, and Kate
Message-ID: <4LRFNGP@drivax.UUCP>
Date: 2 Mar 90 22:14:21 GMT
References: <9002282240.AA26871@EDDIE.MIT.EDU>
Sender: daemon@eddie.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Reply-To: drivax!liberato@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Jimmy Liberato)
Organization: Digital Research, Inc., Monterey, California
Lines: 14
Approved: nessus@eddie.mit.edu


eboneste@BBN.COM (Liz Bonesteel) writes:

>Speaking more of Rolling Stone, I heard a rumor they trashed HOL when
>it came out.  Can anyone confirm this?

Well the final line of a very short (400 line) mini-review was "...her
vision will seem silly the those who believe children should be seen 
and not heard."  The sad part of it was the reviewer offered no original 
insights and it was transparent that he gathered most of his information
from other reviews he had read.  

--
Jimmy Liberato   ...!amdahl!drivax!liberato