turkish

I stole(!) the LP at the Hamburg market in the summer of 1982. What a flash. The cover by Ron-DeGregori-Dalla was a serious disappointment.

@gianco75: try here: link rotto

Ah! So what I have is the previous one. Now I’ll get this one.

I recently listened to kexp.org, downloaded one of their albums (this one, I imagine), I didn't know they were debutants. Very good, but I had forgotten about them.

oh well

try again

test 1, 2, 3 sha sha sha

@Ethos: it's not a "conditio sine qua non": if you really don't want the bold text, just add a little note at the beginning of the reviews you send: "for the editors: this review is perfect as is, please don't edit it pleaz"

@Dave: every editor has their own style (or lack of style). So the same advice applies to you.

In any case, editing isn't just about bold text: there's paragraph division, correcting typos if they occur... in short, if an editor is passionate, they try to present the review in the best way possible. But hey, nobody's perfect.

But then we agree on everything, dear! But the bold text, in fact, the author can include it. So: did you not include it on purpose or were you not aware that you could include it?

Dear Sir, the creative commons clause may be there (or maybe not), but it refers to the review we published and edited, not the one you submitted (the license is ours to provide, not yours, right?). Aside from that, the bold text is an editorial choice that you may not like, but it serves a specific purpose: it has been shown that people don't read from the screen but rather "scan" the text in search of keywords; if they find one that seems interesting, they might read the rest (or part of it), but in most cases, they settle for just that. It may sound sad, but that's how it is, and our statistics also indicate that very few visitors stay on a page for more than thirty seconds. Therefore, the comments on your review, whether positive or negative, are likely based on a very quick (superficial) reading of the text, if not solely on the bolded words. Now, one could question the choice of highlighted words in this particular review (I couldn't say, I don't have time to read it, but I trust the editors since I chose them and consider them true professionals), but the principle remains valid. Of course, your critique is welcome, but I hope this response clarifies why we are rejecting it (de-blob I have no idea who that is). Aloha.