RE: Would you say shame on the guy that wrote this article?

[Tyler <programmer651@comcast.net>]

It doesn't. I just want to make sure they're not defaming the concept of 
looped audio and video.
Tyler Z
On Tue, 4 Sep 2012 09:16:16 +0000, Gareth Whittock wrote:



>Doesn't bother me. What people choose to do with their own and each 
>others 
>bodies is entirely their business.
>Why does it bother you?
>Peace
>g
>Gareth Whittock, sound artist: garethwhittock.co.uk
>>Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 10:45:41 +0200
>>Subject: Re: Would you say shame on the guy that wrote this article?
>>From: perboysen@gmail.com
>>To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com

>>Offended - why? I don't see any connection between music that
>>integrate loops and looping and the fact that someone decides to call
>>a looped stripe of pornographic film "a loop". But thanks for
>>mentioning this funny Off-Topic  coincidence!

>>Greetings from Sweden

>>Per Boysen
>>www.perboysen.com
>>http://www.youtube.com/perboysen


>>On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Tyler <programmer651@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>How many of you are and aren't offended by this? So, these people from 
>>>Wipipedia (read this carefully; I'm talking
>>>about Wipipedia, NOT Wikipedia) have this definition for the word 
>>>"loop." Their 
>>>definition does have to do with
>>>repetition, but in a sexual way. Looper's Delight is a discussion group 
>>>for the 
>>>looping scene, this
>>>Wipi thing is a discussion group for the sexual scene, including fetish 
>>>clubs 
>>>and all that crazy
>>>stuff. Here is how they made "loop" a sex term.
>>>http://londonfetishscene.com/wipi/index.php/Loop
>>>Tyler Z