| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name
 | Date | Lines | 
|---|
| 36.1 |  | AURORA::RAVAN |  | Tue Oct 08 1985 17:06 | 18 | 
|  | I recently got some junk mail from one of those outfits that wants people
to subscribe to a series of paperbacks - the Romance kind, of course, a
group calling themselves "Loveswept".
One of their "letters from satisfied customers" caught my eye:
	"One book is better than the next...
	 They have not come up with an adjec-
	 tive to express how really delightful
	 Loveswepts are."
To me, the funniest thing about it is that the Loveswept people actually
PUBLISHED this, as if it were a serious letter of praise!
Perhaps they were just being honest, though. After all, if the books are
what I suspect they are, the letter is absolutely correct!
-b
 | 
| 36.2 | We Fail By Doing Nothing | BEING::POSTPISCHIL | Always mount a scratch monkey. | Tue Jul 08 1986 09:23 | 5 | 
|  |     Come visit your Mass. Chevy dealers and "see why we're not number
    one for nothing".
    
    
    				-- edp
 | 
| 36.3 | Hype -or- Hope? | NACHO::CONLIFFE |  | Wed Jul 09 1986 10:55 | 6 | 
|  | A headache pill called Anadin used the following slogan to market
their product in England:
	"Headache? Nothing acts faster than Anadin"
	Nigel
 | 
| 36.4 | See-dy | NOGOV::GOODENOUGH | Jeff Goodenough, IPG Reading-UK | Wed Jul 09 1986 11:28 | 3 | 
|  |     Re: .3  Anadin is in fact identical to the product marketed as
    Anacin in the US, even down to the packaging.  Why the one-letter
    difference beats me.
 | 
| 36.5 | From the German | EVER::MCVAY | Pete McVay | Fri Aug 01 1986 09:39 | 7 | 
|  | Schiller, reviewing "Nathan der Wiese", quoted from another
review/commentary by another critic: 
    
    "'Nobody can deny that Lessing is one of the great
    playwrights of our generation.'
    
    I am this nobody; I deny it outright."
 | 
| 36.6 |  | AKOV68::BOYAJIAN | Did I err? | Sat Aug 02 1986 06:50 | 15 | 
|  |     re:.3
    
    Reminds me of the argument that masturbation was better than sex:
    
    	(1) Masturbation is better than nothing.
    	(2) Nothing is better than sex!
    	(3) Masturbation must then be better than sex. Q.E.D.
    
    re:.5
    
    Sounds like a joke I remember from somewhere:
    
    	"Due to popular demand (Peter Popular demanded it)...|
    
    --- jerry
 | 
| 36.7 | Go for the gold! | ERASER::KALLIS | Hallowe'en should be legal holiday | Fri Mar 13 1987 08:58 | 9 | 
|  |     I saw one this morning on the tube.  There was this General Mosors
    ad that started,
    
    "Explode the myth -- Buicks are less expensive than Oldsmobiles."
    [At least I _think_ those were the two car brands.]  My reaction
    was, "Oh, then they're more expensive?"  They, of course, were pushing
    Buicks.                                    
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
 | 
| 36.8 | eschew obfuscation at all cost | VIDEO::OSMAN | Eric, dtn 223-6664, weight 146 | Fri Mar 13 1987 15:19 | 15 | 
|  | 
	Explode the myth -- Buicks are less expensive than Oldsmobiles
	I couldn't fail to disagree with you less !
	Talk about CLARITY in advertising.  Oy vey
 | 
| 36.9 | I have not got time for a pain | JANIS::SUKONNIK |  | Fri May 01 1987 16:28 | 3 | 
|  |     
    I got plenty of time for a pain. I am surprised that there are some
    people that do not have time for that at all. They miss a lot ;-)
 | 
| 36.10 | Advertising | ACE::MOORE |  | Tue May 01 1990 15:57 | 19 | 
|  |     
    Advertising is a good deal like marriage. There may be a better way,
    but what is it?
    
    One form of advertising thats a liability instead of an asset is a
    person blowing his own horn.
    
    The man who stops advertising to save money is like the man who stops
    the clock to save time.
    
    A loan company's advertisement: We take the moaning and groaning out of
    loaning.
    
    Nothing makes installment buying as easy as the advertising.
    
    
    
    
                                Ray
 | 
| 36.11 | Huh? | MAST::FITZPATRICK | Me upon my pony on my boat. | Fri Feb 19 1993 12:52 | 18 | 
|  |     Hi,
    
    	Yesterday, I came across some promotional literature for a Ski
    Mountain that billed itself as "the largest Ski Mountain closest to
    Boston".  My immediate reaction upon reading this was "what the h*ll
    does that mean?".  It seems that they meant to say either that it is
    the largest mountain within a fixed distance from Boston, or that, of
    all mountains of at least a given size, it is the closest to
    Boston.
    	Are they using some formula such as
    
                    (size of mountain)/(distance from Boston)
    
    and, if so, which factor do they consider more important?
    
    -Tom
    
    PS.  We still had a great day skiing.
 | 
| 36.12 | That's all. | SMURF::BINDER | Qui scire uelit ipse debet discere | Fri Feb 19 1993 13:35 | 4 | 
|  |     No formula.  My semantic analysis of the (deliberately?) vague claim
    yields the sense that there is no larger mountain closer to Boston.
    
    -dick
 |