::OAQs:: Once-Asked Questions.

This page is in three...maybe four parts. The first one consists of a slightly-edited version of the original text. Oldtimers can skip this.

The next part is a slightly-edited version of the update to this page. It was written in April of 2001.

The next part is tonight's (Jan 14th, 2003) updated-update.

I was checking out the news groups (specifically alt.fan.frank-zappa and rec.music.makers.bass) during the months of July and August, 1998, and had found the most amazing array of ridiculousnesses. There were several real doozies around 1997 in both of them.

Some of the Zappa fans were circuitously attempting to ascertain whether my sexual predisposition was not only one of the possible reasons for the demise of the '88 band, but whether it was necessary to discuss at all (political correctness issues and such). This was fun to read, but actually took me aback, as I had no idea.

I speak with Mike Keneally a little here and there and he had never mentioned it to me. To say the least, I was mightily surprised. This was one of the stranger things I'd read on the net (at the time). There didn't seem to be one person who knew me that a)owned a computer, b)was online, and c) went to the newsgroups who could 'defend' me or attempt to set things straight.

It may have beentrue, but most likely Mike K (who at the tim had a large online presence) chose not to get involved. This is a good thing (Thank you still, Mike).

On rec.music.makers.bass, I was either a raging bloody sphincter without a lick of talent or a misunderstood genius. I'd of course prefered the latter to be true, but honestly I don't care what the final consensus may be. You are the interested parties. I am merely an observer. Although anyone who has experienced my lack of tact in past exercises can allow for personality through mutual understanding, I haven't had the benefit of this level of communication in the online community. This, hopefully, will change (boy did this ever.)

(Update: 27 April, 2001) This has changed. I have a large online support system going. The lion's share of followers of my career are pro-Thunes. The microscopic few who have anything negative to say have fallen off the groups, EXCEPT for a couple of ex-band members who are inexplicably on the opposite side of whatever fence my supporters and I find ourselves. I was absolutely dumbfounded to have seen in electronic print the bald-faced exaggerations that impugned my character. Well, not dumbfounded, but annoyed.

Since I don't go on tour and I don't hang with musicians, I haven't had a venue for discussing the good things that have been heaped upon me (the small amount I've received feels like a heap when one has generally been without it for one's entire career), nor a sanctuary from the sling and the arrow of my denigrators' charges against me. (27 April, 2001) This has changed. I now have a LARGE amount of good things heaped upon me.

It's all in fun, and I wouldn't have taken it so seriously but for those of you who consider yourselves fans of mine and have spent considerable amounts of time listening to my playing and find it worthy. This site — and a certain amount of my present happiness — are dedicated to you.

January 14th, 2003

Ed Mann has been in touch, so that's one of the two aforementioned ex-fellow-band members taken off the shit-list. Ed has apologized and been completely rehabilitated (I'm ironically using Stalinist terminology). I am very happy to say that Ed is one human who has followed a path and found himself happily at the other end of a long journey with more useful information than he started with.

Several months ago, a Geoscott reader named Dan wrote me and asked me why I still had all this crap concerning ancient history on my site. He was also of the opinion that anything negative written about another human being was counter-productive to further human development. OK, so he didn't even remotely say that, but it was defensive of Ed and confused about my objectives (how's that, Dan?). I thought it was time I put all this into historical perspective, seeing as how the stuff it was being written about ocurred in 1988 and what I wrote was written in 1997 and it's now 2003. That's a 9 to 6 (or 3 to 2) ratio. It's just as historical as the original occurence. Fuck.

Please view the Dan page to read my reply to Dan.



Site design © 2003, Georgia Morf Thunes;
Content © 2003, Scott Carter Thunes, for GeoScott Productions.