There are 3 people in our story today, kiddies.

Person A is a bored, lonely housewife in Indiana who, though meaning well, is a complete obsessive wanna be genius. She likes Andy Kaufman because he is what she could never be.

Person B is a mean-spirited loser from California who used to post in a another message board, unrelated to Andy Kaufman under more than one personality a long time ago and was well known for being a stalker, pest.

Person C is an eccentric hobo living in Mexico who happened upon A and B´s universe and decided to play along.

Person A started a light-hearted dedication web site and message board, but soon came into contact with Person B, who started a relationship with A and the decisions then began being made by B, who is a mean, dark-hearted lonely soul. A fake mystery ensued. Person C came into the mix and played a couple of charaters in a tribute to Andy Kaufman´s style.

A and B came into contact with C and talked him and gained his trust. Soon, in a manner unknown to C, B was able to assume C´s identity and create ungodly havoc. C went away, deciding that all this wasn´t worth the hassle.

B then eliminated A from the mix and sent everything into chaos with fake intrigue and finally a mean hoax that involved everyone being enouraged to take a trip houndreds and perhaps thousands of miles away to Las vegas.

B laughed so loud and eventually talked A back into the mix.

Now, the good people here need to be aware. Have fun, but take nothing to heart and trust noone.

C

finally! i will take a good story over innuendo any day. thanks "C".

Hm. Interesting post, apparently a reappearance by one or two of the layers of some onion from the past. Hard to tell what to make of it, but I'm guessing that B and C are both manifestations of the same imagination, with some editing needed to bring it closer to the mark. I still believe that B/C never had a connection with A and acted of their own accord. I never believed that "A" would sully their creative efforts with some sudden ostentatious offer of a big Vegas appearance by someone she never outright claimed to speak on behalf of. Made no sense.

I had hoped that "A" would have publicly stated something to help clarify things, but perhaps she didn't see the need, or maybe even didn't want to dignify it with a response. Whatever the case, it is all in the past, and perhaps better left that way. If she is starting to feel frisky again and wishes to resume the playfulness so many of us did enjoy, then I feel that most would welcome it.

Would it make sense for some fellow who proudly offers neophytes to the world of prostitution advice built from personal experiences - someone who apparently chose this as a key point of identification from the many adventures of a complicated man - to likewise assume that man's whole "thing" was about leading people on and fooling them? Bah, that's not very complicated, really, and actually an insult to a creative genius to **** him with such faint "praise" in his memory.

Does this message board right here seem to seek to endorse any effort to "fool"? I think most would agree that it doesn't. Does this message board right here seek to torpedo the efforts of "A"? I think most here would likewise agree that it does not. This board has a different "take" and, I think anyone who has been participating within it has accepted it as a relatively bullsh*t- and mystery-free zone, for one, and as just another choice as a place to discuss different things.

We all aired our thoughts on so many matters some time back in our "trial," and collectively agreed to leave it at that, verdictless. It's done, message delivered and hopefully, points taken, or at least viewpoints better understood across the board.

The novelty of people coming along and "playing like Andy" wore out long ago. Thankfully we have stopped seeing "Tony Cliftons" appearing and trying to be clever. This isn't some gol-danged role play; this is a discussion board.

In case it wasn't clear to you before, Mr. Hobo, you are not welcome here. We don't need your onion. Now g'wan, git, off with you.

Oooh! Oooh!

"Living in the spirit of Andy" does NOT mean imitating him and it does not mean "pranking people"... to continue from the previous thought of "d*amning him with faint praise," it is like animating a stick figure in a notebook and declaring "Hey, I'm just like Walt Disney!"

And the thing about peeling the layers of the onion... the thing is, as you go, all you find is... more onion.

This thread may or may not self-destruct in a day or so.

well I don't get the whole onion thing. i mean, you don't keep getting onion FOREVER. eventually you reach the middle of the onion. if you keep peeling then you get -nothing. the absence of onion. a peeled up onion. which is different from more onion.

Rob, I think you are overreacting to "C's" post. There was nothing in it to ressurect the "Onion" intrigue- just the opposite. I think he/she was putting an end to it in his/her own way from an insider's point of view.

Maybe there's more to all the happenings of the last couple years than meets the eye. Not Andy coming back neccesarily, but it would be interesting to find out just who was behind the scenes and why what was done was done in that manner. I must admit that I still have questions about whether Andy DID appear in Las Vegas and that the whole Claire/Winston/Leo thing was brought down and discreditted very soon after to hide the truth- but I'm just thinking aloud now.

In any case, C, wasn't trying to rile things up again, I think he/she was closing a chapter, Again, that's just my opinion.

Tracy,

Thank you for your kind thoughts. Do we know you by another name hereabouts?

I had the choice to either delete that message, to respond to it, or to just let it sit there, of course. I do believe it was posted by the person who named himself after a brand of cigarettes who, in the past, has tried to pin his own actions on others. Whoever he is attempting to identify here as "B," it still seems to be an active attempt to stir things up, not really so much a closure.

As I've said, I still steadfastly believe that Claire was not behind the "Vegas trip"... that same cigarette man was also running around speaking as though he was Andy himself, and even emailing folks privately and carrying on as the same. It was not at all in character with the "Enrique" site, which is a very creative endeavor with several years of effort built into its intrigue. Again, why would Enrique/Claire throw all that into the dumper in favor of luring folks out to Vegas for a big laugh? Whatever the motivation is behind andykaufmanlives.com, I certainly don't feel it was intended to lead up to that type of a finish.

I believe that so far as most of us here are concerned, I feel, the Mr. "C" chapter has been finished for quite some time. His reappearance here could really serve no purpose other than to be an attempt to stir something up again.

But our little audience isn't gathered together here to witness a performance by the late, great Andy Kaufman. Andy's audiences for the most part were eager to see what he had for them. We're here to share our thoughts and discuss... we're not here to have Tony Clifton throw water on our heads over and over again. There may only be about a dozen people paying attention here at any given time... why should these nice folks have to be regarded as some sort of continuously present Andy audience, ripe for being goofed on over and over again? Again, I could have just deleted or ignored that message, but this is what irks me most, and I felt I wanted to respond to it.

I don't want to over-discuss all of that again here, but it was nice to see a message from a new name. If you'd like to discuss some of these thoughts privately, I invite you to email me... and of course I'd like to welcome you to participate more with us here. :)

-- Rob

Rob is the comedy cop. We're not allowed to laugh unless he says it's funny. He's so virile. He can delete posts if he wants to if Mr C is Mr A is really trying to say Mr B is ---

DUDE GET THE JOKE INSTEAD OF EXPLAINING THE JOKE (for once).But yeah andykaufmanlives.com is the funniest/best Andy site I've seen yet, I'll agree with you as far as that goes.

this has been a message from Ruby Cooter, who says, did anyone expect Magic Johnson to be embarrassed of his name? (well, if i was him, i probably would be.)

Why would Magic be embarassed by his name?

i believe he chose the nickname himself. i always wondered if his storied sexual exploits as a young man had any bearing on the choice or if the irony was totally lost on him.

I believe the word "Johnson" entered into popular usage around 1984, when the film "Police Academy" came out. Cmdt. Lassard (George Gaynes) was complaining about how there never used to be female recruits... "There were Johnsons as far as the eye could see!"

I would imagine that Ervin was proud of both his exploits on the court and his "Magic Johnson" I doubt he was at all embarassed about it till hi got the AIDS

So what's your point mother f u c ker? u needz to lay of that crack ******

I can buy it. One question lingers, though: who was in Memphis and Phoenix? Person B?

Someone whose job afford's them the opportunity to travel? Just a guess.