Out of the two versions, I like the first version a LOT more, because it wasn't your normal interview/talk show format.

I think you should all know that these aren't "average men" (a writer, a blogger, and a professor? Wheere's the car mechanic? The teacher? The computer programmer?). While we may have some of the same conversations, average men aren't nearly as eloquent or intellectual as these guys at "the barbershop" are.

To be honest, this isn't much different than morning conversations in my office. The only thing that was missing was talking about this week's episode of "24". I don't hate it, but I don't really love it either.

Sent by Scott K | 2:19 PM ET | 03-01-2007

The first version without Michel was much looser and funnier. They also covered fewer topics because they riffed on the ones they did cover for longer. I am curious as to which version was recorded first. I don't think an all-male roundtable needs to be a part of this podcast more often than once a month. There are plenty of all-male podcasts and talk radio shows already.

Sent by ileen | 3:06 PM ET | 03-01-2007

I'm not sure if I dig this idea, but it doesn't bother me.

As both Scott and ileen have mentioned, why can't I enjoy such a conversation in my own life? How can NPR offer something different from my water cooler moments or what I can hear elsewhere?

Further, as Scott touches upon, why not include normal blokes in these segments? All of these panelists are accomplished media commentators.

I prefer the second version when Michel moderated the discussion. The first version lacked context about the various talking points, and Michel put the topics into context as moderator of the second version.

Sent by Steve Petersen | 3:30 PM ET | 03-01-2007

Ileen - the first version was definitely "looser" than the second. As a man, I know we tend to perk up a bit and polish ourselves when a woman enters the room, regardless of her being an accomplished radio host. ;-)

A note to Scott - we definitely plan to experiment with this more...with the "average Joe's" so to speak. We might eventually try taking the concept to an actual barbershop and record the patrons there to see how much different (with language suitable for broadcast) that dynamic would be.

Keep the comments coming...

Sent by Lee with Rough Cuts | 3:39 PM ET | 03-01-2007

I loved the In the Barbershop segment!!! As a black women all my life I've had an occassion to sit in a barbershop and hear black men "set the world right", first while my father and brother were in the chair and now with my husband and son. I sit quietly back and listen with relish to their views and opinions states most often with passion and humor and their own style. And I smile and sometimes roll my eyes a bit but there is a twinkle in them and love black men collectively most in those times. Version one of the show was most true to that experience. I absolutely loved it!!!

Sent by Sharon Ferguson-Quick | 3:50 PM ET | 03-01-2007

Yeah, Michel. The Barbershop segment was funny, entertaining, and a nice break for N&N Roundtable. Too funny. Go SISTA! Keep that format, I think it will prove a winner.

Sent by Michael | 4:10 PM ET | 03-01-2007

Michel,
I liked both segments, although I do agree that there probably needs to be more of a mix of guests. I prefered the segment with just the guys. I think men tend to speak a little more freely when there isn't a woman present.

Keep up the good work. I'll be listening in.
;-)

Sent by Ivan Guillory | 4:25 PM ET | 03-01-2007

Michel,

Thank you so much for eliciting and airing the opinions of LEARNED black men. Just this morning I sadly listened to a mainstream radio voice tear into our culture by airing some of our less enlighted cultural voices. This segment was a deep breath of very fresh air.

The moderated second of your segments was far better. The first, while more stylish, lacked the impact of the second because the gentlemen engaged each other more than the topic.

Please consider adding a conservative voice to balance the panel. One does not imagine black men are a liberal leaning monolith. Think a sharp, young Colin Powell/J.C. Watts/T.D. Jakes.

Thanks again for your great work. I am much encouraged today.

Sent by Edward | 4:29 PM ET | 03-01-2007

to Scott--we should have talked about 24! why didn't I think of that? maybe because 24 makes my stomach churn? could that be a reason? another reason I should stay OUT of the barbershop? Hmmmmm

Sent by Michel Martin and the rough cuts team | 4:44 PM ET | 03-01-2007

I liked the first version better because the conversations seemed to have a more natural flow. I think there are plenty of group conversations in the media, but I think most of them have moderators.

Sent by Tina C. | 5:00 PM ET | 03-01-2007

the first one was my clear fave. the men were younger and seemed more genuinely enthusiastic about not so much sounding like know-it-alls but hammering out ideas at least. and there's a certain fearlessness in that. and I LIKED the spread of personalities. I don't know that I need an actual barber in the there for it to be more REAL for me.

Sent by Vincent | 6:25 PM ET | 03-01-2007

Yeah, Michel. The Barbershop segment was funny, entertaining, and a nice break to you.

Sent by kim.more | 11:07 PM ET | 03-01-2007

I enjoyed both segments, right up to the pushing about the Oscars. Right there, it became a woman pushing the men, not the men talking. Did THEY bring up the Oscars? Heck no. (It's not my industry awards -- why would I think twice about it??)

Also, I found that this was MUCH less about being "men" than about being "black", again, especially in the second segment. The men were repeatedly pushed about why they weren't watching or supporting other black men. (Note that in the first segment, they talked about the politics that affect everyone, noting, but not dwelling overly, on Barak Obama's half-black half-white race. BTW: How come nobody's calling him half-caucasian-American?)

Don't bill this as MEN TALK unless it gets more diverse.

Sent by Bill Spencer | 12:02 AM ET | 03-02-2007

Michel, I've listened to several of your podcasts and what i like is that they come from a different direction from other content. I really like the title of Rough Cuts because it tells me that it will be unfiltered and not sanitized and watered down. I may not find every podcast engaging, but the ones I like I find really interesting.

So about the Barbershop podcast, that's one of the ones that got me. When and where I grew up we didn't have a barbershop. We had a corner. And listening to those guys in the first segment gave me that same feeling of being on that corner with my guy friends.

I don't know what your plans are for Barbershop, and no disrespect to your moderating abilities, but the first version has my vote.

Sent by 93RR0@2UL | 1:17 AM ET | 03-02-2007

"Behind the Curtain" is a great name if you haven't chosen one yet!!!

Sent by Tessa | 7:23 AM ET | 03-02-2007

I'm not interested in having women define men. We've had that for 30+ years and it's always been insulting; maybe some female will wake up about how the golden rule works, but this isn't one of them.

Sent by Okay Fine | 9:37 AM ET | 03-02-2007

Michel, I've enjoyed reading this blog and listening to the segments from the jump, but I must say this was my absolute favorite!!! As a 20-something black woman without brothers or a strong father figure I've always wanted to know what they talk about. I've quizzed my fiance a few times, but he doesn't give me the goods (I feel like he filters out the real "locker room" or "barbershop", and is a little reluctant to bare it all - its man talk!). I definitely think when you leave them to themselves, their true colors come flying out. Although I think you bring a great angle to the conversation, I prefer you let them have it on their own. They seem to be a lot looser, as previous posters have noted. I also think by leaving them to themselves, we listeners get that "fly on the wall" experience our culture seems to crave. I think going to an actual barbershop and just letting the tape roll would be wonderful. It's fresh and so different from other NPR programs. Loved it, loved it, loved it!

And keep up the excellent work! I can't wait until this show is a regular feature on the radio. You guys are doing ground-breaking, out-of-the-box, exciting radio. I can't say enough good things about your program. I'm anxiously waiting! Don't keep me in suspense too long! Oh, and I like the Rough Cuts title too. Maybe that should remain the show's title. It does have the natural and unhindered connotation that a previous poster mentioned. Keep up the excellent work!

Sent by Tameika Jackson | 10:24 AM ET | 03-02-2007

I really liked this show & Michel I have enjoyed your work for a while now.

Ok, I liked both ways of doing this without you being in the Barbershop & just listening in. I think on the whole I preferred you being there. I liked how you were able to call on some of the things they said & I dont think it limited their responses. You asked some follow up on their opinions that kept things a little more focused on the topic at hand.

But how you do this I think depends on if you are primarily interested in seeing how men talk to each other without females present or in what they have to say about any given topic. Either way it was fun & illuminating.

Please keep going & put this sucker on the air.

Sent by Michael | 12:06 PM ET | 03-02-2007

I liked the first version better, and the guys are great. Need more "normal" guys though. And hey, when I'm with guy friends, in addition to current events, we talk a lot about our kids; their stories, successes, challenges, and all the day-to-day stuff that parents of kids share. None of my women friends believe this, by the way. Oh yeah, and we talk a lot about women.

Sent by Dan B. | 1:02 PM ET | 03-02-2007

I agree that the first segment was a more free discussion. I really prefer this format. It really is informative entertainment. I strongly recommend that this be a regular feature.

Sent by Carol | 1:50 PM ET | 03-02-2007

i personally liked both segments for different reasons.
1st segment was loose and free flowing
2nd segment was more organized and easy to follow.
it is so candid and real, by the way, people are people..whether they are professors, bloggers, or TV personalities...we all have opinions
this show is great, i cant wait for it to be released to the public

one suggestion, maybe there can be a black youth roundtable feature, or maybe one that is focused on young adults divided by gender

Sent by Treese | 2:07 PM ET | 03-02-2007

One thing struck me about the conversation that the men were having about the Obama/Clinton discussion in the first segment. The man referred to women candidates past and present left out Carole Mosely Braun, Shirley Chisolm and Elizabeth Dole. I'd love to know why the guys think that happened.

Sent by Kim Pearson | 2:25 PM ET | 03-02-2007

I enjoyed the first version of the Barbershop feature more than the second. I felt that without a moderator, the conversation felt a bit more natural and the men seemed more relaxed. Is the plan to include these same men in each segment or will there be a rotating panel? I agree with other posters who said they'd like to hear blue-collar (i.e., regular Joe)moderators along with the ones who were on this program. I will definitely tune in!

Sent by Rachel | 2:40 PM ET | 03-02-2007

I enjoyed the first version more, but I got a deeper sense for how the men felt/thought about issues in the second version.

I'll keep tuning in to see which format continues.

Sent by Tisha T | 3:23 PM ET | 03-02-2007

It works better when you are in the barbershop with the guys. Seems to guide the conversation more nad you ask the right questions. CPlease answer this question? What is supposed to set Rough Cuts apart from the other programs on NPR? It seems to me that it is just like any other program on NPR. a group of people who get together and talk about the subjects of the day....why not have them focus on specific subjects;giving youth advice on how to better themselves, giving others info on how to reach their goals, stay focused in life..etc... If men are going ot sit around and talk why not make it a time that would be prosperous for the listeners. We hear enough about the lives of those in Hollywood and the sports world. Give us something that is useful and will enable us and empower.

Sent by Suzanne Quarles | 4:08 PM ET | 03-02-2007

A great ideal,I like the first version better,more give and take

Sent by tootsie | 4:56 PM ET | 03-02-2007

I prefer the first segment - it was much more a conversation amongst the men than an interview. What are you going for in this segment? "Barbeshop" talk or a roundtable? I think it would be interesting to go into different barbershops each segment.

Sent by Lea | 9:19 PM ET | 03-02-2007

I prefer the first version. It doesn't have anything to do with gender, it's just that the unmoderated format is less common, less conventional, feels less hidebound.
Having panelists who are more broadly representative, as some have suggested, seems like a good idea, but it might risk the pace & focus of the show . . . or take it to an engaging new level. Why not try it? You can always fall back.

Sent by James Frazier | 2:39 AM ET | 03-03-2007

The second version was dead compared to the first -- just another talk/interview show. Also, the interviewer interjected her own political views into the discussion -"we all feel this way, don't we?" kind of thing. We do?

Sent by Michele | 7:07 AM ET | 03-03-2007

I liked the first piece better than the second, but I cringed when Anna Nicole came up and the Oscars - it felt forced. I think the script guide needs to be changed - more open to issues that the panelists actually want to cover.

Sent by Ariel | 1:11 PM ET | 03-03-2007

I liked the first version, which was funny, entertaining, and felt more like a real conversation. I appreciated hearing a radio broadcast of the conversational interplay between smart black men.

Sent by Naomi | 5:21 PM ET | 03-03-2007

I applaud your focus on the opinions of men but aren't these guys just slight variations on what already fills the airwaves whether it be TV talking heads or radio sports/jock chat? They were both pretty good but I enjoyed the first one more, it was more amateurish but seemed more natural. Michel seemed to loosen up a bit in the second one (compared to her on air personality for the other RoughCuts I've listened to). You (Michel) may need to loosen up a bit. NPR thinks they're so hip but it can really be a bit stodgy. Good to hear natural voices though.

Sent by John | 6:01 PM ET | 03-03-2007

This sounds like for guys who all vote the same way complaining alot. This is boring.
Why not complain less and have someone intellegent who isnt a democrat. Regardless of party affiliation, it is always dull to hear a one sided whine session. Where is Ray Swarez when you need him?

Sent by J | 7:06 PM ET | 03-03-2007

Please please don't inflict the lashing-out opinion show that we see on TV onto NPR. This is exactly why I don't watch TV but listen to NPR. For real, intimate conversations one-on-one that achieve something in a short amount of time, not hurried opinions that aren't given time to be fleshed out.

Sent by Abby in Brooklyn | 10:56 PM ET | 03-03-2007

Version One, Version One, Version One. The second sounded like a woman breaking into the men's poker game.

Sent by Anne | 3:11 AM ET | 03-04-2007

There are still not many instances on radio or television to hear black men kicking back and rapping--intelligently--about current events. That said, I delighted in listening to both segments. The first, however, was more true to the real-life barbershop experience. I grew up with my Dad and four brothers and now have six beautiful nephews. In both earlier and recent years, I have had more than a few opportunities to visit the barbershop. Once while I was there waiting on my nephew, the conversation began to include a bit of--let's say "rough verbage." I noticed a quick head motion of one barber as he spoke to a customer and said "Hey, hey we're in mixed company." Clearly this was a reference to my presence as the only woman in the shop at the time and a reminder to the brother to be respectful and clean up his dialogue. My point here is that it will NEVER be a true barbershop experience with a woman in the room. If you want to moderate then please--call the show something else. Oh, and true to real life---every brother in the shop is not as intelligent as your panel. You should probably diversify. Have you thought about sending a brother (sorry, Michel) out to a few real barbershops? Of course, you may incur a need for a large amount of editing once back in the studio. And, what about the Black women talking at the beauty shops? There is research in the scholarly literature that looks at the way in which these places serve as what is called a street-level 'information commons' in academe.

Sent by unrama@yahoo.com | 6:59 AM ET | 03-04-2007

When I think of barbershop talk, I think of regular guys, talking informally about whatever's on their minds - friends, family, women, the fan belt that needs replacing, etc. The word implies that they see each other regularly, and that an air of intimacy has developed between them.

The show, however, felt like professional commentators thrown together to give editorials. They didn't speak naturally as if they were relaxing in a barbershop; instead, they spoke almost without pause about national interests. That's fine, but I don't think it can be advertised as barbershop talk.

Also, if the show is so heavily focused on blacks, why don't you say it, either in the title, or at least the introduction?

Sent by db | 7:53 AM ET | 03-04-2007

I liked version one. Please don't use more "normal" guys, though--have you ever listened to that call-in show sports all night or whatever it's called? I found the unadulterated barbershop quartet witty, sharp, and entertaining. And I think radio commentators, like politicians, should be chosen because they have MORE to offer than the average joe.

Sent by Karen | 1:18 PM ET | 03-04-2007

Really enjoyed both segments. Listening to the first one reminded me of spending time hanging with my closest friend while his wife is out of the house. We talk about all kinds of things in a way that we don't when his wife is there. It's all male energy though not necessarily machismo. Now when his wife is there that's nice too, just different and I like both energies.

If I had to choose between the two segments I'd pick the first because it's so rare to have a group of men talking on the radio, particularly black men. Your presence, Michel, changed the dynamic (sort of like observation changing the very thing observed in science), but it was still good. Feels like more topics were covered in the 2nd segment.

Once a week seems like a little much. Once every two weeks - just like the frequency of haircuts - seems like it'd be just right. I'm also all for mixing up the ethnic make up of the "Barbershops" though you gotta love black men for having a conversation that includes both the word "agog" and the phrase "step off." I'm not sure where else in the world you're likely to get that.

Of course, one of the main things men talk about in the absence of women IS women and there wasn't a whole lot of that, but that might have gotten a little too racy anyway.

Sent by Stanley | 1:19 PM ET | 03-04-2007

I liked the first version much better. I think a more diverse group of guys is needed. I would listen to this program and really hope it gets picked up.

Sent by Brenda | 2:53 PM ET | 03-04-2007

I have been listing to rough cuts for about a month and am looking forward to the program once it airs. I liked the segment and thought the one moderated by Mrs. Martin was the best. While I understand the need to use the barbershop metaphor it is a bit of a reach. The segment is not much different than the round table segment on News and Notes.

From what I have heard this program will become another of the NPR family that I am addicted.

Sent by Albert Barnett | 5:31 PM ET | 03-04-2007

Great segment idea! The all-guy format works better. I wasn't bothered by the prominence of the participants; I think it's good for people, especially young men, to hear good conversation.

Sent by Ollie J. | 8:13 PM ET | 03-04-2007

I really liked this segment--it was my favorites of all the episodes I've listened too. I liked the first version better because it had that great feel of evesdropping on a conversation with people who talk/write/critique politics and culture for a living--so it seems deceptively like "ordinary talk" but really, it is so much smarter. These kind of podcasts (like the Slate gabfest) are a great use of the podcast medium because you get the informality of ordinary conversation but at an elevated level (unlike typical conversations, the ones around my own dinner table included.) By contrast, some of the previous episodes were informal and conversational, but didn't have that spark of brilliance that comes when you use professional journalists/commentators. And the fact that this show was made up entirely of pundits who were black men made it that much more interesting, because really, that is so rare in mainstream media. (I am a white woman and in the media channels I receive, it is always the same old people.)

Sent by Diana | 10:07 PM ET | 03-04-2007

BEST "RoughCuts" yet.

Continue with the "Barbershop" format and you can even match the "Rough Cuts" title.

Sent by BillF | 8:38 AM ET | 03-05-2007

I strongly preferred the first option. It felt like I was a fly on the wall and the overall energy and flow seemed more natural and less of a typical radio format.

Sent by Kendra Anderson | 10:46 AM ET | 03-05-2007

I like the whole Roughcuts show. It's my favorite podcast. I really enjoyed the format of Buzz, Buzz, Buzz...'s first segment for its less rigid structure.

Sent by MLG | 11:36 AM ET | 03-05-2007

Regarding the Barber Shop segment: I think both versions are important to air. I am a teacher for 4th and 5th graders in an inner city school in California. Our Afro-American students are not "closing the gap" and I think this segment suggest one reason why. The gentlemen in the piece demonstrated they could "be street" in their own conversation and erudite when you moderated while being thoughtful and insightful in both formats. My students just dont get the erudite modeling whether at home or in the media leading subsequently to the Obama racial indentification being an issue. They need to be willing to see the value of academic and professional communication expectations.

Sent by Mason | 12:42 PM ET | 03-05-2007

I liked the first version a lot better. It seemed the men were more comfortable and funnier, and seemed to spend LESS time talking about sports. :) I disagree with other commenters that more average people should be used. I liked hearing from educated, articulate people....this is NPR, after all! Keep up the good work, out of all of the rough cuts stories I've heard so far, this is my favorite.

Sent by Samantha | 1:30 AM ET | 03-06-2007

I enjoyed both versions, but I have to say that on an entertainment level, the first version was a lot more fun. The second version became more formal, and more like every other interview segment out there. Decide ahead of time what topics to cover, then let them lose.

Sent by Lianne | 8:10 AM ET | 03-06-2007

I thoroughly enjoyed both versions of the Barbershop and generally agree with what has been said about the looser, free wheeling nature of the first version without Michel. However, I believe the second version worked better as a product than the first version. I would listen to either and enjoy it but the guys did tend to ramble on a bit without someone directing them --ever so gently--to the next topic. Michel Martin is masterful in her ability to give a light touch to a program that required just that. The guys are to be commended for not pulling their punches in the segment when she joined in. The second version was tighter but did not lose its authenticity. Congratulations on a project that is long overdue.

Sent by Ernest Hopkins | 2:50 PM ET | 03-06-2007

I thought this was the best of the bunch. Especially if you want to attract new listeners. I actually thought it was great to do both approaches.

Sent by James Gagnon | 1:28 PM ET | 03-07-2007

I liked the first one best, but thought it would have been improved if there was a little more of the moderator role taken on by one of the men--a sense that someone was guiding the ship. A good model for this is Slate's GabFest each Friday, in which John Dickerson usually plays the role of host, moving through three clear topics and a final "cocktail chatter" segment. That sense of structure, which never varies, helps an ensemble type of discussion, I think, because I like knowing the conversation will be very freewheeling but still have some boundaries.
As a white guy, I appreciated the chance to listen in on a group of black men, both for the content and for the colorful rhythms of the conversation.
One last thing: I love the experimental nature of this podcast and hope you don't abandon it when the show goes "live" on NPR. It would be terrific if this continued as a real podcast, with radio listeners given a chance to overhear the fun, instead of the radio tail wagging the big new dog of true podcasting.

Sent by Len | 1:39 PM ET | 03-07-2007

I like the first version, it is much more like what I would expect a barber-shop conversation to be like. Is Rough Cuts intended to focus on the black point-of-view? Or is that just the way it has worked out so far? As a Canadian listener I find it interesting to hear content about/by black Americans that is different than what I am exposed to on TV, and in music. If this is intended to be more of a black show then why isn't that stated in the show notes?

Sent by Canadensis | 1:47 PM ET | 03-07-2007

I liked the first version better!! The first version was more entertaining and relaxed than what you normally hear on NPR.

Sent by Zep | 10:58 AM ET | 03-08-2007

I liked it a lot. What a bright, articulate, funny group of guys.The first version is great.

Sent by Harry Curtis | 1:56 PM ET | 03-08-2007

I loved both versions, but the second seemed easier to follow. Which ever format you follow, keep this feature!

Sent by Lee | 2:17 PM ET | 03-08-2007

Hello Michel,
I loved the flow of the first podcast without your input, but I have to say that there seemed to be more meat to the second one. maybe the guys need a lady to keep them on task!

Sent by Lyre | 5:24 PM ET | 03-08-2007

There were redeeming factors to both styles.
The first suffered as it seemed like the guys were face to face, thererfore someone had to basically be the mediator and ask someone to talk.
The second was the old interviewer/interviewee format which is what it would seem 'Rough Cuts' is trying to get away from.
Please continue to find that edge that other magazine type porograms don't have.

Sent by Bob Banister | 5:43 PM ET | 03-08-2007

It is a great idea, but articulate? Hardly. I started listening to the first version and was enjoying the give and take of the conversations but then found myself becoming slightly annoyed by ???You know???? after ???You know???? after ???You know???? What started as an annoyance soon became an assault on my hearing and I just stopped listening before I got to the end. Would you like a challenge? Try to count the number of times they use this meaningless phrase. It can???t be done.

Sent by Mel Dixon | 7:07 AM ET | 03-12-2007

Hi Michel,
I really liked this ssegment. I always like to hear black men talk about what's going on. I agree with Scott K.There could have been a little nore diversity in the participants. Where are the teachers, cae mechanics and computer programmer?

Sent by Mallari | 10:26 AM ET | 03-12-2007

Enjoyed the first version (guys only). I'd love to hear these guys once a week.

Sent by Lorraine | 12:02 AM ET | 03-13-2007

The barbershop segment (especially the first version) was my favorite Rough Cuts so far. I think my husband will really enjoy it too. This is a show I would make an effort to catch each week, and/or to download the podcast.

Sent by ER | 11:46 AM ET | 03-13-2007

I really liked this edition. I enjoy going to the real barbershop every (or every other) weekend. I have some of the best laughs of my week while there. I enjoyed the first version, or the guys' version, because it seemed to flow in the real life "stream of consciousness" way. Less structured and kind of going from one topic to the next more fluidly.

I have your segment bookmarked and visit it daily, looking for new pieces. Great stuff. Keep it coming.

Sent by Cordell | 1:18 PM ET | 03-14-2007

I've been listening and enjoying all of the Rough Cuts segments so far, but this was the one that got me to actually come to the NPR website to write in, so I would take that as a good sign. As much as I love Ms. Martin, I preferred version 1. It was some fun eavesdropping for me, as a woman who always wonders what men talk about when not in mixed company.

Sent by a | 5:06 PM ET | 03-14-2007

Congratulations on the show and the blog: you're about to give birth to a miracle radio child.

Just wanted to pick up on the brother who signified that Eddie Murphy should NOT be permitted an oscar the week after he came out in yet another fat suit in "Norbit"
It ought to be a verb: Norbit--to shamelessly set back the race, for money.
I'd love to hear some more talk about this, as it approaches $100 million at the B/O.
(And, yes, I just blogged on it at The American Race (www.theamericanrace.typepad.com) )

Again, I think you're doing an amazing job!

Sent by Leon Wynter | 3:36 PM ET | 03-28-2007

The first one is definitely superior. It was funny, fresh, and compelling. And we need to hear these guys voices--without their being a female in the room. And PLEASE don't bring in what folks are calling the "ordinary" Joe. As someone said, we hear that all the time when they call in--and it's deadly. These guys are smart and edgy: we don't hear these black male voices anywhere. Give them to us in Rough Cuts weekly!

Sent by AC | 8:56 PM ET | 03-28-2007