You're Soaking in it

I watched at the time, and I recall it being pretty quick... days or weeks in between. It was when the Clay-is-Alex charade really began to unravel.

I loved Date with an Angel... it's just so perfectly 80's fun, and the soundtrack is sweet. Also loved her in Mission Impossible.

Christine Tucci (ex-Amanda, AW) is sister to Stanley Tucci. Robin Strasser is the ex-wife of / mother of two sons with Laurence Luckinbill, husband of Lucie Arnaz. Their sons were still very young when he remarried, and essentially treated as grandsons by Lucille Ball as they grew up. Thad Luckinbill (Y&R) is distantly related to Laurence & family. Carrington Garland (Kelly, Santa Barbara) is the daughter of Beverly Garland. Schuyler Grant (ex-Camille Hawkins, AMC) is the great niece of Katherine Hepburn.

Everyone knows that's not true! Diller's daughter is Robin Strasser.

Sorry for the confusion - it was sarcasm.

Everything Paul has said on this this thread has been verified.

Mid-1987 is when O'Shea left, but Schnessel was still on the same story trajectory. The WGA strike the following year, where it seemed as if the entire show was stuck in 1888 time travel forever, seemed to throw things off a bit. No, she was back on Ryan's Hope by this time.

I think it's really more a negotiation tactic. Just like with AW & JB, when they start leaking names of other actresses, suddenly everything resolves... BTW, there was a rumor, totally unfounded, that they were going to ask Lisa Rinna to step in, lol...

Great casting, Khan! She was one of the top considered for recast B&B's Taylor back in 02 when they couldn't reach an agreement with Tylo. Of course, it blew over and Tylo came back... which I was kind of bummed about. I would have loved to see her take on that.

I haven't seen that. Please say it again or even explain it better, so that everyone can understand: There's clearly a problem rapidly developing between you and many others here. What do you think the problem is?

Reconsider what? It isn't my behavior that's alienating more and more people. There's clearly a problem rapidly developing between you and many others here. What do you think the problem is?

Donna, Khan is frustrated with you. Lots of people are. Your disappointment in someone doesn't deflect your responsibility for causing disruption. When a bunch of people are feeling the same thing about someone, the one thing that's in common, is THAT someone. You are responsible for everything you write. But you are engaging in a revolving cycle. You are going in circles 1) Making "mistakes" that you say you're learning from 2) Receiving people's frustration that they post on the board 3) and this is what varies (a) You debate them (b) You ask for further explanation, sometimes repeatedly (c) You change the focus to someone calling you a name or saying something that you feel is insulting Whenever you choose "C," you give yourself a pass - like now it doesn't matter that people are upset with you. 4) You go back to repeating step 1. You've walked into a community of people talking cooperatively, and then you basically pulled out a loudspeaker, start reading encyclopedia passages, lit fireworks, released a coup of chickens.... Typically people have two ears and one mouth - we should all listen with twice as much time & effort, as what we put into talking. I gave you yesterday what I thought was really good advice, and you're not really receiving it. If there's another diagnosis apart from Parkinsons that is more cognitive or behavioral in nature, I believe people here would be sensitive to that. But your actions are off the wall, and frankly sometimes upsetting to others. Like the rest of us humans, you have to adapt to what is happening around you. Society in general doesn't, and neither does a message board community, make accommodations for social disruption in their environments.

I was unaware of the Parkinsons until yesterday. As I'm sure I don't need to tell you, Khan, or anyone, Parkinsons does not directly relate to cognitive or mental behavioral issues. Side note - Don't think I've ever brought this up here: Two of the three careers in my lifetime: writing, and behavioral intervention therapy - basically that means identifying & targeting socially maladaptive actions, and creating a plan to teach more socially functional replacement behaviors. I think I tend to subconsciously analyze any communication that's difficult. But nothing on this board has ever pressed my behaviorist button like this has.

That's not him... Here you go, I found something: https://www.betterbalancefinancial.com/about.html

He lives in Tampa now, I believe he works in the Home Finance & Insurance industry.

I showed you how it is not appropriate for here. It is soap-related, and it's a non-soap-related, music & movies, section of the community. So to answer your question, no, it isn't. And as far as gobbling up space, I'm saying that much of your content - and you post a lot of it in a short amount of time - seems to come out of left field. It's not all of it - sometimes you do engage, and that's good. But when that out-of-left-field stuff happens (i.e. your first post in this discussion, above), it's a lot of content and it's overwhelming, It may come from your enthusiasm. I don't know what motivates it. All I know is, when I read through this board for the past few weeks, I'm now preparing myself at every turn for your comments - often several consecutive. It appears others are feeling that way, too. I'm suggesting that you take a moment to dial it back, and try to read what's happening, and be a part of it. To put it as if it were a real world conversation: ENGAGE in the discussion, avoid talking over it. There's nothing to prove. Just add to the quality of the conversation by both listening, then talking in response, and so-on... I'm honestly trying to help you here. Thanks for considering it.

"Non-Soap Related" > "Music & Movies" But please try to also consider the other parts of what I said... Don't just gobble up empty board space like we're playing Reverse-PacMan. It's a lot. Example - If someone points out to you that your comments don't fit the discussion you're in, that's not a reason in itself to try to post yet another comment. More doesn't mean better.

@Donna B This is where you are at right now: Home > Non-Soap Related > Music & Movies > What Are You Listening To? It's at the top of every page. It's also part of reading the room - participate in what you see happening. Join it, don't saturate or turn it upside down. This is just my advice; trying to give you constructive feedback.

Yes. Also: WTF? Anyway... back to regular programming:

Vice-versa. Agnes Nixon had some kind of partnership deal with ABC - hence the "(c) Dramatic Creations, Inc." at the end of Loving's credit crawl, instead of "the American Broadcasting Company" you'd see on the other 4 soaps.

That definitely would have worked, Khan! Funny thing, when AMC recast Liza initially (then "un-cast) with Beth Ehlers, I thought they chose the wrong GL-Beth. Chamberlin would have made a much better Liza than Ehlers.

Elaine Princi (OLTL's Dorian, 1989-1993) now teaches specialized programs - Language Arts, Writing, History - for 5th graders at a charter school in the San Fernando Valley / Los Angeles area.

What are you saying?? There is no way he is Frank Sinatra's son! Yes, those EYES... That's how he most resembles Allen: (l'm sorry for the sarcasm.... I couldn't hold back on this one, lol.)

The post you're responding to is from 9 years ago, but I'm gonna take a stab in the dark that DRW50 meant Kelly Rutherford - who played Megan on Melrose Place (and Sam on Generations). Buchanan was in re-negotiation in 1994. AW was negotiating right back, holding auditions for her recast and making overtures to people like Karen Witter - who'd just left OLTL as Tina, as well as Grace Phillips - who had replaced Buchanan on OLTL as Sarah two years earlier (ouch). Of course, Anne Heche's name was tossed around, too. Obviously, JB & AW came to an agreement and she was back on-air. Three years later, re-negotiations would happen again, and AW took a big step further by simply temp-recasting Vicky with Cynthia Watros (double-ouch). As for Ellen Wheeler, she actually screen tested the role(s) in 1991, and they chose JB over her. At this time, they just weren't interested in going back to her.

To add some context, ABC was going after ED right before Gottlieb & Malone came on. Max was still Nicholas Walker (sigh), strangely paired with Yasmine Bleeth's Leeann. That would have put Eileen co-starring with her real life ex-BF. I wonder, if she had happened on OLTL, if Blair might have been rendered unnecessary at that time. With Kin, he "tested" with Robin, who of course really wanted him to come on - but that test was really for him, to get a feel of Pierce and what he's be taking on. One of the things he sort of jokingly (but maybe he meant it?) griped about was the intense dialog. Remember around this time, scenes were really being written with the character layer-shedding in mind. What Kin read with Robin was an emotional scene in the cabin that ultimately aired with James Fitzpatrick, where he pretty much delivered a monologue. Still good, but would have been far more awesome with Shriner.