Register on the forum now to remove ALL ads + popups + get access to tons of hidden content for members only!
vintage erotica forum vintage erotica forum vintage erotica forum
vintage erotica forum

Go Back   Vintage Erotica Forums > Classic Models > Softcore Models > Softcore Models Discussion

Follow Vintage Erotica Forum on Twitter
Best Porn Sites Meet Our Girls Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices
Softcore Models Discussion For all chat and discussions on Vintage Models


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-07-2013, 04:20 PM   #21
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default Repairs

I looked through Karen's thread briefly yesterday and found the same problems, Marialva, and sometimes it's impossible to tell which picture is missing, because the BB code failed as well as the storage site. It will take some time to fix. Maybe a group effort? Collectively, we must have every scan or variant of Karen that has appeared. I hope the moderators will work with us. It makes no sense to post all of the lost photos as strays, when some were part of sets (like the post 51 set of Karen's full size layout scans) or layouts.

Of course, I'd be happier to have new photos and more hi-res scans of Karen, but we must be thankful for what PB has given us. Before the electronic era, I had thought we'd just have to be content with the magazine layouts. To have so much more for Karen, great!

I'm thinking of writing a note on how beautifully Karen's face conveys her emotions. It's amazing, however, how small most of Karen scans end up if you focus only on her face, as I'm trying to do. It's amazing how inadequate the 720 x 480 scans look these days. Please PB, help us out!

Last edited by cqnew1648; 08-07-2013 at 04:29 PM..
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to cqnew1648 For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2013, 05:04 PM   #22
Eteocles
Junior Member
 
Eteocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1
Thanks: 1
Thanked 26 Times in 1 Post
Eteocles 100+Eteocles 100+
Default more karenariana

When she was contacted along with all the other former playmates in preparation for the Playmate Book in 1996 she was only quoted as responding that "that was then, this is now." OK, can't read too much into that, it had been fifteen years after all since she had been in Playboy, but cumulatively one does get the impression that her experience with the magazine was not satisfying. Others have commented on the fact that it was her father that pushed her to pose; besides suggesting a certain reluctance on Karen's part, it seems to me that most father's instincts would be to steer their little girls away from Playboy and keep nude photos of them out of the hands of the other members of their bowling league. But let that pass. If he got her in there, we owe him a debt of gratitude. It's Hef, I think, that soured her on the experience. She was in the January issue, which is no guarantee of being PM of the year of course, but I was in college when the issue came out and even the girls in the dorm had to check this creature out. Tastes differ, you can quote me, but I bet most polls would place her among the top five PM's ever. Add to which, both she and her fans were virtually assured she had PMOY wrapped up by written copy accompanying her photo in the end of the year review—something like she was looking forward to being the first girl from her hometown to be so honored. But, although I'm sure he took a shot, Hef, as it happened, wasn't sharing his bed with Karen but with a cheap chorus girl we know as Shannon Tweed, later to marry that ghastly clown what's his name from Kiss whose talent seems limited to impersonating a snake. This was around the time Tweed started with the collagen treatments, acquired tits that could only have been paid for with a coupon, and began appearing in White Cargo and other movie garbage. Well, PMOY honors didn't always go to Hef's current piece—only when she insisted on it, which she did. Karen was not only robbed, but humiliated by having words put in her mouth in an early 1982 issue to the effect that she no longer expected to win, because "the competition is too strong this year." Well, 1981 was a relatively good year, but even Patricia Farinelli—imho—would have been a disappointing consolation prize, Karen was clearly the class of the field. OK, it's speculation, but a lot of readers were hacked off, it's only reasonable to suspect Karen was a little miffed too. Others here have commented on her dislike of the promotional work she was obliged to do for the magazine in the ensuing months; apparently she had no taste for Mansion life, either, somehow I can't see her being chatted up by the likes of James Caan or kicking it naked in the grotto.
I'm not breast obsessed, they're sublime, OK, but her favorite feature for me is her enchanting, somewhat off-kilter smile. And how carefully she's coiffed at Glamourcon (or one of those other autograph affairs)—compared, say, with Lynda Wiesmeier's messy mop. (Sorry, Lynda, it was 70's hair, I know, not your fault.) Too bad we didn't get to see much more of Karen, though—any of her.
Eteocles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 04:18 AM   #23
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default Thoughts about Eteocles’ Thoughts about Karen Price

Thanks, Eteocles, for your thoughts on Karen. I hadn’t thought about Karen’s comments in the December 1981 PM review. As you say, they suggest that she would have been delighted and honored to be POY, despite her rough go as a PM during the first months of 1981 and her second thoughts about posing. I’d like to think she would have accepted and enjoyed the title, knowing as she surely did that she was far and away the favorite of fans like us. It does appear that they broke the news to her by the spring of 1982 that she wouldn’t win, which must have hurt, even if she was relieved not to have to spend an additional year at auto shows and mansion events.

Still, I worry that Karen may have talked her way out of being POY with her candid remarks to the press. I fear that PB took advantage of Karen because she’s smart, articulate, and interesting. They featured her in press interviews and 17 times in the PM’s corner, but may have deep-sixed her as POY for that very reason: because she was too intelligent to toe a party line and too sensitive not to be hurt by the actions of jerks who didn’t appreciate her or the spirit in which she posed. What’s worse, Hef kept punishing Karen for his decision to name his ex-girlfriend POY. Remember the PB special edition celebrating the 100 top PMs of the first 50 years? Karen was in there—in 55th place. That’s worse than a joke—it was an attempt to create space between her and Hef’s ex-girlfriend. When fans vote, Karen is always in the top five, and often #1.

I wish that every day of Karen’s two-year gig (and of the reign she deserved as POY) could have gone like this one in Canada:



PB should be about fun, flirting, and fantasy. I hope Karen loved being the dream girl of us regular guys (and I hope she still does in some small way). And as Eteocles says, Karen’s smile is her best feature. When she’s smiling, she's impossibly cute!

The sad thing, as Eteocles points out, is that Hef doesn’t always get the point of PB. It’s an odd thing to say about the guy who founded PB, but if Hef had gotten the point, he would have treated Karen right and named her POY. By putting Karen in the company of lechers at the mansion, he demeaned her. And Hef helped make PB irrelevant by failing to appreciate what Karen could have done for PB. America’s ideal of womanhood had changed by 1981, and Karen represented the future. What would it have meant for PB’s future to honor a young woman who was that bright? Let Karen speak her mind, share her thoughts, and be a force to reckon with.

Does Hef realize what he missed when he didn’t honor her with a POY video? What would it have said about PB and its ideal of beauty if he had opened Karen’s video with scenes of her performing acrobatic stunts with friends at Muscle Beach? Or tumbling and somersaulting on the beach? Or performing at the gym on the balance beam, the uneven bars, and the floor routine mat? Why not celebrate Karen’s athleticism? Strength? Daring? That’s what we love about the women we love in real life, so why not let us love that about the women we adore in our fantasies? Hef could have kept PB relevant by championing Karen, but he was stuck in the fifties—a gain for his ex-girlfriend, perhaps, but a loss for Karen, for us, and for PB.

Last edited by cqnew1648; 06-19-2017 at 08:32 PM..
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 05:02 PM   #24
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default What’s best about Karen Price?

I can’t help but agree with Eteocles: what’s most captivating about Karen is her smile. How could you not fall in love with her, whether she’s with her pet squirrel, looking out a window, performing acrobatic stunts, or making small talk at a car show or radio station?








I especially love her photo in the gym. She’s joyful, graceful, and happily giving us a hint of what’s to come—as erotic (and endearing) an opening photo as you’ll ever see in PB.



And now we have a follow-up photo from the gym. Karen's wearing the same wonderful smile, but now she's giving us a preview of what's to come!



What’s amazing to me (and I know I may just be speaking for myself here, but I think not) is that I’m drawn to her face even when Karen is cavorting on the beach or the patio.

[

No woman has ever been blessed with a figure more splendid that Karen’s, but my gaze always turns first and foremost in these photos to the beauty of her face; and what thrills me more than anything else is to see Karen enjoying herself. I read an article recently that speaks to the fact that most regular guys don’t objectify or dehumanize the beautiful women they fantasize about. We see them as very human--out of our league, of course, but as people we do care about, admire, and wish well. That’s certainly the way I feel about Karen, and indeed about every woman whose talent and beauty moves me.

Last edited by cqnew1648; 06-19-2017 at 09:08 PM.. Reason: Added two newly released photos & a comment
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 06:17 PM   #25
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default Congratulations to Karen for the top-rated thread on VEF

It’s wonderful to see that Karen Price is now the top-rated model on VEF’s SC thread. [Click on Softcore Models and sort the threads by “Thread Rating” to see her top-billing.] It’s a great way to celebrate the thirty-second anniversary of Karen’s appearance on newsstands. I know that Karen has left her PB years far behind, but I hope she’ll be happy to know someday how popular she is with PB’s most fervent and sophisticated fans, and take pride in it, as she should. It’s an extraordinary accomplishment to be the fairest of the fair, a testament to her athleticism, hard work, and presence before the camera. Thanks again to Karen for sharing her beauty with us.

VEF fans are stingy when it comes to praise for SC models: only 42 of over 5,738 threads currently receive a “five”—less than 1 percent. But VEF fans haven’t been sparing in their praise of Karen or of other PB models, who occupy most of the top-10 spots. They include Carol Imhof, Kimberly McArthur, Janet Lupo, Bettie Page, Candy Loving, Cynthia Myers, and Donna Edmondson.

Thanks to everyone who rated Karen’s thread a “five.”
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:43 PM   #26
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default First Thoughts about Karen Price in Dear PMs

Like all of Karen’s fans, I’m delighted that she signed up in the fall of 1981 for a two-year stint as a regular contributor to PB’s new monthly feature, Dear PMs. It’s a treat to hear her thoughts and to have so many more pictures of her (albeit small ones). PB clearly knew how special Karen is and what great pictures they still had in the vault. That’s why, I'm sure, they featured her in the first ever Dear PM column and invited her to be a regular. PB ran the column initially with only 7 PMs, and Karen was the only one to appear in every column during the first six months. And PB wasn’t shy about counting on Karen to sell the column and the magazine. In the first issue in which the column ran (October 1981), Karen appeared in the most erotic photo ever to appear in the column (they toned it down after that!), and she appeared in that month’s subscription ad as well.





Karen also appeared in the most playful and seductive picture in the column’s history in February, 1982.





PB’s staff clearly knew Karen was the darling of PB fans: as a friend on VEF put it in a private message, “she has the face of an angel and the body of a fertility goddess!” The Art Department realized that Karen’s shoot by the fireplace was as scorching hot as her brass bed shoot and knew it would be a shame to waste it. And to top it off, Ken Marcus won the Annual Prize in 1981 for the Best Playmate Pictorial for his shoot with Karen.





PB hadn’t yet figured out that we’d pay handsomely for annual review specials to see more of Karen’s photos, but they realized she could “move product.” She could to this day, if they ever figure out a way to profit from what’s in the vault. Karen was so popular that she appeared 17 times during the two years she participated in the column.

We can take heart, then, that the business office, the editorial staff, and the Art Department knew, as we do, who should have been POY. Too bad only one man’s vote counted—and a tainted vote at that. But I know we should be grateful to Hef nonetheless—no Hef, no PB, no Karen!

Last edited by cqnew1648; 09-05-2014 at 02:34 AM..
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 09:46 PM   #27
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default Second thoughts about Karen Price in Dear PMs

Still, it’s puzzling that Karen signed up to do the Dear PMs feature. We’ve spoken on our thread and in private messages about Karen’s mixed feelings about her experiences as a PM and her regrets about posing—feelings she made clear in the spring of 1981 in her early interviews with Canadian papers. Her decision to participate in Dear PMs is all the more surprising given her reservations about being in the spotlight and her discomfort at being treated thoughtlessly by some people as a sex object. Dear PM asked its contributors to be more open and public about their lives and feelings than any other PMs had been asked to do in the past. By the spring of 1981, Karen was so shell-shocked that she moved back in with her mother. But by the fall, she was willing to be quite specific about where we could meet a woman like her, even to the point of naming the most likely time and place, and she made no bones about loving sex, as long as it was with a man she loves and who respects her, cares about her, and treats her as an equal.

For some reason, therefore, Karen decided by the fall of 1981 to embrace the PM experience, even if she was still ill at ease at some of the car shows (maybe she was just bored!). Karen must have felt better about being a PM by the fall of 1981, or she must have decided to make the most of her new-found fame, when she signed on to participate in the Dear PM series. PB opened doors for her, which must have been exciting, given her ambitions. She was featured in “World of Playboy” twice, and we learned from that feature (and from the PM review and her movie credits) that she auditioned successfully for small film roles, that her acrobatic act was going strong, and that she had fun on her Alaskan adventure for PB, which gave her more to do than a car show and allowed her to meet fans in a more natural, co-ed setting. She probably felt more at ease as a PM in the company of both women and men. And she may have learned to cope with the downside of being a PM. I hope so for Karen’s sake. And I hope they paid her well for her Dear PM thoughts.

But on the downside, when we think about Karen feelings during her time with PB, her stint with Dear PMs probably means that she would have accepted the title of POY if it had been offered to her. Indeed, her willingness to participate in Dear PMs probably means that she hoped to win, which means that she was probably disappointed to lose to Hef’s girlfriend—not a great way to lose after having done so much for PB and having proven her worth to the program. She was PB’s most intelligent, articulate, and beautiful voice. And why didn’t they give the Annual Award for Best Playmate Pictorial to Ken and Karen, rather than to Ken alone? After all, he didn’t win the award for the centerfold, which by Karen’s own admission was taken before she learned how to pose. Ken’s centerfold doesn’t capture Karen’s warmth or beauty to the degree that say, Marilyn Lange’s centerfold does. Ken Marcus is a peerless photographer, but he won the prize because Karen was adorable with her squirrel—because she was captivating in the gym—and because she set the set on fire in the bedroom, once she was at ease before the camera. How he could concentrate long enough to snap the shutter is beyond me!





In light of these thoughts, I’ve thought a bit more about Karen’s response when a PB staffer asked her in the January 1982 Annual Review about her chances of becoming POY. She said “The competition is too good this year. Beside, I’ve had a lot of fun just being Miss January.” It could be, as Eteocles suggests, that she answered as she did because she had given up hope of becoming POY. But it’s quite possible she hadn’t. It was a tough question to ask Karen in such a public forum, and her response was understandably modest and considerate of the feelings of the other PMs. She couldn’t possibly have said that she hoped to win or expected to win without looking foolish or arrogant or worse, and she kindly pointed to the merits of the other PMs and deflected attention from herself. What’s most important, I think, is that the staff member asked her that question—a question that wasn’t asked of any other PM in any other annual review in that era. It suggests to me that the interviewer thought Karen had an excellent chance to win—it would have been a cruel question otherwise. And the interviewer probably asked it because he (it’s a guy question!) hoped Karen would win. That’s the only reason I can think of why he would have asked her a question that he shouldn’t have out of consideration for Karen and the other PMs. So again, it seems to me that Karen was the odds-on favorite to be POY, if the staff and the fans had anything to do with it. But of course, we didn’t have anything to do with it. It was one man’s decision. So I feel all the more for Karen. She was robbed—and it must have hurt, even if she had had her fill by then of being a PM.

Karen will probably never chat with us about her experiences as a PM or about her feelings from so many years ago. It could be fun, but then again, it might be depressing for her and for us. I’m glad that Patti Farinelli spoke with her fans and shared her thoughts on a range of subjects. It was fun. But I was horrified to learn that PB dubbed her video. I thought that we were listening to Patti, but in fact we were listening to none other than Shannon Tweed (there’s a very troubling theme developing here!). The truth about how Karen was treated and about why she lost to “that other woman” might be painful for her and for us. But then again, Karen might be heartened to know that she has so many genuine fans, old and new, after all these years. She’s only a few weeks away from a million views on VEF!

Last edited by cqnew1648; 06-28-2014 at 04:48 PM.. Reason: Fixed broken IV link
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2014, 07:29 AM   #28
kwaidan
Member
 
kwaidan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 21
Thanks: 2,832
Thanked 374 Times in 21 Posts
kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+kwaidan 1000+
Default Karens Dear PM answers....

In context to the above discussions, part of me wonders if the entire Dear PM thing was a sham. Pictures of the PM's were used, with text that was made up to further push the 'sexual identity" that comes with being a Playmate. Make any sense?
So, Karen, being a PM, and despite her strong dislike for the entire experience, was at PB's mercy as far as using her pictures for anything they wanted....at one time I thought I read that PM's were under some kind of contract....so maybe her pics were under 'contract' to be used with whatever the mag wanted to use them for....hence a fake text along with it.
I'd like to think she and the other PM's said those "hot" statements....but the smart and cynical part of me thinks they did not....hell...a lot of me thinks that the "quotes' the accompany the pictorials are just as 'fake' as well....
Just my two cents.
kwaidan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to kwaidan For This Useful Post:
Old 02-04-2014, 11:26 PM   #29
spazarino
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 380
Thanks: 117
Thanked 2,723 Times in 348 Posts
spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+spazarino 10000+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwaidan View Post
at one time I thought I read that PM's were under some kind of contract....so maybe her pics were under 'contract' to be used with whatever the mag wanted to use them for....hence a fake text along with it.
I'd like to think she and the other PM's said those "hot" statements....but the smart and cynical part of me thinks they did not....hell...a lot of me thinks that the "quotes' the accompany the pictorials are just as 'fake' as well....
Just my two cents.
I believe the contract is for 2 years (with a straight buyout on the pics themselves....hence why PB still puts shots from 25 years ago in some mags)
spazarino is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to spazarino For This Useful Post:
Old 02-08-2014, 02:43 AM   #30
cqnew1648
Senior Member
 
cqnew1648's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 146
Thanks: 1,829
Thanked 7,371 Times in 155 Posts
cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+cqnew1648 25000+
Default Did Karen and the other PMs featured in Dear PMs write their own answers?

Kwaidan raises a great question: did the PMs featured in the Dear PMs column answer the questions that PB posed, or did PB staffers answer the questions? I hope that we’ll be able to chat with a Dear PMs correspondent some day and learn first-hand how they were recruited and how the column worked. But I’m almost certain they answered the questions themselves. The first reason I think so is that PB featured very few PMs in the column, and it featured a handful of those a dozen times or more. As Alan DeMoss noted in his VEF post on the column, a handful of PMs gave the bulk of the responses (see below, with the PMs who appeared in the first six columns enumerated). Why feature Lorraine Michaels 40 times, and Barbara Edwards and Donna Edmondson only 5 times each? If PB was making up answers, why not feature their POYs? Why go to the trouble to make up copy for Lorraine so many times? And PB went back to 1975 to enlist Azizi Johari. Why not make up stuff for Patti McGuire or Debra Fondren if you were going back that far? Both kept up strong relationships with PB and with Hef, so they probably would have participated if asked. The numbers don’t add up to a fraud.

And then there is the content. I’m sure someone with a gift for this sort of thing could run a program to figure out if a single author wrote all of Lorraine Michaels’ columns, and a different author all of Cathy Larmouth’s, etc. That would be a better statistical test. But what strikes me most, as a fan of Karen, is that we do hear her voice in her responses, just as we did in the copy in the January 1981 issue. Was she serious about her ambition to teach acrobatics in her own school? Yes. Was she serious about staying fit and healthy? In Australian PB, she said "I don't drink, smoke, or take drugs. I never have and I never will. Maybe I'm just a health nut, but I just don't believe in putting certain substances into my system." Was she serious about what she looked for in guys? She was clear that she liked “active” guys,” a guy who is “healthy and takes care of himself,” and who’d seek her out in some athletic setting. Biking, gymnastics, acrobatics were her thing—not drinking. Not a surprise that she ended up happily married to an athletic, active, adventurous guy who shared her ambition to be an acrobat and teach acrobats—a kindred spirit. Her answer to the question differed from those of the other PMs, and it was clearly in her own voice. She was speaking for herself. And given that PB values its professional relationships with its PMs, I think it would have been unthinkable—and bad for business—to put fake words in their mouths and to put them in the feature without their consent. The fact that Karen and a few others appeared so many times suggests that PB did have their consent.

And finally, I don’t think it’s a surprise that PMs would give frank answers to questions about sex, romance, and relationships. They are folks—god bless them—who were “out there” in a wonderful way and who were probably to a person women who enjoyed sex and being sexual beings. Why else pose for PB? It wouldn’t be a surprise if they embraced the non-sexist aspects of the PB philosophy, which at its best tried to promote healthier attitudes toward sex and greater knowledge about sex in a nation that was way behind on both fronts—and still is.

40 - Lorraine Michaels [I, II, IV, V, VI]
28 - Cathy Larmouth [III, IV, V, VI]
25 - Cher Butler
22 - Tracy Vaccaro
20 - Susie Scott
18 - Sherry Arnett, Marcie Hanson [I, II, III, IV, VI]
17 - Azizi Johari, Karen Price [I, II, III, IV, V, VI], Julie Peterson, Liz Stewart
16 - Lynne Austin, Laurie Carr
14 - Marlene Janssen
12 - Cathy St George
11 - Carol Ficatier, Rebecca Ferratti, Lesa Pedriana
10 - Luann Lee, Venice Kong
9 - Roberta Vasquez, Brandi Brandt
8 - Lisa Welch [I, II, III, V], Michelle Drake
7 - Jeana Tomasino [I, II, III. IV, V], Kathy Shower, Kym Paige
6 - Denise Mcconnell, Rebecca Armstrong, India Allen, Anna Clark, Missy Cleveland, Anne-Marie Fox, Marianne Gravatte, Debi Johnson, Vicki Mccarty [I, II, III, IV, V], Linda Rhys-Vaughn, Lynda Wiesmeier
5 - Barbara Edwards, Donna Edmondson, Marina Baker
4 - Teri Weigel, Kim Mccarthur, Kym Malin, Ava Fabian
3 - Victoria Cooke (VI), Eloise Broady, Terri Doss, Kim Morris, Patty Duffek, Alana Soares, Laura Richmond
2 - Pia Reyes, Christine Richters, Julie McCullough, Penny Baker, Kari Kennell, Patty Farinelli, Veronica Gamba
1 - Shannon Tweed (VI)


P.S.: The Roman numerals indicate which PMs appeared in the first six Dear PM columns. Karen was the only PM to appear in all six.

Last edited by cqnew1648; 05-07-2014 at 04:21 AM..
cqnew1648 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:39 PM.






vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.1 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.