New DJ Interview "It looks like we're going to be doing a lot more touring"

[D-GenerationX]

He used it as an example, to bolster a larger point.

Correct.

But can you not do two things at one time?  I get the point you are trying to make about me.  And, from what I see, I am not even giving you a problem about it.  Have I told you that you were totally offbase, I felt that was unfair, etc?  I have not.  That alone suggests I accept what you are saying, at least on some level.

But then, separate from all that, I asked you a question you ducked.  I tried again.  More ducking. 

In my experience, a guy passing on it once is one thing.  A guy passing a second time and stating he's never going to answer it, at that point, the focus becomes why there are so unwilling?  There must be some reason.

Can't we say concurrently that what you are saying about me might have merit, but also give your opinion on a direct question about something else?  Does you answering a question about those 2 sets of vocals somehow detract from your read of me?  Is it even related, I'd even ask.

[pilferk]

Correct.

But can you not do two things at one time?  I get the point you are trying to make about me.  And, from what I see, I am not even giving you a problem about it.  Have I told you that you were totally offbase, I felt that was unfair, etc?  I have not.  That alone suggests I accept what you are saying, at least on some level.

Then..there you go.  That's the only point I was interested in, or was trying to make.

You owned it.

But then, separate from all that, I asked you a question you ducked.  I tried again.  More ducking. 

I'm not ducking.  Ducking implies that I would be expected to have an answer or opinion. I see zero reason why there would be some expectation that I'd have an opinion on this.

I just don't. It wasn't (and isn't) relevant to the point. And I wasn't (as far as I recall) an active participant at the time. 

Did this interaction really stick in your craw so much, you need someone to revisit it for you?

In my experience, a guy passing on it once is one thing.  A guy passing a second time and stating he's never going to answer it, at that point, the focus becomes why there are so unwilling?  There must be some reason.

Because the guy doesn't find any of it interesting, or relevant.  And has no interest in weighing in on something he wasn't involved in, or has any real knowledge of (as I said, I don't even recall the situation/conversation).

Likely, since I do read most of the new stuff, I read it at the time and passed on participating. If I'd had an opinion, I probably would have presented it then. Did I?

Can't we say concurrently that what you are saying about me might have merit, but also give your opinion on a direct question about something else?  Does you answering a question about those 2 sets of vocals somehow detract from your read of me?  Is it even related, I'd even ask.

I gave you my opinion: I don't have one.  I don't care. I don't see it as a relevant tangent.  It's really that simple.  Nothing else. Just ambivalence.

Tell you what: If my opinion really means THAT much to you, you can link me the old conversation, in sum total, and I'll take some time over the next couple days to re-read it and draft my dissertation on it. Include links to the concert snippets, too, if they're not included in the convo.

[D-GenerationX]

There are no archives to dig up, man.  It was just a question put to you, and only you.  Right here, right now, today.

If you don't want to address it, you don't want to address it.  Is what it is.

[pilferk]

There are no archives to dig up, man.  It was just a question put to you, and only you.  Right here, right now, today.

If you don't want to address it, you don't want to address it.  Is what it is.

I don't have enough interest, information, or impetus to address it. It's that simple....

Are you, ultimately, trying to say there are two sides to the coin?  Is that where you're going?

'Cause, if it is, I think I've already weighed in on that one...

[D-GenerationX]

There are no archives to dig up, man.  It was just a question put to you, and only you.  Right here, right now, today.

If you don't want to address it, you don't want to address it.  Is what it is.

I don't have enough interest, information, or impetus to address it. It's that simple....

No worries.

[draguns]

I go to Big Blue View for NY Giants news after reading the message board here. The admin of that board gets Giants news and he has an in with the Giants front office and coach. Does he he allow negative posts on his websites? Yep, he does. The message board this past season was brutal. You think what gets posted here is bad and negative. Check out some of the posts from this season when the Giants were terrible and you'll see what I'm talking about. What DX, Ginger King, Jaeball  and Mortis says here is nothing compared to the negativity of what when on there.

Opposing viewpoints are fine.  Not everything in life is going to be hunky dory. You actually need an opposing viewpoint to improve upon yourself and work at things.  

Agree.  I also go to Big Blue View for G-Men news (sidenote: who do you want them to pick at #9?) and that's why I am somewhat surprised that my comments (and some others here) are viewed as negative.  It seems that if you disagree with anything Jarmo says, if you veer off the message at all, you're negative (and whining, entitled, etc., etc.).  The world is not just "Jarmo and friends" and "negative motherfuckers".  There are clearly degrees to which people view certain things (for example, I have no problem with a Vegas residency, strippers, and flying pianos) yet we all get lumped in the same bucket regardless.

It's not that black and white.  But it seems that some people here can't take any sort of opinion that doesn't end with the band is right and wins again. 

Yeah, that's what I don't get either.  I think that Axl isn't good at techno/industrial rock music such as Rhiad or My World. It's not his forte and background to be quite honest with you. The moment you say that here though you are deemed a hater. Over at Big Blue View, I sometimes wonder if these fans are Giant fans or not due to how harsh the criticism of Coughlin, Reese, and Eli can get.  Additionally, I like the Vegas residency. I wish he would do one at MSG or Prudential Center.

I don't want to veer to far off from GNR, but I would like the Giants to draft an offensive lineman or the WR Cooper.

[mortismurphy]

Ultimately, this is a forum promoting 'positivity', correct? Would ad hominem attacks be filed under 'negativity'? I think they would. Where are the ad hominem attacks coming from?  I do not see many coming from dgx or ginger, or even in fairness some of the people defending against these so called 'whiners'. You would expect such instruments of positivity to, appear positive, but no. Just using my example,

- you are a 'whiner' if you do not agree with the politics here. We have established that.

-'Go away; - I actually had some guy messaging that to my inbox. I got a message with a conspicuous Axl picture telling me to 'go away'. Bacon repeated this line merely a few days ago. I have never personally felt the need to tell anyone to ''go away''. If they disagreed with me I would prefer them to debate it out like a man.
 
- you are posting as other people somewhere else. Where does this rubbish come from. Grammar? But surely grammar is correct or incorrect?

- ''Whiney shit'' or some other insult. A 'prat' if I remember correctly.

- ''zero humour''. Again Bacon, before descending into zero grammar.

- Lies.

- frightening levels of analyse into posting history. I found myself explaining why I could not post in the year, 2006 (or whenever gnr were doing something which was actually good for a change - which is rare) based on work history. And then I asked myself, 'why am I actually doing this?'

And then there are the straw men.

The straw men are particularly infuriating as they make it impossible to debate anything in any real sense. ''That statement contradicts'' ''why are you saying DJ is lying'' ''but I never said he is lying, just that there is a contradiction'' ''why are you accusing DJ of lying'' (it is always DJ but never Ron now for some odd reason). Impossible to have any reasonable conversation with people this irrational.

Fundamentally though, a fan base is only as good as their artist.  If you want sycophants, you will get sycophants.

[14 Yrs Of Silence]

Yeah, once you do those first few pages on a topic, you've pretty much talked it out.

I've suggested several times that by only having 3 or 4 active threads at a time, its basically impossible to keep "on topic".

But the time you hit page 22 of whatever topic, odds are, the conversation has shifted several times.

But...it's the same shit.  Nothing new, at all. It's the SAME conversation, with the same people, making the same points, and constructing the same arguments.

I understand all the above points, made from all the above posters (D-X's was just the last in the train)...but it's still reading the same exact things. It's BORING.

Sure...it's volume.   Sure, it's adding to the post/page count.  But...honestly...I'd rather silence.  JMHO.

I'm finding myself less and less interested in participating.  I lurked for a LONG time, again..because it got so monotonous and repetitive.  I've been back, lately...but, honestly....it's starting to feel that way again.

Maybe the forum should close until there's something new to talk about?

[pilferk]

Maybe the forum should close until there's something new to talk about?

Nope.  I don't think you have to take ANY actual action in relation to the forum operation. Why would you?

Again, there seems to be this weird misconception that "activity levels" define the construct of a message board.  It doesn't.

Besides, there's often "new stuff" to talk about.  We've had a flurry of new topics over the past couple weeks.

The fact they end up tangenting into the "boring stuff".....I hardly think that's reason to turn the lights off.  It might be reason to start moderating those threads and mass c&p ing that stuff over to dead horse.

[pilferk]

Ultimately, this is a forum promoting 'positivity', correct? Would ad hominem attacks be filed under 'negativity'? I think they would. Where are the ad hominem attacks coming from?  I do not see many coming from dgx or ginger, or even in fairness some of the people defending against these so called 'whiners'. You would expect such instruments of positivity to, appear positive, but no. Just using my example,

- you are a 'whiner' if you do not agree with the politics here. We have established that.

- and you "drink the kool aid" or are "delusional" if you have a generally positive attitude or AGREE with some of the politics here

-'Go away; - I actually had some guy messaging that to my inbox. I got a message with a conspicuous Axl picture telling me to 'go away'. Bacon repeated this line merely a few days ago. I have never personally felt the need to tell anyone to ''go away''. If they disagreed with me I would prefer them to debate it out like a man.
 
- you are posting as other people somewhere else. Where does this rubbish come from. Grammar? But surely grammar is correct or incorrect?

- ''Whiney shit'' or some other insult. A 'prat' if I remember correctly.

- "rose colored glasses", "imbecile", "Pravda readers", "zombified propagandising zealot", "that type of fan is completely absurd", "Axl apologist", "sycophant", "delusional", "irrational" "swinging from Axl's nut", "toeing the company line", "hypocrit"....shall I go on?  It goes both ways, my friend.

You are VERY accepting of the viewpoint "this is not gnr", and various others.  You put forth the idea these are valid alternate POV's than the ones expressed by a contingent here at HTGTH, and argue that they should not be diminished by being labeled, as you point out, above.  Great. Fair enough, and I'm with you.

And then, you are almost completely intolerant of the opposite side.  You paint the "critical" fan as being superior to the less critical, or "positive" or however you want to label it, fan.  And then you "label", or categorize, the opposing viewpoint in exactly the same ways you object to having the viewpoint you are most sympathetic to being "labeled".

You want "open mindedness", and then poo poo on the opposing viewpoint in exactly the ways you object to.

- ''zero humour''. Again Bacon, before descending into zero grammar.

I started that, and, quite frankly, it's true. I'm sorry if that hurts your feelings (truly). Your sense of humor largely doesn't come across in your prose. That's not meant as an ad hominem attack...it doesn't make me think less of you or your posts. It was meant as an explanation as to why you got serious responses to what you intended as a joke.  I've noticed I'm not the first to fall into that particular pitfall with your "joke" posts.  And, honestly, I don't mind if you have to clarify later...I'm just explaining to you why it keeps happening.

Really...sorry if that bugged you.

- Lies.

The album?  Sure, it's often a topic of conversation.

In terms of "about you"....specifics?  Because other than the "he's that other poster"....I'm not sure I can think of any.  You might not like the characterization of your opinions, but I'd suggest that others don't really like YOUR characterizations of their positions, either.

- frightening levels of analyse into posting history. I found myself explaining why I could not post in the year, 2006 (or whenever gnr were doing something which was actually good for a change - which is rare) based on work history. And then I asked myself, 'why am I actually doing this?'

Like jarmos post history is often analyzed?

I agree on this front, but I apply it globally: The threads should be about the topic, not the people posting in it.  And yet...lots of topics (certainly more than the instance you're thinking of here) end up being about "the posters", and I'd offer up more often than not, it's about jarmo.

And then there are the straw men.

The straw men are particularly infuriating as they make it impossible to debate anything in any real sense. ''That statement contradicts'' ''why are you saying DJ is lying'' ''but I never said he is lying, just that there is a contradiction'' ''why are you accusing DJ of lying'' (it is always DJ but never Ron now for some odd reason). Impossible to have any reasonable conversation with people this irrational.

It goes both way, man.  You've done it too, so has D-X, so have others.  TO ME.  You BOTH, in the course of a week, on slightly different topics, created, ascribed, and argued against an opinion for me.  I'm not trying to draw D-X into the discussion, either, or lump you together.  I"m just trying to point out that....it's common on both sides of the "pov spectrum".

What's ironic is: You take issue, in a batch of posts, of people saying you're accusing certain band members of lying. You bemoan the straw man and say you never said that.

A few days later? You do the EXACT same thing, in discussing a previous Ron interview.  You insist that people (me, included) are saying Ron is lying..when nobody has actually said that.  I can think of no clearer example, here, of things going both ways.

I agree, it can be annoying. But it isn't a tactic reserved for those holding an opposing viewpoint to yours.

Fundamentally though, a fan base is only as good as their artist.  If you want sycophants, you will get sycophants.

Surely you see the irony of closing a post about ad hominem attacks with the above. Right?

There is a LOT of Pot. Kettle. Black. moments in your post, above.  And, once again, we're decending into discussions about posters...and not the topic.

[jarmo]

- frightening levels of analyse into posting history.

Are you scared that it's that easy to see your posts?
Don't be scared.

This coming from a guy who made a statement like "the 2012 Jarmo would've banned you". Amusing.

I found myself explaining why I could not post in the year, 2006 (or whenever gnr were doing something which was actually good for a change - which is rare) based on work history.

It's rare that GN'R does something good? You're on the wrong fucking site.

Fundamentally though, a fan base is only as good as their artist.  If you want sycophants, you will get sycophants.

I think it's time for your decade long break again.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

A little more (or really, any) levity probably wouldn't kill us. 

Ever think maybe it would ease some of the tension if everyone wasn't so guarded and took everything so seriously?

[Ginger King]

A little more (or really, any) levity probably wouldn't kill us. 

Ever think maybe it would ease some of the tension if everyone wasn't so guarded and took everything so seriously?

Agree.  IMO, a fan forum should talk about the good, the bad, and the ugly.  It should discuss all things Guns n Roses.  It seems like the mantra here is to not only focus on the good, but pretend the bad and the ugly don't exist.  If that's the stated purpose, then so be it.  It's your playground.

Here, the overwhelming amount of posters and topics are positive.  I'll grant you it's a difficult thing to balance, and some sites focus more on the negative and the absurd way too much.  I just don't see the benefit of insulating yourself from it.

[D-GenerationX]

I just mean we could joke around with each other a bit more.  Would have to lighten the mood, I should think.

The amount of distrust and wariness around here is pretty goofy, I think.  You never see anyone joke around.  This is SERIOUS BUSINESS, this talking about a rock band stuff.

[faldor]

A little more (or really, any) levity probably wouldn't kill us. 

Ever think maybe it would ease some of the tension if everyone wasn't so guarded and took everything so seriously?

Agree.  IMO, a fan forum should talk about the good, the bad, and the ugly.  It should discuss all things Guns n Roses.  It seems like the mantra here is to not only focus on the good, but pretend the bad and the ugly don't exist.  If that's the stated purpose, then so be it.  It's your playground.

Here, the overwhelming amount of posters and topics are positive.  I'll grant you it's a difficult thing to balance, and some sites focus more on the negative and the absurd way too much.  I just don't see the benefit of insulating yourself from it.

Criticism is fine. As you can see, people are freely posting their displeasures. They're not being censored. But to bring up the same tired points every single day is extremely tiresome. What's the point? Nothing new is being brought to the table. Talk about beating a Dead Horse. If that leads to extended periods of inactivity here, so be it. But, do as you please. I rarely post here anymore because it's the same boring discussion every day. Which, I personally think is worse than there just being nothing new to talk about. It seems like a colossal waste of time to me. But whatever, everyone is entitled to their own opinions and are free to use their time as they see fit.

[D-GenerationX]

You really can't say people aren't free to speak around here.

You may get ripped apart and called every name in the book, but you can still speak your mind.

[jarmo]

It seems like the mantra here is to not only focus on the good, but pretend the bad and the ugly don't exist.  If that's the stated purpose, then so be it.  It's your playground.

It comes down to the single little thing I keep bringing up time and time again, and none of you seem to get it. Instead you repeat this ad nausea.
If GN'R is a band that constantly upsets you year after year, this isn't the message board for you. If it's that "horrible" to be a fan, go somewhere else. Debbie Downers are free to find other places to post.

The fact that some of you have to be challenged to say something nice about the band once in a while speaks volumes. That shouldn't have to be the case. Therefore it's obvious that these kinds of fans might not exactly be the "target audience" for this board.

Here we are, another month, the same people and the same complaints about how this site is run.



/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

The fact that some of you have to be challenged to say something nice about the band once in a while speaks volumes. That shouldn't have to be the case. Therefore it's obvious that these kinds of fans might not exactly be the "target audience" for this board.

Here we are, another month, the same people and the same complaints about how this site is run.

I understand the point you are making, and I accept it.

But, to look at this from a different angle, isn't sort of understood that we like the band if we are still coming here everyday?  Like, isn't it a given?

Isn't there it at least some redundancy involved in constant reaffirmations of that premise?

[pilferk]

A little more (or really, any) levity probably wouldn't kill us. 

Ever think maybe it would ease some of the tension if everyone wasn't so guarded and took everything so seriously?

I agree.

"Can't we all just get along"?

[Ginger King]

It seems like the mantra here is to not only focus on the good, but pretend the bad and the ugly don't exist.  If that's the stated purpose, then so be it.  It's your playground.

It comes down to the single little thing I keep bringing up time and time again, and none of you seem to get it. Instead you repeat this ad nausea.
If GN'R is a band that constantly upsets you year after year, this isn't the message board for you. If it's that "horrible" to be a fan, go somewhere else. Debbie Downers are free to find other places to post.

The fact that some of you have to be challenged to say something nice about the band once in a while speaks volumes. That shouldn't have to be the case. Therefore it's obvious that these kinds of fans might not exactly be the "target audience" for this board.

Here we are, another month, the same people and the same complaints about how this site is run.

/jarmo

Ugh?again with the we?re constantly negative and upset with GnR.  Just.  Not.  True.  For sure, I question some of their actions (or non-actions) more than you, but I?m not constantly bemoaning the state of affairs (or letting it affect my life in any way). 

Also, we don?t only point out positives when there?s a gun to our head.  Many times, there will be (unsolicited) posts from people speaking positively.  You seem to ignore these, or just chalk it up to we?re just saying something nice so can double down on the negative later.

If anyone here is not a fan of Axl and GnR, I would submit that it?s weird that they?re here.