|
|
Post by maarts on Apr 7, 2007 8:58:41 GMT -5
Fine. I'll bite.
It ain't about what you say it's about the way you go about it. Yes, we all like to debate music and I don't mind going into debate with you but you manage to put everyone you engage offside with a couple of things.
* Your opening posts are always invites to your blog- that smells blatantly like you want to boost your hitcount on mySpace and I don't like to be used for that. If you have something to put to the group, post it directly here.
* We are not rockists, it doesn't interest us.
* I don't like the way you believe that the way you categorize genres is the end of all discussion. The categorical way you dismiss certain input from everyone who engages in discussion puts everyone off. It turns discussion in just a bunch of statements to and fro.
We get worked up over it because you don't get the blunt messages we are sending. That's why I keep on thinking that you are not for real. On MOJO you told me that debate about your person didn't interest you and that's why you never responded in the past. Do I detect a little about-face here when you state that we could 'try to have a discussion about it'? So riddle me this- why is it so difficult for you to read people's opinions on you and adjust to the point where you allow discussion to flow on any thread you start without you stamping your own authority on it straight from the get-go, cut out the blog-part and become more personable so people wouldn't raise their shields immediately when you post something?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Apr 7, 2007 11:11:59 GMT -5
Fine. I'll bite. It ain't about what you say it's about the way you go about it. Yes, we all like to debate music and I don't mind going into debate with you but you manage to put everyone you engage offside with a couple of things. * Your opening posts are always invites to your blog- that smells blatantly like you want to boost your hitcount on mySpace and I don't like to be used for that. If you have something to put to the group, post it directly here. * We are not rockists, it doesn't interest us. * I don't like the way you believe that the way you categorize genres is the end of all discussion. The categorical way you dismiss certain input from everyone who engages in discussion puts everyone off. It turns discussion in just a bunch of statements to and fro. We get worked up over it because you don't get the blunt messages we are sending. That's why I keep on thinking that you are not for real. On MOJO you told me that debate about your person didn't interest you and that's why you never responded in the past. Do I detect a little about-face here when you state that we could 'try to have a discussion about it'? So riddle me this- why is it so difficult for you to read people's opinions on you and adjust to the point where you allow discussion to flow on any thread you start without you stamping your own authority on it straight from the get-go, cut out the blog-part and become more personable so people wouldn't raise their shields immediately when you post something? Amen. I was going to post a more substantive reply myself, but I don't think I'd change a word of what Maarts wrote here. I will just directly address the following to Mr. Wagemann. PEW, you do ask some interesting questions sometimes, but you're so closed-minded and obnoxious, that we all just want you to shut the fuck up. Frankly, you're lucky that we're all feeling rather tolerant of you right now -- otherwise you'd be banned once again. And believe it or not, I actually told Strat that we should give you a chance since you weren't going straight to outright trolling and flaming people. And I still maintain that as long as you aren't simply being offensive and flaming folks, you should be given the opportunity to speak here. However, you've managed to piss off pretty much everyone to the point that no one is really listening to you on a consistent basis. And I wanna strongly endorse what Maarts said about your blog and "rockjism" -- your blog is in your sig, if we wanna read it we'll go there, just like JAC's; and no one here is a "rockist" and no one is really very interested in that whole thing. |
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on Apr 7, 2007 11:40:13 GMT -5
Alright, PEW, I will bite. I will totally post freely with you and give you a chance under the stipulation that you do not mention your blog. Other than that, happy posting and I will engage you in a much more friendly manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryosuke on Apr 7, 2007 11:41:28 GMT -5
You guys realize that this isn't going to make a differene, right? He'll just think you're dead wrong, and keep on being the same self.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Apr 7, 2007 11:46:43 GMT -5
You guys realize that this isn't going to make a differene, right? He'll just think you're dead wrong, and keep on being the same self. I know that, Ryo, but sometimes you've gotta try to reach out even though you know it will be unsuccesful. Sort of like when I remind Bowiglou just how much the Doors suck, or point out to everyone that Billy Joel is the rock and roll anti-christ.  |
|
|
|
Post by loudaab on Apr 7, 2007 13:24:07 GMT -5
Alright, PEW, I will bite. I will totally post freely with you and give you a chance under the stipulation that you do not mention your blog. Other than that, happy posting and I will engage you in a much more friendly manner. Sounds good.  In reply to maarts, I really am not that interested in discussing personal matters on MOJO. That is strictly a music related board. But I do find myself loosening my belt a bit more on this board because it is not strictly speaking a "music board". And I admit there are certain music boards I will hit up, just to drum up a little action for my blog, and I can see how that would be annoying. So as I promised my new best friend Skvor I'm gonna cut that out--at least on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Apr 7, 2007 15:21:16 GMT -5
I don't understand why I have to be "worked up" to call pew an idiot. It's really more of an exasperation thing and a refusal to play his, pretty obvious IMO, games. Pew's the one that has to prove to us that he's not a troll not the other way around. If he wants to be treated better...or "doesn't understand" why he's treated this way then it's his burden to change or deal with it. I'm not terribly worried about it because I don't believe for one second that he just wants to get along.
|
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on Apr 7, 2007 15:39:18 GMT -5
The burden of proof is definitely on PEW, no arguments there.
|
|
|
|
Post by upinkzeppelin2 on Apr 7, 2007 16:45:15 GMT -5
As I said before, if you don't want to talk with PEW, when you see PEW start a new thread, leave it be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Apr 7, 2007 17:50:10 GMT -5
As I said before, if you don't want to talk with PEW, when you see PEW start a new thread, leave it be.I don't mind talking with pew, as previously stated most of his threads start as pretty reasonable discussions and later devolve. These "why can't we all get along" discussions are, imo, more damaging to the community then the arguing. Over the last five years we should've learned that, no, we can't all get along and, no, we can't just ignore people we don't like. All these threads and discussions do is call more attention to it and people who aren't involved just get more sick of it. This is why it turns into days on end of "who's fault is it?" when you just let people bitch for a few posts, it goes away, you can skip past it. |
|
|
|
Post by KooL on Apr 7, 2007 19:28:18 GMT -5
You guys realize that this isn't going to make a differene, right? He'll just think you're dead wrong, and keep on being the same self. Ryo may be one of the youngest posters here, but that doesn't stop him from being one of the smartest. PEW-talk is boring. PEW won't change. This talk is just a vicious cycle with no end. He's loving the attention. I'm guilty of participating in it too, especially this time around. Unfortunately, we'll be having this discussion again a year from now, just like we had it a year ago. Let us hold hands and pray on these holy days that the third banning works a charm in '08. Happy Holidays/Easter/Whatever to all. Cunts included. |
|
|
|
Post by loudaab on Apr 7, 2007 20:25:58 GMT -5
The burden of proof is definitely on PEW, no arguments there. skvor: WTF? Just a second ago you said all I needed to do was not mention my blog anymore and now you turn around and add thsi new stimputlation: that I have to PROVE I'm not a troll?!? Isnt that sorta like proving that there are no such things as ghosts? Or prove there is no God. I mean how do you prove something that doesnt exist doesnt exist? Consider yourself removed from my best friend list... ***But dont worry, send me some naked pictures of your mom and I'll put you back on it... |
|
|
|
Post by KooL on Apr 7, 2007 20:54:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by KooL on Apr 7, 2007 21:01:23 GMT -5
btw pew, you don't need to prove you're not a troll. That's a fact. You just need to prove you can be a reasonable one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Apr 7, 2007 21:07:24 GMT -5
So, I've been listening to a lot of punk lately...a lot of punk isn't very good. I'm glad punk's dead, I think.
|
|
