Band Photos

Kevin O'Neal kevinandt at
Fri Aug 6 11:53:16 CDT 2004

>Marcus Surrealius
>Band Photos
>> But, despite not being into those discussions, you
>> didn't see me going "oh
>> yawwwwn", and this list sucks now "piss off."
>I was agreeing with someone else, who said something
>like that.

Trust me, I understand that.

> I notice you didn't take issue with him.

Well, he wasn't addressing me directly.

>Or the people who whined about political discussions
>revolving around Pete with one hand yet posted the
>"OhboyI'mgoing" with the other hand.

I wasn't involved.

>Be evenhanded, how about it?

I *am* being even handed.
I'm addressing the person who addressed me.

>> Great, then everyone will make derogatory comments
>> about every little thing
>> they don't like.
>Newsflash: they ALREADY ARE. As you are, here.

I'm simply defending myself.
Did I criticize your post or anyone else's?

>> "Band Photo" kind of slapped at me.
>Don't be so sensitive. I was using the same subject
>Tom did to reply to what Tom wrote.

I know that.  Tom's use of my subject line as a launch on Paul is what I was
talking about.
I was going to let it slide until you addressed me specifically.

>Who's got ire? Not me. Just mentioning.

Maybe they do.
But, you got some ire.
Well, maybe we replace ire with Who list-frustration.

>Acutually it'd be more like the other way around. If I
>was to tell them <Kiss fans> anything. But each to his own sewage.

Ouch.  Is Scott even here to defend himself?  ;-)

>Perhaps they should think about that before they start
>complaining in the first place. Seems like I'm last in
>line, and the one who's getting all the grief.

Well, maybe I missed that.

>> about an upcoming show.  And, I actually like to
>> read about that passion,
>> and the after show glow.
>Each to his own sewage.

I've never known you to try and dissuade people from expressing excitement
about upcoming shows.
But, I ....and I think the rest of us understand why.

>> Maybe if you'd get your ass to a show sometime this
>> decade, you too would be able to share in the fun!
>but at this point
>the only reason to go to a "Who Revue" show. Even the
>Encore series, it seems, show why NOT to attend the

Talk about "yawwwn".  And, you're wrong.
You're missing some impressive musicians playing some impressive music at an
impressively professional level.

> Both are positive things!
>But not the same things, which means my statement
>wasn't contradictory, as you said.

Damn, how powerful of a microscope did you use to split *that* fine hair.

>It's a pity it'll be called a Who album, when it's

So, you'll listen to a new album even if it's called a Who album?
Where are your ethics???

>Sometimes it's better to end on a high note.

Townshend is playing some of the best guitar of his career.
He's physically and mentally in the best shape of his life.
It would be stupid to end it now.
But, he can't get the sort of "play" he can with his mates that make up
And, Who2 can't get the sort of "play" they can without the use of the name
"The Who."

I'm at the point that it's all just splitting hairs at this point.
I'd prefer them to tour and release albums under the name of Who2, but it's
not going to cause me to miss out on shows, not get excited about shows,
Don't be left behind.

>didn't Townshend himself say that about The Who once a
>long time ago in a galaxy far, far away?

As we know, he's said allot of things.

>> But Mark, you've got to let people talk about The
>> Who as it is now and will
>> be and what's going on, even if you don't want to be
>> along for that ride.
>How am I "stopping" them, exactly?

Making derogatory comments against, or complaining about Who-related posts
discourages future posting.

>And, to be quite
>blunt about it, some of these very same people ARE
>stopping any Who-related political discussion by
>complaing to Paul or threatening to leave.

Well, I'm of the mind that anyone complaining to Paul is an ass.
Even though I wasn't participating in that last round that spurred Paul's
reminder that this *isn't* a pure free-market list, I thought everyone was
on subject and it was all very civil.
A couple of Lurkers leave in a huff, and the regulars that keep the list
going (although not to Tom's speed or liking) get slapped around for it.

>Paul can
>verify, if he wishes, that I haven't complained about
>ANYONE on this list EVER.

I never have either.  But, I've seen formyself complaints forwarded to Paul.
I've seen 'em start it and then turn around and blame the one trying to get
back on subject.

>So, shit, I was just agreeing with Tom.

You were telling me my post about the new "band bow" (totally Who related)
was boring.
I've never done that to you or anyone.
Pardon me for taking issue with it, and defending what I post about.
What, did you expect me to say "yeah, you're right, I'm boring, stupid me
for pointing that out.  Sorry, I'll just cower over here in the corner and
shut up?"
You know me better.

You and Tom have a beef with Paul.
That's fine, and I can't blame youz.
But, you used my post to get there.
Wha'd *I* do??

>Now it's an
>"issue." This isn't freedom, this is "Bush freedom."

Oh please.
You calling me Bush?
You know better.

>Good thing I didn't wait to get the deluxe package. I
>had a feeling.

It seemed too good to be true.

Kevin in VT

More information about the TheWho mailing list