RE: Beating a dead horse

["O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@vtmednet.org>]

>From: "Brian Cady" <cadyb@home.com>
>Subject:MeltingdownBBSProductions
>Not precisely. It became a war zone towards the middle. Then Matt shut out
>certain people and closed the BBS to new members but it continued on for a
>good little while. It was ultimately closed because Pete wanted the BBS
open
>to everyone but thought he couldn't without similar flame wars occurring.

Damn, anyone ever describe you as having a memory like a bear trap?
I had forgotten about the "exile" part.  Seemed to happen pretty rapidly
though.
I don't think Pete really was left with a choice.  It seemed unfair to not
allow new people on the list, and I don't believe he had the technology to
allow new folk while at the same time preventing the "exiled" from
re-joining.

>From: "Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>
>Subject: Re: I shot the Heroin (but I didn't snort the deputy); Pete vs the
fans
>
>I do believe it was innocent, in that the intent was never more than to
>alert Pete to a problem. True, the alerter had expectations not followed
>through by the alertee...but we're talking about intent here.

No argument that the *initial* intent was innocent.  I'm not so sure that
building frustrations didn't morph that.

>Promises <snip> they
>were broken. That contributed greatly to the aggression, and it's
>understandable. Wouldn't you say? 

Contribution to frustration is clearly understandable.  I can't understand
the aggression.

>Sometime aggression comes from frustration. Some of which, at least, was
>justified.

Aggression, in my book, is never justified.  Particularly in this case.

>Well, in that case shouldn't I be taken seriously by the band?

Why?  I don't feel that way.  I would *hope* I'd be taken seriously by the
band, but if not, I need to be grounded enough to accept that.  
Mark, you have always been an advocate for musician rights when it comes to
their music.  It's their art to do with as *they* feel.  So, doesn't it fit
that if a band, any band, doesn't agree with the opinion of a fan,
irregardless of how devoted, it's the bands right?  Why does The Who owe us
anything?
If they had closed up shop after Moon's death, and decided not to even think
about their music or any music again in their lives, that would be their
right.  And no matter how much bitching from their fans, the fans don't have
a right to force them to release previously unreleased music, or make more
music, or tour, or even take a piss.
I see it more as, I have the right to accept what is given to me.  No more.
I may not always like it, but I don't have the right to force the band to
change what I don't like.  If I did, I'm infringing on *their* rights.

>Don't I have a perspective not possible for the band members and their
menions?
>Sure!

Absolutely, but that doesn't mean you have the right to make them hear it,
or take it.

Kevin in VT