[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Speculation vs. Fact



>From: John Hughes <john@pureneasy.fsnet.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: CharityMusicTommyDownloads
>
>Kevin, re
>I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. What I commented on was the way the
>speculation turned suddenly into gospel fact.

You seem to be the only one who took it that way.  It was very clear to me
that it was all speculation.
I'm sorry (not that I contributed) if you became confused.

>You know that Bill commented 
>"you know the boys.I'm sure the money is going to a charity."

Funny, I still took this as speculation.  And really, not such an out of
line comment.  Bill was sure. But, as we now know, Bill was also wrong.  Big
Deal.  Bill also doesn't represent The Who, and I think most realized that.

>and then you commented "I'll pay bucks to the charity". How did you
>assume from a speculation there was a charity involved? 

Come on dude.  Next time I'll be sure to put an *IF IT GOES TO CHARITY*
emphasis, just to make sure you are not confused in the future.
John, people on this and other lists move pretty fast.
The whole point to this whole thing is that it was understood that it was
speculation, and the conversation flowed from there.
The point of the conversation was about payment.  Nothing more.  Since
payment is required, how were you going to make it if you traded for the
download. It's one thing to take money from The Who, it's another thing to
take money from a charity...*IF THAT'S WHERE IT HAD BEEN GOING TO*.  *IF*,
*IF*, *IF ALREADY*.

>> > But, damn strong speculation considering what the band has been 
>> > doing as of late.

>Again, I completely disagree.

Completely or just kind of?

>It's never going to be more than 
>speculation. Look, when the Robin Hood charity, the teenage cancer
>charity and bridge charity gigs were announced they were announced as
>charity functions right from the start. 
>This was announced as a pay to download only. Given the previous
>history, were it to have a charitable element, *I am positive* this
>would have included the comment "(some) proceeds to (named) charity".

Well at least you're seeing that it *was* speculation.  And, you have some
valid points above.  But at the same time, you could have easily been wrong.
Again, big deal.

>I've now been to the download site; nothing there about money going to
>charity. Care to comment?

Do I care to comment?  Thank you for the invitation.
My comment:  You were right, everyone on this list who knew and stated that
the money, with out a doubt, was going to a charity, were wrong.
Can you count how many of us that makes????

Kevin in VT