[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: This Header is dumb (was Re: This is dumb)
>>Over The Rhine do not have fans. They have listeners. They have listeners
>>that have shared a journey with them
>
> Hey, I'm a fan. What is this, Semantics 101? Don't speak for me, and I won't
> speak for you.
You can be wantever you want. "Fan" is short for fanatic. It brings with
it all sorts of things that most of the people I've met that like Over The
Rhine are not.
> I've been reading posts for a couple years now, and I generally make
> judicious use of my delete key. I can only see the phrase HTH! a few times
> in one day without rolling my eyes. I like the discussions when they're
> actually OTR-related, but it's admittedly hard to wade through all the
> clique-y banter that gets tossed around on this list.
This banter is not cluque-y. They let people right on in. I just joined
this list a few weeks ago and have felt more than welcome. Money of the
listees know eachother. That means they well necesarily more familar with
eachother than a normal mail list. After this ousting of yourself those who
disagree with might not welcome you quite as willingly, but that's just
normal human response to an initial bad impression.
>>This could be the case, or maybe they respect their position so much that
>>they honor us with the privalege of asking for our oppinion. Your ignorant
>>response leaves you unworthy of such an honor.
> It wasn't an ignorant response to me. It may have offended *your* delicate
> sensibilities, but to me it seemed an honest response to an honest question.
> I think if Linford's going to ask something of us, he should be prepared to
> take the good and the bad. Duh.
No. I think Lynford asked for our oppinions, quite honestly and openly. I
do not think that any human being should have his honesty and openness
assualted. By anybody, under just about any circumstances. There are too
many plotters and schemers and problems based on misconception. Honesty, in
my eyes, is a brilliant thing that should be rewarded.
>>Your friends are obviously self-centered assholes.
> OK, so I wouldn't blow up a small school of children, but your response, Mr.
> Gardner, was no less offensive. I mean, honestly, who's the asshole here?
Given the choices I would say the people who would be willing to sacrifice
the (even if they are only hypothetical) lives of innocents in order to
reach personal goals. Remember back there when we were talking about
fanatics? I guess if someone is going to post such an abrasive post, they
have to be prepared to take the good with the bad. Or are you forgetting
your own argument?
> Actually, when I read it, I thought that normal people stomping on the
> well-manicured front lawn of the Apple Orchard *was* part of his concern. I
> got that sense in the 'flourescent tits' bit. Maybe I misunderstood as well,
> but that's what you get for trying to reach a wide audience with your
> flowery language. Don't believe me? Then *you* go back and read the posts
> where we all came to a consensus on what an OTR song *really* means.
Re-read it please:
"Remember, the vegetable stand means no significant media exposure, no
grammy, no "Florida girls with fluorescent tits" listening to your song on
the modern rock station coming out of the boom box by the sand volleyball
net."
He's not listing the girls with "fluorescent tits" as a negative thing. You
are bringing your own interpritation into it. It's listed right after "no
grammy." My interpritation is that he is saying that the small vegetable
stand will mean that most of the world will never know who they are. I
think that if you re-read the whole paragraph you will find that he's
talking about whether exposure is worth the effort it will take, and the
time it will take away from making more music.
>>Exactly NOT you point. This is MY point, you're just saying it. It is
>>partially ours, and he is respecting exactly this by requesting our
>>oppinion. I think it's way cool of him. Imagine if your favorite actor
>>asked you whether he should take a movie or not. This respect for your fan
>>base is awe inspiring, and wonderful. In short, sit down, and shut up!
>
> "Mommmmmmmm, he said something I didn't like!"
>
> 'sit down, and shut up?' In one sentence you talk about the respect Linford
> has for us, and then you follow it with this?
> Linford *asked* us what we thought. Where's *your* tolerance, Mr. Gardner?
The respect Linford has for us is one that I think we (as a collective
fanbase) have earned. This man who comes cussing and swearing his point
into a mild-mannered discussion group, speaking of killing children to
further personal goals, and attacks honesty with crassness... does not
deserve my respect. Nor does he garner it. Also, if you'll notice I never
attacked the speaker as a person. I attacked his arguement, and stated an
oppinion of his friends.
> Again, I read the same thing when I read Linford's letter. Your
> interpretation is not 'more right' than anyone else's.
> I also happen to think artistic control is an issue.
I envite you to re-read the missive then.
> My reason for posting at all is that I am really discouraged and
> disappointed with all you gooey-eyed fans that turn make camp amongst
> yourselves, nudging each other and saying things like 'who is this boffo
> anyway? .. who let him in?' I suppose you're just kidding. That would make
> it safe, eh?
My response was formulated the moment I read the post. In the solitary
confinement of my room. I did not connect to The Hive Mind in order to
download my oppinion on the letter. If it seems that I've been assimulated
after only of few weeks, then it may very well be that it is because I have
always thought like the others that I have just met. I believe it was that
Tuesday afternoon, one mid-may in '83 when my mother told me what the word
courtesy meant.
--
"Everyone has a little secret he keeps,
I light the fires while the city sleeps."
-MC 900FT Jesus, "The City Sleeps"
Follow-Ups: