[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
more thoughts.
JLuvzMusyk at aol_com wrote:
> > Why *do* we have the right to do so? I don't think we do. IT's not right
> for anyone to call anyone names...
>
> darling, i didn't say it was right. i said we *had* the right. there is a
> difference.
I know you weren't saying it was good. but I still don't think we *have* the
right.
> and as for not being a musician and that's why you don't criticize the band...
that's not the only reason I don't... *grin*
> as the famous quote goes (although i cannot remember who said it...ysoie, can
> you help me out?):
>
> "i don't know what art is, but i know what i like."
yes, I understand. My point is that the criticism that has been coming up lately
has not been constructive at all. It's been mean and simply full of opinions. It
has nothing to do (for the most part) with the quality, only that people don't
like change. And that is Linford's business. It's his band and he has the right to
experiment with new things if he wants. and who are we to say it was an awful or
wonderful choice? It might be a mistake, but isn't it Linford's right to find out
for himself if it works or not?
I have suggested things in the past. But speaking the way that is being spoken if
I was in *his* position it wouldn't do any good becuase I wouldn't even read the
post... so how does it help?
We should listen to what others say... but the person/s in charge see the big
picture. See the things we are seeing are from one side only... ours. We aren't
seeing all the things that create the decisions. we aren't seeing all the hard
decisions that have had to be made. We don't really know *how* Linford is leading
his band becuase we aren't there involved. We can't say Linford shouldn't have
gotten rid of the people he did... or that he did. becuase simply put we don't
know. etc.
Amy
References: