uscore

Agreed. The Academy is terrible. It probably looks great from the stage, with a couple of levels of faces looking at you, and people all along the stair cases but it's not much fun being there. People congregate round the bottom of the steps and you can't get past even though there is often loads of space ahead of them. And if you can't get down the steps you have to watch from the bar area with the low ceiling which echoes the sound into pieces. I also refuse to go there unless I'm absolutely desperate to see an act. Or if I'm certain the gig isn't sold out

if they add 3 or 4 bands that I really like then the lineup will be a lot better.

no, last time I got in without a ticket was 1999

You got me. I am cool.

I've made damn sure that my kids like blur and pulp (not so much Oasis).

is it an awful slot? it usually pulls a fair sized crowd

loads of taxes go on stuff I don't use. That's kind of the point. Go down this road and you end up with rich people with private militias who don't want their taxes to spent on police for everyone. Or people without kids not wanting their taxes spent on schools. Etc.

yeah Amyl will pull a big crowd. They are quite intense and engaging live, in a way that Interpol sadly aren't. At home I'd chose to listen to Interpol 1000 times over Amyl, but live is a different matter.

yeah absolutely, I wasn't trying to get into a qualitative debate, or blame acts for being successful. I like pop music and come from an era where the record labels were far more in charge of what we all listen to than they are these days. I just wanted to point out that it's not a simple as "bands are successful because people want listen to them" because what people what to listen to is massively affected by radio airplay etc. It's not a simple meritocracy.

Incidentally I really like the chorus on Last Dinner Party's song The Feminine Urge. Derivative as f**k but still nice.

I think that's only partly true. an average band can be pushed further than they arguably deserve. Repeated airplay gets songs into people's heads. It's not a simple meritocracy. Sometimes a band will get lucky because they have a single at the right time, or is on an advert, or has a link to another famous person or act, or is pushed harder by a record label that likes them. A band has to have a certain level of competence to "do well" as you put it, but there are countless other factors at play too.

they only get a couple of hours each

I think they are both reasonable definitions of fairness. Just different opinions.

SEE should minimise the tech exploits each year as much as possible, but beyond that I reckon it's fair game. Unless you sit there with a single browser on a single laptop counting down 20 seconds til the next refresh, we've all gamed the system to some degree. I'm firmly in the 'system isn't perfect but it at least it (crudely) rewards effort" gang. I think it's better the festival is filled with people who make an effort to get there. Everything about Glastonbury is about making effort, starting with the long walk from the car-parks. You can sit on a high horse and refuse to join up with at least a couple of other groups, if you wish. On the other hand you've got a few months now to find some people, find a decent auto-fill tool, and maybe install an extra browser or two to increase your chances. You'd probably have much better odds with that than in a lottery.