Spiringsteen

[Breeze]

Tempted to not step into the fray with all the shit flying around but here's my tuppence worth. They should have had Bruce on Friday and Neil Young on Saturday because Mr Young was so unutterably immense that there was no way on God's earth that anyone could measure up. I left Bruce after 7 songs.

[eFestivals]

if you'd been more 'pleasant' about it, I wouldn't have got as wound up as I did. It is possible to debate oposing view without being abusive.

Look, please go back and read my first posts in this thread (they start on page 5) and then try telling me that they were anything but pleasant. I was perfectly pleasant and reasonable at the start. I only got abusive as a result of others being abusive. So you need to be telling them that it's perfectly possible to debate opposing views without being abusive, and then things like this won't happen. And perhaps remind yourself of your own suggestion too, eh?

[chevychase]

It's in this thread. If you can't be bothered to find it then I can't either; I'm more than bored with all this.

[eFestivals]

I'm sorry dude but "all this" can be attributed (largely) to you. Yes there are other Springsteen-haters on here who've made their feelings quite clear on occassion; particularly in response to the admittedly OTT fervour of some Bruce fans. But for going on 5 months now, you've never missed an opportunity. Any time the word "Bruce", "Boss" or "Springsteen" is in a thread you just know a side-splitting quip (complete with smiley faces) won't be far behind.

you'd have a point if you were correct. You're not, you're a very VERY long way from being correct. Just for you -

You can talk all you like about buying his record, giving him a chance blah blah blah...end of the day, you don't like the cat. Fair enough. But why be a dick about it?

if certain Bruce fans hadn't been dicks about it then you'd have seen nothing similar from me. Yes, it really is that simple.

[pinback]

This Thread has nothing on the Reading/Leeds pearl jam one from 2006.

[ml1dch]

I could be bothered, as far as I can tell it wasn't there. Now I'm not as fast and loose as throwing the 'liar' word around as you but maybe if you could just back up what you're saying.

After all, it seems to be what you're asking other posters to do.

[chevychase]

Just for you -

Edited July 3, 2009 by chevychase

[chevychase]

This Thread has nothing on the Reading/Leeds pearl jam one from 2006.

Edited July 3, 2009 by chevychase

[pinback]

Really? I would have thought Pearl Jam would be to that crowd what Rolf seemingly is to Glasto..?

[eFestivals]

1) At this stage of the conversation/argument/lunacy it is frankly not enough to say "you'd have a point if you were right" which, if you think about it, is just about the most dumbass comment to make anytime ever.

perhaps. Tho I'd say it's just as dumbarse to accuse me of doing something I've not done, and then you'd never have had to have seen those words.

2) I've just read my previous post back and I shouldn't have called you a dick. I've said before your info is (for obvious reasons) invaluable on here (made my day when you "broke" the Springsteen news: your finest hour!!!). I genuinelyt didn't mean to "call" you that, but rather to suggest you were coming across as one at times...you know the difference, right?

See, that's the thing with forums - you don't get to see me pissing myself as some of the dumbarse things others have posted, and you don't necessarily get to see that I'm taking the piss out of them being dumbarses. That might well come across as dickish, but do I much care? Nope. These things are here to amuse us all.

3) Most importantly, those faces (the bane of my life): the reason I hate them so is because I CAN'T do them. I'm fairly certain my work computer limits the things you can do on here (when I post it often kicks me out and makes me log back on etc). Either that or I am very stupid (I HAVE been listening to Outlaw Pete on repeat for the last 16 hours straight!!!, see, that would have been a perfect time to insert the faces but I have do make do with lcrappy exclamation marks).

Hang on, if I copy/paste yours it might.......woohooo!

PS - the people from the nuthouse are on their way, tho it sounds as tho they're too late and your insanity will be permanent. 16 hours? You're some sick bunny.

[eFestivals]

no-one has been as abusive as you've been.

Yes, you started off pleasantly enough, then it's if you snapped, and started the name calling

to be honest, just going back over your earlier posts, they're just silly really...

1st post (I think... .don't want to be open to the lying acusation again...)):

How can he be over-rated.. millions of people like him, they're the ones who rate him highly (obviously) you just don't like him

2nd post (possibly..?):

He's not highly rated..?? someone better tell the promoters

and you think he's crap, that's all, loads don't

not much later:

he failed to impress you, and (presumably) many others. He did impress plenty of people

now I realise they're not particularly offensive.. but not much later you started calling me a moron for making a jokey comment on how an argument with you usually ends up being quite abusive...

that's when the debate turned, as far as I can tell

See, you still don't get it.

Is your opinion of Bruce "silly"? Then why is mine? My opinion has an identical basis to your own. If my opinion of Bruce is "silly" then so is yours.

Do you think your opinion of Bruce "silly"? If you don't, you're a fully paid up member of the Bruce morons club, and me calling you a moron was 100% spot on.

[ml1dch]

But you're still yet to find any post in which somebody claims that your opinion is worth less than theirs.

[eFestivals]

But you're still yet to find any post in which somebody claims that your opinion is worth less than theirs.

there's loads of them.

The latest example is tonyblair's latest post on this very page, cos I'm damned sure he doesn't think his own opinion of Bruce silly.

[benissright]

there's loads of them.

The latest example is tonyblair's latest post on this very page, cos I'm damned sure he doesn't think his own opinion of Bruce silly.

[ml1dch]

there's loads of them.

The latest example is tonyblair's latest post on this very page, cos I'm damned sure he doesn't think his own opinion of Bruce silly.

[Wooderson]

(should I peper this with a few of these every now and again for some effect?).

[eFestivals]

obviously having a problem with basic english here...

where have I said your opinion is silly. You said he's over-rated crap.. that's not an opinion.

yes it is - it's my opinion.

You also said it's not true that he's highly rated... that's not an opinion either (and it's wrong )

I accept that was badly worded and could have been put in a clearer way.

What I meant was that he doesn't deserve that rating.

[eFestivals]

Erm im sure you just dont understand english very well.

Tony Blair is pointing out the flaws in your argument, as you are making very definite statements when actually they are opinions. Tony Blair pointing out that regardless of your opinion, Bruce is highly rated, isnt an opinion of Tony Blairs, its a fact.

they are statements of my opinion.

If someone says "Bruce is great" then that's their opinion. It, funnily enough, works in reverse too.

(It was the "silly" bit I pulled him up on - he has a point with the "highly rated" bit, due to poor wording from me on what I meant).

[Wooderson]

What I meant was that he doesn't deserve that rating.

[eFestivals]

I thought you said earlier that someone had explicitly said that your opinion was worth less than theirs.

perhaps less thought and more reading of what's being said? Just a thought.

So tonyblair isn't allowed to interpret your posts in a certain way but you are allowed to interpret his in a certain way?

There's a distinct whiff of double standards and hypocrisy around here.

tony has made false statements - there is no interpretation gone on by him because where he chose to falsely portray what I'd said my words were clear enough that they could not have been misinterpreted to mean what he posted.

We're all expressing opinions here. There is no need for every post to be peppered with "IMO" and the like to make it 100% clear that it's that person's opinion. So when he says my opinion of Bruce is silly, unless he also thinks his own opinion - and everyone else's - of Bruce to be silly then he's believing his own opinion to be worth more by his dismissal of mine as "silly".

Please do note that nowhere have I said anything similar of the Bruce-likers opinions of Bruce. I consider them as welcome to their own opinions of Bruce as I am to my own opinion. So there's not the double standards you're imagining.

[eFestivals]

Based on what exactly Neil? The 5 minutes youve seen of him at Glasto and his latest record that you hate?

You (presumably) have your opinion that he deserves that rating, based on your experiences of him. I have my opinion that he doesn't deserve that rating based on my experiences of him.

Care to show me how one of those opinions can be worth more than the other?

They are both informed opinions, of equal weight. You don't have to agree with my opinion, but if you want me to respect your opinion (and I do - I've not disrespected ANYONE'S opinion of Bruce on these boards) then please give me the courtesy of respecting mine.

Youre beginning to disappear into that longdrop youve dug btw.

and the contents of those longdrops is coming out in your posts BTW.

Edited July 3, 2009 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I didn't say your opinon is (or was) silly, I said your posts were.

and within my post that you find to be silly is what? My opinion.

FFS.

[ml1dch]

perhaps less thought and more reading of what's being said? Just a thought.

[Wooderson]

You (presumably) have your opinion that he deserves that rating, based on your experiences of him. I have my opinion that he doesn't deserve that rating based on my experiences of him.

Care to show me how one of those opinions can be worth more than the other?

and the contents of those longdrops is coming out in your posts BTW.

[eFestivals]

Well when I read this:

And then it transpired that not a single person had told you that your "opinion is worth less than their own", then we would have to assume that you've been telling one of those lies that your so fond of shouting at tony about. Naughty Neil.

Unless you can find someone who has told you that?

I think your statement that I've quoted above is pretty clear and can't really be interpreted in any way other than (again, I quote):

I'm sure that those people that you've accused will be prepared to turn the other cheek and accept your apology to them though. I would put one of those silly faces at this point, but I find them contemptible.

oh do please take your head from your arse. No wonder all you're smelling is shit.

I didn't say your opinon is (or was) silly, I said your posts were.

and within my post that you find to be silly is what? My opinion.

FFS.