And my post was just me saying that I don't (the merchandise). I wasn't distorting anything.Birds in Hell wrote:The point I was trying to make by way of the strawman picture is that what you wrote is a distortion of my post: nobody claimed Pearl Jam sucks solely because they make bad t-shirts or sell too many silly merchandise items.stip wrote:Birds in Hell wrote:stip wrote:I think I just don't judge a band by the quality of their shirts.
you're right. I left out dog collars.
I don't agree with that position spenno. Not as a blanket statement. I'm not sure what the facebook post thing is referring to, but otherwise I pretty much am not judging the band as a band because of the merchandising decisions the business arm decides to make. At least none of the ones that they've made so far, since the critique of almost all of them seems to be that pearl jam is exploiting their fans by giving them things they want to buy that other fans (or ex-fans in some cases) don't think are necessary.
My earlier position was simply that it's understandable that people will take those things into consideration, among other more important things like the quality of the music and live shows, when taking stock of how they feel about the band at this point in time. That's all.
It would be really interesting to figure out how many people are currently perfectly happy with the quality of the music and live shows AND upset by the recent business practices. I suspect there aren't too many, which is why I think this thread and these conversations are mostly a proxy for expressing unhappiness with the music.
