Page 77 of 169
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:22 am
by stip
BurtReynolds wrote:I only see two alternatives. one is for people who don't like PJ's recent output to just stop posting here (which makes obvious sense now that I type it out
). It would be pretty empty place for awhile, though. I'm sure people would trickle in over time, but even many of the newcomers post here to complain. Its not as if everyone is going to realize their dislike of PJ's output is horribly irrational and that it is in fact really amazeballs. That just isn't happening.
The other alternative, the nuclear option, is to blow it up and make it not about PJ anymore. Or make it about PJ Harvey, who is excellent and everyone should listen to her right now.
Or the people who dont' care about pearl jam could refrain from trashing pearl jam every opportunity they get, and participate in discussions that pertain to the parts of the band that they like, or just jump in when they have something worthwhile to say about the things that they don't like. There's that.
There's a PJ harvey thread in OB. I dont' care about her one way or the other. But if I didn't like her, I probably wouldn't hang out in that thread talking about how awful she is all the time. And if I did, the thread probably wouldn't be very enjoyable for you.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:23 am
by dimejinky99
stip wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Birds in Hell wrote:stip wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:We've had a few new posters over the last year who seemed to have no problem getting into this board.
It's not impossible, and a lot of them are great posters, but super thick skin or not caring much about pearl jam anymore shouldn't have to be pre reqs for posting on a pearl jam message board. Nor should having to apologize for actually caring about them
I think we have quite different ideas on what ultimately sustains the forum.
I don’t think you can enforce a particular slant on the discussions here – at least not successfully or not without risk of damaging the quality of the discussion that currently exists. For the most part, many of the regular posters here are the same that were here five, six, seven years ago: it’s not as though there’s been a great influx of new members eager to make light of Pearl Jam’s various follies or, alternatively, that the existing cohort of RM posters decided en masse to adopt that approach. It’s the band’s activities, not some pre-determined attitude of the posters, who’ve driven any perceived change in tone at RM.
To me, this place exists first and foremost as a discussion forum for its members; its general tone is, and should be, reflective of the thoughts and opinions of those individuals. I don’t think there’s any basis for a notion of responsibility towards how the forum is perceived by hypothetical new members or the Pearl Jam fan community at large. RM is McParadigm, Lament, BurtReynolds, cutuphalfdead, etc much more than it is a Pearl Jam fan discussion board.
Hear, hear.
and it's a big board. But this is a point of entry, and there is a difference between talking about your opinions and gleefully trashing everything you can about the band that is still the board's namesake with an imperial relentlessness. You just may not notice this because you don't care.
Or terrorising people for having the nerve to actually like Pj. Or defend them.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:23 am
by stip
I don't like this avatar
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:24 am
by stip
that's better.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:24 am
by dimejinky99
stip wrote:I don't like this avatar
Me neither. I have reported you for it.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:24 am
by Birds in Hell
stip wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Birds in Hell wrote:stip wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:We've had a few new posters over the last year who seemed to have no problem getting into this board.
It's not impossible, and a lot of them are great posters, but super thick skin or not caring much about pearl jam anymore shouldn't have to be pre reqs for posting on a pearl jam message board. Nor should having to apologize for actually caring about them
I think we have quite different ideas on what ultimately sustains the forum.
I don’t think you can enforce a particular slant on the discussions here – at least not successfully or not without risk of damaging the quality of the discussion that currently exists. For the most part, many of the regular posters here are the same that were here five, six, seven years ago: it’s not as though there’s been a great influx of new members eager to make light of Pearl Jam’s various follies or, alternatively, that the existing cohort of RM posters decided en masse to adopt that approach. It’s the band’s activities, not some pre-determined attitude of the posters, who’ve driven any perceived change in tone at RM.
To me, this place exists first and foremost as a discussion forum for its members; its general tone is, and should be, reflective of the thoughts and opinions of those individuals. I don’t think there’s any basis for a notion of responsibility towards how the forum is perceived by hypothetical new members or the Pearl Jam fan community at large. RM is McParadigm, Lament, BurtReynolds, cutuphalfdead, etc much more than it is a Pearl Jam fan discussion board.
Hear, hear.
and it's a big board. But this is a point of entry, and there is a difference between talking about your opinions and
gleefully trashing everything you can about the band that is still the board's namesake with an imperial relentlessness. You just may not notice this because you don't care.
That may be your perception but I genuinely don't think it matches reality.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:25 am
by verb_to_trust
Yeah, lets talk about PJ Harvey instead
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:25 am
by Norah
stip wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Birds in Hell wrote:stip wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:We've had a few new posters over the last year who seemed to have no problem getting into this board.
It's not impossible, and a lot of them are great posters, but super thick skin or not caring much about pearl jam anymore shouldn't have to be pre reqs for posting on a pearl jam message board. Nor should having to apologize for actually caring about them
I think we have quite different ideas on what ultimately sustains the forum.
I don’t think you can enforce a particular slant on the discussions here – at least not successfully or not without risk of damaging the quality of the discussion that currently exists. For the most part, many of the regular posters here are the same that were here five, six, seven years ago: it’s not as though there’s been a great influx of new members eager to make light of Pearl Jam’s various follies or, alternatively, that the existing cohort of RM posters decided en masse to adopt that approach. It’s the band’s activities, not some pre-determined attitude of the posters, who’ve driven any perceived change in tone at RM.
To me, this place exists first and foremost as a discussion forum for its members; its general tone is, and should be, reflective of the thoughts and opinions of those individuals. I don’t think there’s any basis for a notion of responsibility towards how the forum is perceived by hypothetical new members or the Pearl Jam fan community at large. RM is McParadigm, Lament, BurtReynolds, cutuphalfdead, etc much more than it is a Pearl Jam fan discussion board.
Hear, hear.
and it's a big board. But this is a point of entry, and there is a difference between talking about your opinions and gleefully trashing everything you can about the band that is still the board's namesake with an imperial relentlessness. You just may not notice this because you don't care.
What we need is a bigger board, with bigger nails!
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:26 am
by McParadigm
stip wrote: I probably wouldn't hang out in that thread talking about how awful she is all the time. And if I did, the thread probably wouldn't be very enjoyable for you.
Reading your work in the Beatles thread was a personal high point for me. Right up there with the birth of my children
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:26 am
by Birds in Hell
dimejinky99 wrote:Or terrorising people for having the nerve to actually like Pj. Or defend them.
Yeah, this doesn't happen either.
Rampant Pearl Jam negativity; RM's own bogeyman.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:27 am
by McParadigm
Guys, we are at least four months away from it being time for our annual "this fucking talk" talk
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:29 am
by BurtReynolds
BurtReynolds wrote:I only see two alternatives. one is for people who don't like PJ's recent output to just stop posting here (which makes obvious sense now that I type it out
). It would be pretty empty place for awhile, though. I'm sure people would trickle in over time, but even many of the newcomers post here to complain. Its not as if everyone is going to realize their dislike of PJ's output is horribly irrational and that it is in fact really amazeballs. That just isn't happening.
The other alternative, the nuclear option, is to blow it up and make it not about PJ anymore. Or make it about PJ Harvey, who is excellent and everyone should listen to her right now.
stip wrote:
Or the people who dont' care about pearl jam could refrain from trashing pearl jam every opportunity they get
reducing the traffic on this board by about 90%
stip wrote: and participate in discussions that pertain to the parts of the band that they like
kind of been done to death, really, unless someone out there is really interested in hearing someone's adoration for Yield for the millionth time.
stip wrote:or just jump in when they have something worthwhile to say about the things that they don't like. There's that.
reducing the traffic on this board by another 99%
stip wrote:There's a PJ harvey thread in OB. I dont' care about her one way or the other. But if I didn't like her, I probably wouldn't hang out in that thread talking about how awful she is all the time. And if I did, the thread probably wouldn't be very enjoyable for you.
On the contrary, a negative Stip comment in the PJ Harvey thread is the only thing that would give it real validity!
Birds in Hell wrote:dimejinky99 wrote:Or terrorising people for having the nerve to actually like Pj. Or defend them.
Yeah, this doesn't happen either.
Rampant Pearl Jam negativity; RM's own bogeyman.
yeah I haven't seen the bullying type stuff of new members. I used to see it, but haven't lately. Of course, one gets what they deserve for posting in the POST RIOT ACT MONEY GRAB THREAD. All bets are off here.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:30 am
by PryTo
I think some of the trashing of the band stems from the heavy censorship on the official. What’s attractive about this place is that you don’t find too many of the sheep found over there. That means there can be a level of critical discussion regarding everything from the music to the merch that’s missing on the official, which consists primarily of posts about how awesome PJ is, how they can do no wrong, how such and such would love to smoke a joint with Ed, and so on. You don’t get much of that here, which is a relief.
What is highly attractive is the depth of discussion, as demonstrated in the LAL threads of late and even in some of the March Madness posts. It’s a good place to for in-depth analysis of music. I don’t think of it as being all bashing PJ all the time. There’s some of that, sure, but I really think that’s partly because it’s fun to do something you can’t get away with on the official. And those dog collars suck and so do those corporate shows – at least to some of us. It’s nice to have a forum for opinions that have been banned from the official. So carry on, I say.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:32 am
by dimejinky99
If RM is American dad, my role is roger.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:34 am
by BurtReynolds
dimejinky99 wrote:If RM is American dad, my role is roger.
If RM is American dad, it should be cancelled.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:36 am
by dimejinky99
It's funnier than the Cleveland show.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:36 am
by Norah
Lightning Bolt is better than Backspacer. Doesn't mean I should listen to it.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:38 am
by Norah
Ugh, I don't even know if that's true.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:39 am
by dimejinky99
Time will be kinder to backspacer than its two predeccessors.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue March 25, 2014 12:39 am
by verb_to_trust
Maybe we need a negative sub forum