Red Mosquito

WtOB? wrote:i don’t think anyone on this board thinks we are entitled to this music. no one had any complaints when the link was removed.

Jorge wrote:Yeah, who are the people vociferously demanding that the content is allowed to be distributed?

Stopping distribution of leaked materials makes complete sense to me. It's the added clause of "also you're not allowed to talk about it" that rubbed me the wrong way.

Even so, as others pointed out, that also makes a kind of sense because discussion can lead to people asking for the leak privately... so even discussion about not being allowed to discuss it should be off limits. We're currently not complying because we've been talking about the leaked materials for pages and pages! All this navel-gazing about stolen materials and the breach of the artistic process and our responsibility as fans is just spreading the word even wider lol

WtOB? wrote:

Jorge wrote:Yeah, who are the people vociferously demanding that the content is allowed to be distributed?

Stopping distribution of leaked materials makes complete sense to me. It's the added clause of "also you're not allowed to talk about it" that rubbed me the wrong way.

Even so, as others pointed out, that also makes a kind of sense because discussion can lead to people asking for the leak privately... so even discussion about not being allowed to discuss it should be off limits. We're currently not complying because we've been talking about the leaked materials for pages and pages! All this navel-gazing about stolen materials and the breach of the artistic process and our responsibility as fans is just spreading the word even wider lol

are we allowed to talk about the fact that we're not allowed to talk about it? and if not, are we allowed to talk about the fact that we're not allowed to talk about the fact that we're not allowed to talk about it? and if not.....

E.H. Ruddock wrote:See this is where we as a board start to look dumb. We can't talk about it. That isn't going to change.

Also, for thread integrity, these aren't random PJ related thoughts.

Kevin Davis wrote:Today I remembered that PJ released Give Way for RSD a couple years back and that I haven't played it since I first got it. I am going to listen to that today.

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:I am not going to claim to know the impetus behind why leak A triggers a certain type of reaction and leak B does not.

But strat/dime are right, I think. This is material that was stolen. This wasn't a commercial release we just got to access early (and perhaps would then be tempted not to purchase).

And this was material that, for whatever reason, the artists who created did not want to share. In fact we know a lot of this material was intentionally shelved because they did not want to release it, which is one of the reasons why the Lightning Bolt -> Gigaton gap was so long.

As a fan, I always want more. I am passionate about this music. It adds to my life. And even if I don't always love or care about a particular piece of it, every bit of music I can access helps shape or recontextualize my relationship to the rest. Pearl Jam is a tapestry for me at this point. And so when something is available I will seek it out. And then I will seek people to talk about it with, because I enjoy this music more as part of a community than an individual.

But if the artist who created the work deemed it private, and not for public consumption, for whatever reason, that's their right, and I respect it. Each piece of music is a reflection on them as artists. We will judge it. We will critique it And it is an expression of their own selves that they may wish to keep for themselves. And I don't think we have the right to question why they want to do so.

It's what we would all want to see in our own lives. We don't expect every text we send to someone to be made public. We don't want the rough draft of our office power point shared. We don't want people to see the outcomes of our projects until they are completed and we can be proud of them.

If that stuff gets shared I think it's legitimate for it to feel invasive. Even violated. The level of that violation may depend on the quantity of what is shared. It may be the quality. It could be that it is personal, and not for us.

Maybe this isn't about money, or public perception, or the cultivation of fandom. Maybe it's about how they identify as artists and human beings knowing that we will be judging them as both.

As a fan forum, we privileges our fan identities. But if we are asked to occasionally think about the band's humanity and to allow that to supersede our fan need, that's a sacrifice I am comfortable making. We spend most of our fandom in gray spaces where we need to navigate these boundaries ourselves. But when someone comes out and asks you to prioritize their humanity, it's not hard to figure out what to do.

I like how stip is posturing the moral high ground while simultaneously totally listening to the songs. Magnificent work sir!

96583UP wrote:i love pearl jam

must stink always having people trying to be invasive in your space

years and years of this

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:I am not going to claim to know the impetus behind why leak A triggers a certain type of reaction and leak B does not.

But strat/dime are right, I think. This is material that was stolen. This wasn't a commercial release we just got to access early (and perhaps would then be tempted not to purchase).

And this was material that, for whatever reason, the artists who created did not want to share. In fact we know a lot of this material was intentionally shelved because they did not want to release it, which is one of the reasons why the Lightning Bolt -> Gigaton gap was so long.

As a fan, I always want more. I am passionate about this music. It adds to my life. And even if I don't always love or care about a particular piece of it, every bit of music I can access helps shape or recontextualize my relationship to the rest. Pearl Jam is a tapestry for me at this point. And so when something is available I will seek it out. And then I will seek people to talk about it with, because I enjoy this music more as part of a community than an individual.

But if the artist who created the work deemed it private, and not for public consumption, for whatever reason, that's their right, and I respect it. Each piece of music is a reflection on them as artists. We will judge it. We will critique it And it is an expression of their own selves that they may wish to keep for themselves. And I don't think we have the right to question why they want to do so.

It's what we would all want to see in our own lives. We don't expect every text we send to someone to be made public. We don't want the rough draft of our office power point shared. We don't want people to see the outcomes of our projects until they are completed and we can be proud of them.

If that stuff gets shared I think it's legitimate for it to feel invasive. Even violated. The level of that violation may depend on the quantity of what is shared. It may be the quality. It could be that it is personal, and not for us.

Maybe this isn't about money, or public perception, or the cultivation of fandom. Maybe it's about how they identify as artists and human beings knowing that we will be judging them as both.

As a fan forum, we privileges our fan identities. But if we are asked to occasionally think about the band's humanity and to allow that to supersede our fan need, that's a sacrifice I am comfortable making. We spend most of our fandom in gray spaces where we need to navigate these boundaries ourselves. But when someone comes out and asks you to prioritize their humanity, it's not hard to figure out what to do.

I like how stip is posturing the moral high ground while simultaneously totally listening to the songs. Magnificent work sir!

Bi_3 wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:Today I remembered that PJ released Give Way for RSD a couple years back and that I haven't played it since I first got it. I am going to listen to that today.

This post reminded me how I waited outside Best Buy for a couple hours to get this, could literally see it in the store, and then they pulled it minutes before the doors opened... and the security dude would not except $100 cash for a "copy that got lost in shipping"

stip wrote:for whatever reason I didnt try very hard to get Give Way. Seems like I would have. Maybe if i got it two songs at a time on 50 dollar bootlegs