How would BB history be different if Mike had received proper cowriting credits?

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

Is anyone calling you a Tony Asher cheerleader or apologist? or a VDP cheerleader or apologist? Or even a Brianista? ... No, they are not!

The fact that you stoop to such attempts at insulting us that way just shows your belief that disliking Mike and all the delusions that seem to go along with such a mindset are to be taken for granted as some unassailable position rather than typical human pettiness.... No one is asking you to like Mike, but when you push around opinions as scientific proof of something: it should be questioned..... And if you can't handle such questions without resorting to insults, maybe you should consider your motivations for demanding that Mike's credit for WIBN is undeserved etc etc etc.

The day I unjustly make up a lie to build up Tony or VDP at Mike's expense (Like Tony being the true author of Good Vibrations or VDP the collaborator for Gettin Hungry) is the day I'm an appologist for them. The day I accuse posters that fairly criticize TA/VDP of being haters is the day I stoop to your level. The day I play the guilt card (Boo Hoo, TA/VDP work so hard! say nice things about them too!) whenever someone has the 'audacity' to compliment someone else's work instead, that's the day I give you all permission to dismiss me as I have done to yours and Cam's nonsense. Do you have any self awareness at all?

WHO is tying to build up Mike at Tony or VDP's expense? And what have those guys had to suffer because of any of this???

You like them, you dislike Mike: OK, we get that part, but it still doesn't answer the question.

No matter how you like it or do not like it: Mike contributed to WIBN! This shouldn't even be an issue. It is neither and insult to Tony Asher or anyone else that the public (the small segment who could actually give a damn) now knows that Mike wrote the coda.... You got to consider also, the fact that Tony Asher knew this all along yet still took credit for those words.... But, hey, he's a helpless victim here, so we'll let it slide...

As for Mama Says, we don't know enough.... Maybe, just maybe Brian told Mike "Yeah, yeah! You'll do all the lyrics for this next album" ..... So, they go write a bunch of songs and then Brian slaps Mama Says on there at the end on a last minute whim..... Now he's scared and doesn't know what to do credit/wise, so he just lets it go and some penny pusher does the rest...... Pure baseless speculation, I admit..... Any other  ideas?

I suggest you look back at what you wrote, take a long hard look in the mirror, and take a nap.

I suggest speculation based on facts. And to concede when someone presents a theory supported by more hard evidence. Or I could tell you about how VDP actually wrote Little Pad by climbing in through Brian's airducts while the latter took his smoker breaks. It's based on speculation I admit, but who's to say I'm wrong? Why don't you email Mike about it?

[Cam Mott]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

We will continue to disagree then until you get more credible evidence than the publishing.

^Thanks for ignoring half of my argument and thus proving my point. You are not worth the time it takes to reply to you. That's not a personal attack. That's my reaction to someone who cannot discuss something intelligently, form thoughtful counter-arguments and resorts to ignoring logical rebuttals to his fantastic lies.

Back at ya, pal. Let me know if you find out anything new.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

Is anyone calling you a Tony Asher cheerleader or apologist? or a VDP cheerleader or apologist? Or even a Brianista? ... No, they are not!

The fact that you stoop to such attempts at insulting us that way just shows your belief that disliking Mike and all the delusions that seem to go along with such a mindset are to be taken for granted as some unassailable position rather than typical human pettiness.... No one is asking you to like Mike, but when you push around opinions as scientific proof of something: it should be questioned..... And if you can't handle such questions without resorting to insults, maybe you should consider your motivations for demanding that Mike's credit for WIBN is undeserved etc etc etc.

The day I unjustly make up a lie to build up Tony or VDP at Mike's expense (Like Tony being the true author of Good Vibrations or VDP the collaborator for Gettin Hungry) is the day I'm an appologist for them. The day I accuse posters that fairly criticize TA/VDP of being haters is the day I stoop to your level. The day I play the guilt card (Boo Hoo, TA/VDP work so hard! say nice things about them too!) whenever someone has the 'audacity' to compliment someone else's work instead, that's the day I give you all permission to dismiss me as I have done to yours and Cam's nonsense. Do you have any self awareness at all?

WHO is tying to build up Mike at Tony or VDP's expense? And what have those guys had to suffer because of any of this???

You like them, you dislike Mike: OK, we get that part, but it still doesn't answer the question.

No matter how you like it or do not like it: Mike contributed to WIBN! This shouldn't even be an issue. It is neither and insult to Tony Asher or anyone else that the public (the small segment who could actually give a damn) now knows that Mike wrote the coda.... You got to consider also, the fact that Tony Asher knew this all along yet still took credit for those words.... But, hey, he's a helpless victim here, so we'll let it slide...

As for Mama Says, we don't know enough.... Maybe, just maybe Brian told Mike "Yeah, yeah! You'll do all the lyrics for this next album" ..... So, they go write a bunch of songs and then Brian slaps Mama Says on there at the end on a last minute whim..... Now he's scared and doesn't know what to do credit/wise, so he just lets it go and some penny pusher does the rest...... Pure baseless speculation, I admit..... Any other  ideas?

I suggest you look back at what you wrote, take a long hard look in the mirror, and take a nap.

I suggest speculation based on facts. And to concede when someone presents a theory supported by more hard evidence. Or I could tell you about how VDP actually wrote Little Pad by climbing in through Brian's airducts while the latter took his smoker breaks. It's based on speculation I admit, but who's to say I'm wrong? Why don't you email Mike about it?

But I'm not debating you regarding Mama Says. I honestly believe Mike didn't write those words.....

I asked you to explain how Mike's credit on WIBN is unjust and all you did was tell me your process for arriving at an answer which you could not even provide....

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

Is anyone calling you a Tony Asher cheerleader or apologist? or a VDP cheerleader or apologist? Or even a Brianista? ... No, they are not!

The fact that you stoop to such attempts at insulting us that way just shows your belief that disliking Mike and all the delusions that seem to go along with such a mindset are to be taken for granted as some unassailable position rather than typical human pettiness.... No one is asking you to like Mike, but when you push around opinions as scientific proof of something: it should be questioned..... And if you can't handle such questions without resorting to insults, maybe you should consider your motivations for demanding that Mike's credit for WIBN is undeserved etc etc etc.

The day I unjustly make up a lie to build up Tony or VDP at Mike's expense (Like Tony being the true author of Good Vibrations or VDP the collaborator for Gettin Hungry) is the day I'm an appologist for them. The day I accuse posters that fairly criticize TA/VDP of being haters is the day I stoop to your level. The day I play the guilt card (Boo Hoo, TA/VDP work so hard! say nice things about them too!) whenever someone has the 'audacity' to compliment someone else's work instead, that's the day I give you all permission to dismiss me as I have done to yours and Cam's nonsense. Do you have any self awareness at all?

WHO is tying to build up Mike at Tony or VDP's expense? And what have those guys had to suffer because of any of this???

You like them, you dislike Mike: OK, we get that part, but it still doesn't answer the question.

No matter how you like it or do not like it: Mike contributed to WIBN! This shouldn't even be an issue. It is neither and insult to Tony Asher or anyone else that the public (the small segment who could actually give a damn) now knows that Mike wrote the coda.... You got to consider also, the fact that Tony Asher knew this all along yet still took credit for those words.... But, hey, he's a helpless victim here, so we'll let it slide...

As for Mama Says, we don't know enough.... Maybe, just maybe Brian told Mike "Yeah, yeah! You'll do all the lyrics for this next album" ..... So, they go write a bunch of songs and then Brian slaps Mama Says on there at the end on a last minute whim..... Now he's scared and doesn't know what to do credit/wise, so he just lets it go and some penny pusher does the rest...... Pure baseless speculation, I admit..... Any other  ideas?

I suggest you look back at what you wrote, take a long hard look in the mirror, and take a nap.

I suggest speculation based on facts. And to concede when someone presents a theory supported by more hard evidence. Or I could tell you about how VDP actually wrote Little Pad by climbing in through Brian's airducts while the latter took his smoker breaks. It's based on speculation I admit, but who's to say I'm wrong? Why don't you email Mike about it?

But I'm not debating you regarding Mama Says. I honestly believe Mike didn't write those words.....

I asked you to explain how Mike's credit on WIBN is unjust and all you did was tell me your process for arriving at an answer which you could not even provide....

I've already provided my reasons for believing that coauthor credit isnt warranted. If you had not spent this entire conversation immediately assuming the worst in all my posts and running with it, maybe we could have had a real discussion about it. But I've learned to respect your's and Cam's responses less and less with each post. Again, for reasons previously stated.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

Is anyone calling you a Tony Asher cheerleader or apologist? or a VDP cheerleader or apologist? Or even a Brianista? ... No, they are not!

The fact that you stoop to such attempts at insulting us that way just shows your belief that disliking Mike and all the delusions that seem to go along with such a mindset are to be taken for granted as some unassailable position rather than typical human pettiness.... No one is asking you to like Mike, but when you push around opinions as scientific proof of something: it should be questioned..... And if you can't handle such questions without resorting to insults, maybe you should consider your motivations for demanding that Mike's credit for WIBN is undeserved etc etc etc.

The day I unjustly make up a lie to build up Tony or VDP at Mike's expense (Like Tony being the true author of Good Vibrations or VDP the collaborator for Gettin Hungry) is the day I'm an appologist for them. The day I accuse posters that fairly criticize TA/VDP of being haters is the day I stoop to your level. The day I play the guilt card (Boo Hoo, TA/VDP work so hard! say nice things about them too!) whenever someone has the 'audacity' to compliment someone else's work instead, that's the day I give you all permission to dismiss me as I have done to yours and Cam's nonsense. Do you have any self awareness at all?

WHO is tying to build up Mike at Tony or VDP's expense? And what have those guys had to suffer because of any of this???

You like them, you dislike Mike: OK, we get that part, but it still doesn't answer the question.

No matter how you like it or do not like it: Mike contributed to WIBN! This shouldn't even be an issue. It is neither and insult to Tony Asher or anyone else that the public (the small segment who could actually give a damn) now knows that Mike wrote the coda.... You got to consider also, the fact that Tony Asher knew this all along yet still took credit for those words.... But, hey, he's a helpless victim here, so we'll let it slide...

As for Mama Says, we don't know enough.... Maybe, just maybe Brian told Mike "Yeah, yeah! You'll do all the lyrics for this next album" ..... So, they go write a bunch of songs and then Brian slaps Mama Says on there at the end on a last minute whim..... Now he's scared and doesn't know what to do credit/wise, so he just lets it go and some penny pusher does the rest...... Pure baseless speculation, I admit..... Any other  ideas?

I suggest you look back at what you wrote, take a long hard look in the mirror, and take a nap.

I suggest speculation based on facts. And to concede when someone presents a theory supported by more hard evidence. Or I could tell you about how VDP actually wrote Little Pad by climbing in through Brian's airducts while the latter took his smoker breaks. It's based on speculation I admit, but who's to say I'm wrong? Why don't you email Mike about it?

But I'm not debating you regarding Mama Says. I honestly believe Mike didn't write those words.....

I asked you to explain how Mike's credit on WIBN is unjust and all you did was tell me your process for arriving at an answer which you could not even provide....

I've already provided my reasons for believing that coauthor credit isnt warranted. If you had not spent this entire conversation immediately assuming the worst in all my posts and running with it, maybe we could have had a real discussion about it. But I've learned to respect your's and Cam's responses less and less with each post. Again, for reasons previously stated.

OK, well I can respect your not believing Mike was warranted a credit on WIBN. I just think that of all examples: it's a tough case to make for all the reasons I've pointed out...

Simple disagreement in the end.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

Is anyone calling you a Tony Asher cheerleader or apologist? or a VDP cheerleader or apologist? Or even a Brianista? ... No, they are not!

The fact that you stoop to such attempts at insulting us that way just shows your belief that disliking Mike and all the delusions that seem to go along with such a mindset are to be taken for granted as some unassailable position rather than typical human pettiness.... No one is asking you to like Mike, but when you push around opinions as scientific proof of something: it should be questioned..... And if you can't handle such questions without resorting to insults, maybe you should consider your motivations for demanding that Mike's credit for WIBN is undeserved etc etc etc.

The day I unjustly make up a lie to build up Tony or VDP at Mike's expense (Like Tony being the true author of Good Vibrations or VDP the collaborator for Gettin Hungry) is the day I'm an appologist for them. The day I accuse posters that fairly criticize TA/VDP of being haters is the day I stoop to your level. The day I play the guilt card (Boo Hoo, TA/VDP work so hard! say nice things about them too!) whenever someone has the 'audacity' to compliment someone else's work instead, that's the day I give you all permission to dismiss me as I have done to yours and Cam's nonsense. Do you have any self awareness at all?

WHO is tying to build up Mike at Tony or VDP's expense? And what have those guys had to suffer because of any of this???

You like them, you dislike Mike: OK, we get that part, but it still doesn't answer the question.

No matter how you like it or do not like it: Mike contributed to WIBN! This shouldn't even be an issue. It is neither and insult to Tony Asher or anyone else that the public (the small segment who could actually give a damn) now knows that Mike wrote the coda.... You got to consider also, the fact that Tony Asher knew this all along yet still took credit for those words.... But, hey, he's a helpless victim here, so we'll let it slide...

As for Mama Says, we don't know enough.... Maybe, just maybe Brian told Mike "Yeah, yeah! You'll do all the lyrics for this next album" ..... So, they go write a bunch of songs and then Brian slaps Mama Says on there at the end on a last minute whim..... Now he's scared and doesn't know what to do credit/wise, so he just lets it go and some penny pusher does the rest...... Pure baseless speculation, I admit..... Any other  ideas?

I suggest you look back at what you wrote, take a long hard look in the mirror, and take a nap.

I suggest speculation based on facts. And to concede when someone presents a theory supported by more hard evidence. Or I could tell you about how VDP actually wrote Little Pad by climbing in through Brian's airducts while the latter took his smoker breaks. It's based on speculation I admit, but who's to say I'm wrong? Why don't you email Mike about it?

But I'm not debating you regarding Mama Says. I honestly believe Mike didn't write those words.....

I asked you to explain how Mike's credit on WIBN is unjust and all you did was tell me your process for arriving at an answer which you could not even provide....

I've already provided my reasons for believing that coauthor credit isnt warranted. If you had not spent this entire conversation immediately assuming the worst in all my posts and running with it, maybe we could have had a real discussion about it. But I've learned to respect your's and Cam's responses less and less with each post. Again, for reasons previously stated.

OK, well I can respect your not believing Mike was warranted a credit on WIBN. I just think that of all examples: it's a tough case to make for all the reasons I've pointed out...

Simple disagreement in the end.

Except, all throughout this debate and on other threads you come off as very overly (and in some cases unfairly) defensive of Mike. Again, I've listed some specific instances against me. I'm just letting you know how you come across.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Roger Christian, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Jack Reiley are lucky men. Apparently Brian's "shakiness", mental illness, and auditory illusions that kept him from correcting songwriting credits were only present when it applied to Mike Love.

My apologies if this has been mentioned and I missed it:
Wasn't VDP omitted from some credits he was due on Smiley Smile?  It was brought up with Brian and Melinda during the BWPS era I believe.

I'd argue this was the case with Mama Says on Wild Honey.


And Cam, this is YOUR wild, baseless theory. It's up to you to prove it. You email VDP. I will not do your grunt work for you, and with your history I bet even if VDP confirmed what everyone but you already knows, you'd still deny it.

As opposed to your baseless theory. You're the one who thinks he has to be the author, I'm not gonna do your grunt work. I ready to continue to disagree, if somebody comes up with something more definitive than the publishing (and your baseless theories) we can have another go at it.

I'm not the one who brought up the idea of contacting him--you are. My theories are not baseless, your all-encompassing Mike Love Appologism has made you delusional. You are the one challenging the DOCUMENTED FACTS. Period. End of conversation (unless you *prove* me wrong. with actual facts.)

This isn't a debate for us to "have a go at." This is you blatantly making stories up and using them to justify a slanderous lie. I will not entertain your ramblings on the matter any further.

Is anyone calling you a Tony Asher cheerleader or apologist? or a VDP cheerleader or apologist? Or even a Brianista? ... No, they are not!

The fact that you stoop to such attempts at insulting us that way just shows your belief that disliking Mike and all the delusions that seem to go along with such a mindset are to be taken for granted as some unassailable position rather than typical human pettiness.... No one is asking you to like Mike, but when you push around opinions as scientific proof of something: it should be questioned..... And if you can't handle such questions without resorting to insults, maybe you should consider your motivations for demanding that Mike's credit for WIBN is undeserved etc etc etc.

The day I unjustly make up a lie to build up Tony or VDP at Mike's expense (Like Tony being the true author of Good Vibrations or VDP the collaborator for Gettin Hungry) is the day I'm an appologist for them. The day I accuse posters that fairly criticize TA/VDP of being haters is the day I stoop to your level. The day I play the guilt card (Boo Hoo, TA/VDP work so hard! say nice things about them too!) whenever someone has the 'audacity' to compliment someone else's work instead, that's the day I give you all permission to dismiss me as I have done to yours and Cam's nonsense. Do you have any self awareness at all?

WHO is tying to build up Mike at Tony or VDP's expense? And what have those guys had to suffer because of any of this???

You like them, you dislike Mike: OK, we get that part, but it still doesn't answer the question.

No matter how you like it or do not like it: Mike contributed to WIBN! This shouldn't even be an issue. It is neither and insult to Tony Asher or anyone else that the public (the small segment who could actually give a damn) now knows that Mike wrote the coda.... You got to consider also, the fact that Tony Asher knew this all along yet still took credit for those words.... But, hey, he's a helpless victim here, so we'll let it slide...

As for Mama Says, we don't know enough.... Maybe, just maybe Brian told Mike "Yeah, yeah! You'll do all the lyrics for this next album" ..... So, they go write a bunch of songs and then Brian slaps Mama Says on there at the end on a last minute whim..... Now he's scared and doesn't know what to do credit/wise, so he just lets it go and some penny pusher does the rest...... Pure baseless speculation, I admit..... Any other  ideas?

I suggest you look back at what you wrote, take a long hard look in the mirror, and take a nap.

I suggest speculation based on facts. And to concede when someone presents a theory supported by more hard evidence. Or I could tell you about how VDP actually wrote Little Pad by climbing in through Brian's airducts while the latter took his smoker breaks. It's based on speculation I admit, but who's to say I'm wrong? Why don't you email Mike about it?

But I'm not debating you regarding Mama Says. I honestly believe Mike didn't write those words.....

I asked you to explain how Mike's credit on WIBN is unjust and all you did was tell me your process for arriving at an answer which you could not even provide....

I've already provided my reasons for believing that coauthor credit isnt warranted. If you had not spent this entire conversation immediately assuming the worst in all my posts and running with it, maybe we could have had a real discussion about it. But I've learned to respect your's and Cam's responses less and less with each post. Again, for reasons previously stated.

OK, well I can respect your not believing Mike was warranted a credit on WIBN. I just think that of all examples: it's a tough case to make for all the reasons I've pointed out...

Simple disagreement in the end.

Except, all throughout this debate and on other threads you come off as very overly (and in some cases unfairly) defensive of Mike. Again, I've listed some specific instances against me. I'm just letting you know how you come across.

Understood. Just try and believe me when I say it's far less about Mike than it is about the principle behind the whole saga.

[guitarfool2002]

I'm going to bring in something that I noticed here, related to the discussion rather than the actual topic(s) being discussed, and in an attempt to bring it back to the cases we're talking about, compare this to something else. It might be controversial, I agree it's incendiary in some circles, but just consider this before continuing the back and forth over opinions and the like.

OK, I notice some replies in the last two pages have suggested a notion of "the court ruled on it, deal with it". That is trying to shut down opinions on the micro-issue of WIBN's credits, which were one part in a case that originally mentioned over 70 songs, then 48 were taken to court, and that 48 got narrowed down to 35 for which awards and credits were decided by the court.

Of those 35, WIBN was one of them, that's it.

Until the actual court transcripts and a copy of the decision can be produced, we don't know what *exactly* was given in terms of percentages. We just know that Mike got something for it, and his name appears on the credits from now on.

Take that as a court decision, a "verdict" if you will.

We can all freely share our thoughts on that verdict. We can all speculate on that verdict, we can each decide whether to weigh Asher's views on it or Mike's views on it (which I haven't yet seen specifically regarding WIBN), and we can weigh what went into the deliberations to reach that decision on that song.

Ultimately, no one doubts Mike got credit for it. We know his team went for more in that case than the coda, but we do not know how much more if anything they actually got.

So does the decision of the court mean questioning it in terms of musical legitimacy or from a different perspective as a musician is a fool's errand, and shouldn't even be allowed?

Does it mean the court decision cannot be challenged, questioned, or even disagreed with after the fact?

Does it suggest that because the decision came down from the judge, and awards were given to the plaintiff, that the actual handling of the case itself cannot be questioned if you disagree with the way the case was argued or decided on some other grounds, including those musical opinions about what defines a contribution to a song?

Here is the controversy:

If this were the case, if the decision should be the ultimate word and debate on the merits of the case are pointless...in other words "deal with it", with "it" being the outcome of the case...

...compare this to any number of high profile court cases where groups of people are still arguing the merits of and arguing about the decisions of the court, in some cases presenting all kinds of "facts" to suggest the court's decision was wrong, or at least they believe it was wrong for various reasons.

Consider George Zimmerman in the Martin case, consider Bush v. Gore in the Supreme Court around the 2000 elections, consider Roe v. Wade, consider any number of high profile cases where the decision is far from the final word for those who didn't agree and in some cases have valid points as to why they don't agree.

Is the reaction there to shut down debate and tell those who are still angry at the Zimmerman verdict to "deal with it" because he was found innocent by a jury?

That kind of thing bothers me because beyond causing hard feelings on a forum like this, it's also in a way suggesting the appeals process in general has no place in the courts or the legal system in general, on the basis that the judgement of the court determined what was "fact" and who was "right".

So, drop any discussion or challenge in something as trivial as the WIBN credit issue or any other songwriting issues related, and accept that the court made its decision, and that's that.

But don't in the same breath argue for the appeals process when it's used to try to correct what some viewed as incorrect rulings based on any number of issues, because I see them as directly related.

In this case, ultimately, all parties named Brian and Mike wanted to put it behind them and look ahead rather than drag it out any more. Fortunately when it did finally get finished up, Brian was neither the 1989 Brian, nor was he the 1992 Brian, and he was getting out of some very bad legal and personal stuff. And Mike, too, was in direct contact with Brian and was able to reconnect as family rather than being shut out by those around Brian. Note that when it got finished up, they went right back into writing songs together, a baby step in the process of getting back on track as blood relatives, as of that year. And that's their initiative.

But it doesn't mean we can't have debates over the merits of the case/claims/decision just the same.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Egad! We're talking about a freaking 2:30 pop song!

Mike was awarded credit for a 30 second coda which he also sings, solo. If he wrote it: which, by all accounts, he did: can we live with this?

The jury awarding him this credit is merely more evidence to support that Mike did in fact contribute this small portion of the song. Big F*uck it all to hell deal!!!

Of course the jury's decision can be endlessly discussed, dissected at sleep inducing length, again and again and again and again..... and again and again and again....


....... Somewhere in the Overlook Hotel there is a framed transcript of this thread......

[Ron]

So... eh.... you a FAMILY man, Pinder??

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

So... eh.... you a FAMILY man, Pinder??

Yeah, and don't you worry..... my wife is a confirmed Beach Boys, Brian Wilson minutia addict!! She'll love ti!

[Ron]

Sorry, it was just a bad Shining joke. 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Sorry, it was just a bad Shining joke.  

So was my reply  

Whatever you do, stay out of Studio 237!!!!!

[Ron]

Touche.  I must go watch that movie again.  See you folks tommorow night!

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Touche.  I must go watch that movie again.  See you folks tommorow night!

The scene where Shelly Duvall sees apparitions of Bruce and Al rolling around on the floor making pig noises is the scariest!!!!!

[guitarfool2002]

I'm just making an observation about that case specifically. The eyewitness account of the whole trail showed it was not just or even mostly about money for Mike's people.

No matter what I feel about this, let's go on it for a minute and consider another question like the one posed as the topic of this thread:

What if Brian had lost his case against Irving/Almo et al, and the court found that the sale of Sea Of Tunes was authorized and no "wrongdoing" or misconduct had taken place. Which would mean Irving/Almo could retain everything and Brian had no claim on royalites, profits, and the like.

Would Mike have filed a lawsuit against *them* to get his credits and payments due from the songs? They would be the people to sue because they were collecting revenue from the songs since at least 1970.

Just asking opinion as a hypothetical "what if?" scenario, again like the initial question of the thread.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm just making an observation about that case specifically. The eyewitness account of the whole trail showed it was not just or even mostly about money for Mike's people.

No matter what I feel about this, let's go on it for a minute and consider another question like the one posed as the topic of this thread:

What if Brian had lost his case against Irving/Almo et al, and the court found that the sale of Sea Of Tunes was authorized and no "wrongdoing" or misconduct had taken place. Which would mean Irving/Almo could retain everything and Brian had no claim on royalites, profits, and the like.

Would Mike have filed a lawsuit against *them* to get his credits and payments due from the songs? They would be the people to sue because they were collecting revenue from the songs since at least 1970.

Just asking opinion as a hypothetical "what if?" scenario, again like the initial question of the thread.

Best answer possible: we have no idea.

[guitarfool2002]

I'm just making an observation about that case specifically. The eyewitness account of the whole trail showed it was not just or even mostly about money for Mike's people.

No matter what I feel about this, let's go on it for a minute and consider another question like the one posed as the topic of this thread:

What if Brian had lost his case against Irving/Almo et al, and the court found that the sale of Sea Of Tunes was authorized and no "wrongdoing" or misconduct had taken place. Which would mean Irving/Almo could retain everything and Brian had no claim on royalites, profits, and the like.

Would Mike have filed a lawsuit against *them* to get his credits and payments due from the songs? They would be the people to sue because they were collecting revenue from the songs since at least 1970.

Just asking opinion as a hypothetical "what if?" scenario, again like the initial question of the thread.

Best answer possible: we have no idea.

Just lighten up, man. If you don't want to join in, then don't. Maybe I missed it, but did you post the same reply to the person who started the topic by asking a similar hypothetical question 17 pages ago?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm just making an observation about that case specifically. The eyewitness account of the whole trail showed it was not just or even mostly about money for Mike's people.

No matter what I feel about this, let's go on it for a minute and consider another question like the one posed as the topic of this thread:

What if Brian had lost his case against Irving/Almo et al, and the court found that the sale of Sea Of Tunes was authorized and no "wrongdoing" or misconduct had taken place. Which would mean Irving/Almo could retain everything and Brian had no claim on royalites, profits, and the like.

Would Mike have filed a lawsuit against *them* to get his credits and payments due from the songs? They would be the people to sue because they were collecting revenue from the songs since at least 1970.

Just asking opinion as a hypothetical "what if?" scenario, again like the initial question of the thread.

Best answer possible: we have no idea.

Just lighten up, man. If you don't want to join in, then don't. Maybe I missed it, but did you post the same reply to the person who started the topic by asking a similar hypothetical question 17 pages ago?

Point is, such speculation just causes fights around here and gets us all worked up, and your lengthy "what- if's" are just kerosene for the fire! Hell, it's hard enough not to fight about things we know happened!!!

The only hypothetical I'm willing to consider is we all pretend VDP challenged Mike to a duel and it played out like the end of Barry Lyndon! .... That might just sooth some spirits around here.

[guitarfool2002]

I'm just making an observation about that case specifically. The eyewitness account of the whole trail showed it was not just or even mostly about money for Mike's people.

No matter what I feel about this, let's go on it for a minute and consider another question like the one posed as the topic of this thread:

What if Brian had lost his case against Irving/Almo et al, and the court found that the sale of Sea Of Tunes was authorized and no "wrongdoing" or misconduct had taken place. Which would mean Irving/Almo could retain everything and Brian had no claim on royalites, profits, and the like.

Would Mike have filed a lawsuit against *them* to get his credits and payments due from the songs? They would be the people to sue because they were collecting revenue from the songs since at least 1970.

Just asking opinion as a hypothetical "what if?" scenario, again like the initial question of the thread.

Best answer possible: we have no idea.

Just lighten up, man. If you don't want to join in, then don't. Maybe I missed it, but did you post the same reply to the person who started the topic by asking a similar hypothetical question 17 pages ago?

Point is, such speculation just causes fights around here and gets us all worked up, and your lengthy "what- if's" are just kerosene for the fire! Hell, it's hard enough not to fight about things we know happened!!!

The only hypothetical I'm willing to consider is we all pretend VDP challenged Mike to a duel and it played out like the end of Barry Lyndon! .... That might just sooth some spirits around here.

No, what I find soothing is reading and then re-reading Mike Love's own words from 2004 where he basically shreds the opinion that Brian should shoulder the blame for fucking Mike out of money for all those songs. I laugh like DeNiro in the theater from "Cape Fear" thinking about the irony of that.

And the fact that even Mike's own words were questioned and doubted in favor of the "tough sh*t" and "deal with it" bullshit replies you've thrown around like empty Doritos bags at the University of Colorado student center, trying to distract attention from the elephant in the room, makes me laugh even more.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm just making an observation about that case specifically. The eyewitness account of the whole trail showed it was not just or even mostly about money for Mike's people.

No matter what I feel about this, let's go on it for a minute and consider another question like the one posed as the topic of this thread:

What if Brian had lost his case against Irving/Almo et al, and the court found that the sale of Sea Of Tunes was authorized and no "wrongdoing" or misconduct had taken place. Which would mean Irving/Almo could retain everything and Brian had no claim on royalites, profits, and the like.

Would Mike have filed a lawsuit against *them* to get his credits and payments due from the songs? They would be the people to sue because they were collecting revenue from the songs since at least 1970.

Just asking opinion as a hypothetical "what if?" scenario, again like the initial question of the thread.

Best answer possible: we have no idea.

Just lighten up, man. If you don't want to join in, then don't. Maybe I missed it, but did you post the same reply to the person who started the topic by asking a similar hypothetical question 17 pages ago?

Point is, such speculation just causes fights around here and gets us all worked up, and your lengthy "what- if's" are just kerosene for the fire! Hell, it's hard enough not to fight about things we know happened!!!

The only hypothetical I'm willing to consider is we all pretend VDP challenged Mike to a duel and it played out like the end of Barry Lyndon! .... That might just sooth some spirits around here.

No, what I find soothing is reading and then re-reading Mike Love's own words from 2004 where he basically shreds the opinion that Brian should shoulder the blame for fucking Mike out of money for all those songs. I laugh like DeNiro in the theater from "Cape Fear" thinking about the irony of that.

And the fact that even Mike's own words were questioned and doubted in favor of the "tough sh*t" and "deal with it" bullshit replies you've thrown around like empty Doritos bags at the University of Colorado student center, trying to distract attention from the elephant in the room, makes me laugh even more.

What elephant in the room? And what can possibly come of all this after 50 freaking years? A pay per view event where Mike apologizes the Brian and the world? And even if that happened we'd have 800 pages the next day of "But was Mike's apology sincere"?

You can rattle off page after page after reams more pages of hypotheticals but it still comes back to the same reality! And we all have to suck it up from time to time in life and not everything needs a public apology.

I'm laughing like, uh, DeNiro in his mom's basement in King Of Comedy!!!

Cape Fear laughing scene was creepier though, so touché.

[guitarfool2002]

The elephant in the room is that Mike himself directly contradicted what folks here were trying to suggest happened to him 50 years ago by placing blame on Murry and suggesting Brian wasn't capable of doing certain things that others here criticize him for not doing, yet that's not enough...the man's own words and opinions are less valid than a letter by Murry Wilson, I guess that's the way it is. Mike made essentially the same points as some in the thread who were accused of being "anti-Mike".

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

The elephant in the room is that Mike himself directly contradicted what folks here were trying to suggest happened to him 50 years ago by placing blame on Murry and suggesting Brian wasn't capable of doing certain things that others here criticize him for not doing, yet that's not enough...the man's own words and opinions are less valid than a letter by Murry Wilson, I guess that's the way it is. Mike made essentially the same points as some in the thread who were accused of being "anti-Mike".

And everybody directly involved has lived long and prospered..... This was 50 freaking years ago! So what?

[CenturyDeprived]

Another question in this whole crazy topic(s) that we are discussing:

Would Mike at some point between, say, 1967-1982, ever have publicly taken a tiny bit of responsibility for SMiLE's demise, in exchange for his cowriting credits (and all the associated coin)?

[CenturyDeprived]

The elephant in the room is that Mike himself directly contradicted what folks here were trying to suggest happened to him 50 years ago by placing blame on Murry and suggesting Brian wasn't capable of doing certain things that others here criticize him for not doing, yet that's not enough...the man's own words and opinions are less valid than a letter by Murry Wilson, I guess that's the way it is. Mike made essentially the same points as some in the thread who were accused of being "anti-Mike".

And everybody directly involved has lived long and prospered..... This was 50 freaking years ago! So what?

Regardless of my opinion on the topic we're discussing... why do people in these threads roll out the "it was 50 years ago" card? What does the amount of time that has elapsed have to do with anything? This is a BB board, and most of the discussion-worthy items took place a long time ago. Not sure what the relevance is.