The Smiley Smile Message Board

Hello! Long-time member here, infrequent poster. I've noticed a drop in activity here of late, are we all talked out on BB? Or do we just need another good news item to get the ball rolling again? And whatever happened to AGD, the bedrock of the forum?

He was banned for being a bully.

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,23685.0.html

That "bedrock" of the forum turned out to be more like quicksand (read the thread posted by Funky Pretty) and it's incredibly obvious that the forum carried on just fine in it's absence. AGD and his little friends now reside on the Pet Sounds Forum (a tumbleweed infested fringe of the Beach Boys web-sphere where those who got kicked off here for legitimate reasons reside).

I'll probably get quite a lot of argument about this, but I'll say it anyway. I think that the belief that everybody over on PSF are evil is toxic, and I believe that PSF believing everybody on the SS board are evil is also toxic. Somewhere down the line this board split into two factions, with everybody against everybody else. I can't even muster up enough energy to be pissed off anymore. I'm just incredibly sad. SmileySmile used to be the number 1 Beach Boy's website on the internet. But not any longer. In the last day or so I've come to believe that everybody banned starting with Andrew Doe to today should be allowed to come back for 30 days. If those 30 days end without any "incidents", then another 30 should be added, and we would just play it by ear from there. Of course, more than two mods would be needed to help keep an eye on certain people.

After seeing all you saw, you want Doe back? f*** that. No one who brings someone's kids into their personal grudges or issues is welcome here.

Man, is that ever a disappointing post from you. Seriously, after all that has gone down? f*** that. Ask Billy as well about the banned members being allowed back and what they did to get banned.

It was just a thought. An idea to try to change this place. Alright, Doe's out then.

Just for the record, I had completely forgotten about that particular issue. I agree with you on that.

How about this guy?

@Jay, that's exactly why I asked repeatedly for at least an overview of the major bans that took place on this site (and sticky such a thread in the sandbox). Between harassment of valued members, to sarcasm aimed directly/intentionally at an insider, the call for JT to commit suicide, those who were compared to suicide bombers because they think Mike Love is a prick, etc etc. None of those guys deserve to come back. And as for AGD coming back, please re-read that thread posted above and the PMs Billy posted later in that thread to get a full appreciation for all the angst Billy went through during that time...do any mods deserve to possibly have to go through such a thing again? There are so many other examples of reprehensible behavior of those who were booted from this board (many now post on the PS forum).

Of course not everyone over on the PS forum is evil. But the core of the place is made up of posters who were booted from here for legitimate and serious reasons - ask Billy about any of those bans and see if he wants any of those guys back.

This place took a hit. But it has honestly been phenomenal to post here without the potential for receiving a PM with bum information in it regarding Melinda's story (which happened to me and others). It has been great to not have to read why VDPs supposedly isn't a credible source for Beach Boys anecdotes because he flubbed a factoid about a poet in a Twitter post in 2013. It has been great not debating the idiots who defended Mike Love at every turn even when Mike was clearly in the wrong. It has been great not having to see Debbie KL get harassed for being supportive of Brian Wilson's musical output. The list of benefits goes on.

and this one:

Alternative Facts are soooo in at the moment. :lol

They sure are.

BB fans are not getting any younger, and forums are out of favor with the new generation: they use sites like Reddit. So banning AGD  and splitting the user base in two is basically signing this forum's death warrant. It's going to be a challenge surviving, don't make it impossible by creating two rival forums.

I say unban everybody. Mods can delete posts and lock threads that get out of hand.

Not happening.

This has been a fun exercise, but the attempt to save face for Doe by suggesting this or any other forum is dying will not work. The truth got out, now he has to answer for it. Alongside others - There is a lot of answering to do.

But, if the attempt to do it were to be graded, it gets a solid F.

Reddit? That was so 2015...

Lot of talk about numbers recently too, like how many were at this event or that event...

Is splitting the user base in two an accurate statement when the forum with Doe and company averages around 10-15 users online reading at any given time, while this one averages around 90 or 100? This forum's numbers are essentially where they were a year or more ago. If the presence of Doe is such a strong drawing card, why isn't the forum where he posts breaking 15 readers and why is the Britain forum dead in the water? Hardly a new thread there for weeks.

The numbers don't jive with the theory.

Doe was not only a major contributor, but he was a BB scholar with incredible expertise. Sure he's an eccentric and can be very acerbic, but when you're dealing with somebody who contributes so much and is basically irreplaceable, you gotta give them more leeway, otherwise you're just hurting your own forum.

He lied, slandered people, and used people's family and kids as punchlines of insults and subjects of slander. You approve of that? You know where to find him and his bullshit.

To be honest, I don't know much about why certain people besides Doe were banned. Thinking it over, Doe was indeed banned for a valid reason. As well as Mike's Beard. Perhaps I should have thought more carefully before posting. I just think it's sad that things went the way they did.

Doe is a lying snake.  If allowed back he would only continue as he has. You guys haven't seen the worst.  I can't due to confidential information from the affected party but have made them aware.  I made sure of that.  

I will say this...libel is a hell of a thing. He'd best tread lightly

I think it's sad too. For all involved, especially those who got dragged into the mud including Billy and me. But it's a done deal now, and all the attempts to try resurrecting or boosting Doe or any of these people who lied can be met with a simple reminder of the facts and the reasons why all of it happened, as shown above. The choices were made, they chose to lie and behave as they did, and they are not welcome.

For real? Ask Billy about all the bullshit he went through giving that guy leeway - what Billy did for the guy went beyond leeway - and still Doe is throwing temper tantrums about Billy on his facebook (even throwing in petulant digs at Billy's personal life - real adult). If you or anyone else hasn't: read the thread posted above regarding AGD's ban, then read the PMs that Billy posted regarding Melinda. There were more PMs that weren't brought to light that maybe honestly should come to light so people would once and for all realize just how f***ed up things got.

And as Al Jolson said, "you ain't seen nothing yet..."

Oh, wait...that was Bachman Turner Overdrive who said that. Jolson was "you ain't heard nothin yet..."

Where are the fact checkers when you need them?

Oh...never mind.

And I'm sure the other group would express similar sentiments, which is exactly why a regrouping will never happen. Everyone wants their own space where their beliefs aren't questioned. It's basic human nature. Both boards will eventually die, as will everything else.

I'm just very sad that Stephen Desper left this thread seemingly forever and we may never receive his insight with the Boys again...  :(

Yeah, no one who lies and distorts the facts likes to be challenged with reality and facts. So, they find places where they won't be challenged and where facts can be shaped to fit any needs or agendas. Mission accomplished.

Yeah, me too. It's a shame what happened. I hope he comes back.

The way that went down was especially unfortunate.  Luckily, you can still find him over at the Pet Sounds forum.

Ahh, so all this was a marketing gimmick? Now it makes sense.

Watch out for falling prices.  Everything must go!

Come for the Desper, stay for the bullshit!

A regrouping will never happen, not because of a belief that supposedly people want safe spaces - but because there's one group of people that acted with complete disregard for a lot of people (including Melinda Wilson) and the people here wanted nothing to do with them.

They even have their own bookie!

besides the Wilsons and Jardines,  the other members were affected,  including the request of personal information,  for nefarious purposes.

The people that want safe spaces are those who feel free to post bullshit and treat people in the ways that got them banned here and elsewhere without fear of being challenged or confronted. So in that regard, I guess they found it? All 12 of them.

He said we may never receive his insight again and I told him you can still find his posts elsewhere.  Nothing more than that.  If you want to spin it into something else, that's your call.  

Maybe not here, but there's also a buyer beware issue. But yeah I got what you meant. 

You can find his posts right next to the posts and liars that are driving people off and keeping people away. Good marketing, right there.

Spin enough?

They do have Dezbo The Clown giving away free balloon animals to the kids under 12 every other Saturday, all we have is the facts...no contest I guess.

Dezbo the clown?

It's an inside joke.

Ah..ok. I was hoping it wasn't a shot at somebody...

He does know his way around a balloon giraffe though, I gotta say. Can blow them and tie them in 8 seconds flat.

I post on both forums and while my loyalty lies here and there are definitely more loonies over there, the topics of discussion between the two boards are neither better or worse than each other.  The fact is that not much is going on in the world of The Beach Boys at the moment so you can't expect things to always be exciting.  You're not missing out on any insight without the posters who left for the other forum.  If they came back, there would just be more drama which is not needed at all.  If you ever have a question for AGD or feel like being belittled by a right-wing nutjob, you can always pop over to the Pet Sounds forum while still being a member here.  No need to choose between the two and no need for those exiled to come back here.

It's not a "supposed" belief--it's basic psychology. Groupthink, ingroup and outgroup biases... A budding psychologist could write an incredible dissertation on Beach Boy fans.

Cool!

A 5-year old kid could suss out some of those liars and charlatans better than some people seem able to do even after seeing the truth firsthand.

Or do we need reminders of the lies?

Are you ever going to let it go?  What is your end goal in trashing PSF every time it's brought up?

Truth and honesty, little things like that. Ask Doe.

Do you see the prototypical Beach Boys fan being better served by a Jungian or Freudian analysis, or perhaps a Neo-Freudian approach along the lines of Fromm? Or maybe go out on a limb and try a Lacanian analysis instead?

Truth and honesty doesn't involve trashing the entire forum because you don't like a few people.  Nothing honest about that.

When the forum harbors people who have a very visible history of reprehensible behavior you shouldn't be surprised when it's called out as such....especially in this thread where one of those harbored guys was being revered.

Yeah, there's a couple people over there who have said some bad things in the past (some of which is very unclear).  The rest of the membership doesn't care and has moved on.  It's easy enough to ignore them as most of the people in question rarely post.  You don't have to like them to be a member, either.

What happened with the guy who was the original admin who quit then came back first under a new name, then back as a regular member? Anything wrong?

It's about the supposed principles of a forum that will allow such people with open arms in the first place...and even give badges of honor to those who have passed along absolutely sh*t information about the wife of one of the most famous songwriters in history. A forum willing to bend over backwards to accept and keep such members should be called out for having such low standards.

Wow. All that drama went unnoticed by me. No, this thread was not intended as some kind of ploy to get AGD back, not when he's been cruel to some members, I honestly didn't know that. Also, I don't want to defect to PSF, or even divide my time between the two. SS is where it's at, as far as I am concerned. We have still got all the readers, as someone here already pointed out. That matters a lot.

I know AGD could be acerbic and hot-headed, had a run-in with him myself once. I posted that Dennis' fave song was "Every Breath you Take" (which it was towards the end), and knowing of Dennis' fate, AGD was convinced I was a troll. Took me a whole page of apologizing and explaining to convince him otherwise.

It's sad that BB fandom should be split into factions, just like our band, but so be it. Happens to a lot of fan communities. But I thank you all for your input here. I'll try to drop in more often and contribute as best I can .

(https://scontent.fhou1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/fr/cp0/e15/q65/16251688_10154958319334287_2738336211686704804_o.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=cb4d1cef578eb9cee4f8344a6dd7e30e&oe=591F09D0)

You already know what happened, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.

"I will never change with what I think happened in here and you will never convince me otherwise."

Have we actually seen what this sh*t information is?

What does that have to do with what I said?

What, do you and Cam want to fact-check it?

For starters, is "SmileBrian" the poster here Melinda Wilson? yes or no?

Thinking Melinda is SmileBrian or anyone else is hardly something to get worked up about.

Yes. One example is in the thread posted on the first page of this thread. AGD passed information to Billy from an impeccable source that Melinda Wilson was libeling Mike's band on SS through the username Smile Brian. I have met Smile Brian personally at a concert and he is very much not Melinda Wilson. There are other worse examples regarding Melinda and Brian's adopted children...these PMs were seen by several people, including those who are moderators on the PS forum.

"Thinking"? No, read the damn PM. Doe said he had information from an impeccable source that Melinda Wilson was Smile Brian, and that Smile Brian was libeling Mike's band. It is written plain as day. This wasn't some passing thought Andrew Doe was "thinking". It was information passed from an impeccable source, not fact checked, and given to the moderator of the most popular Beach Boys forum on the web. Attempting to whitewash the serverity of such a claim is incredibly ignorant.

My bookshelf looks better now

(https://scontent.fhou1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/fr/cp0/e15/q65/16178843_10154958391814287_7749444132501979288_o.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=77f530cef17bae4718fb0e539125bca7&oe=590596FA)

Smile Brian sent me a photo of him at a casino, and I can also confirm that he is not Melinda.

It was also suggested - I can't recall if the same impeccable source was behind this one - that SmileBrian was Carol Kaye. I guess any woman who ran afoul of either Doe or the impeccable source(s) was projected into and took the form of SmileBrian.

Is that a competent Freudian analysis or more of a Jungian hypothesis? I say Freud.

The bit about the kids is what I'm talking about.  If so many people have seen it already, it needs to be made public and everyone else can judge for themselves.

Even that shortchanges things.  I think I laid it out pretty well in my last post. Needless to say he did far more than just the whole Melinda is really Smile Brian, or Ellis, or (insert random poster). Goes beyond just the slander of those not on the Love boat,  so to speak. I covered some of the worst above and in the link posted for the original thread.

I will take being Melinda over Carol though! ;) Will post more when I wake up in the morning.

Besides him making a snide remark about his Web host and his child? I can't go into it because the affected do not want it to be made public so I wont out of respect.  

Melinda, when you get a chance, could you ask Brian when he plans on releasing 'Pleasure Island' ;)

Hey and can you hook me up with 3 BW VIP tickets?  And ask Brian if he ever got the pizza Ray FedExed him.

Right on it guys! ;D EDIT: BW got the pizza and pleasure island will be released on 4/20 with drip drop on there!

:lol :lol Dammit if only this was real. Pleasure Island needs to happen. And I wish I had a slice of that pizza ;D

I am only Smile Brian after all.... ;)

Oh, Carol...we know it's you.

I played bass on all the BBs tracks dammit!

Oh carol I know

 :lol That AGD has a Bluetooth headset connected to prerecorded M&B statements under "someone who would know".

Password: "SetEndDate"

  :lol :lol :lol

Lol

Mike's password is "wheeeen" :lol

Well now my "saggy ass" is truly depressed.  Does this mean the diamond bracelet I sent you for Christmas isn't going to get me backstage?  What a cruel, cruel blow...Should I have caught on when you asked me to send it to some guy named Adam in the hinterlands of the UK?

But the Alternative Facts board is available to anyone who really wants to go there.  If I become consumed by masochism, I'll probably try to join.  Craig, Freudian, definitely.

The more the merrier, embrace all, there is no grave, bring back the good times. Although I wouldn't say this place is dying... It's been quiet lately, but there haven't really been any new developements. I wouldn't mind some more activity, especially about music.

Don't be so sure.  She's a master of disguise.

(https://68.media.tumblr.com/1ca05984ae8c7d99b6bdc86ee033dbca/tumblr_ok8mdsRCg61qzd1yeo1_400.jpg)

Caught me! :lol :lol

Forgive me for coming late to the party but what happened with Mr. Desper?  I greatly enjoyed his posts and everything he shared.

He linked Trump's rallies with the 1970s BBs touring operation and all hell broke loose for better or worse.

For worse. In the realm of all things it was a really innocent topic and some here couldn't at all handle it. Sadly this forum lost one of the best assets it had because of such a petty squabble (and I don't blame Mr. Desper at all for leaving). If Mr. Desper comes here and reads this: please know that everyone here appreciates to the fullest the contributions you made throughout the years. The archives of your posts in the Stephen Desper thread will no doubt be culled through for the decades to come. We really hope you make it back here soon.

Rocky Racoon that picture made my morning :lol

I don't want to retread the Desper situation too much, and I certainly value his knowledge and experience with the BBs and would always love to see more info from him.

But I do think there was a bit too much incredulity regarding his post favorably comparing Trump rallies to the band's touring setup, etc.. It was *obvious* why people saw it as an unneeded politically-tinged post, and that's because it was imbued with some politics. I found the comparison to be supremely odd; a thread about the BB's touring setup could have been started without any reference to Trump or politics at all. But it wasn't a big deal.

I'd point to some examples regarding that episode, but unless my forum search skills are not serving me well, it appears that entire thread is gone. Not locked, but gone completely.

In any event, that episode didn't strike me as a *huge* deal, and I certainly didn't see how it warranted Mr. Desper leaving. He was engaged in discussion about the overtones present in his post, and a discussion ensued. I think part of the hubbub on that old thread was debate over whether it should be moved to the Sandbox, rather than anyone finding anything about the post/thread so heinous. I hope Mr. Desper comes back. But I don't blame anyone here as if he was "run off" the board or anything. I've never been a fan of walking on egg shells here for fear someone will leave. Sometimes honored guests are needlessly trolled on boards (in which case it should be dealt with and usually is), and sometimes they're fairly and on even ground engaged in discussion or taken to task, or whatever the situation is.

The guy who mixed Sunflower to perfection (and who had a seemingly infinite supply of Beach Boys anecdotes and an unmatched knowledge of Beach Boys production) saw similarities between the different styles of campaigning and Beach Boys touring. It wasn't solely about Trump...he also included a paragraph about how Hillary's campaigning mirrored that of some eras of Beach Boy touring where they did more intimate tours. The whole point of his post was that he was reminded that both ways of reaching out to an audience are powerful.

I guess when it comes to a revered member who is actually contributing priceless information there should be a certain level of respect and understanding. I agree that walking on eggshells isn't something we should have to do on a messageboard, but when it comes to people who contribute information (and music) that no one else has, when they bring up a pretty harmless topic about being reminded of different touring styles, it's probably best for people not to go into total tantrum mode.

I think part of the hangup in that old thread (and again, it doesn't appear to be online anymore for some reason, so I'm doing my best to remember) was that it turned into kind of a semantics thing. I think maybe people were too quick to jump to the political angle. But I think people rightly got a bit hung up on the fact that Mr. Desper didn't want to admit that what he was saying was, as some would tend to read it, somewhat of a "positive" interpretation of something (in this case Trump's rallies) that many saw as so egregiously about so many negative things (people being beat up at rallies, hate and racism being spewed at the rallies, etc.).

It having been well established that many people felt that way about those rallies, I don't think it was out of line to question the potential tastelessness of the analogy.

Agree 100%! I said as much. Nobody's to blame for Mr. Desper's leave.

I totally understand your perspective of things. And I admittedly didn't follow along with that thread too much. I didn't read any follow up posts by Desper (or don't remember them) but I do remember that his initial post was remarking on both sides of the campaign and how they compared to Beach Boys touring. Talking about how Trump went from one state to another in one day to rally at stadiums is not at all endorsing what was said that those rallies. In that initial post he never even mentioned what was said at those rallies.

When was the last time a band/candidate/etc made such a splash doing a state-to-state marathon tour multiple times a day with packed stadiums? It is only logical that someone who saw firsthand the Beach Boys touring of that same kind would draw a comparison.

Again, I totally get what you're saying, and I really shouldn't be the one defending his words as I only remember one of his posts in that thread. But I really do stand by the idea that, given what Desper has given us throughout the years, people really blew that whole thing out of proportion.

Yep. Damn shame, that.

THIS x10000.

I hate Trump, despise the man, his politics, etc. But I can handle someone comparing the touring aspects of a campaign with similar aspects to the band's touring. It was ultimately not a post about politics (even if it was "secretly" some sort of pro-Trump message, who cares?) It was really very unfortunate that people got pissed about it and mouthed off to the point where Stephen left. Very, very unfortunate and totally unnecessary.

Again - who cares if he was even attempting on purpose to imply something good about one of the candidates (in a post that actually had pertinent, never-before-heard information on the band)? I fail to see how that matters in context.  How people would prioritize telling off someone, even if it means they leave and take their expertise with them. Most importantly, Stephen brought no toxicity to this board.

Yes, I am someone who'd want to talk to someone about political views that I view as being uncool, but that thread ultimately was talking about the band, and people should have checked their politics at the door for that one. No doubt about it. I get how many of us are very emotionally charged (including me) about this era which we are in now... but still, the way some posters reacted felt like a really shortsighted way of handling that situation.

I did not vote for Trump but I just don't understand the intolerance of pro-Hillary or anti-Trump groups for people with political views other than their own.  I find the idea that if a band wanted to play the Trump inauguration, Hollywood people and other artists would threaten them with never getting any kind of work again abhorrent.  This is a democracy and not only should we tolerate alternative points of view, freedom of speech requires that it is protected and should be celebrated - we at least have freedom of speech in this country, unlike many others around the world.  Notice I'm talking alternative points of view - not hate speech, which I realize many feel Trump used during the campaign, which of course should be criticized and "deplored" to borrow a Hillary phrase.

I think this forum is for debating and discussing alternative points of view on the Beach boys music and history, not political issues - other than the Sandbox.  Let's leave it there.

I think I remember what happened... Mr. Desper made an unfortunate comparison between some band members antics and Trump's "locker room" comments. He retracted it pretty quickly, but not before a smileysmiler (I don't remember who, and it doesn't matter anyway, I agree it's no one's fault Mr. Desper took leave of this forum) screencapped it and posted the retracted statements. I remember this because it rubbed me the wrong way (because it implicated Beach Boys band members in actions that they may not be able to defend themselves for in their deceased state). I said I thought that posting a screencap of the retracted statement was not a cool thing to do, and I think there was some agreement at that point to lock or remove the thread.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Desper had already made the "leaving this town" announcement prior to the screencap getting posted. Still, I didn't think it was fair to let that statement to be left visible.

I won't comment on the others, but from what I recall of the posts that lead to Desper leaving, my take is that a bunch of people overreacted and made it political.

It may or may not have been a subtle nod to Trump, but I'd say this supposed "endorsement" was barely implied (if implied at all) and could have been avoided in the responses.

I assume what caused Desper to leave is that he wasn't being treated with respect by several posters, and I assume he doesn't want to share his inside knowledge in that kind of environment.

It's true no one is forcing anyone to stay or leave, but my opinion (which I assume many disagree with) is the "honored guest" type folks should be given some additional leeway -- i.e., special treatment.

I think most here would agree with this...especially in this case. Those who have actual credentials and don't have a consistent record of abusing their status in the community should be given leeway if they ever get out of line (ie break a board rule or mouth off to an unruly poster). As CD stated, "Stephen brought no toxicity to this board." - he did nothing but consistently bring his wonderful knowledge, stories, and sometimes personal mixes to share with this community...it's a fact, that.

Yeh I suppose it's akin to somehow having Mike Love posting on the board ... sharing his insights into the recording of Wild Honey, and mentioning that Brian was doing too many drugs at the time ... then everyone piling up on him about the drug comment ... meanwhile, we lose the Wild Honey stories!

This is kind of random but whatever happened to Jon Stebbins?  Haven't seen him here in a long time.

If he said what he told the Detroit Free Press last year ("Brian’s life is controlled completely. It has been since Gene Landy, and it still is. And he’s medicated." (http://www.freep.com/story/entertainment/music/2016/08/17/mike-love-beach-boys-preview/88770362/)) I wouldn't hope for a positive outcome from even the most quiet posters here.

Screenshot wasn't big deal imo. But glad we agree it's nobody's fault. He was good poster with great info. Those who think he was treated unfairly & it made him leave, we'll agree to disagree. It's just that, checking that thread, some people had flying reactions to anything "Trump". It was valid too, I think.

I think that's the inherent problem here. We can't simply sit and accept someone saying something we disagree with without making a huge deal about it ... we have to be moral saviors. We should expect Mike to say things like that if he were to come on the board ... end result is that this board is a hostile environment to people like Mike Love (for example) ... I think the board should own that.

But it's also worth noting that Desper was not suspended or banned or anything of the sort, and nobody ever suggested (as far as I can remember) that he should be.

So if the issue at hand was banning him or taking any action against him due to mentioning a divisive political figure in a potentially positive light, I would absolutely agree that he should be given plenty of leeway. More than others? I don't know, but I don't even think that's at play in this case as he didn't do anything that needed action. I wouldn't particularly say an "honored guest" should be given any more leeway to insult others, etc. But again, this doesn't apply to Desper.

The issue at play in that thread was actually eventually less about Mr. Desper and more about the ostracizing or criticism of those who were critical of him. It had somewhat of a vibe (and this has happened online at various forums over the years were "insiders" are present) of advocating to not take an "Honored Guest" to task the way we would someone else on the board. I don't agree with that. It's not like other clear cases of unwarranted haranguing of insiders, such as questioning things where the insider *clearly* has expertise and experience we don't. If Desper described something Brian did in the studio one time, and someone disagreed and said Desper was full of beans, I'd say that's totally unwarranted.

But the disagreeable aspect (to some) of Desper's comments had nothing do with his expertise of the band. Nobody denied what he was saying about the Beach Boys' sound system, etc. They questioned a number of things (appropriateness, effectiveness of analogy, potential for some level of political advocacy for the candidate in question) where Mr. Desper is no more an expert than anyone else here.

I think it's unfortunate that Mr. Desper stopped posting, and I think both sides of that old thread could probably go back in time and handle it better. But I also don't like the threat of an "insider" leaving, or an "insider" actually leaving, being used, even if unknowingly, as sort of a weapon or argument against being able to debate, even with an insider. And the only reason I waded back into this topic is because I don't think it's fair, in the event that someone is coming away with such an impression, to characterize the situation to imply that a slew of posters here were harassing or "ran off" Steve Desper.

With all due respect to Mr. Desper, I can't say I agree with this. If I were a historian interviewing a subject, yes, I would do my best to do whatever possible to get the information I wanted to get. But this is not an interview setting, it's a community and when we post something, it is generally to start a conversation and in a conversation people might disagree with what you are saying. Short of what Brian did here, which was to have people ask questions in advance, then leave a response, then leave completely, I'm not sure if there is really any way around it. People shouldn't be treated badly but I think disagreeing with a point, or even the phrasing of a point, is not something we need to accept as an instance of wrong-doing.

Maybe some people think they're exacting some sort of change or being a "savoir" by saying they disagree with some a-hole comment Mike or someone else makes. But I'm not under that illusion, and I don't sense most others are.

It's a discussion board. We discuss. We're not changing anything. The fact that we have thread after thread of "wish lists" that BRI ignores is proof we're usually not actually *changing* anything by discussing it here.

Usually, when we disagree with something someone has done or said, there tends to be more to say. When we agree, there's sometimes not much more to say than "Right on, I agree."

As long as the discussion pertains to the topic of this board (and things Mike says about Brian certainly is "on topic" material), I see nothing wrong with it.

If this board were a "hostile" environment for Mike Love (and I wouldn't use that term, I would say it is often quite critical of him), maybe it would be because of the things he has done and said.

And the fact that many disagreed with such an assessment and felt that his initial post made it "political" to begin with is a clear indication of why that old discussion went the way it did.

He made a post, some read it and saw *nothing* political or objectionable about it, while others read it and saw a ham-fisted, at least subtly politically motivated analogy where the same observations about the band's touring setup (insight into which we all agree Mr. Desper surely is second to none) could have been made without evoking or invoking anything to do with a political candidate.

The discussion then quickly became *not* about what Desper was observing about the Beach Boys, but about admitting or not admitting to the political or apolitical nature of the original comments.

I've been on the internet for over 20 years now, and I can't fathom why it's hard to grasp at this stage why *politics* is almost *always* an off-limits area for most online communities. Other forums police this much more than Smiley Smile (and I'm not suggesting it needs to be policed more here).

Parallel to this was and is the very important fact that the SS board *has* a section where that sort of political stuff can go. It's an outlet many other forums don't have. Many forums don't allow politics even in their "Off Topic Discussions" sections.

Yes, and I hope the board continues to own that end result.

Can someone help me out here? I thought the old thread was moved to the Sandbox. Did it get deleted entirely? Did Mr. Desper delete it? I can't find it...

There's no wrong-doing in my opinion. The idea of right/wrong is sort of what I'm addressing as problematic.

And you mention something relevant: this is indeed a community forum, but also serves as single best database of info online about the Beach Boys in my opinion. I think we could stand to be more mindful and respectful of that.

Which means we might consider using more discretion in our comments with regard to certain posters/topics ... instead, what often happens is "insider" posters (particularly controversial ones) are baited into bickering and dragged down into the trenches with us.

Yes, very odd. If you look at Mr. Desper's recent posts, it's nowhere to be found:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php?action=profile;u=2;sa=showPosts

It did get moved to the sandbox, and then I remember it was getting "locked". I don't know if that means the same thing as deleted, but it looks like that's what might have happened.

I think that all makes sense. But then it's easy to disagree on whether proper discretion is being used. "Proper discretion" shouldn't mean "don't disagree with the insider" (and I'm not suggesting anyone is saying this issue is that simple), but it can at some point become a slippery slope of having to compromise oneself in order to not tick off an insider. My recollection is that there were no personal insults aimed at Mr. Desper (I could be wrong), but simply disagreement. Perhaps very strong disagreement. As I've said, the "could haves" work both ways. People could have just ignored the political overtones of the Desper thread to avoid the inevitable blow up. But Mr. Desper could have also easily raised the exact same discussion without any political overtones, again for the sake of avoiding an inevitable blow up.

If he had shown me that post prior to posting and asked my opinion, I would have said  something like "I personally find the analogy inappropriate if not egregiously so, and also separately and objectively I can tell you it's probably going to raise some level of a s**t storm given the divisiveness of the guy and that it's the prime time of the election season."

I think what happened is that Mr. Desper was working from a base assumption that many disagreed with, the assumption being that Trump's rallies and Trump in general were not so disagreeable and repugnant that he couldn't be used as a means for favorable comparison (favorable in terms of finding something impressive) to something to do with the Beach Boys. Some people find people or things so objectionable that there's zero call for inconsequential chit-chat related to that person or thing. Some people don't think it's okay or appropriate to have a breezy, nerdy discussion about the brand of microphone Trump uses at rallies. The base topic is so charged that some find that inappropriate.

Seems to have been locked.

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24543.0.html

However if it was the subject of the original thread you were after.

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24547.0.html

<<I think part of the hangup in that old thread (and again, it doesn't appear to be online anymore for some reason, so I'm doing my best to remember) was that it turned into kind of a semantics thing. I think maybe people were too quick to jump to the political angle. But I think people rightly got a bit hung up on the fact that Mr. Desper didn't want to admit that what he was saying was, as some would tend to read it, somewhat of a "positive" interpretation of something (in this case Trump's rallies) that many saw as so egregiously about so many negative things (people being beat up at rallies, hate and racism being spewed at the rallies, etc.).
It having been well established that many people felt that way about those rallies, I don't think it was out of line to question the potential tastelessness of the analogy. >>

AH... now I see.  So Mr. Desper was trying to compare crowd size and crowd enthusiasm at 1970s Beach Boys concerts to crowd size and crowd enthusiasm at Trump rallies last year.  

And asshats on this board attacked him for making a political post, even though that was clearly the furthest thing from his mind.  

And as a consequence to these misplaced, idiotic attacks on Mr. Desper, this board has now lost the unique historical contributions he made to this forum.

Congratulations to all the children who instigated this.  You must be very proud of yourselves.  

Honestly, that would come down to moderation -- the mods would have to monitor and determine if potentially inflammatory posts are brewing (i.e.., "Hey guys, let's keep the politics out of this and just discuss the rally aspect", etc.) ... and removing problematic posts promptly.

I'm on the Ampex tape recorder list ... it is heavily moderated to be on-topic and there are lots of VERY valuable posters there. Things never get out of hand and any hint of conflict is addressed and nipped in the bud. The place is extremely cordial overall, even with the very high number of disgruntled old grizzly bear posters :)

Yeah, the one thread links to another thread that isn't viewable, and the second link above is to an *edited* version of the original posts with all of the political content removed.

I guess that's evidence of how the entire thread could have been started without the political content, but either way, to be clear that second link above edits out all of the stuff that caused the kerfuffle in the first place.

He also equally brought up a comparison to Clinton's more intimate rallies and said something akin to the idea that it was an equally powerful setting as Trump's stadium rallies. Mr. Desper also compared the one day state-to-state aspect of The Beach Boys touring and the all the work that went into those types of events. I saw a guy who was probably watching TV one day and was reminded of an aspect of Beach Boys touring because of this campaign. It was nothing that deserved to be blown out of proportion. 

Mr. Desper became the victim of an incredibly volatile campaign season and in turn we all became victims because we lost the greatest asset this board ever had. Congrats to the children indeed.

I dunno, this is just coming across as stirring the s**t back up. I don't recall anyone in that thread calling Steve Desper an "asshat" or "idiotic." It's especially unfair to make these characterizations of other posters when apparently *none* of the original posts in question are still up on this board.

My recollection may or may not be wholly accurate, but my recollection tells me that a characterization that "asshats" and "idiotic" people ran off Steve Desper from this board is unfair and out of line. It just isn't the simple. So my original post bringing the topic up was simply to put it out there that maybe there's more than one side to the "Desper was run off the board" story; and this is especially important since only a weird redacted, edited version of the original posts survives.

I disagree with the idea that politics was "clearly the furthest thing from his mind", and clearly that's something we all have to just agree to disagree about. But it's not as if I was advocating *any* action take place against Desper for making the post. He can post what he wants, and people should be able to respond as they wish. My recollection is that nobody resorted to name calling or attacking Steve Desper. "Your analogy is inappropriate", or some variation of such an argument, is not an attack.

But really, at this point we're just grasping disagreement and acrimony from the jaws of polite board discussion.

At this point it's quickly belaboring the issue, but unless I could see the original posts/thread, I'm not sure how to judge the comments about other politicians or political campaigns. My recollection is that the initial comments only concerned Trump.

I also recall other anecdotal evidence that people found in other older posts concerning political comments that seemed to inform the *introduction* of a Trump analogy such that I felt there *was* a connection between political leanings and citing Trump's rallies in a measured favorable light. I recall coming away after weighing all of the information feeling it wasn't an innocuous observation that could have just as easily been made about numerous other things. Again, all opinions that people can agree or disagree with.

But again, when the discussion got bogged down into the semantics of what was "meant" versus how people interpreted the comments, there was no way to not make it "Sandbox" material at that stage.

The initial post did have a section on Clinton (it was the only post I read on the issue so I think I remember it fairly well). I specifically remember him making a comparison between Clinton's more down-to-earth rallies and The Beach Boys more intimate performance settings. And I bring that up because I think people looked past that point In order to assume the worst about Mr. Desper's post. If there are prior posts of his that suggest he was making subtle political nods at a Trump presidency prior to this entanglement I could understand people's irritation. Although I still think that given how much information Mr. Desper added to this forum it's a severe and unesessary loss for this community.

The initial comments were noting the correlation of the touring schedule in the 70's, and a political rally. That the particular rally in question was for trump is just a coincidence. That being said, at one point Mr. Desper at one point compared Brian to trump, which was a big mistake, and things turned ugly very quickly.

I would agree it's a severe and unnecessary loss, which is why I don't think anybody was calling for him to leave the board due to his post.

As for the Clinton comment, that might be jogging my memory, and the comparison to Clinton's rallies *may* have actually played into the perception of pumping up the admirable nature of Trump's rallies. (e.g. Clinton's rallies are more sparsely attended and perhaps a comparison to the Beach Boys' downturn in popularity during certain points?).

Again, especially back then, trying to parse the meaning and impact of both candidates' rallies was a super hot button topic. It didn't surprise me in the least that people took umbrage. Yes, it required some level of parsing and interpretation to get to outrage, but not *that* much. And I maintain the overtones were not innocuous to the point of expressing utter incredulity as to why people saw political overtones in the commentary.

And again, I go back to the fact that nobody was calling for *any* action against Steve Desper. Some folks took issue with the analogy, and I don't think there was anything wrong with that. I do think personally it was an ill-advised analogy given the *content* of the rallies to which he seemed to feel elicited a comparison.

As for prior posts, I think people rightly took issue (and drew a line from) stuff like this:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22757.0.html

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22757.msg538726.html#msg538726

More examples of claiming that something (a "funny" parody in this case) was not meant to be political at all when it *totally* is in the opinion of many. Agree or disagree, find it funny or not funny, but it's totally political and *obviously* potentially offensive.

The comparison was not coincidental. In both cases, my takeaway was that both things (Trump's rallies and the Beach Boys touring setup) were impressive and/or to be admired.

Some people found the content of the rallies (as opposed to the content of a Beach Boys show) *so* objectionable that trying to extract all of the politics from it and still find something impressive about it to be wholly impossible and inappropriate. I have mixed feelings about it myself, but I certainly don't think the umbrage people took because of this was unwarranted.

To some, it was akin to posting "That footage of the Beach Boys' 1976 Anaheim Stadium concert really brings to mind the Nuremberg Rallies." Just because the size of the crowd or the logistical setup of the road crew might be similar, some might find the underlying *thing* being compared very, very inappropriate.

I think I remember a few people calling for Desper to be banned, or at least given a "time out". I do agree that it was a very unnecessary reaction to something that didn't even need to be an issue.

@HeyJude and Jay, thank you both for the links/clarification on the issue.

Any calls for a ban would be uncalled for based on what I remember of that thread.

My recollection is that it was something more like a "Dude, if you'd admit the post had some political overtones, we could move on" sort of vibe. At least, that's where I recall my feelings were at.

That's the thing though. It was never a "political" thread. It was comparing the behind the scenes action between a 1970's concert and a rally. It was more a "logistical" point, than anything political. People just lost their sh*t because the name trump happened to be used.

I'm more inclined to side with Hey Jude's Nuremberg rallies point. Mr. Desper is smart enough to have anticipated some of the responses he received but this is not to say that some of the comments couldn't have also been somewhat curbed knowing that response that they might have received.

Wouldn't say better. I think nobody denies Mr. Desper is severe loss. But this board isn't about just "insiders". What mere BBs fans say does & should count too. It's not meant as offense but they felt, from their p.o.v., it was unpleasant comparison. Sure, they should've stayed objective & try to shut down gut reaction but in this case & amid the Trump events etc., it could be the last straw to these people, it's been building.

Make The Smiley Smile Message Board Great Again.....
Like America it's already great!

Desper was dog-piled because he committed the cardinal sin of making a reference to Republican candidate Donald Trump without going out of his way to state how appalled he was at his candidacy. That was enough to trigger some people here.

As for AGD, if he wants to come back, I say let him back on a probatory basis. If he acts like a jerk again then re-ban him.

I guess you missed the original answers to this, in case you did, let me repost them:







It's a lost cause for you to keep bringing this up. I don't care what he was or how great you think he was, he is not coming back. Ever. Period.

Reasons listed above and elsewhere.

No one pulls the sh*t he did and gets a welcome back or free pass.

I'll drink to that! It is also been made even greater with the permanent banning of the agdster. Mods, y'done good!

I'm pretty sure he was banned a couple times here already anyways. And yet again, the man publicly (and childishly) mouthed off about the personal life of one of the moderators here - I really doubt the moderators want that kind of petulance pervading this board again, understandably.

Anyone who misses Andrew's knowledge and high standards for research can easily find him on that other board. For the rest of us, who want to reside on a board free of people with a history of juvenile gossip and callow board behavior, we'll probably be happy staying here where the moderators did a fine job cleaning up the filth. Truly this place has been pretty much free of any real hassles for months, and it's been wonderful. 

Re: Stephen Desper. I hope he comes back. I hated to see him leave, or made to feel unwelcome enough or ganged up on enough to leave, or go on hiatus (hopefully that's the case and he'll return).

There is a time and a place for everything, but in this case my personal opinion is that certain topics should have been left alone and certain posts gone unsent. Is it because he is Stephen Desper, the guy who pressed record when Brian recorded Til I Die and created the drum sound on Do It Again, among other highlights and amazing work on his resume? I'll say it - yes. It is, that's just how I feel.

Let me address something else, specifically the issue of moderation. I take it into consideration that since so much bullshit went down behind the scenes, board members not involved would not have the knowledge to make judgements or form full opinions on certain issues (and people). But it was nasty, dirty, ugly sh*t being done by - ironically and hypocritically - many if not most of the same people who had been breaking the rules and joining in these various campaigns to shape the board however they saw fit...or however they were told. It ended. Those people in a few cases were outed as liars who had been breaking rules but doing so in ways no one would see, classic Jekyll & Hyde two-faced behavior.

So the reception for ideas that originated with those people who have since been banned or left is pretty cold, if not frozen in ice at this point. What they wanted to do is not the impression that was put out publicly, and maybe some of those who were in the information chain when the campaigns and ideas to start a new board to diminish and ruin this one were ongoing. Again, I know, we know who was behind it.

I hope Desper decides to come back. I also hope that in any future scenarios like what happened with his last posts here of record about the political rallies and his work on similar BB's concert setups from the 70's, more thought is given before posting, and some things are allowed to slide or be ignored entirely in light of everything involved.

The mods should not have to monitor good judgement or judgement calls in general. Some cases it truly is better just to ignore and walk away, especially where the battle being picked is on the surface and not at the core of the posts or issues.

It was his 4th time

I thought the way Doe harangued Carol Kaye was ridiculous (whether she had given incorrect info or not).

And your first sentence is the main reason the thread was acrimonious, because even after all this postmortem now, you're still not seeing how people *did* see it as a political thread. For some, invoking Trump's name and some level of admiration for his rallies, given the content of those rallies, is more than political enough. It was for that *specific* reason that some people had a problem.

I think suggesting that people "lost their sh*t" just because the name appeared is a grossly unfair oversimplification.

Was the problem that people "can't handle" seeing Trump's name? Or seeing Trump touted in any way? I think the answer is no, because "handling" something means you can still take issue with it. Nevertheless, it's clear the person who couldn't "handle" people disagreeing was the person who apparently left the board.

I agree that dog piling on someone is unfortunate, even if done unknowingly and done with strong moral/ethical convictions. I honestly can't say how much of a "dog pile" it was because the thread is gone. But my recollection again is that an *extremely minimal* acknowledgement that the post was what it was, rather than total incredulity, would have neutralized the critics/dog pile.

My recollection is that nobody was asking Desper to repudiate Trump so much as simply wanting an acknowledgment that the *particular* point of comparison he chose (Trump's rallies) was justifiably found by many to be such an objectionable "thing" as to render the entire point of the post moot in some sense. (See the imperfect Nuremberg analogy in a post above).

It was certainly a moral/ethical personal opinion for those that saw the comparison as wholly inappropriate, and clearly there were also some who chose to take a totally clinical view of the thread and didn't care how heinous of a thing Desper was comparing the Beach Boys to, so long as some interesting BB discussion ensued. I can usually put on a pretty clinical, analytical hat, but I'm not prepared for "interesting Beach Boys insider discussion" to take place *at any cost*, including what at least some clearly feel is an outrageous, inappropriate analogy being drawn to the band.

But there have been other times on the "on topic" section of this board where people have voiced their opinions that something is morally/ethically questionable to them. I didn't see a problem with people voicing that opinion back then. And, again, I think almost everybody if not everybody was stopping well short of calling for any suspension or ban or any action to take place because of it. It was just a disagreement, and people who love the Beach Boys shouldn't have to feel they can't speak up about an inappropriate analogy just because the guy making it was an associate of the band.

I have to agree. I think in particular a couple of long overdue "clean ups" have exponentially helped the board. One recent example showed how one person was derailing thread after thread after thread, and that has now been fixed.

I think AGD got more than a fair number of chances; those still bringing up the idea of another "chance" are not, I'm guessing, familiar with how the Mods on this board actually ironically, as I recall, occasionally if not often caught extra s**t for giving him so many chances. Talk about "damned if you do, damned if you don't."

I would also say that observers of this should also keep in mind that when someone, it doesn't matter who, starts saying stuff about YOU and YOUR FAMILY, however incorrect or trollish it may be, it's just *very different*, and the Mods here had to put up with stuff that nobody should have had to.

Something else to chew on: The ramifications of so much *incorrect* info (both the gossipy crap and stuff more germane to the actual band) being spread over the years, both unknowingly and knowingly, continue to be felt. There are still people out there working from some really crazy, bats**t insane pieces of information about Brian and Melinda, the C50 tour, and other stuff.

<<I dunno, this is just coming across as stirring the s**t back up. I don't recall anyone in that thread calling Steve Desper an "asshat" or "idiotic." It's especially unfair to make these characterizations of other posters when apparently *none* of the original posts in question are still up on this board. >>

Trigger Warning:

I'm not sure of your relevance here?  The instigators of this mess - who continue to stir it up in some bizarre, desperate attempt to validate their behavior, were asshats.  And posted in an idiotic matter, finding political context where none existed.  Mr. Desper was making an analogy based on crowd tone and crowd size at public events.  Period.

<<My recollection may or may not be wholly accurate, but my recollection tells me that a characterization that "asshats" and "idiotic" people ran off Steve Desper from this board is unfair and out of line. It just isn't the simple. So my original post bringing the topic up was simply to put it out there that maybe there's more than one side to the "Desper was run off the board" story; and this is especially important since only a weird redacted, edited version of the original posts survives.>>

There are no two sides.  Asshats and idiotic people did run Mr. Desper off this board.  It's fact.  Period.  He was providing his unique insight out of complete generosity to this forum.  And certain posters felt so micro-aggressed by the fact that Desper mentioned a particular politician's name that they posted in outrage.  The mere mention of that candidate's name clearly endangered these posters' safe space and so they began an attack.

<<I disagree with the idea that politics was "clearly the furthest thing from his mind", and clearly that's something we all have to just agree to disagree about. But it's not as if I was advocating *any* action take place against Desper for making the post. He can post what he wants, and people should be able to respond as they wish. My recollection is that nobody resorted to name calling or attacking Steve Desper. "Your analogy is inappropriate", or some variation of such an argument, is not an attack. >>

Of course it was an attack.  And all who participated should grow up, climb out of their safe space and own it.  Desper - in trying to find an analogy that might best explain crowd size and crowd attitude at Beach Boys shows in the 70s (a very unique experience, if you were there), had no political point to make.  He was simply giving some historical perspective to those who might not have been there, at that time.

The absurdity of all of this is that the entire thing was nothing more than a historical music post by one of this board's most interesting and generous contributors.  But I guess he forgot to say "Trigger Warning" before mentioning said candidate's name in his analogy and there was hell to pay, as his micro-aggressed attackers turned the entire thing into a political rant.

Children.  

And I once again submit that seeing political context versus not is how the debate got fired up. To me, noting an impressive aspect of a Trump rally and then drawing a line to the Beach Boys is "political" enough for me. And perhaps "political" isn't even the best word to use, as it's the morally, ethically reprehensible content of said rallies that was the problem, so it kind of transcended politics. I don't think people took issue with Desper's post because it was inherently "political" so much as it used a morally reprehensible (in the eyes of many) basis for comparison. "Hey, those rallies where disabled people are mocked and racist rhetoric is bandied about? Let me tell you about how the microphones and PA system were set up and how it reminded me of the Beach Boys tours!"


Disagree with all of this. You can continue to call people names (and again, this is especially troubling to me because the entire thread we're talking about doesn't exist apparently anymore) and end declarative statements with "Period." as much as you'd like. That you think people were "asshats" is not a "fact."



I think you're politicizing this more than anyone by invoking "safe space" and "trigger warning" and "micro aggression", all silly buzzwords meant to belittle the legitimate ethical questions that can be raised when specifically a *Trump rally* is used as the basis for comparison to the Beach Boys.

I'm also uncomfortable with such a vitriolic characterization of unknown other posters when the entire thread being discussed is gone.

I'd be more than happy to at least attempt to explain why many saw clear overtones in Desper's post that indicated some level of admiration for Trump's rallies, but I have no post to cite.

<<I think you're politicizing this more than anyone by invoking "safe space" and "trigger warning" and "micro aggression", all silly buzzwords meant to belittle the legitimate ethical questions that can be raised when specifically a *Trump rally* is used as the basis for comparison to the Beach Boys. >>

My apologies if you found my post politicized.  It was not intended as such.

In fact, in re-reading my post, I now realize, just like Mr. Desper, I forgot to include the phrase "trigger warning." I've now modified this.

Apparently pointing out disagreements that some people had with a Steve Desper post is a "trigger" for some people.

Again, nobody was calling Steve Desper an "asshat" or a "child" or an "idiot" or using straw man arguments (suggesting "trigger warnings" are needed) to belittle him.

Let's take another example. Suppose I wanted to start a thread somewhere about John Lennon's love and potential obsession with Elvis and so I start a thread in which I make the case that Lennon's obsession with Elvis is akin to Mark David Chapman's obsession with The Catcher in the Rye, and I make that comparison in the subject heading. Do you not think that people might get a little bit upset by the comparison, even though I'm really just comparing two different levels of obsession? Would it not be fair for someone to say, hey, I think that comparison is in bad taste. Would it make sense for me to respond, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, this has NOTHING to do with who I support or don't support. I'm just trying to make a point about Lennon's obsession"?

Some context: before Mr. Desper left, in that thread, he stated that Brian Wilson had treated women the same as Trump declared he did in his statement about grabbing women, with the implication that people were unfairly judging Trump on that statement. Also raised in that thread was an anti-Mexican immigrant video that Mr. Desper had previously posted. While I thought people should step back from heavy criticisms of this content in a main-board thread, it is impossible to reasonably assert that his statements were neutral. 
Also the term 'safe space' was derived from particular situations that would not apply here. And the misapplied sarcasm surrounding that would more accurately apply to one who leaves because he wants to avoid people disagreeing with him than those who are ready to stay and talk about disagreeing. Ditto 'trigger warnings'.
Those most sarcastic about these terms are so often the ones who 'can't handle' people expressing their opinions.
I advocated backing off Desper, but the representations in this thread are incorrect.

Well said.

I actually brought kinda the same point up the other day. It made me wonder if any rumors had possibly already laid a foundation of negativity in people before the C50 began, and thus creating tensions that destroyed any chance of the guys keeping the reunion/albums going passed what was initially agreed on.

I dunno. I've heard some pretty laughably incorrect info about the end of C50, but it was pretty much exclusively bad info meant to put the blame on someone other than Mike (including a few crazy theories that aren't even mentioned in Mike's book at all), and it was all stuff put out after C50 was over.

Billy, that's GREAT! Luckily I wasn't drinking anything as I read it! :bw

Then he must have great memory. I would always type the wrong number of e's... ???

However, I think the Smiley Smile board is perfectly OK, and this same very lively thread is proof of it. The "traffic" may be 10% lower (maybe), but the.... well, let's be kind and just say "the signal to noise ratio"... is 1000% higher (well, 970% after my "contributions" here).

If you were John Lennon’s engineer then we might want to set aside the uncomfortable aspect of that comparison rather than hone in on it.


Let’s say for the purpose of this argument that Desper is anti-immigrant and a misogynist. Do we want him to post here about his insights into recording the Beach Boys? Would we tolerate an occasional mention of his personal/political views? Do we want to engage with him about those views?

We might but I wouldn't blame anyone for engaging with it and I would hope that if I were the engineer, I would be able to accept that and take ownership over my words and actions.

I get the practical side of treading more lightly with insiders with valuable knowledge, but we also have to maintain a sense of fairness and an individual sense of dignity and all of that. I don't particularly like the idea that we should ignore something objectionable that someone says because of the connection to a band, artist, etc. But "not ignoring" it isn't necessarily a big deal.

That is, to the second point above, I think Mr. Desper's views were tolerated. Disagreeing with views is not intolerance. Once again, nobody called for him to be banned or suspended or anything of that sort. I think the only action anybody was calling for was, in some cases, that it should be moved to the Sandbox due to its nature.

If the point is that we shouldn't engage with him even if there is something inappropriate or objectionable, then that's where a disagreement likely stems. Again, I get the idea of maybe "not honing in" on something objectionable if we value the information/knowledge often imparted from that person.

But I think, especially when we're talking simply about *pointing out* the potential inappropriate nature of the comparison, and/or disagreeing with, rather than calling him names or calling for a banning, etc., there's nothing wrong with engaging those views.

So if John Lennon's engineer made a comparison in bad taste concerning Chapman, I don't think it would be out of line to point that out.

Well put.

I just don't like the idea that anybody here should have to compromise their ethics or morals (e.g. *not* say something to an insider that they *would* say to a random poster) in exchange for interesting Beach Boys trivia.

I'm completely with Donny on this.  I come here for one reason only--to discuss the Beach Boys.  I could not care less what any of you believe in, vote for, support, etc. I do not come here for that. I may go to other boards for political speak, I may not but none of it is relevant to the Beach Boys world. If someone with an insane amount of actual inside knowledge, be it Steve Desper, Matt Jardine, Ray Lawlor or similar, wants to come here and share that with us, then that should be all that matters to a Beach Boys board. Disagree with them (or agree) in your own world politically, but lets just discuss what we come here for, can we?

2Chocolate Shake & Mr. Jude (Replies No. 164-66): +1000!

To get back to topic, what thorgil brought, the forum's fine. The thing about dropped activity is myth. I rmbr vividly in 2012, June-July, around C50, not many people posted here after 8pm Board Time. F.ex. 5 posters hanging about. So what's the big deal?

The calls for the political thread to be moved to the Sandbox cover the one scenario you describe. Some balked at the suggestion of moving it.

As for the rest, it just totally depends on what we're talking about. Where is the line drawn? And is saying "I think that's an inappropriate analogy" really clamping down on also discussing the band? The two aren't mutually exclusive.

It *could* have gone like this:

1. Initial post favorably comparing the impressive nature of Trump rallies to an era of BB tours.

2. Posters pointing out in light of the content of the Trump rallies that such a comparison is ill-advised, or inappropriate or whatever descriptor one chooses to use.

3. Initial poster acknowledges the concerns of people in #2, perhaps agrees the analogy would not be advisable given the content of those rallies (or at least given the heated political/election season), and perhaps re-addresses the original post and point of discussion exclusively on the Beach Boys.

That probably would have been it. But nobody would acknowledge there was *anything* objectionable about the premise of the initial post (to my memory), and then it became a semantics sort of thing.

If others want to compromise their morals and ethics to ensure interesting Beach Boys facts and anecdotes, then feel free. But I don't think that should be expected of everybody. Politely asserting one's moral/ethical problems with a post comparing the Beach Boys to something objectionable is not beyond the pale in the slightest.

The board has ups and downs like any board. Sometimes low activity is due to nothing going on in the BB universe. Other times, there is stuff going on and still not that many folks are posting.

Exactly. Despite some people saying the low activity is due to no news, what you describe in the last point totally takes place.

Mr. Desper left because he was disrespected. The thread has been deleted. I assume because it reflects poorly on the board. Hopefully, he'll return. There's a lot more I could say about this, but what's the point? He's surely missed by many members and readers. I will say though, that I remember reading his initial post and thinking "oh yeah, I just heard about this". Meaning, I was watching TV or reading an article which mentioned Trump's rallies and contrasted them with Clinton's. Specifically, that he'd sometimes have multiple rallies (in different states) on the same day. It's not hard to imagine how that might have sparked Desper's memories of the BBs touring. Also, whether or not Desper was called an "asshat" or an "idiot" is completely beside the point.


I agree with DonnyL. I also think insiders and honored guests and moderators should be held to the same standards as everyone else, but it's not a matter of bringing them down, but raising everyone else up. Engaging wasn't the problem, it was the disrespectful tone of a few posters. And sure, you can disagree while maintaining tolerance, but I disagree that Desper's views (or perceived views) were entirely tolerated. Generally speaking, HeyJude, I think you have been downplaying the reaction by some in that thread. It's too bad we can't go back and refresh our memories.

Regarding "asshat" and "idiot" and all of that, that was a reference to unnamed posters here in this thread being called those names. I just thought it was odd to lament Desper departing despite not (to my memory) being called any names or anything of that sort, by employing name calling targeted at some unnamed group of people. That it concerns posts that we can no longer read is what troubles me as well. That goes for the whole narrative of Desper being "run off" in general; we don't have the thread to read anymore so I'm not prepared at this juncture to let stand a narrative that puts *all* of the responsibility for his absence on this board and/or members of the board.

As for downplaying the reaction of folks in that old thread, it's certainly possible. I absolutely would prefer to read back through all of that before offering commentary.

But my memory of that thread is such that I do remember my takeaway at the end of the day was not that he had been unfairly "run off" by members of the board. The whole thing was lamentable, and some restraint and "thinking before posting" was probably due from all sides (including detractors as well as Mr. Desper).

Separately, I'm not necessarily comfortable with the assumption that the thread was deleted specifically or solely because it reflected "poorly on this board", as if it was covering up members "running off" Desper from the board. I honestly have no idea how the entire thread was deleted instead of simply locked. I do remember the post that re-posted Desper's original comments *sans* any political references, which proved to me more than anything that the damn post could have been made that way in the first place.

Let me also mention that I'm no stranger to overreaction or misinterpretation of one's motives in starting a thread. So believe it or not, I'm empathetic to the motives behind a post being mischaracterized. I started a thread a year or two back trying to delve into some comments Elliott Lott had made circa 1999 about Mike not wanting to appear on stage with Carl, and a couple of the usual pro-Mike suspects immediately jumped on me assuming I was just looking to start some sort of anti-Mike thread. As I recall, I acknowledged how it could easily appear or be interpreted that way (I think I even said so in my *initial* post), and went to great pains to *very specifically* explain that I truly was trying to get to the bottom of a murky piece of BB-related history. I didn't feign incredulity as if I didn't even understand how someone could *possibly* read something negative into my motives. After being lambasted by the usual small group of suspects, the thread kind of died down, and eventually Ray Lawlor posted basically confirming and elaborating on that very story, which was the *precise* thing I was looking for when I started the thread.

I would want him to stay and my inclination would be to let it slide, which is what I did and what I suggested others do. I agree with you on that. I'm just disagreeing with some representations of what went on.

Well, I don't feel great about it either, but what else am I supposed to think? It had been sandboxed and presumably locked, at that point, deleting it only serves to keep people from reading it. Also (since it's been brought up again), I found the 'Desper Talks Early BBs Touring' thread to be in poor taste. I didn't say anything at the time or earlier in this thread because I believe Pretty Funky had good intentions, but look at it from Desper's point of view. To be blatantly censored (effectively being told what he's here for) after providing so much to the board and to have some of the same people who ganged up on him such as mathen_ arrogantly reply, "now that's a nice topic!!!"...I mean, come on! I realize how mild that seems out of context and with everything else deleted, but it was incredibly inappropriate IMO. Btw, Desper's initial post wasn't even inflammatory.

That's a shame when you ask an honest question and people misread you. That's actually a pet peeve of mine (I'm making a list for the thread here :)) When people look past your actual question and answer the question they think you're really asking (they're so clever ::)). Anyway, I'll search for that thread later, I'm interested in reading (or perhaps re-reading) your question and Ray Lawlor's response.

Without having the original thread to confirm a time line, I am 99% sure SD had already said he was going to 'take a break' before I did the follow up thread. I do know several posters suggested doing the same as we felt the actual topic was being lost under the negative political talk.

To me the topic was fine, however not being a US voter I did not think it appropriate to disagree with those of you that are.

To the best of my recollection Carol called him out on the old Blue Board over something. I can't remember the exact nature of the disagreement but she threw up to him that she'd heard he was still living with his mother, in her basement.

She was a very easy target after that. The vitriol was unbelievable, how he could say some of the things he said about her, a living legend and him only a legend in his own mind.

Melinda also called him out, asking him exactly what his problem was, she was in the firing line after that, too.

What's worse, AGD succeeded in giving Carol Kaye a bad name among the most, let's be kind again here, "gullible" in BB fandom. I remember threads, even here, where Carol was treated by people like she had run over their collective dog.

Living with his mom, huh?  :lol :lol :lol And in the basement!  :lol :lol :lol Did she feed him too? What a psychological sad sack. No wonder he gets along so well with myKe luHv.

And EVEN if Desper had meant his post to be pro-Trump -- which he didn't -- you don't gang up on the Beach Boys' former sound engineer if you have the incredible opportunity to have him as a member on your Beach Boys discussion board. Here's a guy who WORKED with the BB when they made some of their most legendary records and you chase him off? He should have never been made to rewrite his original post. Very disrespectful.

Bottom line: Everybody stands by what they say: 1) he was treated disrespectfully & as insider should get leeway or 2) nobody drove him away & it's his fault too. & that's that. No long posts would help to convince both sides. It's getting samey.

Repeating myself again - it should never have happened.

First, the post itself wasn't reason to react the way some reacted. My opinion. But what was done is done, let's try to weigh things out so it doesn't happen again. Choose the battles and the axes to grind. If it's off-topic, take it to the sandbox.

Second, and this is a hard point to convince someone of in terms of people who aren't as involved in the daily workings here yet still post very welcome content: A few people and their behaviors and comments are NOT representative of the entire community or even a majority of posters here.

Third: Keep the damn politics in the damn sandbox, or better yet refrain from bringing it up in on-topic posts that others might want to read for the on-topic content.

Fourth: Stephen Desper as others have said is one of the true valued members here, a member whose posts most readers welcome and might even come here to read as a priority when they see he's posted. If someone disagrees with something other than the music or on-topic discussion, whether it be politics or whatever other topic it is, would it be worth losing a poster who most people on this community want to have as a regular posting member?

I say no. If some political this-or-that rubs someone the wrong way, there are times to ignore it and let it slide. And if it's that big of a deal that it needs to be discussed, take it to the place set up for off-topic discussions like politics, in the sandbox.

I want to read posts from members like Stephen Desper because they bring a unique firsthand perspective to the things many of us discuss daily...i.e., the music. No way should what happened be allowed to happen again. It won't.

Points taken. Would this thread be locked now? I don't think anybody will add anything new here, really.

Not yet. The thread was not about that until the last few pages.

Good news!


Welcome back SWD! :)

OK. To bring it back to the OP, I think GoogaMooga asked very silly question. I never knew that this, Smiley Smile board was created solely with Agd in mind. Ah, maybe it was, I wasn't here from the get-go. But the notion is very dumb. If that poster gets banned for bannable reasons, what, the "future of this forum" is doomed? Ha! It must be joke & not funny at that.

It was absolutely, positively not created with Doe in mind, but that's not saying that may not have happened years later on other forums.  ;D

I can imagine. The devotion to that chap by many is insane.

Politics in the USA--very fraught. All political references on the board will likely need to be monitored closely for some time to come so that things don't get out of hand. This is not an easy job for the mods, as they have lives of their own.

Regardless of Stephen's intentions with his post, the thread should have gone to the Sandbox immediately, as I suggested at the time. That action was delayed in occurring, and a series of additional public posts pushed things to an unfortunate conclusion. Despite Latishaw's heavy-handed admonitions, there were a couple of troublesome things in the thread that would likely have been able to be blunted in impact and withstood if the thread had been moved more quickly IMO. Note I am not criticizing the mods for this--it is an incredibly hard job and they are to be commended for taking so many difficult actions, particularly recently--actions that have made the atmosphere of the board infinitely calmer.

I think (and wish and hope and pray) that I speak for everyone in saying that we all hope that bygones will be bygones and that Stephen will be here again with his incredible insights into music, recording technology, and the detailed history of what is arguably the band's most interesting period (1967-71). Whatever else has happened to them over the years, the BBs have been blessed with exceptional recording/engineering personnel, and Stephen is at the very top of that list.

Oh, I 100% see how people took it as political. That's my point. The original post from Desper wasn't meant to be political, but people took it that way. I though *you* specifically were trying to argue that it was political. Perhaps I misunderstood.

RangeRover has either misunderstood my OP or is reading something into it that isn't there. I made it clear that I was an infrequent poster, and later, that I missed out on all that AGD drama, yes, and the Desper thing too. I visit and read selectively, and as incredible as it may seem, I wasn't aware of AGD's objectionable behavior. Until now.

It's ok googa. It was quite the sordid mess...I kinda wish in a way *I* had missed it lol

Nailed it. Can we move on now?

This is sad that someone would hold someone's personal family and financial situation against them - thats online bullying to me.  It's pathetic all right and not for Andrew but for you.  As for Carol Kaye, yes AGD had some bad interactions with Kaye and so didn't hesitate to call her out on her misrepresentations of the truth and her nastiness to anyone who disagreed with those misrepresentations - but Hal Blaine and others had similar experiences with her by all accounts she is one ornery difficult person to deal with.  Just ask the producers of Love and Mercy.  Doesn't take away from her brilliant musicianship and contributions to countless pop music Classics, but sometimes musical icons aren't the best people (Phil Spector anyone?).

Andrew has a history of doing the same thing,  including towards me. Once he realized I was no longer swallowing the bullshit he was spewing, he started telling people he knew the "real" reason why I lost my place. It's no secret, I had to go on medical leave and I ended up behind on my rent and got evicted.  Yet he was trying to imply it was something far more sinister.  So, Rider, no offense but I have to high five OSD right now. If anybody is an online bully, it's that lying sack of Doe.

Doe + Bullying = Oxymoron ...

Doe was obsessed with his "enemies" on top of general bullying.... ::)

As much of a bully he could be, or was, something doesn't feel right to me about kicking a man when he's down.

I'd agree if it was anybody else

Andrew wouldn't think twice about throwing someone under the bus.

This kind of post is just as bad as what AGD is accused of. I find it peculiar that this kind of post is generally tolerated.

Yes it was absurd to treat her the way he did.  She was wrong too to mock him but understandable if he had been bullying her.

I hate all the bad feeling.  I'd love more threads analyzing the music - I'd start more but I'm not technical enough to deconstruct it half as well as some members.

I'd love to see more on CIFOTM/Little Bird as I think there may be more of Child in the latter than is generally noticed.
 

Agreed.

In all fairness, I can see why osd posted what he did, considering what Doe has done publicly and privately to people. That said, two wrongs don't make a right, even if it is Doe.

Iirc, in some old thread Agd started 1st calling OSD names. He said sth. along the lines of that he lives with mother too. & made very uncalled for physical remark.

And was pumping me for personal information  (like real name, address, ect) for an "interested party" (hinting around it was Mike)...I would prefer that the comments made about Doe stay more, um, "adult" and on topic as opposed to personal attacks, but I can definitely forgive if justifiable anger comes out. Too many people have been burned,  and not just on ways that can be made public on the board

Just found that topic, I recalled it's sth. to do with setting the record straight, here's post about OSD: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14464.msg326433.html#msg326433

Also might I add that while attacking Andrew and bringing up him living with his mom in her basement may have crossed a line,  it needs to be spelled out that Andrew did the same to me, slandering my name and implying there was a darker reason for my own homelessness and subsequent moving in with family.  

Let it also be known that if I ever get proof that he has continued  to slander me and I find out he's been making untrue allegations about me and I have proof, I WILL look into my legal options.

I hope what I posted doesn't come off like I'm attacking anybody, or defending doe. I know he's said and done a lot of hurtful things to people. I guess I just keep thinking about lessons my dad always taught me. In situations like this I hear my dad's voice saying "Be the better man. Don't stoop to his level"

Thank you for that. And of course, OSD got punished for responding to what Andrew said, but he got off scott free because he's Andrew G. Love and I fell for his act like a schmuck.  I've since apologized to osd privately,  but now I'm doing it again only publicly.  

Understood. I'm struggling with it myself.

It's interesting that andy accused OSD of the exact same thing he was going through himself. Projecting anger at our own misfortune, much?  ::)

What irks me is that the older SuperFans STILL think Andrew walks on water. Either he's really good at pouring on the bullshit or he has been losing it over the years.

Andrew G. Love! ;D

That was my phones autocorrect :lol

  For years and years and years, AGD's boorish behavior was tolerated, rationalized, condoned...even celebrated. Now he is Public Enemy Number One in Smiley Smile world. Funny how the wind shifts...

... and for those who think I'm defending AGD or "on his side", it was fun revisiting this thread here :) (I was basically arguing the same points I am in this thread with AGD):

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php?topic=11763.160;wap2

Much appreciated then and now, Billy.  :h5

Sorry about your 'shortcomings' OSD.  I'd never given it any thought until this woeful thread apparently re-introduced the matter to those of us who had, hithertofore, been merely UNinformed.  :o

Glad I missed all of THAT.  It ain't the AGD I knew from years and years ago...but it would seem, given ALL that went down, that maybe I didn't know him as well as I thought I did.  :-[

Then again...these are pretty much ALL on-line message board relationships so we really know "dick" about anybody...NOT that I'm actually calling anyone HERE a "dick" or making a comment about anything to do with what size 'jock' one might require if they were to suit up for a sport where the eggs [etc.] might get cracked or broken.  :deadhorse  <  Betcha THAT'd hurt.

I think making Andrew the topic of a thread would just about make his day; that, and kicking his dog. No offence to any dogs out there, or cats , animals of any kind.

The BBs have to have the most f'ed up jacked up fanbase of all time!

It's a true statement, but this is basically because some people don't believe in defending continual toxic behavior - even when coming from members of their favorite band - while other people are somehow able to not only defend it, but go to great lengths to excuse it in every way possible. This is at the heart of why things are the way they are.  This is the root cause. Tragic.  If one is to be honest with themselves, this statement is as accurate as the famous Jack Rieley quote.

I get that some people are more "forgiving" than others, but ultimately there  just needs to be a line drawn where all people can agree certain things are simply not OK. The inability of some factions of the fanbase to be willing to ever, ever draw that line is ultimately why the fanbase is divided the way it is.

Might I suggest this thread be moved to the Sandbox. Doe isn't worthy of this section of the Board.

That's cold.  :lol

Exactly.  Two wrongs don't make a right.

+10

You'll have to excuse me if I don't shed a tear of pity or lend a sympathetic ear in this situation. As someone who fell under the same kind of attempts to be torn down and attacked personally over issues related to a f***ing message board, attempts which are still resonating today among anyone naive enough to believe Doe's personal attack bullshit...no sympathy here. None, zero, zip, nada. Sometimes a good dose of karma coming back to kick someone in the ass isn't a bad thing.

Consider where were these current calls for an easing up when Doe was attacking others? Anyone? Hello? Years of this, and it went unchecked, ignored, or encouraged. Where was the support or defense of people here when Doe was sending his PM's around this board based on lies and attempts to screw this place over because HE and his peeps didn't like the decisions made? Also adding that a number of the attacks were done where the people being targeted could not respond or defend themselves, and weren't even aware they were happening because of where and how the attacks were being posted.

Consider too has he ever stepped up and apologized to anyone he targeted, lied about, or slandered? If anything, and I saw it recently in Billy's case, he did the opposite and doubled down instead of manning up and saying "I'm sorry".

It's a two-way street.

I don't think anyone needs to shed a tear -  if people want to attack Doe for his egregious and outrageous behavior on this board in the past, feel free to do so, as it certainly seems justified.  Attacking him for his personal life situation is petty and irrelevant and mean-spirited.  If we want to set an example for how we want the smiley board to be, now, we shouldn't repeat the mistakes of and the tactics of banned past members.

I agree with that, however as recently as in the past few weeks the exact same behavior that is being criticized in this thread regarding attacking a person's life and personal situations played out in almost the exact same scenario including appearing on a place where the person being attacked had no access to either reply, defend, or even know about it. Not a year ago, not 6 months ago, but within the past few weeks. And shame on those who encouraged and "liked" this garbage being spewed in the name of whatever justification those people (among them some well-known names in BB circles and the like) had for supporting that or even implying support instead of stepping up and saying "Not cool".

If it were not still continuing, if there had been even the smallest gesture of apology or even a mea culpa, it would be a different situation. But it's the same thing continuing as it has, and shame on those for condoning it or showing implied encouragement by not stepping in and saying "no" to the parties who started all this in the first place and can't seem to end it.

Truth and facts, pesky things, those...as the saying goes.

I really don't think this is the case at all. The way I see it is some are arguing for some kind of "moral compass" for this board, while others advocate setting personal issues aside and focusing on "on-topic" content.

I 100% agree with this. The ironic thing is that Doe was asked by an "interested party" (gee who could that be?? Lol) to find out where OSD lived. With that context, OSD commenting on Doe's possible living situation seems like small potatoes. That being said, again, I totally agree with you.

Speaking of which, anyone else find it creepy as f*** that an "interested party" connected to Doe was trying to find the home address of a poster on this forum?

Fair enough, I can appreciate that point of view, particularly in light of the recent Desper situation.  That said, I still think there's some truth in a general sense to what I was saying. On the whole, that particular issue (of toxic behavior being endlessly defended to an often ridiculous degree) certainly doesn't *help* keep a fanbase intact.

Don't forget I was a victim of the witch-hunt as well just for posting my honest opinions. I never joined the board for Doe to attack me and other posters to the point of being accused of being Melinda Wilson.

I think I got off easy being accused of being Melinda.... ::)

Without implying any degree of bravado, the kokodoester doesn't ever want to "find" me. It just wouldn't be at all beneficial on his behalf. And yes, read between the lines if you so choose.

Don't forget he also said he found out where Ang Jones lives and not to be surprised if something happened to her.

Trust me, OSD is a badass! ;D

I think Ang could take care of herself even though doekoko has a brown belt in waddling.

 :lol

But Mike's legacy was at stake! You were only looking for a victim and chose Mike because, uh, randomness! Meanwhile in reality hand me any given Mike Love interview from whatever podunk town parking lot/rodeo the touring band has played and I'd be hard pressed NOT to find some ludicrous statement about or regarding Brian. It's not that hard to find a reason to dislike the man.

I wish the PS forum luck in dealing with this kind of lunacy. Forreal, just because the venue changed doesn't mean the people are any different. Sure now it looks like a pleasant circle jerk for those who think Mike Love can do no wrong. But when those opinions start veering back to reality it'll be interesting to see if the mods there will get any creepy af PMs asking for IP locations for an "interested party", or if someone will get a PM regarding the known locale of a person whose opinion doesn't jibe with whatever ridiculous defense of Mike Love is being written that day...

f***!!!  Really!!!  Wholly sh*t!!!  NEVER knew THAT either.  That explains, perhaps, why [while I was away from the message boards for 2 1/2 years] Ang's on-line demeanor seemed to change as radically as I thought it had.  Wow!!!   f***!!!

Yeah Lee.... :(

I find that much more disturbing that anything levied against AGD.

Do those messages still exist(screenshots?)? Seems like a matter for the police. Let's not forget, online bullying is now being taken(read: prosecuted) much more seriously now.

Yeah, I posted it in the AGD ban thread

Thanks RR for this reminder of how this board REALLY was when it was "healthy, thriving and full of great contributions by real experts". ???

That's pretty heavy stuff, the worst among his offences imho. That guy is the worst thing that could happen to a fanbase.

10 pages about this guy, lol really?  :lol

Now 11, thanks!

I don't know if it was coincidence or not but nearly the day after many of us expressed our appreciation for Stephen Desper in this very thread he came back to this forum. Be it one page or 30 I'm glad this thread was created for that reason alone.

Thanks for the vote of confidence - I'm fine so far and not scared of AGD. He knows where I live because many many years ago he borrowed various news cuttings and I had to write a stern letter to get him to return them which he did by post. Having made the comments he has made on a public forum he would have to be extremely stupid  to take matters any further!

Thanks to those who have expressed concern - the good outweigh the bad on most of the message boards including this one.

I hope my demeanour hasn't changed for the worst! Please accept my apologies if so.

Why not just lock the thread or move to the sandbox? Honestly, I guarantee AGD is rubbing his hands in glee at all this attention.

And anybody mourning the loss of his expertise, he may have been good with dates and session logs but I always thought his hearing was a little iffy:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,550.0.html

IT'S CLEARLY BRIAN SINGING ON THAT DEMO!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAGARvThO58

Welcome back Ang! 8)

Thanks SMiLE Brian!

AGD of course is only missing from here. He is still in evidence elsewhere so hopefully the large number he has offended in the past won't be helping police with their enquires.

That line around :43 seconds "no need for birds, no need for birds" - especially that last "birds" sounds just like BW88 era Brian. Not to mention that the rest of it sounds like vintage Brian anyways.

No Ang...it didn't' change for the worse'.  Your posts did, though, seem somehow deflated of their original enthusiasm and excitement... the 'feel' you used to include.  It was if you had lost your on-line 'joie de vivre'.  Because I had become fed up with the endless bickering and fighting over many things which really had nothing to do with Brian or his music [and because I had a full time project...in terms of prepping, applying and filing in an attempt to acquire a brand new license to own and operate a radio station] so I stepped away.  Over those 30 months or so...THINGS changed.  [some of them for you...]

No apology due ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... from YOU.

Classic example of the hammer hitting the nail squarely on the head.   :rock

Thanks for that Add Some. There have been dispiriting moments for many of us I suppose - indeed we are too often focused on the negative side of things which Brian Wilson himself seems to manage not to do as often as some of his fans.


And THORgil is good with the accurate wielding of hammers so nice metaphor!

AGD saying something dumb and mean, and OSD responding with a homophobic comment ... classic Smiley.

You all would do well to remove your blinders so you can see past the political Brian-camp/Mike-camp politics.

AGD was clearly a jerk in some of his posts, but he was a knowledgeable jerk. At the end of the day, he contributed a wealth of knowledge to the board. Some other posters are simply jerks in some of their posts. I'm sure we're all sweet peaches in real life and we'd get along just dandy.

Let's hold a smiley smile board convention somewhere hold hands and all sing kumbaya!!

Credit where it is due. I agree that AGD is very knowledgable on the subject of the Beach Boys. That is undeniable. Not infallible - no-one is.

If the politics didn't extend to a poster's home address being pursued by an "interested party" or abhorrent PM rumors that involve the adopted children of Melinda and Brian for god's sake then I would agree with you.

Sometime it's good to know where bias lies...the next time someone gets a PM stating that the Landy/Melinda dealership confrontation in 'Love and Mercy' was "pure invention" (as I did) it may be good to know that the person spreading this information has a history of spreading erroneous "rumors" regarding Melinda. Oh, btw, that scene isn't an "invention" at all.

I was there at the dealership..... ;)



J/K

 :lol

I was specifically referring to tolerating BS from certain posters because they're on your "side" in general.

Some folks are using straw man arguments here. I'm personally neutral on the banning of AGD. The allegations you guys are continually referring to are honestly way outside of the scope of what message board moderators should/can handle. If anyone really believes that true threats were made to harm other community members, then that is a matter that needs to be handled by outside authorities. I'm assuming (?) that the "threats" were not taken seriously.

That's not to say the mods didn't make the right decisions -- but airing portions of the dirty laundry likely doesn't paint the entire picture. From what I could gather, it seems like AGD was trying to lead people to believe there was a conspiracy, or he believed it himself and was trying to gather info ... and made some crude/rude jokes and said some shitty things along the way.

The thing is, a board is a private enterprise and, not that anybody is asserting this is the case, I wouldn't expect a board to wait until a member is doing something that is potentially a reportable crime in order to take action against that member.

So what usually happens is one of two very broad scenarios. In one, as was the case here, many, many benefits of doubts were given, numerous warnings, and it wasn't until proof of very extreme and lamentable behavior was available that action was finally taken. I can see how the mods can get frustrated. They see complaints about action being too slow, only to later see complaints that the action was too severe and/or quick.

The other scenario is very strict moderation, which this board certainly *doesn't* have. Most folks tend to appreciate the lack of draconian moderation. On some boards, if you even in passing mention a bootleg or something, you're gone. One political post and you're gone. One post about religion and you're gone. And so on. Yes, there have been boards where you mention you bought "Yellow Matter Custard" on vinyl in 1975 at a swap meet and they'll either suspend or ban you, or at least delete the post and perhaps the thread.

Any enthusiastic fan, and certainly someone who has done research and authored books and all of that, being banned due to behavior is no doubt an awkward, unfortunate turn of events. But for some folks, there's a point where one can't have a sort of "mob wife" mentality about it anymore and just glean all the cool, on-topic stuff from someone even though there has been a glut of questionable behavior. Especially when that behavior centers quite a bit on things specifically to do with the band and band members that are the topic of this board.

Solid points, HeyJude.

All around it was an unfortunate turn of events. I guess the bright side is that hopefully people will be less likely to flat out believe anything they are told, and hopefully they will do research on their own to verify any piece of information they are given - even by those who seem to be credible sources. This very much includes this very PM fiasco.

I also want to redact my above statement that erroneous "facts" were spread about Melinda. I meant to write "erroneous rumors". Anywho, I think it's all behind this forum now, and hopefully there won't be any more calls for unbanning people who clearly deserved to be booted.

I think all members who lose their frogs should be sent packing. ;)

:lol

The agdster fired a salvo at me bringing up a part of anatomy that opened the door for me to fire back as I did. Not that I will, but if you think that was ugly, there were the PM's that he thought I'd get fired up about which I did not. I considered the source and ignored him for the most part. He's a nasty, little child at heart who wants control and power and did everyone here a favor by letting it explode smack dab in the middle of his fat face. Being an obsessive follower of a band does not give him a free pass to be a rude, arrogant prick to fellow posters.

I think AGD is like Tom Hanks' character in the movie "big"..... ;)

If he was Tom Hanks's character in "Cast Away", the volleyball would have been named "Love"

With a Straw hat on the volleyball....

Interesting reading threads like this in hindsight:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,11204.0.html

Wow, the irony is killing me.


You mean...SMiLE Brian??!!  :o  :o

:lol

def. a case of "pot kettle black" ::)

The irony is truly ironic...

wow...summerinparadise.flac was RIGHT ON THE MONEY

AG(Do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do) Doe.

I wonder how he feels about being SS-less now?

Welcome back, Ang!
This thread has been very useful after all: it contributed to "bringing back" two of the most valuable posters a music forum could have: Stephen Desper and Ang Jones.
That's what I call the Power of Truth. Truth is never useless. :)

No amount of knowledge can condone behaviour like that, particularly the bits about Ang and OSD. I wonder who should remove their blinders.
And OSD is not the same as AGD. He has just one pet peeve: Mike. It's an understandable peeve, as ML, after his initial great contributions, has been a perpetual frustration to all at least minimally objective BB fans. OSD has always taken a lot of flack for that, more than warranted, but he sounds like a nice guy... provided you can accept that he doesn't like Mike. :)
 

Thanks so much thorgil although Stephen Desper is far more valuable a poster than I am.  You are too IMO and I'm not just writing that because of your compliment either - your posts are unfailingly thoughtful and interesting.

I certainly don't blame OSD for being critical of Mike - sometimes I try to forgive and forget Mike's behaviour but then Mike does another interview or book and it's back to square one. It is a challenge to forgive repeat offenders even when we know there are good aspects to their characters as well as bad.

OSD was there in real time from the 1960s onward to see his favorite band torn apart by Mike Love!

So glad to see both Desper and Ang back!  I've been a bit MIA lately due to being overwhelmed by things that belong in the Sandbox, but I'm happy to see this place vital.  I don't think this has been an AGD thread for awhile, but more about inclusiveness, as long as it's honest.  I suspect my politics don't match Desper's these days, but I really don't care as long as we're discussing music.

Here's the thing in our faces, particularly as Americans here...do we want entertainment in place of the truth?  I think both can happen if we hold ourselves to integrity.  I watched Mr. Desper in the studio and at the board at concerts in the late 60's/early 70's and he is frikkin' brilliant.  He tells the truth when he speaks to this. Ang is a remarkably smart true fan of not only Brian Wilson, but any expression of brilliance in the arts.  Their commentary is truly appreciated.

As far as AGD, I'll leave it to the group to work that out.  I used to enjoy chatting with him, nearly always non-BB related.  I haven't heard from him in awhile. I tend to wonder why... ;-)  Have fun with that one...

Well put as usual.

Thanks so much for your words Debbie. On the occasions I don't post for awhile and then come back, I wonder why I did so because it nearly always improves my day. Even the arguments can be interesting!  And I agree, the thread seems to have gone beyond being just about AGD's absence from this message board but that's typical too - you throw a pebble in the stream and the ripples tend to move outwards.

And we had a couple very good, and probably unexpected, ripples here!

Seconded ...

Thanks!

I can tell you he has a few minions & nut huggers that use the same MO over there. They flood you with PMs to curb your freedom of expression. They are an utterly disgusting group of people. However, there are some good people over there that are lost in the shuffle not affiliated with "the expert".  And of course some good folks are on both places., well, really only kds.

Well, I read and post (rather infrequently) on both boards, am not affiliated with "the expert" or anyone else over on the PS board, and have never received even one PM to curb my freedom of expression.

I'm am bummed, however, to learn that SteveMC, whoever he is, has excluded me, Desper, and others who post on both boards, with the exception of kds, from the "good folks" category!

Personally, I'd like to see peace between the two boards. Doesn't mean various members have to agree with each other, but I don't think bashing all the members of either board achieves anything of positive consequence in the world of BB/BW fandom.

Sorry custom machine, I don't know you but perhaps you can build a custom machine and merge the best elements for your own enjoyment.  But if you're sympathetic to that I'd like to continue not knowing you.  :lol I kid, I kid. Nice meeting you.

Nice "meeting you" as well.

I can already tell you're a "wonderful person" like your friends in Kokomo-istan.   ;D

I'd like to reply to this and do so with the notion that some of it is personal and has quite a way to go before being resolved.

I don't know how much more can be said on the topic of members receiving PM's from certain members no longer here, messages which in some *very specific* cases led to people being upset by them enough to literally quit the board. This kind of activity was strictly against the rules, and was dealt with. Some of those issues are not public, but they did happen and there is still proof along with whatever follow-up actions were taken, whether or not other members ever received these messages or not. It means nothing whether someone else didn't get them if there were numbers of members here who did get them and in certain cases were upset enough to report them.

Fast forward to the ps forum, and there was another case several months ago where a member there received a threat via PM just as had been happening here, and apparently there were no consequences against the member sending it - Alan Smith. I hope all of that got straightened out, because it was right in line with the same kind of garbage that was happening here until it was reported and stopped.

If there is *still* stuff going on with the PM system on the ps forum, I hope the new or interim mods take aggressive action to stop it, because THAT kind of idiotic behavior and bullying thinking no one would know it was happening is what contributed to a bad scene here. Keep in mind how "the mods" were bashed and criticized for not enforcing rules, yet when that rule was enforced regarding the abuse of the PM system and using it to bully people and other garbage, we got blamed for all the ills of the forum in general. Consider who was crying foul the loudest in those criticisms.

I have to address Custom Machine as well, after the call for peace: With all of the history involved, why did you sit by and watch people lying and bashing me specifically along with this whole community for months in light of what you just posted here? I'm all for peace and love too, but not when the lies and distortions are still being posted on communities like ps forum where "the mods" from Smiley have zero involvement, and never did. I don't recall any calls for an end to it and a call for peace when any number of people who moved on or got banned from this board, and now have moved on or left the ps forum, were regularly taking personal shots at Billy and I over moderation issues here, and beyond that, continuing to post lies about various issues including reasons for a ban when in some cases the truth is spelled out right here on this board.

Simple logic and troubleshooting/testing methods say that if the case is made that a certain variable or element is causing the problems, you run the next test so that variable is removed entirely and see if the results change accordingly.

The end result in this case is despite all the blame and finger-pointing against the mods here and other factors trying to say they "ruined" this board and caused the drama and dust-ups which were tearing it apart, those factors had ZERO involvement on a new board - yet similar issues now including reports of the PM bullshit happening there too have been hitting the ps forum.

So in retrospect, consider if it were the mods' fault here, yet the mods aren't a factor in the ps forum but the group or groups of banned members are there... 2+2=4, sometimes it's that simple of a solution. Maybe the calls for peace should be directed at those who have been causing issues on message boards and fan communities for years and are simply continuing that same behavior on a new forum.

Liars gonna lie, as they say. Bullies are gonna bully until they are confronted and stopped. And leopards cannot change their spots, indeed.

2+2=4

I think it's embarrassing that there are two threads with AGD in the title. Can we at least merge them. This place just feeds the guys ego.

Looks like I unintentionally stepped into a hornet’s net.

Prior to my post above I had not posted anything on either board about the other board, it’s moderators, or it’s members, but when SteveMC responded to Jay’s post I thought it might be good to express the hope for peace between the two boards. Apparently it’s to early in the game for that, as SteveMC came back with a comment about Kokomo-istan and it is very apparent that GF remains quite upset about the events that transpired.

As a senior member of this board, who was around when the BBs released Surfin’ in Dec. 1961, became a mega fan when BB Today was released, and a rabid fan upon the release of Sunflower, I’ve seen plenty of drama on BB boards. In addition to events that have transpired here, it hasn’t been all smooth sailing on the new PS board either. Mods have come and gone, with a couple recently resigning. I don’t know the backstory, and in fact had to ask someone who exactly the current PS mods were, as I hadn’t gone to the trouble of paying attention.

Don’t know what to say concerning this info about Alan Smith. We are both fans of vinyl and audio equipment (both modern and vintage) and he has always come across to me as a really good guy, with some great posts on both the SS and PS boards, although he recently announced he was leaving the PS board. I’ve sent him a message for his take on this. I can also tell you, Craig, that I’ve told a number of people that you and I share an interest in vintage top 40 airchecks, and that you came across as a really good guy when we corresponded about our mutual interest in those old radio broadcasts, as well as other areas of conversation such as recommended New England lobster shacks, as well as telling people that you have been responsible for some of the most interesting and well researched posts on this board concerning BB history.

Guess I like to think of myself as a Swiss David Marks, one who moves freely between both boards. I understand some very unpleasant stuff went down, but for me I think it’s now time to focus our energies on the task at hand - discussing BW and the BBs. There are some interesting and educaitonal posts on both boards, and that discourse is what I’m here (and there) for.

I agree with those sentiments, and felt the same way coming from another angle. It's just that lies are still being told and posted (and worse,  believed), similar behavior that drove people off this forum seems to have continued onto the PS forum while the mods here were blamed for somehow ruining this forum, and a lot of damage was done to people that will take time or at least some kind of an acknowledgement or apology to help start healing things. At this point the lies are still appearing regularly and there are more efforts to double down than there are to even acknowledge wrongdoing even in the most minor way. And there is a lot more to the whole thing than interpersonal squabbling and grudges. i find it sad too that it interrupts or distracts from talking about the really good stuff and digging deep into that.

This thread is Snowflake Central...sensitive little bunch!

You are aware there is a study in Sweden at the moment that shows there is a direct correlation between use of the word 'snowflake' in a derogatory sense, and having a tiny penis. According to the study users of the word are asserting their masculinity in an attempt to draw attention away from their microscopic member.

Personally I love your insightful, razor witted posts, and I would really hate it if everytime the annoying liberals on this board saw one of your posts they were thinking 'boy, that guy must have absolutely tiny tool'

Just going to quote myself here...

Not even going to read 13 pages of drivel but I will say..

Every board has it's active times and down times, we'll be buzzing again soon, this is The Beach Boys.

I miss AGD, he should be brought back.

The mods would never entertain a boneheaded decision as you suggest. If you miss him so much, you can hang out at PS. They're so starved for members, they'll buy you food, pay your rent, clean your bathroom and walk your dog.  ::)

Shady, I've always liked you as a poster here, and I'd never ever think less of you for holding the opinion that you do about this topic. But you may want to read at least the first page or two of this thread to get a better grasp on the ban. It wasn't at all an easy decision for Billy, I think Billy said he became physically ill around the time he had to make a decision about this ban - he really did see Andrew as a close online friend. And since the ban he's been berated publicly multiple times by this once close friend. Billy's personal problems have even been a subject in these public diatribes.

Hopefully this topic will be put to rest asap, but I would encourage anyone here who has doubts about the decision of this ban to do research about it. If you have done research and you still think it was a bad decision by the mods, definitely present your case. I'm sure if there was a reasonable defense the mods would lift the ban, but so far this hasn't happened.

What's wrong with having a small penis ?

Since you seem to be on the "snowflake" side, you should be aware that body-shaming is frowned upon in the snowflake community.

Andrew belongs where he is...where he will be mostly fawned over, which will reduce his tendency to be a bully--or, at least, to act out so aggressively in that manner.

I have been through similar situations on chat boards where my personal investment was higher, and I can tell you is that schisms are an inherent part of the landscape, and it's better if the key instigating agent (and their enablers) move on, regardless of how much knowledge/insight they may possess.

The simple facts of the BBs are these. The Wilson brothers were all extremely talented, but acted out in varying ways due to an abusive father. Each of them felt more comfortable with writing partners as a result, which led to a series of complications. Mike Love has always struggled between right-wing paranoia and a spiritual sense that he didn't want to have to divorce from material pleasures (hence the appeal of the Maharishi)--he was a great lead singer and, when he would leave his ego at the door, an at-least serviceable lyricist. As the material matured, however, his skills became less valuable--but history (and the varying fates of the Wilson brothers) has left him in a position where his limited vision of the band continues to compete with a more comprehensive view of the BBs achievements and legacy. Those who enable Mike Love in his post-2012 mode are doing a disservice to the music they love, because 97%+ of it was composed by the Wilson brothers.

What Andrew has to say about this on the larger scale is something that remained hidden behind his posturing as a bully and an ultimate "factual authority." This should be noted with an appropriate amount of regret, because he is by no means bereft of aesthetic insight. But--when he began to twist the arms of others with different interpretations of those facts is when he crossed a Rubicon, and he had to go. It was clearly an agonizing decision for the mods, and it took great courage for them to do so.

That said, there is no coming back for him--and those who wish for that really need to leave the vast majority of us (who understand all too well why he had to go) in peace. Enough is enough: go genuflect to the man over at his "Elba"-like place of exile.

Well said Don

Peace & Love, Peace & Love as Ringo would say.  ;D

https://youtu.be/DCyuq-ofnPc

Agreed. Totally uncalled for.

Maybe or you could see it for what it is and appreciate my fine Irish wit.

The truth is rarely called for --that's kind of the issue.  But go ahead and edit it. Ask the mods. Enjoy.

Yeah, that was a bit much. I don't blame you for the sentiment, but that did cross a line

Christ almighty if that's fine irish wit please let me never visit that country in my lifetime. sh*t like that is what gives this community a bad name. Calling out stupidity and petulant behavior is one thing, but wishing some people that kind of ill will is going way too damn far.

I need a break from this place.

(http://media.hollywood.com/images/638x425/3504119.jpg)

Does this thread remind anybody else of Portlandia?

Anyhoo....

 :angel:

What a shitshow, AGD would be proud of such a nasty comment.

We await a monograph on the oh-so-subtle differences betwixt Irish wit, Welsh wit, and half-wits (e.g. our dear old friend Rocky Pamplin).

Where is Ontor when we really need him???  :hat

Good gawd...2 separate threads about the cancer which it's said infested this site.  Well... ... ...the cancer was removed yet this specific site remains deathly ill in spite of it.

It looks oh-so weak.  It looks decidedly smaller than miniscule.  And it looks like it's close to all that matters here anymore.  They don't fucking exist and yet *WE* con-fuckin'-tinue to both fertilize and water their sad little site with more sadness here than they'll EVER be able to muster.

It's as if S.S. is committing suicide...and using ol' Andrew as the rope.

Enough of this bullshit. ::)

Move on.

I think you overreact and overstate. Clearly a few folks remain here with the desire to distract over matters that are over and done with. And a few folks will enter into the thread with a "dissenting view" about Andrew, if only to stir the pot.

How is that any different than what happened in so many threads that he was involved in? It's the residue of a bully and the remnants of his stooges still causing trouble.

There continue to be many, many stimulating discussions about BBs music here. And most of them are now completely free of the hijacking sociopathy that festered for so long. The only people who "committed suicide" are the ones who went too far in terms of influence-peddling and intellectual bullying here and decided to keep firing torpedoes. Their "badge of honor" is to be banned from this so-called "hateful" place. So be it. Good riddance!

Good riddance indeed, to the lot of them. But I will ask this upfront and direct: What if *you* (as in anyone reading) had who knows how much false if not slanderous information circulating about you personally, your families, or anything beyond "the music"...what would you do? How do you correct the bullshit that came from a campaign that hit every BB's related forum and continues to do so, knowing it was false from day 1 and seeing that certain lies are still circulating? Keep in mind, that's not band members, that is people here on this board, including "the mods" who had to find out that people were spreading this sh*t on places we have nothing to do with and didn't read. Only the surface has been scratched with all this garbage and the various behaviors and campaigns to ruin this place because "the mods" didn't bow down to certain people and interests.

I'm all for moving on, but for f*ck's sake not if everything is going to be whitewashed or swept under the carpet as if nothing ever happened and the lies continue. That's how the offenders and perpetrators of all this garbage get away with it. Historians/experts/collectors or not, it doesn't work that way. There has to be an outlet to set the record straight when necessary. We got bashed for too long simply for not toe'ing the line and buying into the bullshit.

FYI: The post has been edited and quotes of it as well. Maybe consider editing replies accordingly, and we move on.

It's not.

I suppose this is the part of the film where you tell me I have a small willy and I live in mother's basement --it's not true. My gf happens to have a large vee-j-j and my folks live in MY upstairs. So you see it's about perspective. What I mean is that you learned of all this and the nefarious details in real-time. I just learned about it mostly this week. In real time you may have posted some harsh things. Having said that, this thread(and others), if you read the whole thing, helps one connect the dots to wtf went on and is going on.  In real-time maybe your perspective was different and perhaps mine will be in a few months.

I thought that was Foskett's job? *cough*

You missed out "fuckwits", which I think was an AGD phrase.

I only mention it because this great big stinking turd of a thread...and its equally retch-worthy twin...really only serves to empower 'them'.  We give all of that historic shyte legs and life by continually living 'there' and thusly raising the stature of those long gone.  THIS sh*t plays right into the hands of misery.  And who keeps it front and centre?  WE DO.

THAT is stupid.

It's in the sandbox, and it's there if and when a reply or correction is needed. When people got bashed and targeted personally as they were, and there have been no attempts to make things right or correct the lies or even tell the truth about what happened and how it all went down, there will naturally be a lot of anger and bad feelings, and it keeps sitting unresolved.

Here's my thought: If lies are told and the truth gets distorted, and people continue to promote and believe those lies, don't the liars end up succeeding in what they were trying to do all along? Substitute "bullies" for liars and it's another facet of what happened here until it was stopped. If the bully gets off scott-free with no blame or responsibility and simply picks up the same activity elsewhere, doesn't the bully win?

Bullies and liars shouldn't win in my book.

Glad to see these threads combined. Giving them less attention is the most important step towards strengthening our board.The sooner we move on,  the sooner they take ownership of the drama.

.

Yes. You have pretty much summed up my feeling on the matter as well.

Best post in thread. You hit the nail on the head.

Doe is Wikipedia for the Beach Boys...all info gotten from other sources, and everything has to be taken with several grains of salt...

They do win when we continue to shine the light on them.  And then we do it again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  And again.  etc./etc.

Let them fade to black.  If another issue in THIS regard rears its ugly head...shoot it off then.  Glad that this has been relegated to the litter box but it still lives and breathes.  When that happens "bullies and liars" not only "win" they also get to laugh.

We HAVE to move on...or... ... ...we become the joke.  Then we lose again. 

'They' wouldn't stop talking about Donald Trump.  Trump won.

Listening to the kokodope again, huh? Try to kick the habit and the cough will go away too.  ::)

:lol Yeah, that was one of Andrew's favorite stories.

Which makes me wonder what Foskett has to do for Mike.

Amen.

Were the hell did that come from?  ???

Trust me, he's not listening to him! That was a reference to one of Doe's favorite claims.

Got it, guys. My bad. Must have missed that somehow. ;D

No worries!

Seems to be up to his old tricks too..is now claiming that Brian has no say at all in the show scheduling and kind of implying it's being forced on him.

When did the 2016 tour end?  I get the concern, but with Andrew and others, the concern can turn into unwarranted alarmism really quickly.

Yeah it's all about considering the source. Doe's real issue with the tour is Brian's not Mike, Melinda's not Jackie, and he's not getting comped tickets.

No comped tickets from me.... ;)

 :lol :lol   :o :o :o

Shine the sandals and pour the w(h)ine before BTTYS?

Last time I checked it involved amyl nitrate, handcuffs, ad a baby owl.

Oh wait, I thought you were talking about what ANDREW does for Mike.

eta: Think he's a right **** for what he's said and done but can we have less of what easily comes off like tabloid homophobic smears please?

Homophobic? I may be a lot of things, and am not perfect by any means, but I am not homophobic by any means.

Billy is SS's left wing ambassador....

Exactly. I despise the man , no doubt about it, and he just may be the only person in the world whom I truly hate in every sense of the word,  but I would not use certain words to describe him that he has used on others. I do not see what was homophobic about my comment, and what one would actually *do* with a baby owl, cuffs, and poppers boggles the mind.

Edit

I get the connection now. .. I meant it more along the lines of him being completely devoted to Mike like a Love-struck teenage girl and willing to do anything to earn those back row seats at the county fair. I wouldn't care if they were legit lovers,  I'm not like that at all. Wasn't thinking along those lines when I said it . To use another analogy, it's like Mike is the master  and Andrew is Rover,  always willing to play fetch like the good puppy he is. Who's a good boy? Andrew! And he's even mostly house trained! And if he has an accident,  Mike's book makes an excellent substitute for newspaper.

Ro Ro runts ruvies!!!  >:D

:lol

Nah, he would anything for Love, but he won't do that.

This thread should be "Billy C. Missing, the future of this forum" ;)

Couldn't leave this one alone. I have no opinion on Doe, but in terms of providing a user-friendly compendium available to everyone, nobody else has come close, and it's doubtful they ever will. There are many individuals on this forum who have shelled out literally thousands of dollars collecting every piece of literature ever written about the band. With those resources, they could start a Bellagio rival, but nah, they'd rather bicker about Mike Love or fantasize about what the Beach Boys would be like if they were born female. Best thing we got is the 2 or 3 people who have been beefing up the Beach Boys Wikipedia pages for the past decade or so.

Honorable mention: The Beach Boys Fan Club's Liner Notes Archive (http://www.beachboysfanclub.com/bbstudio.htm#linernotes). Wonder why they stopped archiving after 1999.

I have to agree.

I disagree, Doe just hosted information that C-man, Ian Rustan, Howie Edelson, and Jon Stebbins. Hell Brad Elliot and Mike Eder did more work for the BBs community than Doe.

"Much lamented" Mike Eder?

I meant Brad Elliot.., ;)

I was about to lose my temper.  ;D My friendship with Mike Eder predates this board.  Mike had a rather public breakdown and caused a few people to become very worried, but I believe he's ok now. I wish he would come back to the board, but I understand that this place might not be the best environment for him.

I have wished for quite some time now that one of the well known "scholars" of The Beach Boys would compile one huge "reference of historical data" book(or anthology book series) on the group. Basically the Bellagio website in book form.

Mike is a class act. Be well, Mike.

Agree about Mike Eder, I liked this poster. The way some people treated him back then was very rude.

Exactly.  Doe himself has done jack sh*t.

Totally agree. When he came back after some recovery time, he was attacked for daring to not use his name as his username, and for having the "Honourable Guest" title. He was pretty much driven away from the board.

Mike's a good guy. Sad part is, though, his opinion on certain things was colored by things I shared to him that Andrew told me, not realizing how much of a charlatan Andrew was (and is).

I'm sure if he really takes a look at these threads, as well as the pm's, he'll eventually see the bigger picture of things.