MiC up for order on Amazon, August release

[PaulTMA]

I'm really sad I don't have Goin' To The Beach on my hard drive and ipod in mp3 format.  

EDIT:  Jimmy Hill pre-ordered MIC from Amazon for me, so I now have the mp3.

Jimmy Hill and his BIG CHIN. 

[Nicko1234]

So what did Hickey say?

I'm also curious. Seems to me that a lot of personal things get said around here by a lot of people. Andrew H. is one of the more passionate pro-Brian folks, so it's hard not to draw conclusions that dissent from a certain party line is being squelched.

In a moment of anger he levelled a couple of insults at another poster. F`ing idiot and a***hole if memory serves. Which he did later apologize for as the admin said.

[leggo of my ego]

I'm so glad Mike opted for this track instead of the original version of Big Sur. Thanks, Mike!

if I ever read some sarcasm... 

Unfortunately, since the mid 70s (early?), Mike's lost track of what the strengths of BB music (including his own) are.

This is a very accurate (and depressing) statement re Mr Love.

Incidentally, MIC now £57 on Amazon UK!!

If True - w00t!

[Wirestone]

So what did Hickey say?

I'm also curious. Seems to me that a lot of personal things get said around here by a lot of people. Andrew H. is one of the more passionate pro-Brian folks, so it's hard not to draw conclusions that dissent from a certain party line is being squelched.

In a moment of anger he levelled a couple of insults at another poster. F`ing idiot and a***hole if memory serves. Which he did later apologize for as the admin said.

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

[Nicko1234]

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

 

Very good.

[Mike's Beard]

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

What sounds better, The Iron Turban or The Ginger Curtain? Is your neighbour spreading anti-Myke propaganda? Let the Mods know and they can arrange a little vist for them in the night where they will be pistol whupped into obedience.

[Wirestone]

That is pretty funny, actually.

[DonnyL]

The drums on it sound new and maybe some other newer overdubs?
Technically, it sounds great but the song is pretty much one chorus over and over.

the mix sounds modern to me, but the drums themselves sound like circa '79. I'd bet there's a guitar overdub + modern digital mix w/ the rest vintage '79-'80.

[Jason]

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

These determinations are made by the moderators. We use best judgment in every case. And we will work to the best of our ability to apply these standards fairly. The new "activist stance" is not going to be used as an excuse to "shut down anti-Mike sentiment". We don't ban people for having opinions. And from a personal standpoint, I also won't ban people for having anti-Mike views. But like any extremist view, if it is seen to be stepping on the toes of others, all of the moderators will be using their best judgment.

As always, we're open to suggestions.

[smile-holland]

So what did Hickey say?

I'm also curious. Seems to me that a lot of personal things get said around here by a lot of people. Andrew H. is one of the more passionate pro-Brian folks, so it's hard not to draw conclusions that dissent from a certain party line is being squelched.

In a moment of anger he levelled a couple of insults at another poster. F`ing idiot and a***hole if memory serves. Which he did later apologize for as the admin said.

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

Good questions. I'll try to respond to that later today/evening (unless one of the other mods beats me to it). But in a new topic (expect it to be posted in the welcome-section). Please let's return to discussing MIC in this topic.

EDIT: and Jason actually did beat me to it. Well, let me add then, that one of the reasons for us mods to be more strict is, that lately we have seen more and more discussions get out of hand BECAUSE we were not directly banning someone for not acting according the rules. In these latest cases: the ones that were banned are totally different persons with different opinions, and it wasn't one mod banning them all. And IMO I'd like them all to return to the board after the ban has ended, as I do appreciate their input on this board. 

And to close this side-discussion: my signature pretty much says it: "think before you post".

[Stegibo]

Aww, where can I listen to Goin' To The Beach? Everyone's writing about it!!

[Smilin Ed H]

delete

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

I have a more on topic complaint.

Seriously, WTF is up with the pricing right now? The UK is gonna get this thing for half the price I'm currently paying, they'd better hurry and lower it here as well.

[alf wiedersehen]

I have a more on topic complaint.

Seriously, WTF is up with the pricing right now? The UK is gonna get this thing for half the price I'm currently paying, they'd better hurry and lower it here as well.

Realistically, the UK version is twenty dollars cheaper.
And, if pricing is that much of a big deal for, why not order from Amazon UK?

[Disney Boy (1985)]

MIC now £57 on Amazon UK!!

really? says £82.99 now

Maybe once you pre-order it the price descends, but this is what I'm now being told: Total £56.57

[leggo of my ego]

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

What sounds better, The Iron Turban or The Ginger Curtain? Is your neighbour spreading anti-Myke propaganda? Let the Mods know and they can arrange a little vist for them in the night where they will be pistol whupped into obedience.

  Ya you vill show ze proper respect for Mike Luv or else... 

[TonyW]

So what did Hickey say?

I'm also curious. Seems to me that a lot of personal things get said around here by a lot of people. Andrew H. is one of the more passionate pro-Brian folks, so it's hard not to draw conclusions that dissent from a certain party line is being squelched.

In a moment of anger he levelled a couple of insults at another poster. F`ing idiot and a***hole if memory serves. Which he did later apologize for as the admin said.

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

Exactly! And let's not forgot that it was one prominent moderator on this board who a few years ago was deliberately baiting other posters who disagreed with his Mike-centric views so he could wave his ban stick and then come on a brag about it. It was a pretty low and pretty pathetic time on this board from which it has never really recovered.

[Jason]

This is the Smiley Smile board, not East Germany!  

[ontor pertawst]

At least they had trenchcoats and cool sunglasses. We just get those damn shirts.

[TonyW]

This is the Smiley Smile board, not East Germany!  

Pathetic again ... and you just drag it down another level.

[Jason]

That wasn't even in response to you.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

So what did Hickey say?

I'm also curious. Seems to me that a lot of personal things get said around here by a lot of people. Andrew H. is one of the more passionate pro-Brian folks, so it's hard not to draw conclusions that dissent from a certain party line is being squelched.

In a moment of anger he levelled a couple of insults at another poster. F`ing idiot and a***hole if memory serves. Which he did later apologize for as the admin said.

So people are now being banned, not for consistently and egregiously flouting the rules -- as has been the standard in the past -- but for momentarily losing their temper? And after apologizing?

How are these determinations being made, and by whom?

What kind of assurances can the board moderators give us that this new standard will be applied fairly?

Has any thought been made as to the chilling effect this will have on board dialogue, especially given that many folks backing Mike have been quick to claim persecution at criticism of their stances? How can we trust that this new, activist stance of moderators will not be used to shut down anti-Mike sentiment, especially given the history of some of the mods themselves?

Exactly! And let's not forgot that it was one prominent moderator on this board who a few years ago was deliberately baiting other posters who disagreed with his Mike-centric views so he could wave his ban stick and then come on a brag about it. It was a pretty low and pretty pathetic time on this board from which it has never really recovered.

I don't see any signs of that. The Moderators all seem very fair, patient and level headed. Let us not forget that they are major fans too with their own opinions. I applaud these new rules and the enforcement.  If you can't be civil, funny or sarcastic in disagreeing with somebody, it's time to step back and take a deep breath.

[Rocky Raccoon]

I mean this is a message board about the Beach Boys.  The fact that people get into heated arguments on here is a little ridiculous, not to sound judgmental.  Obviously debates are welcome and the fact that everyone has such a different opinion on the band is one of the things that make Beach Boys fans so interesting.  But to lash out at one single person for not agreeing with you and to say things that can be potentially offensive, people can get into a habit of that and as a result, someone's feelings might actually get seriously hurt.  I'm not saying that has actually happened but it's definitely possible.  Sometimes on the internet, we forget that we're not just typing words to an empty screen, we're interacting with actual people and we need to show each other respect and try not to say things that we would never dare say to someone in public.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

I would just like to state a few things for the record

1) Last night I did not recieve a visit from three gentlemen, one of whom did not have a dutch accent, one was not wearing an "I Love The Lovester" T-Shirt
    and the other was not referred to by the other two as "Big Billy C"

2) They did not suggest I cease from making anti-Myke statements immediately, and did not hint that they would  "take me down to Guantana-kokomo" if I did not.

3) They did not ask me to start a thread entitled "Goin To The Beach" where I renounced all anti-Myke behaviour and encouraged people to embrace this new song, which does not  contain subliminal
    backwards messages instructing the listener to kill Mummy, Daddy and all Brianistas.        

[ontor pertawst]

Bruce got to him!