New Jeff Beck interview. Discuss.

[Robbie Mac]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans,

That's the definition of "overheated". When the C50 tour was announced it was only natural that the Mike-bashers would start whistling a different tune once he was back working with Brian. What were they supposed to say when Brian was praising Mike in interviews? "No, man, you're an idiot! Mike's a jerk". Even some of the the most ardent Mike-bashers happily and quite willfully played along hoping the boys were back for good and, more importantly, WANTING to believe that the future was bright. When the tour ended this board went right back to the whole Brian-vs-Mike debate like it usually does.

To use a Kiss analogy again: The posters on KissFAQ were feuding with each other and engaging in paranoid fantasies leading up to the band's rock-n-roll HOF induction. When the original four stepped onstage all smiles and back-slapping, even the most vicious Gene-haters were calling him "classy" and talking about how the "magic was back" etc. Once it was over they went right back to what they always do.    

I mean, come on...The fact that Brian's new album is coming with guest vocalists from a younger generation that most older posters had never heard of before was bound to cause moans and groans.....It would've been bizarre if it didn't.

I don't know why this is so baffling to people. For example, I just heard that Paul McCartney is collaborating with Kanye West. I couldn't tell you one thing about Kanye West, don't know his music, don't want to listen to it and don't care. Guess how I took that news? Part of me is thinking "Oh crap, I don't want to hear some guy rapping all over a Paul McCartney album" and the other part of me is saying "Now calm down, Paul's had a pretty good track record lately. He'll make it work". Having those thoughts is not some kind of egregious attack on McCartney. It's a quite normal response.

If I was on a Beatles message board I'm sure I'd see people writing those exact same sentiments and arguing back and forth. To suggest otherwise about this or any other fan message board is just giving in to paranoid fantasies.





 

It is a problem when one of the fantasizers is a board moderator. And it's not a new thing, so he was chosen as moderator even though he feels that way (which makes the other mods suspect for selecting him). If that makes me a bad poster for saying that, oh well. I will just go back to lurking or not reading it much. No biggie.

Ask a Brianista how they felt about Jason, a guy who never should have been a moderator of anything.

[Jim V.]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans,

That's the definition of "overheated". When the C50 tour was announced it was only natural that the Mike-bashers would start whistling a different tune once he was back working with Brian. What were they supposed to say when Brian was praising Mike in interviews? "No, man, you're an idiot! Mike's a jerk". Even some of the the most ardent Mike-bashers happily and quite willfully played along hoping the boys were back for good and, more importantly, WANTING to believe that the future was bright. When the tour ended this board went right back to the whole Brian-vs-Mike debate like it usually does.

To use a Kiss analogy again: The posters on KissFAQ were feuding with each other and engaging in paranoid fantasies leading up to the band's rock-n-roll HOF induction. When the original four stepped onstage all smiles and back-slapping, even the most vicious Gene-haters were calling him "classy" and talking about how the "magic was back" etc. Once it was over they went right back to what they always do.    

I mean, come on...The fact that Brian's new album is coming with guest vocalists from a younger generation that most older posters had never heard of before was bound to cause moans and groans.....It would've been bizarre if it didn't.

I don't know why this is so baffling to people. For example, I just heard that Paul McCartney is collaborating with Kanye West. I couldn't tell you one thing about Kanye West, don't know his music, don't want to listen to it and don't care. Guess how I took that news? Part of me is thinking "Oh crap, I don't want to hear some guy rapping all over a Paul McCartney album" and the other part of me is saying "Now calm down, Paul's had a pretty good track record lately. He'll make it work". Having those thoughts is not some kind of egregious attack on McCartney. It's a quite normal response.

If I was on a Beatles message board I'm sure I'd see people writing those exact same sentiments and arguing back and forth. To suggest otherwise about this or any other fan message board is just giving in to paranoid fantasies.





 

It is a problem when one of the fantasizers is a board moderator. And it's not a new thing, so he was chosen as moderator even though he feels that way (which makes the other mods suspect for selecting him). If that makes me a bad poster for saying that, oh well. I will just go back to lurking or not reading it much. No biggie.

Ask a Brianista how they felt about Jason, a guy who never should have been a moderator of anything.

Brianista? Don't you mean "sociopaths" Andy?

[GhostyTMRS]

Regardless of who's a moderator and who's not, I've seen these "fads" hit the board every so often. From the terms "Brianistas" to "Kokomoists" when a poster wants to label someone in a derogatory fashion (and neither term seems to apply to anything...well...real) and now I guess the latest fad is to suggest there's a hidden agenda if someone likes a Mike and Bruce show or, God forbid, someone's critical of how Brian's solo career is handled....What is this crap? The Man From U.N.C.L.E.?

..and Brian's career IS handled, like anyone else who's made a name for themselves has advisors, "people", etc. It's called show business for a reason.  Geez, even George Clooney has "people" he hires to steer his career.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

It is a problem when one of the fantasizers is a board moderator. And it's not a new thing, so he was chosen as moderator even though he feels that way (which makes the other mods suspect for selecting him). If that makes me a bad poster for saying that, oh well. I will just go back to lurking or not reading it much. No biggie.

Are you freaking serious? So, me and Smile Holland are 'suspect' for choosing him because he feels differently from you? Doesn't make you a 'bad poster' (whatever that means), but it does make you come across as a bit of an ass. If you don't like the way we run the board, feel free to leave. Nobody is forcing you to be here.

[Nicko1234]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

This must be the most preposterous suggestion in the history of this board. Mike and Bruce are playing a hundred shows a year to people who do not read this board. This board is completely irrelevant in the great scheme of things.

Some might want to suggest that this board has become a Mike-embracing area but the facts show that it`s just a place where people have differing opinions (shock horror). Plenty of people have criticized Mike for the ending of C50, there were pages dedicated to the fact that Mike was going to veto all Dennis songs from the MiC collection (which proved completely untrue), there have been threads about BRI voting to take away Mike`s licence, every interview is pored over with suggestions that questions are being chosen/vetoed by Mike`s management (which again seems untrue) etc.

Now do some people also have a bee in their bonnet about Brian`s management, the use of autotune etc.? Very probably yes. But they are entitled to their opinions too and it doesn`t exactly constitute a big conspiracy.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Regardless of who's a moderator and who's not, I've seen these "fads" hit the board every so often. From the terms "Brianistas" to "Kokomoists" when a poster wants to label someone in a derogatory fashion (and neither term seems to apply to anything...well...real) and now I guess the latest fad is to suggest there's a hidden agenda if someone likes a Mike and Bruce show or, God forbid, someone's critical of how Brian's solo career is handled....What is this crap? The Man From U.N.C.L.E.?

..and Brian's career IS handled, like anyone else who's made a name for themselves has advisors, "people", etc. It's called show business for a reason.  Geez, even George Clooney has "people" he hires to steer his career.

Both 'Brianistas' AND 'Kokomo-ists' annoy the sh*t out of me. Personally speaking, I cannot stand biased, one-sided views. Guess what folks...in their own way, ALL of the core band have been asses at one point or another (except Dave...I don't think I've ever read anything negative about him on a personal level).

And yes, in complete agreement about the 'handlers'. That's pretty much standard practice in show business. And whatever one may feel about Brian's 'situation'....be glad he's not Britney Spears, who cannot make phone calls, go online, have access to her own money, or even read whatever she wants without everything being 'screened' beforehand. Hell, until the conservatorship was (very slightly) amended, she couldn't even be legally credited with writing anything.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act.

Definitely no evidence of the former...considering my finances at this point, I certainly would be welcome!

As for the latter, well....there are several parties on BOTH sides who are members here, although I don't see Scott or John trying to boost Mike's rep, and I certainly do not see Nelson, Probyn, or other members of Brian's band doing the same!

[Custom Machine]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

Ah ha!  Now it's all coming into focus.  Those stories from two years ago of people seeing AGD, while sitting on a grassy knoll in Dallas, being handed a huge bag full on cash by BRI's Elliot Lott must be true.  Then all it took were some posts from Mr. Doe and others on the Smiley Smile Message Board and world opinion was swayed in favor of Mike and Bruce going back to touring on their own.

[Sheriff John Stone]

At this point I've had my fill of various attempts to rewrite or reshape history to possibly suit an agenda. There is an agenda at work, what exactly it is...who knows. I'm curious to see what the end game may be if there is one, or if it's just a small group of fans who seem to have something negative to say against BW in general spouting off whenever news breaks. But I've had my fill of various attempts to paint certain events or even truths as something other than what they are, and maybe if someone here could shed some light on the reasons why almost every announcement or news blurb or report or leaked photo or video of recent BW projects has come under such scrutiny as to be ridiculous.

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

Sad. Very sad.

[Dancing Bear]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

Ah ha!  Now it's all coming into focus.  Those stories from two years ago of people seeing AGD, while sitting on a grassy knoll in Dallas, being handed a huge bag full on cash by BRI's Elliot Lott must be true.  Then all it took were some posts from Mr. Doe and others on the Smiley Smile Message Board and world opinion was swayed in favor of Mike and Bruce going back to touring on their own.

You know, some of us may be in Jeff becks's payroll as well.

[guitarfool2002]

When I mentioned Brian's encounter with Paul it was not intended as a low blow.  You seem to have missed the point I was making which was, Brian is not particularly comfortable being around musical peers.  How do I know this?  We've all read or heard stories about his encounters with people over the years.  No low blows, no agendas, I am a big Brian fan and categorically state that I do not have anything other than affection for him.  I have met him a few times and he has been very gracious and humble.  I don't like people going around criticising him.  He has overcome so many obstacles in his life to give us all great joy, and is still doing so today.  I am looking forward, as always, to his new album coming out.  I even bought a ticket to see Kacey Musgraves, despite never having hear her sing.  If she's good enough for Brian then that was all the recommendation I needed.  Hopefully this clarifies my opinion of Brian for you.

I also noted your comments in the movie discussion thread and felt you were arguing against other posters for the sake of it.  There is no 'agenda'.  People were only expressing reservations about the accuracy of the props and hoping it wouldn't be a reflection of the film as a whole. 

So again I'll just say, sod what Beck thinks about Brian.  We love the guy, will go to his gigs and buy the music because we love him and it's what we do.  It's not worth getting worked up about.

I wasn't looking for clarification but it was nice to see and get an understanding, and we are on the same page in many ways. I may be different in that I think it is worth getting worked up about in our own small way if you have someone - anyone - spouting off to the press and painting a certain picture of someone (in this case Brian) that at the very least is unfair and not at all indicative of the bigger picture of the man's daily life, happiness, activities, family, etc. In this case how many people with only a passing knowledge of Brian Wilson have read Beck's comments and immediately thought "yeah, that dude must need help...", based entirely and unfairly on something Jeff Beck said? Again, do we know it's accurate, do we trust Beck's version of events as the whole story, or is there more? Do we at least open up to the possibility that perhaps there is more to it than someone "who needs help" according to Beck? Coming from a guy who was considered a friend, yeah I get worked up because it isn't right to do that. That's me.

The Surf's Up thing - that was solid fact, coming from Brian on multiple occasions. I restated it here, I got challenged, some disagreed that it was even the origination of the pairing, and yes I get defensive when something which is beyond needing "proof" is challenged and I still wonder why that was the case here. The suggestion that Brian was again "forced" or nudged into doing something - carrying with it the possible implication that he didn't want to do it but went along yet again with the mysterious "handlers" against his own wishes perhaps - was discussed and mentioned more than when the actual truth of the matter as reported on the record by Brian himself and others, as if the inventions about what "could" have happened were more important than what *did* actually happen. And that was as simple as Brian hearing him play Surf's Up and wanting to work with him on music.

Then I get the suggestion I'm an "insider" or something for knowing this...it was in various reports and articles that got syndicated and republished around the web and in the music press...why make whether or not I am an insider or Bazooka Joe of bubble gum wrapper fame an issue on this board? It is totally irrelevant, *I* have nothing to do with interviews or statements that have been published in dozens of outlets, print and online that everyone has equal access to if they look for it.

So that, yes, I'll get defensive too because it's not about me or anything of the sort. If an honored guest on this board made a similar post as I did about the benefit show and Brian/Beck, would the reply have mentioned "insider" or anything of the sort? I'm reposting stuff I saw and heard over decades of following this band, that's what most of us do in these discussions. It just so happens I was right, 100% right, and those who chose not to believe it could then read Brian in his own words describing the Beck-Wilson pairing. Simple as that.

Another charge that concerns me: If you're going to reference me arguing for the sake of the arguing in the BW film thread, please give me at least a chance to see the basis of this statement and point out where I argued for the sake of arguing. Because I don't do that, I try deliberately not to do that. And if I did it without realizing it, let me see where and when I did it so I can see what I did and if necessary correct or defend it. That's not much to ask. Just let me see the basis of that statement.

I can and will say once and for all that saying the movie will be terrible based on still frames and not a second of actual film from the movie is foolish, silly, and not what I'd expect from fans. At least wait to see it before deciding it's a turkey and telling others it will suck. Then, all is fair game once it is actually available to see. I can say I'm excited for it, I can say I'm not excited for it, what seems a stretch is for me to say it either sucks or is a masterpiece before seeing any of it. Again, that's me. I will say I'm glad it's being released, and I'm interested and excited to watch it.

I seriously am glad there is some common ground here, but I also felt it necessary to explain myself a bit more and also request more information where necessary so I can see what I've been tagged with doing. 

[Mike's Beard]

At this point I've had my fill of various attempts to rewrite or reshape history to possibly suit an agenda. There is an agenda at work, what exactly it is...who knows. I'm curious to see what the end game may be if there is one, or if it's just a small group of fans who seem to have something negative to say against BW in general spouting off whenever news breaks. But I've had my fill of various attempts to paint certain events or even truths as something other than what they are, and maybe if someone here could shed some light on the reasons why almost every announcement or news blurb or report or leaked photo or video of recent BW projects has come under such scrutiny as to be ridiculous.

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

I really hope you were joking when you posted this.

[smile-holland]

It is a problem when one of the fantasizers is a board moderator. And it's not a new thing, so he was chosen as moderator even though he feels that way (which makes the other mods suspect for selecting him). If that makes me a bad poster for saying that, oh well. I will just go back to lurking or not reading it much. No biggie.

Since when isn't it allowed for moderators to have an opinion? The moderators are fans too, and we like to discuss as well. That's the fun part of being around here (moderating often isn't), and the main reason we became a member of this board, so don't take that away from us.
For the record: "we" choose a new moderator, based on his or her qualities on having a good, objective approach on things (or: we choose someone based on what's best for this messageboard); not because we agree on his/her opinions.

You don't have to agree with our choices or our opinions. We don't always agree on someone else's opinion either. But - and I speak on behalf of the others as well - I always respect someone else's opinion. It's the way how one communicates with another that matters to me (and lately - seing how some topics get out of hand - worries me more and more, tbh).

[SMiLE Brian]

smile Holland and Billy are the best mods this board could ask for. Adding GF was a logical addition since he is a great guy as well.

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

smile Holland and Billy are the best mods this board could ask for. Adding GF was a logical addition since he is a great guy as well.

Seconded!!!!!!!

[drbeachboy]

Regardless of who's a moderator and who's not, I've seen these "fads" hit the board every so often. From the terms "Brianistas" to "Kokomoists" when a poster wants to label someone in a derogatory fashion (and neither term seems to apply to anything...well...real) and now I guess the latest fad is to suggest there's a hidden agenda if someone likes a Mike and Bruce show or, God forbid, someone's critical of how Brian's solo career is handled....What is this crap? The Man From U.N.C.L.E.?

..and Brian's career IS handled, like anyone else who's made a name for themselves has advisors, "people", etc. It's called show business for a reason.  Geez, even George Clooney has "people" he hires to steer his career.

When did "Brianista" become derogatory? For years is was a badge of honor to be one. While all the guys did one thing or another that might piss a fan off, none did anything that makes me hate any of them. They surely don't hate each other, so why should we? Even after all the sh*t that went down after C50, Brian didn't take to kindly to interviewers getting down on Mike. They are my favorite band and I ain't hatin' on any of them.

[Mr. Cohen]

I really hope you were joking when you posted this.

While I think his idea of payola being involved is silly, I do think that perhaps some of the posters here have been tainted by association. They manage to score a big interview or e-mail or something and become fiercely loyal to the viewpoints of their sources. I barely post here anymore and I've been slammed more than once for voicing something (unwittingly) that a "source" disagrees with.

This isn't a relaxed place to talk about the Beach Boys anymore, and hasn't been for awhile. It's circled by sharks that zealously attack anything that attempts to contradict their view of history.

[Andrew G. Doe]

When did "Brianista" become derogatory?

Oh, pretty much around the same time that The Bloo showed up... coincidence, huh ?

[Andrew G. Doe]

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

That's not speculation, that's sheer screaming insanity. Sorry Clay, but that's about the daftest BB-related post I've seen since the Hoffster claimed Capitol were going to pull The Smile Sessions because fans had the balls to actually ask for more info about it, and asked him to take the rap. Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm sure as hell not on a retainer from Mike & Bruce to spread anti-Wilson propaganda (hey... maybe I should ask ?). Aside from anything else, I don't need paying to underscore the truth, or to point out misapprehensions. Remember, Mike's statement about the makeup of the touring band post 9/28/12 was issued at the express request of Brian's people. Guess Mike's people paid them to ask that...

BTW, Mike's license isn't exclusive. Gregg says so. And he knows.   

[filledeplage]

At this point I've had my fill of various attempts to rewrite or reshape history to possibly suit an agenda. There is an agenda at work, what exactly it is...who knows. I'm curious to see what the end game may be if there is one, or if it's just a small group of fans who seem to have something negative to say against BW in general spouting off whenever news breaks. But I've had my fill of various attempts to paint certain events or even truths as something other than what they are, and maybe if someone here could shed some light on the reasons why almost every announcement or news blurb or report or leaked photo or video of recent BW projects has come under such scrutiny as to be ridiculous.

I have speculated in the past that BRI might either be compensating some posters or doing posting on its own to boost Mike's legitimacy as a touring act. Pure speculation, of course, but it definitely would have harmed Mike if his post C50-touring activities had actually caused confusion among fans, and there was ample evidence that it did. At about the same time that such reports started appearing on this board, there was a notable uptick in pro-Mike, "it was always planned this way," "Only idiots would expect the full band to continue" kinds of posts.

It makes you wonder, right? Because if Al or Brian's managers / wives had dropped by and seen evidence of confusion, they might have some ground to contest that exclusive touring license. But as it was, those early posts about post-C50 M&B shows were buried under an avalanche of similarly-worded pushback. And then, a bunch of posts made sure to note how happy everyone way to be paid their shares of Mike's revenue.

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy, really, and I think this line of thinking can rapidly turn really weird. But it is curious. And we know that the history of this group has many strange diversions.

Seriously? That "speculation" as to whether Mike has paid posters is patently absurd.  I guess I'll look in my mailbox for the check. FYI - just back from four days of sold out shows.  Arguing with success?

When Mike decided to rebuild a Touring Band, after Carl died, I'm the first to admit ( as a "doubting Thomas" type ) I had to take a real wait-and-see approach. And, contemporaneously, I saw Brian, and was delighted to do so, especially after the loss of a second sibling (I've been there;  a pretty ugly place) and watching Brian "bloom" in front of the audience, with Melinda off to the side of the stage.

Mike, was, I think sort of wisely conservative (not in the political sense)in his approach.  Now, the Touring Band has a global track record in various venues, and a carefully-crafted setlist with core people who are perfectionists.  In terms of fans, I'd be on the fussiest list, looking for a balance of what I go to hear.  And from small kids to some lady who just turned 100 or 101...

Four sold-out shows. And, I just checked the mailbox.  No "negotiable instrument" yet.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

smile Holland and Billy are the best mods this board could ask for. Adding GF was a logical addition since he is a great guy as well.

Seconded!!!!!!!

Thanks guys!

[Cam Mott]

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy either but now I'm wondering if Wirestone isn't being compensated to boost Brian or deboost Mike. (taps finger tips together)

[drbeachboy]

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy either but now I'm wondering if Wirestone isn't being compensated to boost Brian or deboost Mike. (taps finger tips together)

I don't think so, but I do think we are all taking this way too seriously. Makes me a wee bit worried.

[Cam Mott]

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy either but now I'm wondering if Wirestone isn't being compensated to boost Brian or deboost Mike. (taps finger tips together)

I don't think so, but I do think we are all taking this way too seriously. Makes me a wee bit worried.

Now I'm wondering if you aren't being compensated to pretend to be reasonable to throw us off the scent of Wirestone and your fellow conspirators. (strokes white cat)

[drbeachboy]

I'm not a conspiracy minded guy either but now I'm wondering if Wirestone isn't being compensated to boost Brian or deboost Mike. (taps finger tips together)

I don't think so, but I do think we are all taking this way too seriously. Makes me a wee bit worried.

Now I'm wondering if you aren't being compensated to pretend to be reasonable to throw us off the scent of Wirestone and your fellow conspirators. (strokes white cat)

It truly amazes me the sh*t we make up in here, and that some people believe it.