From Brianistas to Lovesters

[HeyJude]

Hey Jude -  please stick to the point.  

First of all, I *DIRECTLY* addressed your point (by disagreeing with it), even though your point had nothing to do with the issues raised in previous posts.

If anything, you've helped to prove the point I was making that Mike defends himself by deflecting from the issue of what he admittedly *didn't* like about what Brian was writing at that time and instead attacking the literal factual veracity of whether he specifically can be proved to have uttered the specific phrase "don't f**k with the formula."

I suggest reading the posts in the thread will help you stick to the point.

Your suggestion that the band was always a 100% united artistic front is laughable; and is proved wrong by statements from the band member themselves, including Mike Love. They formed a company; they were arguably a united business front (though plenty of stories about how their business operation was run would suggest they weren't really even united there either).

[filledeplage]

Hey Jude -  please stick to the point. 

First of all, I *DIRECTLY* addressed your point (by disagreeing with it), even though your point had nothing to do with the issues raised in previous posts.

If anything, you've helped to prove the point I was making that Mike defends himself by deflecting from the issue of what he admittedly *didn't* like about what Brian was writing at that time and instead attacking the literal factual veracity of whether he specifically can be proved to have uttered the specific phrase "don't f**k with the formula."

I suggest reading the posts in the thread will help you stick to the point.

Your suggestion that the band was always a 100% united artistic front is laughable; and is proved wrong by statements from the band member themselves, including Mike Love. They formed a company; they were arguably a united business front (though plenty of stories about how their business operation was run would suggest they weren't really even a united there either).

Hey Jude - Gaumont Palace is the official credible statement as far as I am concerned.  It is straight out of their mouths and full of frustration at the record company.  Laughable?  Each one weighed in.  And it was concerning more artistic and creative control.  Are you saying that they were lying? All four of them in 1971?

There was confrontation between the record company and the band.  Why would they release Best of Vol I, only 8 weeks post? The time-line says it all.  No confidence.  And really no bona fide promotion.   

Against all those odds the singles mined from Pet Sounds did extraordinarily well, but that was no thanks to Capitol.  After all, GOK was a Side B release. 

[HeyJude]

Hey Jude -  please stick to the point. 

First of all, I *DIRECTLY* addressed your point (by disagreeing with it), even though your point had nothing to do with the issues raised in previous posts.

If anything, you've helped to prove the point I was making that Mike defends himself by deflecting from the issue of what he admittedly *didn't* like about what Brian was writing at that time and instead attacking the literal factual veracity of whether he specifically can be proved to have uttered the specific phrase "don't f**k with the formula."

I suggest reading the posts in the thread will help you stick to the point.

Your suggestion that the band was always a 100% united artistic front is laughable; and is proved wrong by statements from the band member themselves, including Mike Love. They formed a company; they were arguably a united business front (though plenty of stories about how their business operation was run would suggest they weren't really even a united there either).

Hey Jude - Gaumont Palace is the official credible statement as far as I am concerned.  It is straight out of their mouths and full of frustration at the record company.  Laughable?  Each one weighed in.  And it was concerning more artistic and creative control.  Are you saying that they were lying? All four of them in 1971?

There was confrontation between the record company and the band.  Why would they release Best of Vol I, only 8 weeks post? The time-line says it all.  No confidence.  And really no bona fide promotion.   

Against all those odds the singles mined from Pet Sounds did extraordinarily well, but that was no thanks to Capitol.  After all, GOK was a Side B release. 

What are you talking about? Are you reading and responding to a different thread?

All of the band having a beef with Capitol (e.g. a common enemy) is not at all the same thing as having a united artistic front where everybody in the band has the same level of interest and engagement and ability to relate to the material Brian was writing.

All of the band agreeing that they're pissed at Capitol Records has nothing to do with what Mike thought of the lyrics to "Hang on to Your Ego" or the lyrics of Van Dyke Parks.

[filledeplage]

Hey Jude -  please stick to the point. 

First of all, I *DIRECTLY* addressed your point (by disagreeing with it), even though your point had nothing to do with the issues raised in previous posts.

If anything, you've helped to prove the point I was making that Mike defends himself by deflecting from the issue of what he admittedly *didn't* like about what Brian was writing at that time and instead attacking the literal factual veracity of whether he specifically can be proved to have uttered the specific phrase "don't f**k with the formula."

I suggest reading the posts in the thread will help you stick to the point.

Your suggestion that the band was always a 100% united artistic front is laughable; and is proved wrong by statements from the band member themselves, including Mike Love. They formed a company; they were arguably a united business front (though plenty of stories about how their business operation was run would suggest they weren't really even a united there either).

Hey Jude - Gaumont Palace is the official credible statement as far as I am concerned.  It is straight out of their mouths and full of frustration at the record company.  Laughable?  Each one weighed in.  And it was concerning more artistic and creative control.  Are you saying that they were lying? All four of them in 1971?

There was confrontation between the record company and the band.  Why would they release Best of Vol I, only 8 weeks post? The time-line says it all.  No confidence.  And really no bona fide promotion.   

Against all those odds the singles mined from Pet Sounds did extraordinarily well, but that was no thanks to Capitol.  After all, GOK was a Side B release. 

What are you talking about? Are you reading and responding to a different thread?

All of the band having a beef with Capitol (e.g. a common enemy) is not at all the same thing as having a united artistic front where everybody in the band has the same level of interest and engagement and ability to relate to the material Brian was writing.

All of the band agreeing that they're pissed at Capitol Records has nothing to do with what Mike thought of the lyrics to "Hang on to Your Ego" or the lyrics of Van Dyke Parks.

Hey Jude - we are not talking about Parks. This is just band members.  And yes, Capitol was an enemy and it seems that Murry played ball with them (certainly with the SOT sale.)  So, these "kids" were screwed.  I consider those in their 20's "kids" for purposes of dealing with the sharks they dealt with.

You have another position about the time-line.  I subscribe to the Gaumont Palace interview.  I find that they were swimming upstream and struggling to stay afloat. 

[Lee Marshall]

Your suggestion that the band was always a 100% united artistic front is laughable; and is proved wrong by statements from the band member themselves, including Mike Love.

Perhaps there is further evidence that HJ is bang on.  I offer the release of an album called 'Smiley Smile' as proof.  And to not include "Parks" when he was so connected to exactly what is being discussed is also more than just a wee bit odd.  There was one member who offered direction.  There was one other who wanted to build a wall between the past and the future.  The only thing he didn't try was to encourage Mexicans to pay for it.

Further proof?

'Do It Again'.  [and again...and again...and again.]

[HeyJude]

Hey Jude - we are not talking about Parks. This is just band members.  And yes, Capitol was an enemy and it seems that Murry played ball with them (certainly with the SOT sale.)  So, these "kids" were screwed.  I consider those in their 20's "kids" for purposes of dealing with the sharks they dealt with.

You have another position about the time-line.  I subscribe to the Gaumont Palace interview.  I find that they were swimming upstream and struggling to stay afloat. 

I'm not sure what else to add.  You've created your own topic, debate, and conclusion.

To answer responses to your off-topic, non-sequitur posts, responses that despite their better judgment still *try* to speak to whatever it is you're talking about, with "we're not talking about Parks" is insulting, to be honest.

It's unfair to sidetrack a thread with nothing *but* things we're "not talking about", but then when someone tries to decipher what you're talking about by bringing other points and examples in, then claim that it's "not what we're talking about."

Nobody was talking about the Gaumont either, or Capitol Records. Wtf?

[filledeplage]

Hey Jude - we are not talking about Parks. This is just band members.  And yes, Capitol was an enemy and it seems that Murry played ball with them (certainly with the SOT sale.)  So, these "kids" were screwed.  I consider those in their 20's "kids" for purposes of dealing with the sharks they dealt with.

You have another position about the time-line.  I subscribe to the Gaumont Palace interview.  I find that they were swimming upstream and struggling to stay afloat. 

I'm not sure what else to add.  You've created your own topic, debate, and conclusion.

To answer responses to your off-topic, non-sequitur posts, responses that despite their better judgment still *try* to speak to whatever it is you're talking about, with "we're not talking about Parks" is insulting, to be honest.

It's unfair to sidetrack a thread with nothing *but* things we're "not talking about", but then when someone tries to decipher what you're talking about by bringing other points and examples in, then claim that it's "not what we're talking about."

Nobody was talking about the Gaumont either, or Capitol Records. Wtf?

Hey Jude - you don't agree.  You don't need to attack the content of what I wrote but somehow feel entitled to "stalk" what I post.   

It is my opinion based on 50+ years as a BB fan, seeing the ups and downs for myself, not reading it in some book in a music course.  It is not for you do decide what added info is "sidetracking." That is censorship. 

This board has lost some very valuable posters due to the bullying of long-time posters who choose not to disparage individual band members or their opinions.   I am sorry to see them leave, because I have appreciated their input.  If this board is to survive it needs to become more tolerant of all opinions. 

You are not a mod. If you can't understand Gaumont Palace, and the intent of the speakers, at the time it was recorded, and their very clear feelings against Capitol, you might not be looking at the bona fide positions clearly. 

http://youtu.be/uehyh57k2_E   part 1

http://youtu.be/so7lsV6i4V4   part 2

Hope they copy.

[HeyJude]

Why is what everybody else is doing "attacking" and "bullying" and "stalking", but your posts aren't?

No, I don't agree with some things and will state why and how when applicable.

You also have, at numerous junctures, either ignored or mischaracterized things I (and others) have posted here. You sometimes mischaracterize it even when you can scroll up a few posts to verify what was actually said.

I admit that asking someone "have you even read the other posts in this thread?" is a somewhat pointed question (though it's not attacking or bullying or stalking), but when you continually ignore what everybody else is posting and offer non-sequitur responses over and over and over, I strongly sense the other posts *aren't* being read.
 
I'm not a Mod, never claimed to be and don't post anything that indicates I am. What I do take issue with is your accusations of "stalking" and "attacking" and "bullying", I take those accusations (whether against me or others on this board) very seriously, and I would humbly suggest that YOUR accusations tread far closer to breaking the rules of this board.

I also suggest this whole thing be dropped and we get back on topic. I again have to opine that I worry that there are people who *want* threads that include comments critical of Mike to be derailed and sidetracked and to descend into chaos.

[filledeplage]

Why is what everybody else is doing "attacking" and "bullying" and "stalking", but your posts aren't?

No, I don't agree with some things and will state why and how when applicable.

You also have, at numerous junctures, either ignored or mischaracterized things I (and others) have posted here. You sometimes mischaracterize it even when you can scroll up a few posts to verify what was actually said.

I admit that asking someone "have you even read the other posts in this thread?" is a somewhat pointed question (though it's not attacking or bullying or stalking), but when you continually ignore what everybody else is posting and offer non-sequitur responses over and over and over, I strongly sense the other posts *aren't* being read.
 
I'm not a Mod, never claimed to be and don't post anything that indicates I am. What I do take issue with is your accusations of "stalking" and "attacking" and "bullying", I take those accusations (whether against me or others on this board) very seriously, and I would humbly suggest that YOUR accusations tread far closer to breaking the rules of this board.

I also suggest this whole thing be dropped and we get back on topic. I again have to opine that I worry that there are people who *want* threads that include comments critical of Mike to be derailed and sidetracked and to descend into chaos.

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start. 

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

 
 

[CenturyDeprived]

Why is what everybody else is doing "attacking" and "bullying" and "stalking", but your posts aren't?

No, I don't agree with some things and will state why and how when applicable.

You also have, at numerous junctures, either ignored or mischaracterized things I (and others) have posted here. You sometimes mischaracterize it even when you can scroll up a few posts to verify what was actually said.

I admit that asking someone "have you even read the other posts in this thread?" is a somewhat pointed question (though it's not attacking or bullying or stalking), but when you continually ignore what everybody else is posting and offer non-sequitur responses over and over and over, I strongly sense the other posts *aren't* being read.
 
I'm not a Mod, never claimed to be and don't post anything that indicates I am. What I do take issue with is your accusations of "stalking" and "attacking" and "bullying", I take those accusations (whether against me or others on this board) very seriously, and I would humbly suggest that YOUR accusations tread far closer to breaking the rules of this board.

I also suggest this whole thing be dropped and we get back on topic. I again have to opine that I worry that there are people who *want* threads that include comments critical of Mike to be derailed and sidetracked and to descend into chaos.

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.)  

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.  

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong?  

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not.  

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post.  
 
  

People who jump into threads and troll without answering questions, and others' subsequent severe annoyance over that behavior (and them calling it out, but the troll's non-answers get subsequently defended by the troll's other non-answers) leads to threadcrapping. That's not an insignificant factor in why people have been on this board less.  At least if I have derailed a thread or two in the past, I have owned up to it. Trolls don't up own to things (much like their "hero").

[guitarfool2002]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

[Robbie Mac]

So, I guess David Anderle was talking out of his ass when he said 1. the attitude was "don't f*** with the formula" and 2. the band member who expressed the sentiment (if not the exact verbiage) was Mike.

[filledeplage]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

[HeyJude]

So, I guess David Anderle was talking out of his ass when he said 1. the attitude was "don't f*** with the formula" and 2. the band member who expressed the sentiment (if not the exact verbiage) was Mike.

And that's precisely why we just need to make sure to point out that that was Mike's attitude rather than the precise verbiage, because we continually get a "I never said that!" defense that ignores the actual contend of the issue.

Not to stoke the flames, but I'm not 100% convinced he *didn't* ever make that remark, but I understand how someone a half century ago could have been paraphrasing and then the whole thing took on a life of its own. If Mike hadn't had a history of questioning some of the lyrics written by outside writers, and hadn't expressed apprehension about changing the band's sound, then the "don't f**k with the formula" thing would never have taken off in the first place. That doesn't excuse lazy reporting and research in terms of not trying to verify the precise quote, but it's worth keeping in mind.

[HeyJude]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

You're responding to guitarfool's post and comments, not mine, so I'm not sure why you're addressing me.

[Robbie Mac]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

Where were the calls for tolerance from you when Brian fans were being bullied? Where were the calls for respect from you when an actual friend of Brian's was brutally insulted by a waste of sperm and egg? This respect thing? Works both ways, FDP.

[guitarfool2002]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

The comments were mine, not HeyJude. And the statement or opinion that "it was never that way" isn't true, as any search of the archives especially since Fall 2012 will prove - not to mention the blowups that used to happen on any number of BB boards that have since imploded or stalled entirely.

It's a case of being silent or complacent when the shoe is on the other foot. There are examples too numerous to list, but this whole notion of camps and the like ganging up on people and trying to shut them down played out long before Lee Dempsey decided to bail out here after Andrew Doe was banned. And it was the exact same scenario only applied to the other "camp", which I guess must have been OK judging by the complacency and lack of concern as people here were getting attacked and driven off the board based on their opinions and expressing it, not their behavior.

The facts are there in the archives, maybe a revisit would be in order before pointing fingers at the reasons why this board went to sh*t which have little or no relationship to what had actually been happening.

[HeyJude]

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat. 

This is more true of what *you* do when someone criticizes Mike, or even just criticizes topics tangential to Mike (John Stamos, etc.).

At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong?  

In several cases, people have had to be banned rather than have chosen to leave. I think those, both that were forced to leave due to their actions, and those that *want* to leave, should probably make things better.

A question perhaps worth asking both rhetorically and to yourself is, why would someone who doesn't like it here continue to be here?

When it reaches the point where you're only here to say why "here" sucks so much, what's the point then?

As long as this board is going, you're probably never going to get away with continually and systematically defending Mike against any and all criticisms and never once admitting a fault. And if someone wants to take that tact, even *that* is usually fine. But people are going to disagree with you, and those disagreements may include pointing out potential flaws in logic, inconsistent statements, changing the subject and deflecting, and so on.

[filledeplage]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

The comments were mine, not HeyJude. And the statement or opinion that "it was never that way" isn't true, as any search of the archives especially since Fall 2012 will prove - not to mention the blowups that used to happen on any number of BB boards that have since imploded or stalled entirely.

It's a case of being silent or complacent when the shoe is on the other foot. There are examples too numerous to list, but this whole notion of camps and the like ganging up on people and trying to shut them down played out long before Lee Dempsey decided to bail out here after Andrew Doe was banned. And it was the exact same scenario only applied to the other "camp", which I guess must have been OK judging by the complacency and lack of concern as people here were getting attacked and driven off the board based on their opinions and expressing it, not their behavior.

The facts are there in the archives, maybe a revisit would be in order before pointing fingers at the reasons why this board went to sh*t which have little or no relationship to what had actually been happening.

GF - there are a multitude of reasons.  Some were banned and others were bullied or watched bullying and got fed up as it took the joy out of discussing this music that is joyful.

It is the elephant in the room.  Yes, since C50's end there has been a problem.  Some could not get beyond that event and polarization happened since that time.  

If I could count on nothing else in my life, it is that people who liked and gravitated toward this music were reallly nice people. (who had great taste in music.)

And I get that some crossed-the-line...

But others who just tried to give all band members the benefit-of-the-doubt get insulted, shut down and silenced. I happen to think that everyone makes mistakes, but that everyone deserves the benefit-of-the-doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty.  I am not blaming mods who donate their time and expertise (but more those who "think" they are mods and chill any opinions that they don't hold.) And who gang-up in unison like a high school clique.  

And that is my opinion.  

[CenturyDeprived]

But others who just tried to give all band members the benefit-of-the-doubt get insulted, shut down and silenced. I happen to think that everyone makes mistakes, but that everyone deserves the benefit-of-the-doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty.  

The problem is that, based on your posts, I don't honestly think you believe this applies to Mike. Of course it's good to say innocent until proven guilty, but at some point, some people are simply guilty of certain things.

I don't believe you could ever say he is guilty of doing something crappy (an action by him and him alone). And that's anything but objectivity.

And if you don't want to say something bad about a guy in your favorite band, fine. Just admit that, and let's just not pretend that there's objectivity here. I can respect it if you can admit it.

[HeyJude]

"Benefit of the doubt" is *definitely* a key phrase in this discussion.

I've said many times that Mike has simply used up his benefit of the doubt with me and many fans. Burned way too many times.

I still look at what he does and says and don't attack truly good or innocuous comments. When Mike says "Oh, that song, that was a good one", I'm not jumping up and saying "What an a**hole!"

But when Mike is blatantly inflammatory in an interview, he no longer deserves, in my opinion, the benefit of a "well, maybe what he really meant was...." sort of defense. I'm open to hearing one, and in a few rare cases I've found some points compelling. Someone once got into the psychology of Mike and how being thrown out of his home at a young age deeply affected him and how he carried himself in life after that. Those types of insights are valuable.

But when he implies Brian is controlled, beats the Wilson drug use issue to death, and so on, there's no room to justify that stuff at this stage.

If ever there was proof of Brian's strength and fortitude, it's that he doesn't take the bait from Mike and still takes the high road in interviews and so on.

[guitarfool2002]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

The comments were mine, not HeyJude. And the statement or opinion that "it was never that way" isn't true, as any search of the archives especially since Fall 2012 will prove - not to mention the blowups that used to happen on any number of BB boards that have since imploded or stalled entirely.

It's a case of being silent or complacent when the shoe is on the other foot. There are examples too numerous to list, but this whole notion of camps and the like ganging up on people and trying to shut them down played out long before Lee Dempsey decided to bail out here after Andrew Doe was banned. And it was the exact same scenario only applied to the other "camp", which I guess must have been OK judging by the complacency and lack of concern as people here were getting attacked and driven off the board based on their opinions and expressing it, not their behavior.

The facts are there in the archives, maybe a revisit would be in order before pointing fingers at the reasons why this board went to sh*t which have little or no relationship to what had actually been happening.

GF - there are a multitude of reasons.  Some were banned and others were bullied or watched bullying and got fed up as it took the joy out of discussing this music that is joyful.

It is the elephant in the room.  Yes, since C50's end there has been a problem.  Some could not get beyond that event and polarization happened since that time.  

If I could count on nothing else in my life, it is that people who liked and gravitated toward this music were reallly nice people. (who had great taste in music.)

And I get that some crossed-the-line...

But others who just tried to give all band members the benefit-of-the-doubt get insulted, shut down and silenced. I happen to think that everyone makes mistakes, but that everyone deserves the benefit-of-the-doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty.  I am not blaming mods who donate their time and expertise (but more those who "think" they are mods and chill any opinions that they don't hold.) And who gang-up in unison like a high school clique.  

And that is my opinion.  

You're telling me of all people about getting bullied and having the joy taken out of the music, as you've watched those with grudges try to have me removed as a mod on multiple forums and platforms? Then when that failed in light of the truth coming out, they then tried to insult me personally, name-calling, a "campaign" involving several now-banned members, up to and including dragging other moderators into the muck by insulting them too as recent as last week after the attempts to bullshit the facts failed again...and add in all the fake accounts, all the lies, all the personal insults, and it's still continuing?

I'll discuss the facts but don't try to sell me snake oil.

And if you want to mention bullying and chasing people off, consider what happened to Peter Hollens.

Whose "side" did that, FDP?

[filledeplage]

Hey Jude - yes, you just responded to a post to urbanite. (you prefaced your remark.) 

Getting a handle on why people are leaving this board might be a good place to start.

It is a series and a pattern of insult,

then disparage, collectively (as a "clique" for lack of a better term)

and predictable who hops in to pile up on the poster.  Rinse, and repeat.  At least a half-dozen have left in a week.  Think there is nothing wrong? 

Is it surprising that the go-to board has caused another forum to arise?  I think not. 

Yes, there is a pattern of attack towards people who are considered "apologists" or who support all the band.  Maybe it is generational that I have a position that  this group of "incorporated musicians" are still The Beach Boys - and just not all working in the same venues.

And, I am not alone in the opinion.  A new board was formed to respond to the inability to be able to post without being jumped on and attacked. Why did that need to take place?  Intolerance - one word.

You are not a mod to tell a fellow poster (according to the rules of this forum to build people up and not tear them down) what they should post. 

The comments in bold are a complete load of crap, and I'd usually not use that kind of direct language unless comments were aimed at me, but in this case...those comments are absurd.

When you find out why that board was formed, and when you know the truth as to why and how it was formed, then perhaps make those statements as fact. Until then, how about dialing back on the rhetoric and not trying to paint a scenario that isn't accurate?

The hypocrisy is off the charts with this "other forum" BS. The exact scenario you pegged to this board's "problems" have been going on for quite some time, and based on lies and distortions used to attack other people and silence them, if not drive them away entirely.

Now suddenly it's an issue that is driving people away from here after many of the most vocal critics of this board did the exact same behavior, and you were OK with it when it was applied in another direction?

Hey Jude - others are looking at what has transpired here and have opined elsewhere.  Some who don't even post. The web is pretty much an open book.  Look at those who left recently voluntarily. 

Don't put other's stuff on me. 

Hypocrisy is a a value judgment. 

Most come here to discuss BB music and discover quickly that they need to pick a "team" and it was never that way.  There was more tolerance.  I think the conversation needs to happen.  JMHO. 

The comments were mine, not HeyJude. And the statement or opinion that "it was never that way" isn't true, as any search of the archives especially since Fall 2012 will prove - not to mention the blowups that used to happen on any number of BB boards that have since imploded or stalled entirely.

It's a case of being silent or complacent when the shoe is on the other foot. There are examples too numerous to list, but this whole notion of camps and the like ganging up on people and trying to shut them down played out long before Lee Dempsey decided to bail out here after Andrew Doe was banned. And it was the exact same scenario only applied to the other "camp", which I guess must have been OK judging by the complacency and lack of concern as people here were getting attacked and driven off the board based on their opinions and expressing it, not their behavior.

The facts are there in the archives, maybe a revisit would be in order before pointing fingers at the reasons why this board went to sh*t which have little or no relationship to what had actually been happening.

GF - there are a multitude of reasons.  Some were banned and others were bullied or watched bullying and got fed up as it took the joy out of discussing this music that is joyful.

It is the elephant in the room.  Yes, since C50's end there has been a problem.  Some could not get beyond that event and polarization happened since that time.  

If I could count on nothing else in my life, it is that people who liked and gravitated toward this music were reallly nice people. (who had great taste in music.)

And I get that some crossed-the-line...

But others who just tried to give all band members the benefit-of-the-doubt get insulted, shut down and silenced. I happen to think that everyone makes mistakes, but that everyone deserves the benefit-of-the-doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty.  I am not blaming mods who donate their time and expertise (but more those who "think" they are mods and chill any opinions that they don't hold.) And who gang-up in unison like a high school clique.  

And that is my opinion.  

You're telling me of all people about getting bullied and having the joy taken out of the music, as you've watched those with grudges try to have me removed as a mod on multiple forums and platforms? Then when that failed in light of the truth coming out, they then tried to insult me personally, name-calling, a "campaign" involving several now-banned members, up to and including dragging other moderators into the muck by insulting them too as recent as last week after the attempts to bullshit the facts failed again...and add in all the fake accounts, all the lies, all the personal insults, and it's still continuing?

I'll discuss the facts but don't try to sell me snake oil.

And if you want to mention bullying and chasing people off, consider what happened to Peter Hollens.

Whose "side" did that, FDP?

GF - yes, that is exactly what I am saying. That, some, who are just plain old fans who signed up for discussion because they love the Beach Boys got more than they bargained for.  And, yes, from where I sit, that is what I see, now, after around 10 years or so here, including lurking before I signed up.

And, I am not defending someone else's bad actions or bad behavior but position-based issues where the poster is lambasted needlessly.  Those opinions that are not endorsed by some here.  That is not tolerance.  Not everyone is going to agree on everything. That is life.

Yes, I feel that some left because they observed exactly this treatment. I am giving my observation.  I am not selling snake oil. I have no fake account so please don't lump me into that group.  Those who do that, own it. 

And, I am unfamiliar with the Hollens situation, so I cannot comment. 

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Ian Lee is a great human being and I agree with everything he tends to say.  Kind of hilarious the thread on him is locked and then within a matter or hours, he has Mike on his show.  Nice one, Iain.  The interview was a triumph.

You know having more than one account is against the rules, right?

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Setting aside the post count, out of the blue appearance, and the odd idea that one would agree with *everything* that someone would tend to say (really? absolutely everything? I don't even agree with *myself* on everything), one thing that I think *is* probably true is that Mr. Lee's article and subsequent departure from this board most likely *are* related to his scoring an interview for his show.

Hell yes they are related. It was set up like this from day one.