gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
636612 Posts in 25453 Topics by 3621 Members - Latest Member: rickyroma August 21, 2018, 02:28:57 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip  (Read 5587 times)
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 7950



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2018, 01:41:55 PM »

BOOM! Grin
Logged

And production aside, Iíd so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Hickory Violet Part IV
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 378


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 19, 2018, 02:23:28 PM »

I've never read Nancy before, but if the humour has consistently been of this calibre  then why are they ending it?

Surely there are at least another 85  years of side splitting gags like the one show cased above.



Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4423



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2018, 04:03:37 PM »

And like clockwork, the first 5 replies to this excellent first post were predictable SSMB toxic pollution.

Check all the coats and hats at the door for a moment, and I want to ask a few direct questions.

<<<<<<

In your opinion, what did Mike Love contribute to the song Wouldn't It Be Nice?

If as had been reported Mike's only contribution was saying "good night baby, sleep tight" during the fade, in your opinion did that justify suing for and claiming equal writing credit alongside Wilson-Asher?

>>>>>

If mentioning those issues is "toxic pollution" on display, let us know.

But I raise them as well to show how many fans still take issue with Mike's "claims" of authorship on *that specific song* to where his original claims included scenarios presented in court that were as absurd as suggesting Brian would duck into the bathroom during studio sessions and "write" secretly with Mike over the phone. If there is blowback against Mike over this song and it happens to come out when the song is discussed, it's not coming out of thin air.




Do you think that if a person contributes a lyric to a song, they should be credited/acknowledged? Is it deserving of a written credit? I'm asking as a genuine question.

What about song titles? If that were case Ringo is due a TON of money.  LOL

Right - I've used the Ringo example in many discussions of this in the past. Ringo coined the phrase "hard day's night", which became a #1 hit single AND the title of a smash hit film in 1964...and Ringo didn't get credit as a songwriter or credit for the film title. Ringo could have claimed in a lawsuit that he got screwed out of millions, but he didn't. He could also claim "Tomorrow Never Knows" and other malaprops which he was fond of throwing into conversations. Things like "eight days a week", etc. But he never took it to court. Credit to Ringo.

Jay - To your question, in this case there is no-zero-nada logic that can be argued for Mike to where he deserves 1/3 equal credit for "good night baby, sleep tight". Listen to the track. Music by Wilson, lyrics by Asher. It's as simple as that. Most of the song's structure which hooks listeners in comes 2 minutes or so prior to Mike's "contribution", and most DJ's at the time started their talk-up during the fade anyway, so if it had to be argued by a musicologist they may suggest Mike's part was inessential to the overall impression given to listeners by that recording.

It was a very bad decision that screwed Wilson and Asher both financially and conceptually...beyond the notion of what is right or fair.

Further, consider Mike filed roughly *double* the claims to various songs in that suit than what actually made it to the case, which means roughly half got thrown out of court. Consider the reasons why that many of Mike's "claims" to cowrites were dismissed, and how many of those dismissed songs Mike tried to claim credit for where he wasn't due such credit.

It's a shame WIBN slipped through as it did, because it is and was a travesty.

PS - CenturyDeprived: Spot-on. Great post.

I'd also add that Mike's attempt to shoehorn in a credit for WIBN is not unrelated to his recent interview talking about how he wishes he'd written lyrics (how he could've made the album "better" and "more commercial", or something to that effect) for the album Pet Sounds.  It's all part of his same complex. Most people wouldn't do/say either of those things, but the same guy did/said both. 

Dude cannot handle the fact that this album is so critically praised (with Brian naturally receiving the lion's share of that praise), and it became a hunt to find a way to get more credit for Mike on the album. Unfortunately, the opposite effect happened, and Mike came off looking like a petty straw-grabber, and it diminished peoples' empathy for the things Mike ACTUALLY got legit screwed out of. And if Mike were actually a modest guy, people would have empathy for him, the same way I'm sure people have empathy for Denny not getting credited (or appreciated for) "You Are So Beautiful" in his own lifetime.

I feel like Mike watched this clip of the original TV show Dallas as a pep talk, before consulting with his lawyers to try and take as much credit/power as humanly possible. Taking lessons from Jock Ewing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGdfPtW56fo
« Last Edit: February 19, 2018, 04:11:26 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
Kid Presentable
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 230


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2018, 02:55:36 AM »

To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis. 
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise. 
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!
Logged
Hickory Violet Part IV
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 378


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2018, 04:12:39 AM »

To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis. 
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise. 
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!

People were just cracking a joke. It was you who made it 'toxic' by yet again trying to censor people. You were doing it on the Beatles thread, you're doing it here. You just can't help yourself, can you?

Things were fine until this

And like clockwork, the first 5 replies to this excellent first post were predictable SSMB toxic pollution.

This board has a wicked sense of humour, which is needed when dealing with this band. What is the problem with making light of Mike's constant missteps?

And if people attack you, it's because you put yourself firmily in the firing line.





Logged
NOLA BB Fan
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 661


"When you come to a fork in the road, take it."


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2018, 05:48:58 AM »

I've never read Nancy before, but if the humour has consistently been of this calibre  then why are they ending it?

Surely there are at least another 85  years of side splitting gags like the one show cased above.


I used to read the Nancy comic strip when I was a kid (60s). The strip hasn't been in our local daily newspaper for many years. I checked once again this past Sunday with the comics sections of our two local papers - nope.
I remember Nancy giving me a chuckle now and then but not that great. Perhaps it changed in the last decade or so.
Anyway, this particular strip brought me tears of joy.
Logged

"No White Flags." - Team Gleason

"(Brian) got into this really touching music with songs like 'In My Room', and 'Good Vibrations' was amazing. The melodies are so beautiful, almost perfect. I began to realize he was one of the most gifted writers of our generation." - Paul Simon
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7781



View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2018, 06:28:37 AM »

A couple of salient points:

If the songwriting lawsuit had happened in the mid-late 90s (or later), it probably would have turned out somewhat differently. It probably would have been settled, and Mike would have gotten his name on the songs he deserved (as Brian has always readily admitted), and maybe in the settlement Brian could have fought for that small number of songs where the credit amendment was more questionable (like WIBN).

Regarding any depiction of the *vintage* 45 single for WIBN, it's not problematic that it has the original Wilson/Asher credit. That's what the old single looked like.

Just like the old Beatles 45 single would have the "Eight Arms to Hold You" notation, etc.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4701


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2018, 07:43:16 AM »

To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis. 
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise. 
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!

Three people made a comment about a songwriting credit/relevant lawsuit and you respond by calling it ďSSMB toxic pollutionĒ. I tire of seeing the Smiley Smile message board name lugged in with the word ďtoxicĒ, or the Smiley Smile message board name continually mentioned in some disparaging way on this forum and on the PS Forum. After having yet again read another of KDSí passive aggressive swipes against this forum just the other day, its irritating for me to see the SSMB name tied together with the same talking point some PS Forum members have nauseatingly used to bash this forum.

The second post for this Nancy Comic thread on the PS Forum has someone joking about Mike suing over the label...is that PS Forum toxic pollution? No, itís one guy making a joke. If anyone had a problem with that personís comment, they would just logically call out that one guy and not lug in the entire PS Forum name with it. Likewise, three people here (myself included) made some comments about Mike. I totally get why you find our initial posts unnecessary, Iím not disagreeing with that. But three people on a message board of 100+ active members made some comments you donít feel belong in this thread...so call us out and donít make it an overall forum issue.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4358


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 20, 2018, 07:54:22 AM »

To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis. 
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise. 
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!

Three people made a comment about a songwriting credit/relevant lawsuit and you respond by calling it ďSSMB toxic pollutionĒ. I tire of seeing the Smiley Smile message board name lugged in with the word ďtoxicĒ, or the Smiley Smile message board name continually mentioned in some disparaging way on this forum and on the PS Forum. After having yet again read another of KDSí passive aggressive swipes against this forum just the other day, its irritating for me to see the SSMB name tied together with the same talking point some PS Forum members have nauseatingly used to bash this forum.

The second post for this Nancy Comic thread on the PS Forum has someone joking about Mike suing over the label...is that PS Forum toxic pollution? No, itís one guy making a joke. If anyone had a problem with that personís comment, they would just logically call out that one guy and not lug in the entire PS Forum name with it. Likewise, three people here (myself included) made some comments about Mike. I totally get why you find our initial posts unnecessary, Iím not disagreeing with that. But three people on a message board of 100+ active members made some comments you donít feel belong in this thread...so call us out and donít make it an overall forum issue.

I think the "toxic" label still exists on this forum because of the constant anti Mike comments, even on threads that have little or nothing to do with with. 

And sure, this case might've been a joke.   If so, what's the difference between joking about Mike's lawsuit and a joke review of No Pier Pressure? 

Back to the Mike thing.   I'm often labeled an "apologist" and have been accused of having some sort of "end game."  But, I've also admitted that Mike does bring it on himself a bit, and had done some things that warrant criticism. 

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4701


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2018, 08:28:21 AM »

To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis.  
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise.  
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!

Three people made a comment about a songwriting credit/relevant lawsuit and you respond by calling it ďSSMB toxic pollutionĒ. I tire of seeing the Smiley Smile message board name lugged in with the word ďtoxicĒ, or the Smiley Smile message board name continually mentioned in some disparaging way on this forum and on the PS Forum. After having yet again read another of KDSí passive aggressive swipes against this forum just the other day, its irritating for me to see the SSMB name tied together with the same talking point some PS Forum members have nauseatingly used to bash this forum.

The second post for this Nancy Comic thread on the PS Forum has someone joking about Mike suing over the label...is that PS Forum toxic pollution? No, itís one guy making a joke. If anyone had a problem with that personís comment, they would just logically call out that one guy and not lug in the entire PS Forum name with it. Likewise, three people here (myself included) made some comments about Mike. I totally get why you find our initial posts unnecessary, Iím not disagreeing with that. But three people on a message board of 100+ active members made some comments you donít feel belong in this thread...so call us out and donít make it an overall forum issue.

I think the "toxic" label still exists on this forum because of the constant anti Mike comments, even on threads that have little or nothing to do with with.  

And sure, this case might've been a joke.   If so, what's the difference between joking about Mike's lawsuit and a joke review of No Pier Pressure?  

Back to the Mike thing.   I'm often labeled an "apologist" and have been accused of having some sort of "end game."  But, I've also admitted that Mike does bring it on himself a bit, and had done some things that warrant criticism.  

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise.  

1. Frankly, I think there are certain people who loathe that this place exists and theyíll say anything to discredit this place. Yes, we have a few people who make constant negative comments about Mike. Yet that doesnít mean the plethora other active members here need to be under the umbrella generalization of this place being ďtoxicĒ...does it? I mean, just last month Mike made some jackass comments about Al, Carl, and Brian in MOJO. How the hell are us fans supposed to react?

Itís funny, because you mention an analogy about a co-worker in the workplace complaining constantly to the point where it becomes noise - and this is supposed to justify the bashing this forum receives. But yet isnít that exactly what Mike does? He constantly complains about Brian, handlers, prescription meds, etc to the point where its just noise. We are merely doing the exact same thing you do about this forum. Difference is, we pinpoint it on one guy (Mike) and donít make a generalization about the entire band. Why not just call out OSD, myself, or Smile Brian for negative comments? Any other comments I see about Mike seem to be logical backlash to Mikeís constant jamming his foot in his mouth. You can call that constant negativity, but when Mike is giving constant negativity himself, donít expect the rest of us to be willfully ignorant about it...and nothing about that is ďtoxicĒ.

Edit: Itís also funny that you are saying that Mike is negatively brought up in threads with little or nothing to do with him. Yet the other day you brought up ďother forumsĒ in a negative way in a thread that had NOTHING to do with any forums. You found an opportunity to bash the Smiley forum when it was completely unnecessary. Might I suggest you be the change you want to see? I mean, if youíre going to complain about people bringing up off-topic negativity, perhaps you should take that same advice yourself.

2. Joking about Mikeís lawsuit and a joke review of No Pier Pressure? Letís see, in one we get some people calling out Mike straight up lying about Brian in an attempt to make a lot of money and him getting 1/3 credit for 5 words in one of Brianís more intricate pop songs. The other is Brian working months and months in the studio on an album and some kids calling one of the songs ďa stupid fucking pop songĒ along with a bunch of other immature remarks that tore down Brianís hard work. You guys call that a joke, yet Iíd say thats the same bullshit that drove Brian away from posting demos of his work on his own forum. That rightfully pissed off a lot of people. So yeah, Iíd say thereís an ocean of difference between calling out ridiculous lawsuits and making some childish hurtful comments about Brianís album. If you canít see the difference between the two, perhaps thatís exactly why we donít see eye to eye on many things.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2018, 08:37:50 AM by rab2591 » Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7781



View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 20, 2018, 09:05:41 AM »

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise. 

If I had a co-worker who I found "toxic" and who did nothing but complained, and I had an option of not having to visit their office or otherwise be in that space, I'd do just that. I wouldn't continue to poke in and out constantly, intent on continuing to engage with them while claiming they're all "white noise" (but continuing to call that white noise "toxic", etc.)

This message board isn't like a job; you don't have to be here.

Why someone would post on two different BB message boards while calling one "toxic" or otherwise painting the *board* in some way negatively (and taking passive aggressive swipes at that board on the *other* board) is beyond me.


Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4358


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 20, 2018, 09:09:24 AM »

To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis.  
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise.  
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!

Three people made a comment about a songwriting credit/relevant lawsuit and you respond by calling it ďSSMB toxic pollutionĒ. I tire of seeing the Smiley Smile message board name lugged in with the word ďtoxicĒ, or the Smiley Smile message board name continually mentioned in some disparaging way on this forum and on the PS Forum. After having yet again read another of KDSí passive aggressive swipes against this forum just the other day, its irritating for me to see the SSMB name tied together with the same talking point some PS Forum members have nauseatingly used to bash this forum.

The second post for this Nancy Comic thread on the PS Forum has someone joking about Mike suing over the label...is that PS Forum toxic pollution? No, itís one guy making a joke. If anyone had a problem with that personís comment, they would just logically call out that one guy and not lug in the entire PS Forum name with it. Likewise, three people here (myself included) made some comments about Mike. I totally get why you find our initial posts unnecessary, Iím not disagreeing with that. But three people on a message board of 100+ active members made some comments you donít feel belong in this thread...so call us out and donít make it an overall forum issue.

I think the "toxic" label still exists on this forum because of the constant anti Mike comments, even on threads that have little or nothing to do with with.  

And sure, this case might've been a joke.   If so, what's the difference between joking about Mike's lawsuit and a joke review of No Pier Pressure?  

Back to the Mike thing.   I'm often labeled an "apologist" and have been accused of having some sort of "end game."  But, I've also admitted that Mike does bring it on himself a bit, and had done some things that warrant criticism.  

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise.  

1. Frankly, I think there are certain people who loathe that this place exists and theyíll say anything to discredit this place. Yes, we have a few people who make constant negative comments about Mike. Yet that doesnít mean the plethora other active members here need to be under the umbrella generalization of this place being ďtoxicĒ...does it? I mean, just last month Mike made some jackass comments about Al, Carl, and Brian in MOJO. How the hell are us fans supposed to react?

Itís funny, because you mention an analogy about a co-worker in the workplace complaining constantly to the point where it becomes noise - and this is supposed to justify the bashing this forum receives. But yet isnít that exactly what Mike does? He constantly complains about Brian, handlers, prescription meds, etc to the point where its just noise. We are merely doing the exact same thing you do about this forum. Difference is, we pinpoint it on one guy (Mike) and donít make a generalization about the entire band. Why not just call out OSD, myself, or Smile Brian for negative comments? Any other comments I see about Mike seem to be logical backlash to Mikeís constant jamming his foot in his mouth. You can call that constant negativity, but when Mike is giving constant negativity himself, donít expect the rest of us to be willfully ignorant about it...and nothing about that is ďtoxicĒ.

Edit: Itís also funny that you are saying that Mike is negatively brought up in threads with little or nothing to do with him. Yet the other day you brought up ďother forumsĒ in a negative way in a thread that had NOTHING to do with any forums. You found an opportunity to bash the Smiley forum when it was completely unnecessary. Might I suggest you be the change you want to see? I mean, if youíre going to complain about people bringing up off-topic negativity, perhaps you should take that same advice yourself.

2. Joking about Mikeís lawsuit and a joke review of No Pier Pressure? Letís see, in one we get some people calling out Mike straight up lying about Brian in an attempt to make a lot of money and him getting 1/3 credit for 5 words in one of Brianís more intricate pop songs. The other is Brian working months and months in the studio on an album and some kids calling one of the songs ďa stupid fucking pop songĒ along with a bunch of other immature remarks that tore down Brianís hard work. You guys call that a joke, yet Iíd say thats the same bullshit that drove Brian away from posting demos of his work on his own forum. That rightfully pissed off a lot of people. So yeah, Iíd say thereís an ocean of difference between calling out ridiculous lawsuits and making some childish hurtful comments about Brianís album. If you canít see the difference between the two, perhaps thatís exactly why we donít see eye to eye on many things.

You're right, we don't see eye to eye on many things.  

Frankly, when I get accused of having an endgame or hating Brian Wilson on a forum, I think that falls into the realm of the absurd, so I made a joke, referencing that absurdity.  

If the lawsuit comment on here that KP was talking about was a joke than so be it.  But, frankly, I still don't see why it's OK to lampoon Mike's lawsuits, but it's not OK to lampoon NPP.   I'm a fan of the album, and I found that post to be very funny.  

And, it's that one sided nature that gets this board the reputation of being "toxic."
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
B.E.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 544


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 20, 2018, 09:11:46 AM »

Yes, we have a few people who make constant negative comments about Mike.

Some posters revel in it. It shouldn't be surprising that some find it toxic.
Logged
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4358


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: February 20, 2018, 09:12:46 AM »

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise. 

If I had a co-worker who I found "toxic" and who did nothing but complained, and I had an option of not having to visit their office or otherwise be in that space, I'd do just that. I wouldn't continue to poke in and out constantly, intent on continuing to engage with them while claiming they're all "white noise" (but continuing to call that white noise "toxic", etc.)

This message board isn't like a job; you don't have to be here.

Why someone would post on two different BB message boards while calling one "toxic" or otherwise painting the *board* in some way negatively (and taking passive aggressive swipes at that board on the *other* board) is beyond me.




Oh look, HeyJude is telling people how to internet for a change.  

I'm still on this board because there are still some interesting discussions on the music.  I found the posts on the Beach Boys v Beatles threads to be very interesting (well.....most of them).   The Beatles Survivor Game is also quite fun.  



Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4701


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: February 20, 2018, 09:16:14 AM »

Yes, we have a few people who make constant negative comments about Mike.

Some posters revel in it. It shouldn't be surprising that some find it toxic.

No doubt. Doesnít mean the entire board (which includes great posters and insiders) needs to be labeled ďtoxicĒ.

@KDS, Iíd respond to your post(s) by reiterating what I wrote in my initial reply to you, but I wonít. I think I made myself perfectly clear in that post, and if you canít see the logic behind it, so be it.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7781



View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: February 20, 2018, 09:20:27 AM »

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise.  

If I had a co-worker who I found "toxic" and who did nothing but complained, and I had an option of not having to visit their office or otherwise be in that space, I'd do just that. I wouldn't continue to poke in and out constantly, intent on continuing to engage with them while claiming they're all "white noise" (but continuing to call that white noise "toxic", etc.)

This message board isn't like a job; you don't have to be here.

Why someone would post on two different BB message boards while calling one "toxic" or otherwise painting the *board* in some way negatively (and taking passive aggressive swipes at that board on the *other* board) is beyond me.




Oh look, HeyJude is telling people how to internet for a change.  

I'm still on this board because there are still some interesting discussions on the music.  I found the posts on the Beach Boys v Beatles threads to be very interesting (well.....most of them).   The Beatles Survivor Game is also quite fun.  



Nope, nowhere in my post did I tell anyone how to do anything. I mentioned what I'd do in a case where I found something "toxic" and had the option of removing myself from that situation, I mentioned my attitude towards passive aggressive posting about one forum on another, and pointed out the obvious; that one doesn't have to be here.

Let it be known that plenty of folks who don't post on the other BB board do read it. I do from time to time. My personal opinion is it's rather bad form (and more than anything just odd) to post on *both* boards and yet complain about only one (Smiley Smile) on the other (PS Forum).

I've seen threads now and then that look interesting, or random factoids that could use correcting, etc. on the other board. But I don't post there because I don't like the tone of many of the threads, don't like the tone and content of a number of the posters, and so on. I'd feel pretty silly posting thousands of posts on the PS Forum while coming back to the Smiley Smile board and taking passive aggressive swipes against PS Forum posters and the board in general. But that's just me. I'm not telling anybody else what to do or how to be. I'm just trying to point out how such things might appear to others.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2018, 09:21:24 AM by HeyJude » Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4358


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: February 20, 2018, 09:24:28 AM »

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise.  

If I had a co-worker who I found "toxic" and who did nothing but complained, and I had an option of not having to visit their office or otherwise be in that space, I'd do just that. I wouldn't continue to poke in and out constantly, intent on continuing to engage with them while claiming they're all "white noise" (but continuing to call that white noise "toxic", etc.)

This message board isn't like a job; you don't have to be here.

Why someone would post on two different BB message boards while calling one "toxic" or otherwise painting the *board* in some way negatively (and taking passive aggressive swipes at that board on the *other* board) is beyond me.




Oh look, HeyJude is telling people how to internet for a change.  

I'm still on this board because there are still some interesting discussions on the music.  I found the posts on the Beach Boys v Beatles threads to be very interesting (well.....most of them).   The Beatles Survivor Game is also quite fun.  



Nope, nowhere in my post did I tell anyone how to do anything. I mentioned what I'd do in a case where I found something "toxic" and had the option of removing myself from that situation, I mentioned my attitude towards passive aggressive posting about one forum on another, and pointed out the obvious; that one doesn't have to be here.

Let it be known that plenty of folks who don't post on the other BB board do read it. I do from time to time. My personal opinion is it's rather bad form (and more than anything just odd) to post on *both* boards and yet complain about only one (Smiley Smile) on the other (PS Forum).

I've seen threads now and then that look interesting, or random factoids that could use correcting, etc. on the other board. But I don't post there because I don't like the tone of many of the threads, don't like the tone and content of a number of the posters, and so on. I'd feel pretty silly posting thousands of posts on the PS Forum while coming back to the Smiley Smile board and taking passive aggressive swipes against PS Forum posters and the board in general. But that's just me. I'm not telling anybody else what to do or how to be. I'm just trying to point out how such things might appear to others.


To be fair, I've never said anything on PSF that I wouldn't also say on this forum. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4701


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: February 20, 2018, 09:27:08 AM »

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise.  

If I had a co-worker who I found "toxic" and who did nothing but complained, and I had an option of not having to visit their office or otherwise be in that space, I'd do just that. I wouldn't continue to poke in and out constantly, intent on continuing to engage with them while claiming they're all "white noise" (but continuing to call that white noise "toxic", etc.)

This message board isn't like a job; you don't have to be here.

Why someone would post on two different BB message boards while calling one "toxic" or otherwise painting the *board* in some way negatively (and taking passive aggressive swipes at that board on the *other* board) is beyond me.




Oh look, HeyJude is telling people how to internet for a change.  

I'm still on this board because there are still some interesting discussions on the music.  I found the posts on the Beach Boys v Beatles threads to be very interesting (well.....most of them).   The Beatles Survivor Game is also quite fun.  



Nope, nowhere in my post did I tell anyone how to do anything. I mentioned what I'd do in a case where I found something "toxic" and had the option of removing myself from that situation, I mentioned my attitude towards passive aggressive posting about one forum on another, and pointed out the obvious; that one doesn't have to be here.

Let it be known that plenty of folks who don't post on the other BB board do read it. I do from time to time. My personal opinion is it's rather bad form (and more than anything just odd) to post on *both* boards and yet complain about only one (Smiley Smile) on the other (PS Forum).

I've seen threads now and then that look interesting, or random factoids that could use correcting, etc. on the other board. But I don't post there because I don't like the tone of many of the threads, don't like the tone and content of a number of the posters, and so on. I'd feel pretty silly posting thousands of posts on the PS Forum while coming back to the Smiley Smile board and taking passive aggressive swipes against PS Forum posters and the board in general. But that's just me. I'm not telling anybody else what to do or how to be. I'm just trying to point out how such things might appear to others.


To be fair, I've never said anything on PSF that I wouldn't also say on this forum. 

No, you just say it far more often there.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8200


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: February 20, 2018, 09:28:35 AM »

KDS:  http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,25781.msg630530.html#msg630530

Any reply to the original discussion/comments there?
Logged

ďSome people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I donít look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. Itís just wrong thinking in my opinion and I donít mind saying that.Ē - Mike Love

"Every single person who criticized Brian for having She & Him, Kacey Musgraves, Sebu and Nate Ruess guesting on his solo album can now officially go heartily f*** themselves." - Wirestone
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4358


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: February 20, 2018, 09:31:03 AM »

But, I'm sure everyone has had that one co-worker.  You first meet him/her, and they voice some complaints about their job.   But, then every time you see this person in the office, all they do is complain.  At some point, after a while, and after hearing the same complaints so many times, the warranted criticism just becomes noise.  

If I had a co-worker who I found "toxic" and who did nothing but complained, and I had an option of not having to visit their office or otherwise be in that space, I'd do just that. I wouldn't continue to poke in and out constantly, intent on continuing to engage with them while claiming they're all "white noise" (but continuing to call that white noise "toxic", etc.)

This message board isn't like a job; you don't have to be here.

Why someone would post on two different BB message boards while calling one "toxic" or otherwise painting the *board* in some way negatively (and taking passive aggressive swipes at that board on the *other* board) is beyond me.




Oh look, HeyJude is telling people how to internet for a change.  

I'm still on this board because there are still some interesting discussions on the music.  I found the posts on the Beach Boys v Beatles threads to be very interesting (well.....most of them).   The Beatles Survivor Game is also quite fun.  



Nope, nowhere in my post did I tell anyone how to do anything. I mentioned what I'd do in a case where I found something "toxic" and had the option of removing myself from that situation, I mentioned my attitude towards passive aggressive posting about one forum on another, and pointed out the obvious; that one doesn't have to be here.

Let it be known that plenty of folks who don't post on the other BB board do read it. I do from time to time. My personal opinion is it's rather bad form (and more than anything just odd) to post on *both* boards and yet complain about only one (Smiley Smile) on the other (PS Forum).

I've seen threads now and then that look interesting, or random factoids that could use correcting, etc. on the other board. But I don't post there because I don't like the tone of many of the threads, don't like the tone and content of a number of the posters, and so on. I'd feel pretty silly posting thousands of posts on the PS Forum while coming back to the Smiley Smile board and taking passive aggressive swipes against PS Forum posters and the board in general. But that's just me. I'm not telling anybody else what to do or how to be. I'm just trying to point out how such things might appear to others.


To be fair, I've never said anything on PSF that I wouldn't also say on this forum. 

No, you just say it far more often there.

I'm flattered that you find my posts on the Pet Sounds Forum so fascinating.  

Besides, anything I've said on Pet Sounds Forum about the nature of SSMB pales in comparison to some posts I've seen here about the posters on PSF.  
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
KDS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4358


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: February 20, 2018, 09:32:41 AM »

KDS:  http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,25781.msg630530.html#msg630530

Any reply to the original discussion/comments there?

Not really.  I've pretty much laid it out here.   Like I said, this board tends to skew very anti Mike.   I'm not saying anything that's not true. 
Logged

Any opinions posted by me regarding the music of The Beach Boys, and their members, is in no way a show of disrespect towards any member of The Beach Boys, past or present.

"There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference." - Steve Desper
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8200


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2018, 09:35:37 AM »


To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis. 
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise. 
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!


That *IS* the point. He deserves little or no credit. That simple logic goes a long way to explaining why fans take issue with it and will not only call it out but also take shots at it too.

I for one don't want the historical record moving forward to show Mike getting equal credit to the two people who actually *did* write the song. But that's exactly what has happened, up to Mike offering limited edition handwritten copies of a WIBN lyric sheet as part of a VIP package *he* was selling in 2016 as if he were truly an equal contributor to that song.
Logged

ďSome people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I donít look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. Itís just wrong thinking in my opinion and I donít mind saying that.Ē - Mike Love

"Every single person who criticized Brian for having She & Him, Kacey Musgraves, Sebu and Nate Ruess guesting on his solo album can now officially go heartily f*** themselves." - Wirestone
Lady Lynda
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26



View Profile
« Reply #47 on: February 20, 2018, 09:40:07 AM »

"Wouldn't It Be Nice" if we could all just get along.  I was shocked to see the final Nancy comic strip over the weekend, but pleasantly surprised to see that familiar record label and the lyrics to such a wonderful piece of music.  References to music, songs, and artists have always been a part of this comic strip.  If indeed this is the final strip, it couldn't have ended in a better way.  
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 7950



View Profile
« Reply #48 on: February 20, 2018, 09:40:56 AM »


To answer guitarfool's original questions to me.  He probably contributed very little to the song and he probably deserves little credit.  That is beside the point though.

Here is my view of this, maybe some people will understand where I am coming from.

-Original post about the ending of an 85 year old comic strip that makes a pretty touching sendoff involving WIBN.  One of BW's most enduring and iconic moments.
-Immediate response of some regulars going non-sequitur to the original post about the ML writing credit issue and the usual chuckling emojis. 
-I call it toxic.  It is extracting this obtuse little sticking point from the comic, that has been discussed often here, and doing some good ol' repetitive ML sh!tpostin'.  To me that is toxic.
-Board leadership responds and is like "wait, are you disputing the idiocy of the ML writing credit litigation?"  That is really frustrating, I am not disputing that at all.  Why is that the immediate takeaway here upon seeing the WIBN 45 in the comic strip?  That is probably the biggest question that I have.
-People call me an ML apologist, I think?  I am not, I don't like the guy and it is weird that people immediately think that.
-I am called out in a thread outside of this one that I didn't post in.  Some people mock me.  Multiple oldsurferdude accounts swipe at me.  All of this is okay I guess.
-This thread becomes more about Mike's writing credit litigation.  And, not very much about any of the numerous other directions that the original topic has afforded.  Now I bet someone will say "wellllll why didn't YOU post something constructive in the thread then?" as if that is the only way in which I can criticise. 
-I wonder why more people don't agree with me, and then go on with my day.  Later!


That *IS* the point. He deserves little or no credit. That simple logic goes a long way to explaining why fans take issue with it and will not only call it out but also take shots at it too.

I for one don't want the historical record moving forward to show Mike getting equal credit to the two people who actually *did* write the song. But that's exactly what has happened, up to Mike offering limited edition handwritten copies of a WIBN lyric sheet as part of a VIP package *he* was selling in 2016 as if he were truly an equal contributor to that song.
Jesus GF, its the history rewrite from Mike in the "flesh." Mike will do anything to challenge BW's legacy at this point.
Logged

And production aside, Iíd so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8200


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 20, 2018, 09:42:18 AM »

I'm flattered that you find my posts on the Pet Sounds Forum so fascinating.  

Besides, anything I've said on Pet Sounds Forum about the nature of SSMB pales in comparison to some posts I've seen here about the posters on PSF.  

Where were you raising an issue when certain posters now on that forum and not here were polluting this forum with everything from personal attacks and bullying, to slander, to going after and taking cheap shots at people's kids?

You're right, KDS - This place was toxic. Most if not all of that got scrubbed off this place, and is now where you can enjoy that kind of company if you like.

Let's talk reality, shall we?
Logged

ďSome people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I donít look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. Itís just wrong thinking in my opinion and I donít mind saying that.Ē - Mike Love

"Every single person who criticized Brian for having She & Him, Kacey Musgraves, Sebu and Nate Ruess guesting on his solo album can now officially go heartily f*** themselves." - Wirestone
gfx
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.293 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!