I don't think you have to apologize for anything.  Axl won't be apologizing for anything he said that turned out to be inaccurate, so I would just call it even (if it actually comes out).

I don't think for a second that Duff really wanted to do an industrial album, but who knows.  I do know that I've yet to hear an industrial song on any of his post GnR work, so I'm going to guess he was being diplomatic (in typical Duff fashion).

I think the interview is very telling.  It's funny to watch in retrospect and the whole concept of forming a whole new GnR seems as rediculous now as it does on this video, yet somehow it actually happened.

Did anybody stop to think the first post may not be accurate?  I'm just asking the question.

My original post in this thread (while admittedly off topic) was in no way bashing Pitman.  My second post was a follow-up to someone's response (with an admittedly unnecessary harmless opinion about Chris).  In retrospect, I should have left out the comment (though I believe it to be true), but it certainly shouldn't have lead to people freaking out about it.  It's pretty common knowledge that Pitman is the least essential member of the band...why else would there be a site pretending to support him while really making fun of him?  I thought I was stating the obvious...I never knew that more than 2 people liked his contributions.

It has nothing to do with disliking him russ...I don't even know the guy.  It has everything to do with his contributions to the music.  I would never start (nor have I ever started) a thread talking about how much I dislike someone or something, but if someone makes a comment that I want to respond to, I'm assuming I have the right to do that in the thread discussing it whether I like that person or not, correct?

You don't have to answer, it's a rhetorical question.  Feel free to continue the discussion on topic about Chris' website.