You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#5891 Re: Guns N' Roses » Baz mentions Axl, possible Xmas shows (July '08) » 919 weeks ago
I still haven't heard this Bach single and I honestly don't want to. How does a guy who claims to "live metal" do this?
Money? Attention?
How does a guy who lives metal do Broadway (which I hear got great reviews). Baz says whatever is beneficial for him at the time. There's nothing wrong with it, you just can't take anything he says seriously.
PS: Conway Twitty rocks!
#5892 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
I don't understand what's wrong with all old vs new discussions going here.
Because every discussion is an old vs new, or at least it becomes one at some point and time. And most of the time, it's a new fan that starts it, then cries when the old fan responds. So how does the new fan stop it? By forcing old fans to post in a thread off the beaten path to comments made by new fans in a main thread. Yeah, that's fair.
#5893 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
One of my main complaints in the political thread was people bitching about the was things are, but not doing anything to change the situation. That being the case, I'll offer what I believe is a better solution to you:
Eliminate the VR area and add it to the Former GnR section. Create a sub board to the former GnR area. Allow topics in the main area to go wherever they go naturally. When the discussion is over, have one of the staff take the entire thread and copy it to the sub board. Have them then eliminate all posts not related to the original subject and leave that thread in the main section. If people want to carry on the conversation, the whole thread is still there to do so on the sub board (once the main discussion has died off). If people want to just read the stuff related to CD, it's in the CD section. If a new "off topic" discussion picks up in the thread left in the main section, let it happen and repeat the process once it's completed.
Yes, this will create more work for the staff. "Hire" more staff if you think that's necessary. I believe it will ultimately be less work than trying (in vain) to stop threads from heading in the direction that they will naturally end up going. Think of it like a river. You can move it, but ultimately the water is going to go where it wants to go. It's too powerful.
I don't know if it's logistically possible from a technology perspective, but I'm offering a solution. If the technology won't allow it, let me know and I'll come up with another solution. There has to be a better way than this.
#5894 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New Slash song for Les Paul Tribute.... » 919 weeks ago
I'll have to check this out when I get home. The early reviews sound promising...
#5895 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » Marketing Guns N' Roses (back in the day) » 919 weeks ago
Axl Rose and Air Supply. It's really not that far of a stretch actually.
#5896 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
It's not that simple James. The discussions in the "CD" section start as CD discussions and migrate into more than that. It's natural. I know I NEVER have gone into a thread in that section with the intention of bringing up the old band and while I may respond to comments others make, you'd be hard pressed to find a time where I started the discussion down that path. I don't start those discussions, but if I have something to say, I'm going to say it.
So now I'm in the "CD" section and I have a response to what someone said. I'm supposed to take that response and make it in another thread in another part of the forum even though it's completely relevant to the discussion currently taking place in the "CD" thread? Think this through...this is not the solution. It didn't work at the other site and it isn't going to work here. Don't tell me I didn't try it - I probably had the most posts in that thread in the old forum, and not because they were moved there.
As for the smart ass comment - I wasn't any more of a smart ass with my response than you were with your answer. I want to know why the defenders of the new band would rather attack people for prefering the old band than make valid points about the concerns that people have about the new music. I'd say that's a completely fair question.
#5897 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
Unfortunately, some of the longtime members and management team are just as guilty as everybody else. We're all here because we love something about GnR. We're very passionate about the music we love. We have to accept the downside (these arguments) that comes with all the positive things about the site.
#5898 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
Why don't the defenders of the new band ever address the real issues with the songs instead of making some up?
Is that a joke? People at this site have had plenty of criticisms regarding these tracks for years.
That isn't what I asked. Read the question again.
#5899 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
But where do you think every thread is going to go? As soon as someone doesn't like something and says something about it, they get accused of living in the 90s or loving Slash like that's some sort of crime at a GnR site. Once that happens, they defend themselves, which includes a why they don't like something about the new band. It's never going to stop...it's only going to get worse, and telling people they can't discuss it other than in this thread is not a solution. Nobody wants to make a great point where nobody will see it.
#5900 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » New GNR vs old GNR/ GNR vs Velvet Revolver thread » 919 weeks ago
You guys are fighting a losing battle. It's never going to go away, nor should it.
