Quote
drbryant

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

Yes, in fact he seems to be quite smart - as I am sure you are. Although obviously, some of the things he says are bizarre to someone normal such as yourself. Now, may I ask a few questions? If you prefer to decline just say so.

1. How often does Watchman (JJOL) talk to you?

2. When he talks to you, does he sometimes seem to be trying to mess with your head as well? Make you say things that you don't want to say, or do things you don't want to do?

3. Do you feel that the Watchman wants something from you?

4. Why did you kill Sir Craven of Cottage? Do you feel, sometimes, like killing Watchman?

I'll report back once I've had a chance to review your responses.

you're freakin' me out man!

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 06:36 by stonesnow.

There is atleast one on every forum. The Prometheus forums had one guy in particular who kept replying to his own posts. Very fun to watch.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

So what is your point? Someone responds to a thread therefore they must be the author of the thread? And I don't even think the watchman had come on the scene 2.5 years ago. Stop being silly and re-direct your focus back on the Rolling Stones where it belongs.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

So what is your point? Someone responds to a thread therefore they must be the author of the thread? And I don't even think the watchman had come on the scene 2.5 years ago. Stop being silly and re-direct your focus back on the Rolling Stones where it belongs.

Yes he/you did, the watchman was posting here in mid-2010--that's 2.5 years ago now, and did the farewell thread months later in 2011 [stonescrow had already arrived as well by this point]. I know, because that farewell thread was re-posted here a few months ago for my edification--along with stonescrow's farewell thread not long after.

The point of my above post is that I was exposing BlackHat as a liar. He claimed to have been away, to have "retired" for 2.5 years, and he has been exposed as a liar, who therefore has a secret agenda to keep hidden. Sir Craven of Cottage is not his only alter-ego--that makes a total of 7, at least....

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

So what is your point? Someone responds to a thread therefore they must be the author of the thread? And I don't even think the watchman had come on the scene 2.5 years ago. Stop being silly and re-direct your focus back on the Rolling Stones where it belongs.

Yes he/you did, the watchman was posting here in mid-2010--that's 2.5 years ago now, and did the farewell thread months later in 2011 [stonescrow had already arrived as well by this point]. I know, because that farewell thread was re-posted here a few months ago for my edification--along with stonescrow's farewell thread not long after.

The point of my above post is that I was exposing BlackHat as a liar. He claimed to have been away, to have "retired" for 2.5 years, and he has been exposed as a liar, who therefore has a secret agenda to keep hidden. Sir Craven of Cottage is not his only alter-ego--that makes a total of 7, at least....

2.5 years ago would be June 27 of 2010. Stonescrow posted here for the first time on the Stones 48th birthday PST. The watchman came sometime after.

Stonesnow, for the last time, I am not Black Hat. That's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

So what is your point? Someone responds to a thread therefore they must be the author of the thread? And I don't even think the watchman had come on the scene 2.5 years ago. Stop being silly and re-direct your focus back on the Rolling Stones where it belongs.

I never stated that Sir Craven of Cottage was the author of the thread, only that he had last posted in the thread. It's curious, JJOL, how you always jump to the defense of BlackHat, when the above exchange was not directed at you. If something is said to question BlackHat's credibility, you take it personally. Now, why is that? Why would you take something not said to you personally? Are you and BlackHat personally connected?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 07:19 by stonesnow.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

So what is your point? Someone responds to a thread therefore they must be the author of the thread? And I don't even think the watchman had come on the scene 2.5 years ago. Stop being silly and re-direct your focus back on the Rolling Stones where it belongs.

Yes he/you did, the watchman was posting here in mid-2010--that's 2.5 years ago now, and did the farewell thread months later in 2011 [stonescrow had already arrived as well by this point]. I know, because that farewell thread was re-posted here a few months ago for my edification--along with stonescrow's farewell thread not long after.

The point of my above post is that I was exposing BlackHat as a liar. He claimed to have been away, to have "retired" for 2.5 years, and he has been exposed as a liar, who therefore has a secret agenda to keep hidden. Sir Craven of Cottage is not his only alter-ego--that makes a total of 7, at least....

2.5 years ago would be June 27 of 2010. Stonescrow posted here for the first time on the Stones 48th birthday PST. The watchman came sometime after.

Stonesnow, for the last time, I am not Black Hat. That's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

No need to try and muddle the truth of the matter with confusion. Everyone knows thewatchman came first, and that thewatchman was the first to leave. Stonescrow was still posting into 2012, as you can see from the post dated January 29. Thewatchman had moved on months before, with a farewell thread titled "I can't do this anymore."

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
BlackHat
Hey,all I posed was a question. A discussion point.


Feels like I've walked into a mental ward.

Yes, your question. The fifth word in your initial post in this thread is "legacy". Does the Stones legacy preoccupy your mind much? Is their "going out on top" important to you? Would their going out with "a lesser bang" trouble your thoughts and perceptions of The Stones? While we're on the subject, what do you think of the prospect of the Sons of Beatles going out on tour?

I am not the Watchman. I was Sir Craven of Cottage!!! I am interested in the Stones legacy from an intellectual/historical point of view and posed a question on that basis. In the two and a half years since I have been away this place has descended from a community where different views were acknowledged and accepted to being a virtual one party state.

I have a view on what the Stones should do. But they walk their own path and I will continue to partake in whatever they do and will hopefully enjoy.

Some of the stuff that has been posted in this thread in just bizarre. Some contributors are living in a twilight zone. I have read this forum in the last two years but not contributed. I know of the Watchman and his Sons of Beatles thing. It's all a bit odd. But he seems to have messed with the heads of many who contribute here.

You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

So what is your point? Someone responds to a thread therefore they must be the author of the thread? And I don't even think the watchman had come on the scene 2.5 years ago. Stop being silly and re-direct your focus back on the Rolling Stones where it belongs.

Yes he/you did, the watchman was posting here in mid-2010--that's 2.5 years ago now, and did the farewell thread months later in 2011 [stonescrow had already arrived as well by this point]. I know, because that farewell thread was re-posted here a few months ago for my edification--along with stonescrow's farewell thread not long after.

The point of my above post is that I was exposing BlackHat as a liar. He claimed to have been away, to have "retired" for 2.5 years, and he has been exposed as a liar, who therefore has a secret agenda to keep hidden. Sir Craven of Cottage is not his only alter-ego--that makes a total of 7, at least....

2.5 years ago would be June 27 of 2010. Stonescrow posted here for the first time on the Stones 48th birthday PST. The watchman came sometime after.

Stonesnow, for the last time, I am not Black Hat. That's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

No need to try and muddle the truth of the matter with confusion. Everyone knows thewatchman came first, and that thewatchman was the first to leave. Stonescrow was still posting into 2012, as you can see from the post dated January 29. Thewatchman had moved on months before, with a farewell thread titled "I can't do this anymore."

Stonescrow came before the Watchman.

I gave up posting as Sir Craven on a regular basis in May 2010 - two days after the Europa League Final. I do recall re-visiting late last year but did not commit the details to memory. As a reader I did find the Sons of Beatles stuff very amusing.

Believe me this is all very funny. As for the Watchman. Whoever he is he must be taking great pleasure in how he has messed with your heads.

Remember the Rolling Stones are not your life, they are only a part of your life. Why don't you try and get one.

Insanity...
It's actually a decent question, and I couldn't care less who it comes from or if Watchman son-ofBeatles asked it, or is replying himself. Who cares?

But way back Drake said something I have always thought too; yes, the Stones could easily go on and on. And end their careers just like Keith and Ronnie have often hinted at in mystical ways. To die on stage; go down on top.
But they need to scale down. When they do their usual rap about the old Bluesmen going on forever they neglect to mention that they were not playing stadiums in their late years; they were not required to jog up and down ramps; follow computerized lighting cues; or play cock-rock.
Speaking for myself I'd love nothing more than another album of originals; smaller gigs, deep album cuts.
And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do.

Quote
Silver Dagger

Nice picture. I can see where sit just behind Mr Haynes in this picture.

Quote
stonesnow
You said "you" retired from IORR a couple of years ago ["In the two and a half years since I have been away], yet you were most recently active as Sir Craven of Cottage 11 months ago--January 2012! Quite a difference between 11 months and two and a half years. You also mentioned you've been here in "a number of guises", meaning in addition to one other moniker. So, if you please, who did you retire as "a couple of years ago?" Would you mind revealing your full "number of guises"--that is, if you have nothing to hide?

As Sir Craven of Cottage you posted in the "local chip shop" thread exactly 1 year ago:

Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: December 29, 2011 09:23

Where do shell fish go to borrow money? A prawn broker!!!

Your last post as Sir Craven of Cottage was in, of all places, a son of Beatles thread:

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: Sir Craven of Cottage ()
Date: January 28, 2012 22:35

Son of The Beatles?

A post that was answered by the legendary stonescrow--who "DoomNGloom" admitted recently was part of the same persona of thewatchman, stonescrow, MightyStonesStillRollin50, and DoomNGloom. This character usually has 2 alter-egos interacting at once--that is, he answers his own posts!

Re: James McCartney NYC, NJ date
Posted by: stonescrow ()
Date: January 29, 2012 01:25

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
Son of The Beatles?

Lot of pressure being a son of a Beatle. He can handle it.

So you have not been away for 2.5 years....however, the "farewell" thread of thewatchman was from 2.5 years ago....

Well, this is simply too much of a coincidence. Pretty amazing sleuthing by stonesnow.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 15:05 by drbryant.

"they are only a part of your Life" BlackHat says - I seem to remember reading the reverse side of the very first LP "The Rolling Stones" and it said "The Rolling Stones are more than just a group - they are a way of life"
That has been quite true for me and I've loved every minute... ha

"till the next timne..."

Quote
Starr
"they are only a part of your Life" BlackHat says - I seem to remember reading the reverse side of the very first LP "The Rolling Stones" and it said "The Rolling Stones are more than just a group - they are a way of life"
That has been quite true for me and I've loved every minute... ha

"till the next timne..."

There's no N in time.

And didn't you do anything else?

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
Starr
"they are only a part of your Life" BlackHat says - I seem to remember reading the reverse side of the very first LP "The Rolling Stones" and it said "The Rolling Stones are more than just a group - they are a way of life"
That has been quite true for me and I've loved every minute... ha

"till the next timne..."

There's no N in time.

Well, "discretely" means separately (as opposed to discreetly), Sir Craven.

Quote
drbryant

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
Starr
"they are only a part of your Life" BlackHat says - I seem to remember reading the reverse side of the very first LP "The Rolling Stones" and it said "The Rolling Stones are more than just a group - they are a way of life"
That has been quite true for me and I've loved every minute... ha

"till the next timne..."

There's no N in time.

Well, "discretely" means separately (as opposed to discreetly), Sir Craven.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

To answer your question. No.

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
To answer your question. No.

Fair enough

PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

McCartney plays a song in memory of George and John. The whole show is hardly a tribute. He might refer to them but would be slaughtered if he didn't.

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

McCartney plays a song in memory of George and John. The whole show is hardly a tribute. He might refer to them but would be slaughtered if he didn't.

True, but he does play lots of Beatles songs at his concerts.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

McCartney plays a song in memory of George and John. The whole show is hardly a tribute. He might refer to them but would be slaughtered if he didn't.

True, but he does play lots of Beatles songs at his concerts.

that's prolly cos he was getting mercilessly booed when he was doing lotsa van halen songs...he's learned his lesson.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

McCartney plays a song in memory of George and John. The whole show is hardly a tribute. He might refer to them but would be slaughtered if he didn't.

True, but he does play lots of Beatles songs at his concerts.

Coz he's a former Beatle. It's his past as much as theirs.

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

It's not the tempo so much as sort of a lackadaisical approach that doesn't capture the original feelings of the songs. Charlie should boom on Get Off Of My Cloud. The repetitive drums ARE the song. It is not a swinging song. It is that stiff marshall approach that makes the song. You can't just breeze through the old tunes without regard, unless you're going to do an innovative arrangement ala Dylan, which the Stones are not good at.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

McCartney plays a song in memory of George and John. The whole show is hardly a tribute. He might refer to them but would be slaughtered if he didn't.

True, but he does play lots of Beatles songs at his concerts.

that's prolly cos he was getting mercilessly booed when he was doing lotsa van halen songs...he's learned his lesson.

He could never quite make that round house kick over his head look all that convincing either.

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]

Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).

There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.

So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.

Excellent comments.

McCartney got off his ass because he saw the Stones closing in on his beloved Beatles. This is the legacy war nobody wants to talk about. McCartney's shows lately have become tributes to his deceased friends.

I thought Keith did great and the songs being played slower is the way they were recorded in the studio. We just got used to the hyper-versions. It's not that they can't play them much faster.

McCartney plays a song in memory of George and John. The whole show is hardly a tribute. He might refer to them but would be slaughtered if he didn't.

True, but he does play lots of Beatles songs at his concerts.

Coz he's a former Beatle. It's his past as much as theirs.

Who are you talking to?