true - but I've sent in reviews of shows to BV that were not 100% positive and they were not posted. makes one wonder....

Leonard Keringer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bv Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Have you ever seen the movie THE FAN?
> > Robert de Niro playing a baseball fan.
> > Big fan... Just a fan...
> >
> > Bjornulf
>
>
> big fan....more like a psycho-stalker


Now that I understand that OpenG was an obsessive de Niro type-stalker, his banning makes some sense. Still having nightmares about Taxi Driver!

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have you ever seen the movie THE FAN?
> Robert de Niro playing a baseball fan.
> Big fan... Just a fan...
>
> Bjornulf


Are you attacking Open G as a person or are you talking about someone else?

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> true - but I've sent in reviews of shows to BV
> that were not 100% positive and they were not
> posted. makes one wonder....


LOL, BVs reviews are very personal and would not pass as very believable if published in magazines. Sorry but there you have it. But thats ok, he can write reviews like that and others can write their own reviews. No need to ban me for saying this. And its fun to read reports from concerts you haven't attended so keep up the good work.

Hi All,

The best thing to do is not react directly on all post or things your not like, wait for a while sometime you won't even react at all or your reaction will be not as angry as the first time you read the post.

I also find the censorship of Börnulf a bit overdone, but afther reading this post frequently I begin to understand it.

In my country the have a saying "if you give one finger they take your hand"

I one's post a picture you won't believe what they all post I still regret although the last picture I post works fine (no rare reaction).

If I had react on Topics of BV 3 weeks ago it would be completly different.

Nico

I can't understand whats so difficult to accept the rules of this board.

It is forbidden to talk and judge any individuals for private matters.

If you talk about Ronnie Wood as a band-member, how he plays and stuff, this goes allright, because on stage Ronnie is a public person.

(as I understand the rules)

Ok, beside OpenG, forget about Mick Taylor, its been so long that he was a Stone, he'll never join them again, so be happy with Ronnie or just don't post your very personal problems with the playing of Ronnie.

"Ok, beside OpenG, forget about Mick Taylor, its been so long that he was a Stone, he'll never join them again, so be happy with Ronnie or just don't post your very personal problems with the playing of Ronnie."

Be happy with Ronnie or don't post? All hail to The Stones!

It's rather funny. I delete one post out off 500 in a week and people think I am restrictive. Like if pest control is killing one rat per year and the Animals Rights Group start big marches in protest of major rat killing.

Also, it is funny because those with the most "edgy" and tough language and the most offensive way of acting are the ones that feel most I am offending if I mention "The Fan" with Robert the Niro or hookers in Amsterdam. Really funny. What happened to freedom of speach and being able to tolerate strong opinions if you can't take it yourself?

If your review did not get posted it is usually if I get it while I am on travel, which I am often. I try to post most of the e-mail reviews I get within 24 hours. Some time I do lots of travel after a show and then I get a backlog of 100 e-mail. Hard to handle so they get into my "forever-backlog". Not lost but I do never get time to handle them. A shame really but my time is limited. I think I have rejected two or three reviews over the past 6 months in total because of offending contents. One was about Keith being totally useless and he was just like his song "the Worst". Many many felt it was offending and sure it was, it did not add anything, it was personal and not representative so I just removed it. Then there was Philly 1 which I know got a few bad reviews like 2-3 and they were like 50/50 bad and good so I published half of each and tried to make a balance. That's it. I have may be 100 reviews in a backlog I hope I get time to post some time this spring. They are mostly sent to me at a time when the next show was due i.e. more than 1-2 days later and then my work power is on the next show so the review is coming into the backlog. To say I don't post reviews because of contents is not correct. Simple as that. Some people believe in conspiracy. I don't.

By the way I have no relations to the Stones. I write what I like and I say what I like. That is what we call independent. If many people say the show is bad I publish it. But 9 out of 10 times in fact even more often the reviews are very positive. So I assume people just love the shows. Simple as that.

If you don't like my reviews I am really happy that you say so. Others like them so why don't you just move on in life and read something else. a few of my reviews have been published on bootlegs and in public books so I don't worry much about what single persons say from their personal point of view as long as I get feedback from many IORR readers who want me to write reviews and reports. Some want very technical reviews. Like how many errors Ronnie or Mick did. Others want to know what happened at the show. What I think is really low-life is to review a review. To say a review is not worth anything. And this is coming from people with NO NAMES. Anonymously.

I have a name. I am a person. But people who say I censor and don't publish and write reviews who are over-positive don't have names. They have cover-names. Nicks. They don't write reviews. They don't tell who they are. They complain a lot about technical errors. They feel I am offending. I am not impressed. You want to kick the dog, but when the dog is biting back you are crying for your mother... Not very brave...

Bjornulf



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-01-30 20:19 by bv.

Well, I'm just glad OpenG is back and not banned.

He only talks about guitars. If people find this tedious then they should simply ignore his stuff, (ablett!). But they don't. They often get hard and nasty (not ablett!) on him. He is blamed for their problem.

I think, and i hope, that what Bjornulf disliked were the posts about Ronnie's personal stuff. Even so, I'm not sure these should be banned. 'Ron Wood is a useless git'. That's offensive and worthless and could be given the boot, totally agreed........

But IF Ronnie has an alcohol problem and IF it is affecting his playing and affecting the Stones and their reputation, then why on earth should genuine fans not have the freedom to discuss this on a fansite? Rules which condemn such free discussion are not healthy in my opinion.

I think the second/lead guitar role is extremely important and should elevate them from a decent rhythmic four-piece to something rather more special.

Just an opinion. (I have something related to say about the 'two-guitar thing' but will do it in a separate thread).

"Also, it is funny because those with the most "edgy" and tough language and the most offensive way of acting are the ones that feel most I am offending if I mention the Fan with Robert the Noro or hookers in Amsterdam. Really funny. What happened to freedom of speach and being able to tolerate strong opinions if you can't take it yourself?"

The point is, of course, that YOU have to live up to YOUR rules. You cannot shush people and then use the weapons you took out of their hands.

"If you don't like my reviews I am really happy that you say so. Others like them so why don't you just move on in life and read something else."

Yes, I can feel how happy you are that one says so. besides, it was a rather affectionate comment by LA Forum, I think you're getting edgy very quickly here. It's natural that you praise a band that you adore, and if sometimes we find that you get carried away we don't mean that there's anything wrong with that.


"a few of my reviews have been published on bootlegs and in public books so I don't worry much about what singe persons say from their personal point of view as long as I get feedback from many IORR readers who want me to write reviews and reports."

I don't even think LA Forum ment that you shouldn't write them anymore! He certainly enjoys them as an enthusiastic storytelling about a Stones' show.

"Some want very technical reviews. Like how many errors Ronnie or Mick did. Others want to know what happened at the show."

Don't you think there is space for that too, as long as it also highlights how many great notes Ronnie or Mick did?

"What I think is really low-life is to review a review. To say a review is not worth anything."

Now you're getting really angry again, and biaised. of course people should be critical of what they read, whether it is newspapers or anything, and what else is it but to review a review?

"And this is coming from people with NO NAMES. Anonymously."

My name is Olivier Tonneau, I live in Oxford, UK, and it's very easy to find me!

"They feel I am offending. I am not impressed."
I think something is going wrong here. Everybody always says how much they enjoy this site and what a great job you do. Some say you became a little touchy recently and your very aggressive reaction to LA Forum's affectionate and harmless comment seems to corroborate that, as well as your latest phrase:

"You want to kick the dog, but when the dog is biting back you are crying for your mother..."

Who cries for whom? I thinks things are very simple. You were offended by OpenG and many others weren't and they tried to tell you, "was he really that bad? Are you not overreacting?" But we wouldn't say that if we didn't feel quite at ease here, we are not attacking you, not kicking the dog nor crying for our mothers in turn!

God I don't know why I'm writing this. After all, who cares? It's just an internet forum. But it's a nice one and it's a pity that you seem to be getting frustrated at your own creation. Don't take comments too seriously! If we didn't like it we wouldn't be here, so of course we thank you.

OpenG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ron Wood
>
> Actually it was a nice comment about Ron Wood
> being a decent rhythm player,slide
> player,and pedal steel player but the band needs a
> decent single note player to
> play live.As you know Ron Wood can slide to a note
> or two on slide guitar and pedal steel guitar and
> sounds fine. But when he plays single note solos
> he has no
> fluidity,and does not play anything worth
> listening to.He plays octaves up and down the
> fretboard to occupy space and time with few
> notes.There are many examples of this watch
> YCAGWYW from Twickehdon DVD,etc.His two note solo
> on TD from the same show is legendary now on DVD.
>
> I hope you can read this,it may disappear again.

I have no idea why your original thread was deleted.

What you have written above though is IMHO very accurate.