BuffettNews.com

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

DsilCaribe wrote:I'm not a REM fan by any means . . i have none of their albums, and just happened to see them as part the package of seeing Bruce Springsteen. Keep in mind most people watching live 8 arent REM fans so im sure im not the only one asking "why in the world is this guy wearing blue paint on his face"

Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"? R.E.M. have been touring internationally since the beginning of their career. Again, before making such false statements you would be wise to do a little research first.

I think I'd have to agree with Dsil on this one. An awful lot of people watched Live 8 on either MTV or VH1. I'm not sure how many R.E.M. fans are in either networks target demographic. A lot of the acts that performed at Live 8 were much more MTV/VH1 friendly and more relevant to today's music fans than R.E.M., a band that in my mind has always been very overrated. It's hard to take anyone seriously after producing trash like Shiny Happy People and What's The Frequency Kenneth. And before you can't your panties all twisted, I know those aren't the only songs they've ever done. I'm just throwing them out there to make a point, which is that in my opinion they aren't a very good band. I know you disagree but like I said, it's my opinion.

You're letting your personal opinion get in the way of what this event was all about. R.E.M. have long been standard bearers of philanthropic events such as this and have always been outspoken when it comes to such matters so their presence at Live 8 is not out of place at all. If you want to use what's relevant to MTV/VH1's audience that is totally beside the point, the cause of raising awareness is the point. Music long ago stopped being a priority at both MTV and VH1 so I'm surprised they provided any coverage at all.

Now who's not reading other people's posts? You completely missed my point. I was responding to when you asked Dsil "Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"?" (By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?) I said a lot of people watched Live 8 on either MTV or VH1 and I don't think a lot of REM fans are in the target demographic of either network. Which in my view supports Dsil's post. The fact that REM has appeared at events like this in the past is irrelevant as to how many people were there, in person, on AOL or watching MTV/VH1, to see or hear them.

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

DsilCaribe wrote:I'm not a REM fan by any means . . i have none of their albums, and just happened to see them as part the package of seeing Bruce Springsteen. Keep in mind most people watching live 8 arent REM fans so im sure im not the only one asking "why in the world is this guy wearing blue paint on his face"

Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"? R.E.M. have been touring internationally since the beginning of their career. Again, before making such false statements you would be wise to do a little research first.

I think I'd have to agree with Dsil on this one. An awful lot of people watched Live 8 on either MTV or VH1. I'm not sure how many R.E.M. fans are in either networks target demographic. A lot of the acts that performed at Live 8 were much more MTV/VH1 friendly and more relevant to today's music fans than R.E.M., a band that in my mind has always been very overrated. It's hard to take anyone seriously after producing trash like Shiny Happy People and What's The Frequency Kenneth. And before you can't your panties all twisted, I know those aren't the only songs they've ever done. I'm just throwing them out there to make a point, which is that in my opinion they aren't a very good band. I know you disagree but like I said, it's my opinion.

You're letting your personal opinion get in the way of what this event was all about. R.E.M. have long been standard bearers of philanthropic events such as this and have always been outspoken when it comes to such matters so their presence at Live 8 is not out of place at all. If you want to use what's relevant to MTV/VH1's audience that is totally beside the point, the cause of raising awareness is the point. Music long ago stopped being a priority at both MTV and VH1 so I'm surprised they provided any coverage at all.

Now who's not reading other people's posts? You completely missed my point. I was responding to when you asked Dsil "Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"?" (By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?) I said a lot of people watched Live 8 on either MTV or VH1 and I don't think a lot of REM fans are in the target demographic of either network. Which in my view supports Dsil's post. The fact that REM has appeared at events like this in the past is irrelevant as to how many people were there, in person, on AOL or watching MTV/VH1, to see or hear them.

Coverage was also provided by XM, so do you think those people also don't know who R.E.M. are? And in that case the make up thing doesn't even come into play. R.E.M. are much wider known and recognized than you seem to realize which seems to also be clouded by your opinion of them. R.E.M. are known on an international level, for evidence of this check sales charts worldwide and their past tour schedules. You'll quickly learn that they are far more well known on an international level than you give them credit for. That you assume they aren't the target audience for VH1/MTV is totally beside the point, Live 8 was about raising awareness, not trying to reach a "target audience", not to mention, that no matter who the band in question is, MTV and VH1 haven't been about music in a very long time.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?

I guess you missed this, since you didn't answer. I'll wait.

For the record, I know REM is well known (I even own one of their albums from about 1983 or '84 but I haven't listened to it in years because I got over them), has been around for a long time and in the past has been critically praised. That doesn't change my opinion that they aren't very good.

And I stand by my point about the MTV/VH1 target audience. I know what the purpose of the Live 8 concerts was but do you really think those networks cared about raising awareness? Not to be too cynical, but if they didn't think they could pull in big numbers in the ratings they wouldn't have shown one second of Live 8.

Jahfin wrote:http://murmurs.com/talk/showthread.php?t=90689
Driver Nate
Re: Stipe at "Live 8" Where Do These Idiots Come From?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I now wish I never even tried to offer up an explanation to some of the idiots that populate BuffettNews, watch as they continue to take my comments out of context (and in some instances make up comments totally out of the blue). At least I tried to offer up an explanation but it seems to have done little or no good.

Jonathan

wow look at that, Jonathan is trying to get visitors over here!!

Jonathan, as Tiki said, maybe you just aren't making yourself clear

Jonathan, do you really consider us IDIOTS??? and me a FUCTARD???? thats not very nice. . . .even one of our moderator, who happened to get involved in this conversation, are they an idiot too?? Nobody here has ever called you an idiot Jon, at least i haven't. And i dont think anybody truly "hates" you . .hell, i just laugh at you, i could care less about you one way or another . . .but by calling us IDIOTS and FUCTARDS, it seems that you have some sort of strong emotion towards us, a negative emotion, seems to be hatred. Take it easy pal, its just the internet.

Jahfin --
You know, for someone who's always complaining about how he gets treated you sure don't do much to win friends and influence people. And if you're going to rag on people and call them names you should at least have the balls to do it here, not on another message board. Unless you're a spinleless little weasel.

Yeah, and the coverage was so versatile.... The exact same video snippets of the actual artists on both MTV & VH1, but with different VJ's. And very choppy. You'd seldom hear a whole song before the VJ's came back on.

We referred to it as ADDTV.

Jahfin wrote:

Tiki Bar wrote:Jahfin - please ease off on the throttle of insults. You're way out of line on this one, in my opinion. This is BuffettNews - not REMNews. Just because most of us here don't share your broad musical tastes, does not make us ignorant. Rather, to me, it seems more fitting for you to assume we should know this stuff. .

I never "assumed" anyone should know this stuff. I merely suggested that before throwing out such insults, that DsilCaribe could have spent some time researching the matter beforehand. Regarding the insults, what's good for the goose is good for the gander unless it's at BN of course. Go look back at some of DsilCaribe's past exchanges with me and it won't take you long to see what I mean.

Tiki Bar wrote:The answer "because he sometimes wears makeup on tour, and wore makeup on an album cover" to paraphrase, doesn't really answer the question.

Where did I say he "wore makeup on an album cover"? I didn't. All I ask is that you please read my responses before replying because it's obvious that you haven't. ONE MORE TIME:

"On the tour for Around the Sun Stipe is portraying the Cat Burglar from one of the songs on the new album."

OK - I mis-read what you said the 1st time, and didn't re-read it every time you re-posted it. It got lost in the translation. Your insults cloud what you say unfortunately.

In regards to your 2nd point, DsilCaribe started with the question "what is up with Michael Stipes blue paint?? does that have any significance?? If it doesn't..." To me, a simple question of friends on BN who might know the answer, and politely share explanation. And commentary, that for the mass audience, seemed to be trying to draw attention to himself wasn't all that insulting. I often have questions, and ask them of my friends here before doing the research myself. It's just what people do.

I'm not going to go on a witch hunt for DsilCaribe's past exchanges. I live in the now, and there is much more that I miss on BN, than I see. You were just "lucky" that I stumbled across this!

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?

LIPH wrote:I guess you missed this, since you didn't answer. I'll wait.]

I'm not sure how you expect me to answer it since I have no access to such information. If you can put your hands on those figures by all means do so.

LIPH wrote:For the record, I know REM is well known (I even own one of their albums from about 1983 or '84 but I haven't listened to it in years because I got over them), has been around for a long time and in the past has been critically praised. That doesn't change my opinion that they aren't very good.

"Your opinion" keeps entering into this conversation but it doesn't have anything to do with the dicussion at hand which is apparently that Michael Stipe was trying to draw attention away from Live 8 by wearing make up. This remains totally unsubstantiated.

LIPH wrote:And I stand by my point about the MTV/VH1 target audience. I know what the purpose of the Live 8 concerts was but do you really think those networks cared about raising awareness? Not to be too cynical, but if they didn't think they could pull in big numbers in the ratings they wouldn't have shown one second of Live 8.

So your reasoning (or in this case, lack thereof) is that neither network was justified in showing R.E.M.'s performance from Live 8, who were once very prominent figures on both channels when they were known more for music than "reality" shows?

Jahfin wrote:http://murmurs.com/talk/showthread.php?t=90689
Driver Nate
Re: Stipe at "Live 8" Where Do These Idiots Come From?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I now wish I never even tried to offer up an explanation to some of the idiots that populate BuffettNews, watch as they continue to take my comments out of context (and in some instances make up comments totally out of the blue). At least I tried to offer up an explanation but it seems to have done little or no good.

Jonathan

DsilCaribe wrote:wow look at that, Jonathan is trying to get visitors over here!!

I can post whatever I want whereever I want. It's not as like others haven't posted about me on other Buffett sites, yourself included.

DsilCaribe wrote:Jonathan, as Tiki said, maybe you just aren't making yourself clear!!

You know as well as I do that isn't the case at all. Just how many times do you need it spelled out for you? When I've gone out of my way to explain the nature of Stipe's make up a number of times now and you STILL don't get it then it must be because you can't read or are not taking the time to read my replies.

DsilCaribe wrote:Jonathan, do you really consider us IDIOTS??? and me a FUCTARD???? thats not very nice. . . .even one of our moderator, who happened to get involved in this conversation, are they an idiot too?? Nobody here has ever called you an idiot Jon, at least i haven't. And i dont think anybody truly "hates" you . .hell, i just laugh at you, i could care less about you one way or another . . .but by calling us IDIOTS and FUCTARDS, it seems that you have some sort of strong emotion towards us, a negative emotion, seems to be hatred. Take it easy pal, its just the internet.

There's one thing you're good at and that's making assumpations and putting words in other peoples' mouths. Go back and look at the replies you've made to me in the past and then come back and tell me you've NEVER been insulting towards me. You won't be able to do it.

Fuctard is a funny word...but it still takes a backseat to asshat.

LIPH wrote:Jahfin --
You know, for someone who's always complaining about how he gets treated you sure don't do much to win friends and influence people. And if you're going to rag on people and call them names you should at least have the balls to do it here, not on another message board. Unless you're a spinleless little weasel.

Go to any number of Buffett sites and plug in "Jahfin" in the search engine and then come back and preach to all the people here (yourself included) that have bad mouthed me in other forums then try not to bust your ass when you're getting down off of your high horse.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?

LIPH wrote:I guess you missed this, since you didn't answer. I'll wait.]

I'm not sure how you expect me to answer it since I have no access to such information. If you can put your hands on those figures by all means do so.

Once again you miss the point. To refresh your recollection, here's what you said in response to Dsil's post earlier today: "Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"? R.E.M. have been touring internationally since the beginning of their career. Again, before making such false statements you would be wise to do a little research first." (emphasis added) If you think what Dsil said is false where is your supporting evidence?

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:For the record, I know REM is well known (I even own one of their albums from about 1983 or '84 but I haven't listened to it in years because I got over them), has been around for a long time and in the past has been critically praised. That doesn't change my opinion that they aren't very good.

"Your opinion" keeps entering into this conversation but it doesn't have anything to do with the dicussion at hand which is apparently that Michael Stipe was trying to draw attention away from Live 8 by wearing make up. This remains totally unsubstantiated.

I didn't, and still haven't, said anything about Michael Stipe wearing blue paint on his face.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:]And I stand by my point about the MTV/VH1 target audience. I know what the purpose of the Live 8 concerts was but do you really think those networks cared about raising awareness? Not to be too cynical, but if they didn't think they could pull in big numbers in the ratings they wouldn't have shown one second of Live 8.

So your reasoning (or in this case, lack thereof) is that neither network was justified in showing R.E.M.'s performance from Live 8, who were once very prominent figures on both channels when they were known more for music than "reality" shows?

I guess those nasty reading and comprehension skills (or lack thereof) are rearing their ugly head again. I didn't say, or even imply, that MTV and VH1 weren't justified in showing REM, or any of the other performers from Live 8. What I did say, and I really wish I could type slower to help you understand, was that neither network would have shown any of Live 8 if they didn't think they could pull in big ratings numbers. MTV and VH1 are businesses, not philanthropists. Like any other business, they do what they think is in their best interest. And that means "show me the money."

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:Jahfin --
You know, for someone who's always complaining about how he gets treated you sure don't do much to win friends and influence people. And if you're going to rag on people and call them names you should at least have the balls to do it here, not on another message board. Unless you're a spinleless little weasel.

Go to any number of Buffett sites and plug in "Jahfin" in the search engine and then come back and preach to all the people here (yourself included) that have bad mouthed me in other forums then try not to bust your ass when you're getting down off of your high horse.

Maybe that wouldn't be the case if you weren't such an insufferably pompous blowhard. See, I don't have to go to another message board to say what's on my mind.

Jahfin wrote:

Tiki Bar wrote:Jahfin - please ease off on the throttle of insults. You're way out of line on this one, in my opinion. This is BuffettNews - not REMNews. Just because most of us here don't share your broad musical tastes, does not make us ignorant. Rather, to me, it seems more fitting for you to assume we should know this stuff. .

I never "assumed" anyone should know this stuff. I merely suggested that before throwing out such insults, that DsilCaribe could have spent some time researching the matter beforehand. Regarding the insults, what's good for the goose is good for the gander unless it's at BN of course. Go look back at some of DsilCaribe's past exchanges with me and it won't take you long to see what I mean.

Tiki Bar wrote:The answer "because he sometimes wears makeup on tour, and wore makeup on an album cover" to paraphrase, doesn't really answer the question.

Where did I say he "wore makeup on an album cover"? I didn't. All I ask is that you please read my responses before replying because it's obvious that you haven't. ONE MORE TIME:

"On the tour for Around the Sun Stipe is portraying the Cat Burglar from one of the songs on the new album."

Tiki Bar wrote:OK - I mis-read what you said the 1st time, and didn't re-read it every time you re-posted it. It got lost in the translation. Your insults cloud what you say unfortunately.

Again, I'm not sure how I could have made my explanation any clearer. It wasn't part of another body of text and on top of that it was italized for emphasis. Judging from your response it seems you're more interested in reading what you percieve to be the negative rather than seeking out the explanation I offered.

Tiki Bar wrote:In regards to your 2nd point, DsilCaribe started with the question "what is up with Michael Stipes blue paint?? does that have any significance?? If it doesn't..." To me, a simple question of friends on BN who might know the answer, and politely share explanation. And commentary, that for the mass audience, seemed to be trying to draw attention to himself wasn't all that insulting. I often have questions, and ask them of my friends here before doing the research myself. It's just what people do.

I'm not going to go on a witch hunt for DsilCaribe's past exchanges. I live in the now, and there is much more that I miss on BN, than I see. You were just "lucky" that I stumbled across this!

By seeking out DsilCaribe's past responses it's not an indication that you don't live in the now, it's a record of how he's replied to me previously which speaks directly to why I speak to him the way I do.

Damn! There's a good Jahfin fight on a day I'm too busy to join in!!!

LIPH wrote:By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?

LIPH wrote:I guess you missed this, since you didn't answer. I'll wait.]

I'm not sure how you expect me to answer it since I have no access to such information. If you can put your hands on those figures by all means do so.[/quote]

LIPH wrote:Once again you miss the point. To refresh your recollection, here's what you said in response to Dsil's post earlier today: "Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"? R.E.M. have been touring internationally since the beginning of their career. Again, before making such false statements you would be wise to do a little research first." (emphasis added) If you think what Dsil said is false where is your supporting evidence?

The R.E.M. Timeline web site has a record of every tour they've been on since they first starting touring (http://www.remtimeline.com). International sales figures posted at REMhq.com will illustrate how well their records have sold overseas: http://www.remhq.com/flash/index.html

LIPH wrote:For the record, I know REM is well known (I even own one of their albums from about 1983 or '84 but I haven't listened to it in years because I got over them), has been around for a long time and in the past has been critically praised. That doesn't change my opinion that they aren't very good.

Jahfin wrote:"Your opinion" keeps entering into this conversation but it doesn't have anything to do with the dicussion at hand which is apparently that Michael Stipe was trying to draw attention away from Live 8 by wearing make up. This remains totally unsubstantiated.

LIPH wrote:I didn't, and still haven't, said anything about Michael Stipe wearing blue paint on his face.

No, you haven't but that's what started this conversation.

LIPH wrote:And I stand by my point about the MTV/VH1 target audience. I know what the purpose of the Live 8 concerts was but do you really think those networks cared about raising awareness? Not to be too cynical, but if they didn't think they could pull in big numbers in the ratings they wouldn't have shown one second of Live 8.

Jahfin wrote:So your reasoning (or in this case, lack thereof) is that neither network was justified in showing R.E.M.'s performance from Live 8, who were once very prominent figures on both channels when they were known more for music than "reality" shows?

LIPH wrote:I guess those nasty reading and comprehension skills (or lack thereof) are rearing their ugly head again. I didn't say, or even imply, that MTV and VH1 weren't justified in showing REM, or any of the other performers from Live 8. What I did say, and I really wish I could type slower to help you understand, was that neither network would have shown any of Live 8 if they didn't think they could pull in big ratings numbers. MTV and VH1 are businesses, not philanthropists. Like any other business, they do what they think is in their best interest. And that means "show me the money."

So, just what is your point about MTV/VH1's coverage of Live 8 then? Do you not think that just by covering the event they were also helping to raise awareness of starvation in Africa? If that's your standpoint then what was the point of MTV providing coverage of Live Aid in 1985? Of the single "Do They Know It's Christmas?" USA For Africa? These were all events geared towards bringing attention to the cause. I don't know about you but all of these events certainly got my attention.

Left Field ParrotHead wrote:

Ilph wrote:

hawaiiboy wrote:What I have seen of the coverage here in Canada
has been pretty good. They have been cutting
away to show songs by artists at the other venues
when they are between sets in Barrie
Neil Young was just on with a beautiful song I think it was
called When God Made Me backed by a choir.

Tom Green co-hosting has been a bit hard to take, but overall
I think that it has been good

I thought everyone from Canada HAD to like Tom Green.

Most of us stopped liking Tom Green when he burned a Canadian flag as a publicity stunt for his old MTV show. Biggest jerk EVER!

I used to hate Tom Green

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:Jahfin --
You know, for someone who's always complaining about how he gets treated you sure don't do much to win friends and influence people. And if you're going to rag on people and call them names you should at least have the balls to do it here, not on another message board. Unless you're a spinleless little weasel.

Go to any number of Buffett sites and plug in "Jahfin" in the search engine and then come back and preach to all the people here (yourself included) that have bad mouthed me in other forums then try not to bust your ass when you're getting down off of your high horse.

LIPH wrote:Maybe that wouldn't be the case if you weren't such an insufferably pompous blowhard. See, I don't have to go to another message board to say what's on my mind.

Maybe you still haven't figured it out but I don't give a rats ass what you or anyone else think of me. That you think I care is probably your first problem. You also have not addressed the point that you're just as guilty of the very things you're trying to accuse me of. There's your insufferably pompous blowhard.

Jahfin wrote:

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:By the way, since you seem rather fond of telling people they should do a little research before commenting on something I'd be curious to see what research you did to refute that statement. Did you poll the estimated 1.5 billion people who watched Live 8 to see how many of them were in fact REM fans?

LIPH wrote:I guess you missed this, since you didn't answer. I'll wait.]

I'm not sure how you expect me to answer it since I have no access to such information. If you can put your hands on those figures by all means do so.

LIPH wrote:Once again you miss the point. To refresh your recollection, here's what you said in response to Dsil's post earlier today: "Where do you get the impression that "most people watching live 8 arent REM fans"? R.E.M. have been touring internationally since the beginning of their career. Again, before making such false statements you would be wise to do a little research first." (emphasis added) If you think what Dsil said is false where is your supporting evidence?

The R.E.M. Timeline web site has a record of every tour they've been on since they first starting touring (http://www.remtimeline.com). International sales figures posted at REMhq.com will illustrate how well their records have sold overseas: http://www.remhq.com/flash/index.html

So they sold a lot of records and they've been touring for a long time. How does that prove, or disprove, Dsil's point that most people watching Live 8 aren't REM fans?

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:For the record, I know REM is well known (I even own one of their albums from about 1983 or '84 but I haven't listened to it in years because I got over them), has been around for a long time and in the past has been critically praised. That doesn't change my opinion that they aren't very good.

Jahfin wrote:"Your opinion" keeps entering into this conversation but it doesn't have anything to do with the dicussion at hand which is apparently that Michael Stipe was trying to draw attention away from Live 8 by wearing make up. This remains totally unsubstantiated.

LIPH wrote:I didn't, and still haven't, said anything about Michael Stipe wearing blue paint on his face.

No, you haven't but that's what started this conversation.

But I haven't mentioned it so to bring it up in response to something I said is irrelevant.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:And I stand by my point about the MTV/VH1 target audience. I know what the purpose of the Live 8 concerts was but do you really think those networks cared about raising awareness? Not to be too cynical, but if they didn't think they could pull in big numbers in the ratings they wouldn't have shown one second of Live 8.

Jahfin wrote:So your reasoning (or in this case, lack thereof) is that neither network was justified in showing R.E.M.'s performance from Live 8, who were once very prominent figures on both channels when they were known more for music than "reality" shows?

LIPH wrote:I guess those nasty reading and comprehension skills (or lack thereof) are rearing their ugly head again. I didn't say, or even imply, that MTV and VH1 weren't justified in showing REM, or any of the other performers from Live 8. What I did say, and I really wish I could type slower to help you understand, was that neither network would have shown any of Live 8 if they didn't think they could pull in big ratings numbers. MTV and VH1 are businesses, not philanthropists. Like any other business, they do what they think is in their best interest. And that means "show me the money."

So, just what is your point about MTV/VH1's coverage of Live 8 then? Do you not think that just by covering the event they were also helping to raise awareness of starvation in Africa? If that's your standpoint then what was the point of MTV providing coverage of Live Aid in 1985? Of the single "Do They Know It's Christmas?" USA For Africa? These were all events geared towards bringing attention to the cause. I don't know about you but all of these events certainly got my attention.

How many times do I have to explain things to you? If MTV and VH1 didn''t think they could make money off this they wouldn't have shown it. There was no altruism involved. Did it raise people's awareness? Well, I guess people who have been living under a rock for 20 years or so might not have been aware of what's going on in Africa so to that extent I suppose it raised awareness. However, there are some of us who are aware of what's happening in the world around us. I realize that my be difficult for you to understand, but believe me, it's true. I didn't need MTV, VH1, AOL, XM Satellite Radio or a bunch of overprivileged musicians to enlighten me.

Jahfin wrote:Maybe you still haven't figured it out but I don't give a rats ass what you or anyone else think of me. That you think I care is probably your first problem.

So you're capable of reading my mind now? You should be one p*** off anal retentive freak by time you're done.

Jahfin wrote:You also have not addressed the point that you're just as guilty of the very things you're trying to accuse me of. There's your insufferably pompous blowhard.

Please point out one instance where I called you, or anyone else here, ignorant because you didn't know something about a band or artist of whom I'm a fan? You've done it several times today alone.