BuffettNews.com

LIPH wrote:

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

LIPH wrote: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?

Because R.E.M. have been touring INTERNATIONALLY for a very long time and have also sold lots of records in those very same markets. This proves they are way more well known on a worldwide basis than DsilCaribe is aware of.

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.

LIPH wrote:I didn't need MTV, VH1, AOL, XM Satellite Radio or a bunch of overprivileged musicians to enlighten me.

LIPH wrote:

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.

Jahfin wrote: I'm referring to taking the time to do the research behind why Michael Stipe wears stage make up before accusing him of trying to bring attention to himself and not the cause at hand at Live 8.

buffettbride wrote:

Jahfin wrote: I'm referring to taking the time to do the research behind why Michael Stipe wears stage make up before accusing him of trying to bring attention to himself and not the cause at hand at Live 8.

Perhaps he was feeling a little blue that day?





*yawn*

Jahfin wrote:In case you aren't aware of it, the G8 summit is this week and no, not everyone knows about it but they do now. Just like the origins of the aid efforts back in the mid-80s. For some, it took such events as Live Aid to bring a matter like this to the attention of everyone worldwide because not everyone knew about it beforehand.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:I didn't need MTV, VH1, AOL, XM Satellite Radio or a bunch of overprivileged musicians to enlighten me.

Then why do you care so much to take part in this thread about it then? Because you think you know it all and can speak for others? I'd say that'd be about right. And you have the nerve to call me a "insufferably pompous blowhard".

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

Ilph wrote:

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

Definately.

Ilph wrote:

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

Definately.

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:

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

LIPH wrote: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?

Because R.E.M. have been touring INTERNATIONALLY for a very long time and have also sold lots of records in those very same markets. This proves they are way more well known on a worldwide basis than DsilCaribe is aware of.

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.

In case you aren't aware of it, the G8 summit is this week and no, not everyone knows about it but they do now. Just like the origins of the aid efforts back in the mid-80s. For some, it took such events as Live Aid to bring a matter like this to the attention of everyone worldwide because not everyone knew about it beforehand. It doesn't matter to me if VH1 or MTV provided coverage for monetary reasons, the messsage getting out there is the most important point.

LIPH wrote:I didn't need MTV, VH1, AOL, XM Satellite Radio or a bunch of overprivileged musicians to enlighten me.

Then why do you care so much to take part in this thread about it then? Because you think you know it all and can speak for others? I'd say that'd be about right. And you have the nerve to call me a "insufferably pompous blowhard".

nycparrothead wrote:

Ilph wrote:

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

Definately.

I was always a big fan of douchehammer, but again, asshat trumps it!

Ilph wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:

Ilph wrote:

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

Definately.

I was always a big fan of douchehammer, but again, asshat trumps it!

I think asshat is always the go to trump card.

DsilCaribe wrote:

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

buffettbride wrote:

Ilph wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:

Ilph wrote:

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

Definately.

I was always a big fan of douchehammer, but again, asshat trumps it!

I think asshat is always the go to trump card.

I'd have to agree. It's the pinnacle of all things Jah.

Tiki Bar wrote:

DsilCaribe wrote:

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

Vote for Pedro!!

Ilph wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

Ilph wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:

Ilph wrote:

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

Definately.

I was always a big fan of douchehammer, but again, asshat trumps it!

I think asshat is always the go to trump card.

I'd have to agree. It's the pinnacle of all things Jah.

I like to use it with a lot of people. Just ask my dog. I call her an asshat all the time.

buffettbride wrote:

Ilph wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

Ilph wrote:

nycparrothead wrote:

Ilph wrote: Definately.

I was always a big fan of douchehammer, but again, asshat trumps it!

I think asshat is always the go to trump card.

I'd have to agree. It's the pinnacle of all things Jah.

I like to use it with a lot of people. Just ask my dog. I call her an asshat all the time.

That is most excellent. Not really suitable nickname for my kids though. Husband perhaps?

LIPH wrote:

Jahfin wrote:In case you aren't aware of it, the G8 summit is this week and no, not everyone knows about it but they do now. Just like the origins of the aid efforts back in the mid-80s. For some, it took such events as Live Aid to bring a matter like this to the attention of everyone worldwide because not everyone knew about it beforehand.

And if people took the time to inform themselves they WOULD know about things like this. I didn't need Live 8 to tell me about the problems in Africa, or the G8 summit. I already knew. And I feel sorry for anyone who's capable of reading who was so uninformed as to need something like this to open their eyes.

LIPH wrote:I don't see the harm in something like Live Aid, the Concert for Bangledesh, Live 8, etc. if they help bring more awareness to this cause. Not everyone throughout the entire world has the advantage of 24 hours news channels or other sources of knowledge to be informed of such issues so I don't see anything the matter with these events..

Jahfin wrote:

LIPH wrote:I didn't need MTV, VH1, AOL, XM Satellite Radio or a bunch of overprivileged musicians to enlighten me.

Then why do you care so much to take part in this thread about it then? Because you think you know it all and can speak for others? I'd say that'd be about right. And you have the nerve to call me a "insufferably pompous blowhard".

LIPH wrote:I take part in this thread for the same reason you so often state, I can post whatever I want wherever I want. Unless that only applies to you. What is it you always say about people putting words in your mouth? I never said I know it all. I said I was already aware of the problems Live 8 was addressing. I also never claimed to speak for anyone but myself. How you can infer otherwise is beyond me. Unless you're assuming facts not in evidence.

LIPH wrote:I think I've already stated, more than once, that I never said anything about what Michael Stipe was wearing. Maybe your attention span is too short to remember. I was merely responding to your post. I am allowed to do that, aren't I?