Why all the pop hate?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



EPIIIBITES
I find it kinda weird how so many people in here diss pop music. And I'm talking about your typical pop music, not simply bands that play on popular radio like My Chemical Romance (who IMO are more s*%# than most pop acts out there today).

Really, this has mostly to do with people just being afraid of associating themselves with pop songs or artists because of the bad rap (and often rightfully so) they've gotten in the past.

But this "pop sucks" attitude has just become old, and as far as I've seen it's usually people who show insecurities when talking about bands they like, and who don't seem to have the abilities to know what good music is.

There's good music in pretty much every genre, but when it comes to pop, people so smugly brush it aside. Lame.

Just off the top of my head, Destiny's Child, Justin Timberlake, Lily Allen, Nelly Furtado, Sean Paul, Missy Elliot, Avril Lavigne, Black Eyes Peas, and Madonna have all laid down some solid pop tracks over recent years. Granted they probably have shitty albums, but they do what they do best and give us a couple songs each like "Get Busy", "Don't Phunk with My Heart", "Bootylicious", "Smile", "Music", or "Like I Love You" that we can listen to for a couple weeks and then forget about.

Sure it's pop...but it's not all that bad.

Nellinator
Out of that list I admit to liking Avril Lavigne at times. I honestly hate everyone else in that list. I do like some pop artists though, like David Gray and James Blunt although far less than my other music.

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Nellinator
I do like some pop artists though...although far less than my other music. That, I agree with.

Go Canucks Go!

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Nellinator
Out of that list I admit to liking Avril Lavigne at times.
I'd say she's probably the weakest on that list in terms of hit singles..."I'm With You" and "Happy Ending" are good pop tunes, but the rest I'd say are mediocre...not horrible though (except for that latest one, "Girlfriend"...pretty darn weak).

manorastroman
because sean paul, destiny's child, avril lavigne and nelly furtado all suck pretty bad.

madonna (circa two decades ago), lily allen, justin timberlake, missy elliot, and the black eyed peas all have defendable qualities.

by the way, a good pop song isn't one you listen to for a couple weeks and forget about, it's one you listen to for a couple of weeks and NEVER forget about.

Bardock42
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
give us a couple songs each like "Get Busy", "Don't Phunk with My Heart", "Bootylicious", "Smile", "Music", or "Like I Love You" that we can listen to for a couple weeks and then forget about.


For one I don't think they do. It's mostly shit. And there are also the artists that give us songs we can listen to all our lives and never forget about....I dunno. Prefer those.

vintageSW77
most of todays pop stars are nothing but dancers more concerned with the "look" rather the product
product being the right term


Madonna is just a fad hopping shadow of her former self
she changes herself so much i think she no longer knows who the **** she is
whilst definatly being responsible for a lot of classic pop songs in the past nowadays she tries way too hard to keep up with"the kids" and trends hence Timbaland doing her next lp

Lily Allen is just some spoilt daddys girl playing the part of a ladette over backing tracks that were better suited to Terry Hall or Suggs circa 1979
and Sean Paul is hard work to listen to
****ing terrible
its music for the moronic
modern black culture and commercial dance has killed the pop song
its just music for chicks to try clothes on in Top Shop to
All they are is just a bunch of ****ing ringtone kings and queens

manorastroman
Originally posted by vintageSW77
most of todays pop stars are nothing but dancers more concerned with the "look" rather the product
product being the right term


Madonna is just a fad hopping shadow of her former self
she changes herself so much i think she no longer knows who the **** she is
whilst definatly being responsible for a lot of classic pop songs in the past nowadays she tries way too hard to keep up with"the kids" and trends hence Timbaland doing her next lp

Lily Allen is just some spoilt daddys girl playing the part of a ladette over backing tracks that were better suited to Terry Hall or Suggs circa 1979
and Sean Paul is hard work to listen to
****ing terrible
its music for the moronic
modern black culture and commercial dance has killed the pop song
its just music for chicks to try clothes on in Top Shop to
All they are is just a bunch of ****ing ringtone kings and queens

i agree with much of this, except the lily allen bit. lady sovereign tried the daddy's girl angle and got taken down with a choicely worded comment. the girl's solid (at least i like her more than amy winehouse, the "other" brassy english pop star).

but modern black culture killing chart pop isn't so bad; now the pop underground is better than it's ever been. bands are drawing from tin pan alley, brill building, sunshine, twee, and just about every other phase of pop history.

jaden101
i dislike pop music more for what it inspires rather than what it is...without the drivel of boy and girl band pop music we wouldn't have pop idol and the x factor...therefor we wouldn't have dancing on ice and strictly come dancing...and we would have the new fad of west end musical selection programmes such as "what to do about a problem like maria" and "any dream will do" and "grease the musical" that seem to be infecting tv

it encourages the lowest common denomenator of music...

it lowers an art form to a commercial commodity designed specifically to make money rather than to be a form of expression.

vintageSW77
i have happened to be in close vicinity of Lily Allen years before she released a single and she was a major pain in the arse
i was lucky enough to attend at a party for Manc drug fiend Bez out of the Happy Mondays through my ex GFs fathers past connections with Factory records and the the late Rob Gretton a few years back and Lilly was there with her dad Keith Allen and i kid you not the also late JOE ****ING STRUMMER amongst a couple of minor mancunian celebs
she was nothing like she appears onstage
granted she was prob only 15 but what a tosspot

suddenly shes a street wise chick with a mockney accent
shes a faker

EPIIIBITES
I can't argue with pretty much anything that's been said. I'd be a fool to, becasue at the end of the day, I know how much I really despise pop music as a whole and how many times it's made me wanna throw something at the radio or tv becasue of how bad it can be.

Still, none of the artists I listed full out suck. If you guys can't see the difference between some of their hits, and...say...Britney Spears' hits, then I'd have to say you don't have a clue.

vintageSW77
or just a total weariness of listening to pricks going on about how ****ing fantastic they are e.g Sean ****ing Diddy ****ing Jean or whatever name the dicks call him by this week
its all about RnB and **** all else is pop nowadays
even Gwen Stefani who i would say made a brilliant pop song in WHAT YOU WAITING FOR had to go and jump on the bandwagon and get that nightmare AKON involved in her latest track which from what i hear wasnt even worth the no dout shitload of $$$ she paid for the pleasure

im the wrong person to comment on RnB pop hip hop as i cant put into words how much i ****ing despise it
i cant stand back and say "surely some of it must be ok" because ive gone way beyond that
the majority of knobs who listen to it think it automatically associates themselves with a certain lifestyle
and thats one of the reasons i dislike it
its turned the majority of teens near where i live into wannabe gangstah arseholes
ive always disliked people blaming a pop culture element for kids bad behaviour but with these brain dead ****wits its totally justified

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by vintageSW77
its just music for chicks to try clothes on in Top Shop to laughing Might just be.

jaden101
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES


Still, none of the artists I listed full out suck. If you guys can't see the difference between some of their hits, and...say...Britney Spears' hits, then I'd have to say you don't have a clue.

they aren't shit for what reason?...because the ones you listed try and put in little bits of more respectable genres into their pop music?

avril putting a little distortion in her guitars and painting her nails black...black eyed peas (who actually used to be pretty good pre "request line"wink days using tiny smatterings of their old hip hop

lily allen cause she sings with a stupid accent that garage and rnb artists in the UK use

how do these things mean they are less shit?...if anything it makes them more shit...at least full pop acts wear their shallow hearts on their sleeves and dont try to pretend they're something they're not.

manorastroman
lily allen plain does not deserve do be lumped in with avril lavigne, regardless of her father or her personality at age fifteen. her music is leagues beyond avril/sean paul/destiny's child whathaveyou.

plus, she comes off fantastic in interviews.

and britney spears' "toxic" might be better than any song by any of the artists mentioned.

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by jaden101
they aren't shit for what reason?

how do these things mean they are less shit? They're not shit because they've all released solid pop tunes. I don't care if you agree because I think I know what constitutes good and crap music better than most anyone...that's just how I am. But I also know when to sometimes say, "I don't know if that's good or crap" regardless if I like it or not.

Don't think that just because you're on a board with people who talk about music, means you're talking to people who are good judges of music. Some people are better than others...that's just the way it is (and most often than not it's people who are musically inclined, which I'd say most people in here aren't).

As far as I've seen, most people who discuss their opinions here are still are at a point where they can't even separate the music they like from what they can admit is good or bad music. That tells me a lot about what level they're at in terms of being good judges of music.

So whatever...you're right...all these pop artists suck. Sure. We thank you for your contribution. You're exactly the kind of person I made this thread for.

vintageSW77
Originally posted by manorastroman
plus, she comes off fantastic in interviews.



i watched her Planet rock Profile interview yesterday and ive seen a few others
she hasnt changed much
we have a phenomena in the uk where celebs deny their roots and adopt a fake mockney accent to appear street
we have shitloads of them
Lilly is one deffo
and her tunes are just Ska lite for those too young to remember
people go on as if shes doing something truly original just because she wears ball gowns,says a few rude words,smokes ****,swigs booze onstage and puts out a bit of Jools Holland style MOR wanky ska for people who dont remember The Belle Stars
shes not so far off from her hated Paris Hiltons UB40 tribute track from last year

she doesnt give much thought to her fans either with her recent cancelation of her mini tour "because shes bored of singing the same songs and misses her boyfriends couch"
JB must be turning in his grave

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by manorastroman
and britney spears' "toxic" might be better than any song by any of the artists mentioned.
I'd say by far that's got to be the best thing she's done, but I think it's just trying to sound a lot cooler than it is. Maybe it's the pretentious faux out-of-tune electro strings...or 'cause Brittney's singing it and she's the biggest dork to ever hit the pop scene that I can't by her delivery. I don't know. It's just nerdy.

Like the video though wink

jaden101
i'm glad you have a high opinion of yourself...



you are a case in point



lucky for me that i know what i'm talking about then isn't it?

now i'm not saying there isn't good pop music because there is...Michael Jackson, Elton John, Basement Jaxx...many more besides...all geared toward pop...all have genuinly good tunes...

but for the most part, modern pop is uninspired and uninspiring drivel...which spawns more drivel

sometimes this is promoted by good artists...i like the streets...but Lily Allen and Just Jack wouldn't be on the scene if it wasn't for Mike Skinner's success...it called cashing in...and far too many people fall for it...even ones who claim to be good judges of music...apparently

manorastroman
Originally posted by vintageSW77
i watched her Planet rock Profile interview yesterday and ive seen a few others
she hasnt changed much
we have a phenomena in the uk where celebs deny their roots and adopt a fake mockney accent to appear street
we have shitloads of them
Lilly is one deffo
and her tunes are just Ska lite for those too young to remember
people go on as if shes doing something truly original just because she wears ball gowns,says a few rude words,smokes ****,swigs booze onstage and puts out a bit of Jools Holland style MOR wanky ska for people who dont remember The Belle Stars
shes not so far off from her hated Paris Hiltons UB40 tribute track from last year

she doesnt give much thought to her fans either with her recent cancelation of her mini tour "because shes bored of singing the same songs and misses her boyfriends couch"
JB must be turning in his grave

calling her ska-lite is kind of weird--did i say weird? i meant way off base. she has some raga beat and horns, but really...

and frankly, i don't care if her persona is phony. it's not like i'll ever meet her. i'm content with her complete annihilation of lady sovereign and those LILY ALLEN! adverts. she has solid songs and she seems like fun. i want nothing else from a pop star.

vintageSW77
its pretty much the late 70s incarnation of Ska

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by manorastroman
lily allen plain does not deserve do be lumped in with avril lavigne, regardless of her father or her personality at age fifteen. her music is leagues beyond avril/sean paul/destiny's child whathaveyou.
Yeah, I really don't get people who think Lily Allen is s*%#. Regardless if they don't like her music, I find it amazing how they can deny how solid and fresh a pop album she's made.

When your single is rated #7 in Rolling Stone's top 100 of 2006, and when your album is pretty much unanimously a critical success, your music doesn't suck I'm afraid to say.

But people don't like her...so they say she sucks...good logic.

manorastroman
Originally posted by vintageSW77
its pretty much the late 70s incarnation of Ska

which, to be fair, i'm unfamiliar with. i'ma go play in the park!

nuts

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by jaden101
lucky for me that i know what i'm talking about then isn't it?
Sorry. I'm afraid you don't. You implied that all these artists are s#*%. a). I can assure you they're not, and b). I don't think anybody here would agree with you.

Maybe you should consider the possibility that you might not be open-minded enough to determine what's good in modern day pop music (and the Streets or Basement Jaxx isn't the sort of pop music we've been talking about).

...and of course MJ and Elton John are good. That's a no-brainer.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I find it kinda weird how so many people in here diss pop music. And I'm talking about your typical pop music, not simply bands that play on popular radio like My Chemical Romance (who IMO are more s*%# than most pop acts out there today).

Really, this has mostly to do with people just being afraid of associating themselves with pop songs or artists because of the bad rap (and often rightfully so) they've gotten in the past.

But this "pop sucks" attitude has just become old, and as far as I've seen it's usually people who show insecurities when talking about bands they like, and who don't seem to have the abilities to know what good music is.

There's good music in pretty much every genre, but when it comes to pop, people so smugly brush it aside. Lame.

Just off the top of my head, Destiny's Child, Justin Timberlake, Lily Allen, Nelly Furtado, Sean Paul, Missy Elliot, Avril Lavigne, Black Eyes Peas, and Madonna have all laid down some solid pop tracks over recent years. Granted they probably have shitty albums, but they do what they do best and give us a couple songs each like "Get Busy", "Don't Phunk with My Heart", "Bootylicious", "Smile", "Music", or "Like I Love You" that we can listen to for a couple weeks and then forget about.

Sure it's pop...but it's not all that bad.

No, you see, you're confusing the issue.

I like any music as long as I personally think it's good. I'm not going to like music just for the sake of it. If someone made a pop album today that I liked, I'd admit to liking it. I like Michael Jackson, I like Diana Ross & The Supremes (Who I guess had pop influence.) etc.

You're right, there's good music in every genre, but none of the artists you named, to me, are any good at all. The fact that you either like their songs or think you HAVE to, just for the sake of not brushing them aside, doesn't detract from me not thinking they are good. It's an excuse to make you feel better about liking some shit music. You obviously expect us to all go "Yes they're shit, but we like them.", which just...makes zero sense.

You obviously believe we have to give them credit for trying. We don't, they can jump off bridges as far as I'm concerned. All they're good for is keeping idiots away from the good stuff.

Lily Allen is shit, fake and possibly the biggest poser in recent UK music history. As I have proven, you're an anglophile. You like almost anything English. You can't assure anybody she isn't shit. Music taste is subjective, we've been over this. There's no objectively good music. I'm not going to lump Lily Allen with Avril Lavigne because her music is better, in my opinion. I'm not going to say she's worse than she is just because I dislike her music, but I think it's shit, just like you think it's good. Neither of us are "right" or "wrong".

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
...and of course MJ and Elton John are good. That's a no-brainer.

Not to everyone. They're not factually good.

-AC

manorastroman
why do people keep mentioning lily allen's presumed poserness? even if you were good friends with her and could assure without a doubt her phony nature, who the hell cares? she's a pop star, she makes good pop music.

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri



Not to everyone. They're not factually good.

-AC

not to start this up again, but what exactly are you trying to accomplish? do you want people to preface every opinion with "i think" or "most critics agree"?

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, you see, you're confusing the issue.

I like any music as long as I personally think it's good... You know I'll disagree. 'Cause there is good and s*$% music...but let's not go there.

The way I see things, you like any music becasue...you like it. That's it. I'd say whether you think it's good or not is a seperate issue.

But whatever.

Alpha Centauri
To you, not to me, Manor. To me she makes shit music.

She could be the most genuine woman on Earth, but to me, she makes shit music.

EPIIIBITES likes her because he feels she gives a good account of London life, because he's from a faaaar away land. This is why I call her a poser, because she's not giving a real account of anything. It's not presumed, I know for a fact she's a poser.

-AC

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
not to start this up again, but what exactly are you trying to accomplish? do you want people to preface every opinion with "i think" or "most critics agree"?

What's your point? They're not factually good are they? Someone isn't wrong for thinking they are not good, which is what Epibites is implying.

-AC

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You know I'll disagree. 'Cause there is good and s*$% music...but let's not go there.

The way I see things, you like any music becasue you like it. That's it. I'd say whether you think it's good or not is a seperate issue.

But whatever.

You're wrong, though.

The FACT is, there's no such thing as factually good music or factually bad music, no matter how "obvious.". As me and almost everyone else had proven to you before. So maybe it's best for you if we don't go there.

Critics agreeing on something means nothing.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
EPIIIBITES likes her because he feels she gives a good account of London life, because he's from a faaaar away land. This is why I call her a poser, because she's not giving a real account of anything. It's not presumed, I know for a fact she's a poser.

-AC
I like her because first and formeost she has good music.

Alpha Centauri
In your opinion.

-AC

Nellinator
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'd say she's probably the weakest on that list in terms of hit singles..."I'm With You" and "Happy Ending" are good pop tunes, but the rest I'd say are mediocre...not horrible though (except for that latest one, "Girlfriend"...pretty darn weak). I like the song Unwanted... that's pretty much it... oh and Complicated is kinda catchy... and I'm Canadian so I have to give the love to the Canadian artists even though Canadian bands seem to be a hit on this forum.

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You're wrong, though.

The FACT is, there's no such thing as factually good music or factually bad music, no matter how "obvious.". As me and almost everyone else had proven to you before. So maybe it's best for you if we don't go there.
It can't be a proven fact, but I'd say it's a truth.

manorastroman
no, not factually. but considering the lengthy back-n-forths on the subject, it seems like you could just mentally insert the subtext of "i'm epiiibites and this is what i think" instead of bumping in with the "it's not fact" thing everytime he gives an opinion. because, you know, otherwise we'd have to start with the prefaces.

and you couldn't say somebody was wrong, or even that they had bad taste, but once again, it's not like critics review albums purely subjectively. there ARE aesthetic perimiters. (i sincerely hoped i would never type that phrase again)

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by Nellinator
I like the song Unwanted... that's pretty much it... oh and Complicated is kinda catchy... and I'm Canadian so I have to give the love to the Canadian artists even though Canadian bands seem to be a hit on this forum.

What bs is that? You don't HAVE to give love to her because she's Canadian.

You have to like her because she was born in the same country? Ridiculous.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
I think he was only being half-serious.

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What bs is that? You don't HAVE to give love to her because she's Canadian.

You have to like her because she was born in the same country? Ridiculous.

-AC

well i mean...it's not FACTUALLY ridiculous. vin

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
no, not factually. but considering the lengthy back-n-forths on the subject, it seems like you could just mentally insert the subtext of "i'm epiiibites and this is what i think" instead of bumping in with the "it's not fact" thing everytime he gives an opinion. because, you know, otherwise we'd have to start with the prefaces.

and you couldn't say somebody was wrong, or even that they had bad taste, but once again, it's not like critics review albums purely subjectively. there ARE aesthetic perimiters. (i sincerely hoped i would never type that phrase again)

What you fail to understand is, he doesn't think it's his opinion, he actually believes Lily Allen makes factually and undeniably good music. This is the problem, because he debates from the stance of there being no subjectivity in taste. Or there being objectivity in taste.

You can go on about whatever you want aesthetically, it doesn't change the stone cold fact that there is no right or wrong in taste. There are objective areas which make people better musicians, but as far as personally interpreting the music, it's all subjective. Fact.

If you know this, stop trying to pipe up with little tidbits.

Originally posted by manorastroman
well i mean...it's not FACTUALLY ridiculous. vin

Who said it was? Playing the smart-ass doesn't work for you.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
It can't be a proven fact, but I'd say it's a truth.

Truth is fact. A fact is an undeniable truth. You're being an idiot.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

If you know this, stop trying to pipe up with little tidbits.

-AC

i could say the same to you. i'm not ignorant of epiiibites' beliefs, but i don't ****ing care about them, and it gets annoying when a simple phrase of his derails an entire thread because you can't let him go on thinking whatever he wants.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
i could say the same to you. i'm not ignorant of epiiibites' beliefs, but i don't ****ing care about them, and it gets annoying when a simple phrase of his derails an entire thread because you can't let him go on thinking whatever he wants.

I'm not ignorant of his beliefs either, he has EVERY right on Earth to like what he likes. I would defend his right or anybody else's right to that. He does need to accept that he is wrong, though. In terms of "It's truth she makes good music.". It's not. It's opinion.

The problem is, we're trying to debate and it's flawed from the start, why? Because he is debating from a factually incorrect stance.

-AC

jaden101
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES


Maybe you should consider the possibility that you might not be open-minded enough to determine what's good in modern day pop music



i'd say my last update of myspace music section disagrees with you and that i've heard enough good music and enough bad music to know the difference.

22-20's, 80's matchbox b line disaster, aberfeldy, alanis morrissette, alice in chains, ambulance ltd, amos lee, andreas johnston, anthony and the johnstons, ari hest, athlete, augustana, basement jaxx, bayside, ben folds, ben harper, ben lee, bernard fanning, beth orton, bethany dillon, biffy clyro, bishop allen, black rebel motorcycle club, bloc party, blue nile, blue oyster cult, bob dylan, bob marley, bobby womack, bonnie sommerville, brendon benson, british sea power, BT, buzzcocks, cadence weapon, caitlin cary, cardinals, cary brothers, cary pierce, chicane, clap your hands say yeah,CSS, colin hay, corrine bailley rae, counting crows, daft punk, daisy chapman, damien rice, dashboard confessional, daughter darling, dave matthews band, david gray, david kitt, david mead, deanna varagona, death cab for cutie, devendra banhart, dire straits, donovan frankenreiter, doves, eels, elliott smith, elton john, envy corps, erik mongrain, eshbjorn svensson trio, eva cassidy, faith no more, five for fighting, frou frou, G.love and special sauce, gavin degraw, george thorogood, gnarles barkley,gogol bordello, golden smog, goo goo dolls, guns n roses, halflight, hard fi, haven, hootie and the blow fish,hundred reasons, idlewild, incubus, inward eye, inxs, iron and wine, izzy stradlin, jack johnson, jackson brown, james brown, jeff buckley, jefferson airplane, jesse malin, jet, jewel, jimi hendrix, john butler trio, john cougar mellencamp, john mayer, john williams, jonathan jordan, joni mitchell, jordis unga, jose gonzalez, josh groban, josh ritter, josh rouse, joy division, justin nozuka, kaiser chiefs, kathleen edwards, KD lang, keane, kings of leon, leftfield, leona naess, Lionel Neykov, lionel ritchie, live, lowgold, madeliene peyroux, magneta lane, manic street preachers, mark cohn, martha and the muffins, marvin gaye, massive attack, matchbox 20, maximo park, metallica, michael jackson, midlake, minus the bear, minuteman, mr bungle, mofro, mogwai, morning runner, my vitriol, mystery jets , neil young, NERD, new order, new radicals, nine black alps, NIN, norah jones, oasis, of montreal, old crow medicine show, orson, otis reading, over the rhine, paolo nutini, patrick park, pete yorn, powderfinger, punchline, queen, REM, radiohead, ray lamontagne, razorlight, red hot chili peppers. remy zero, robert randolph, rocco deluca, rufus wainwright, ryan adams, sarah mclaughlan, scissor sisters, Scott Matthews, seal, semisonic, sigur ros, simon and garfunkell, sly and the family stone, snow patrol, stellastar, stephen fretwell, stephen kellogg, stereophonics, stevie wonder, stone temple pilots, sufjan stevens, the animals, the aurora, the beautiful girls, the bees, the blueskins, the bravery, the coral, the corrs, the cranberries, the datsuns, the decemberists, the delays, the faint, the feeling, the futureheads, the gossip, the go! team, the hives, the killers, the kooks, the leaves, the libertines, the little willies, the lovely feathers, the meligrove band, the mighty bosstones, the pattern, the postal service, the raconteurs, the rakes, the rolling stones, the rumble strips, the shins , the split canvas, the stands, the streets, the strokes, the subways, the sundays, the thrills, the unknown, the vines, the waifs, the walkabouts, the white stripes. the who, the zutons, this world fair, tim buckley, tom mcrae, trace bundy, tracy chapman, train, travis, turin brakes, tyler bates, U2, ugly kid joe, unkle, vanessa carlton, velvet revolver, vertical horizon, vonda shepard, whiskeytown, white rose movement, wilco, willard grant conspiracy, willie nelson, wintersleep, wolfmother, xavier rudd, yeah yeah yeahs, zero seven



why not?...you want to discuss good pop music...and once again...you wouldn't have lily allen if it wasn't for mike skinner's popularity...so to not discuss him would be silly




i'm glad we agree on something...

manorastroman
INTENSE FLASHBACK to the impasse of the original subjectivity debates. since this thread is apparently going nowhere (being initially flawed and all 313 ) i'd like to mention that things came to a halt when you couldn't understand the difference between liking/disliking something and thinking it's good/crap...which i still don't get. elucidate, please.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
INTENSE FLASHBACK to the impasse of the original subjectivity debates. since this thread is apparently going nowhere (being initially flawed and all 313 ) i'd like to mention that things came to a halt when you couldn't understand the difference between liking/disliking something and thinking it's good/crap...which i still don't get. elucidate, please.

It's illogical to assume any logic contained in "I think this is crap, but I like it.". You obviously don't think it's crap if you like it, you just think you have to believe that.

Nobody seeks out music they think is crap, nobody likes music they think is crap. People just feel guilty, which is why there should be no guilty pleasures. Like what you like and don't be ashamed.

There's no factual good or bad in taste, if you do not understand that, then leave the debate.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Led Zeppelin = Filet Mignon

Hillary Duff = Spam

wink


And for the purposes of this thread, I guess I'd say...

Black Eyed Peas = A Whopper

Alpha Centauri
Here comes the idiocy again.

-AC

Nellinator
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What bs is that? You don't HAVE to give love to her because she's Canadian.

You have to like her because she was born in the same country? Ridiculous.

-AC laughing Being Canadian has nothing to do with it, however, there are benefits to supporting Canadian music and local acts. You, however, are taking this way too serious.

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's illogical to assume any logic contained in "I think this is crap, but I like it.". You obviously don't think it's crap if you like it, you just think you have to believe that.

Nobody seeks out music they think is crap, nobody likes music they think is crap. People just feel guilty, which is why there should be no guilty pleasures. Like what you like and don't be ashamed.

There's no factual good or bad in taste, if you do not understand that, then leave the debate.

-AC

i think that first "obviously" is the trouble. and please, don't conceit to know everybody's psychology. are you in the least qualified to make statements like "nobody seeks out music they think is crap, nobody likes music they think is crap, you obviously don't think it's crap if you like it"?


and if i did understand that on your terms, there would BE no debate. i realize there's no factual crap, but i think you understand that something can be in the direction of fact. they're called gray areas.

Originally posted by Nellinator
You, however, are taking this way too serious.

it's kind of his trademark.

jaden101
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Led Zeppelin = Filet Mignon

Hillary Duff = Spam

wink


And for the purposes of this thread, I guess I'd say...

Black Eyed Peas = A Whopper

cue the "EPIIIBITES loves big whoppers in his mouth" jokes

Alpha Centauri
Even if it's shit?

Why does every debate have to be chock full of comedy and smilies? Yes, I'm here to debate, big whoop. Not sure where that "You take it too seriously." bs came from.

-AC

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
i think that first "obviously" is the trouble. and please, don't conceit to know everybody's psychology. are you in the least qualified to make statements like "nobody seeks out music they think is crap, nobody likes music they think is crap, you obviously don't think it's crap if you like it"?

and if i did understand that on your terms, there would BE no debate. i realize there's no factual crap, but i think you understand that something can be in the direction of fact. they're called gray areas.

Eg: It's as close to a fact as possible without being one that Jimi Hendrix is better than Britney Spears, but it's not ACTUALLY a fact. As much as we'd all love it to be, it's not.

Secondly, people may very well seek out crap music, intentionally, you're right. The point is, logically, you cannot like something that you so vehemently dislike. It makes zero sense. You cannot sit there saying "This music is CRAP, total crap, but I do like it.". It makes no sense.

What is probably meant, is "I know this music isn't of the highest credibility, but I enjoy it.". If that's the case, say it. Don't be ashamed, you've already made the leap to liking the stuff. The only reason people say "This is crap!" is some kind of subconscious attempt at atoning, and yes, I'm making that judgement call.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by jaden101
why not?...you want to discuss good pop music...
Because I don't think The Streets or Basement Jaxx are your typical pop artists. I was attempting at the beginning of the thread to explain it's about typical pop artists...not just artists who are on popular radio.

I'm talking about the audience you're likely to get at a Nelly Furtado, Justin Timberlake, or Destiny's Child concert, as opposed to a Streets concert.

The Streets or Basement Jaxx are miles apart (and miles better) than most pop music.

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Eg: It's as close to a fact as possible without being one that Jimi Hendrix is better than Britney Spears, but it's not ACTUALLY a fact. As much as we'd all love it to be, it's not.

Secondly, people may very well seek out crap music, intentionally, you're right. The point is, logically, you cannot like something that you so vehemently dislike. It makes zero sense. You cannot sit there saying "This music is CRAP, total crap, but I do like it.". It makes no sense.

What is probably meant, is "I know this music isn't of the highest credibility, but I enjoy it.". If that's the case, say it. Don't be ashamed, you've already made the leap to liking the stuff. The only reason people say "This is crap!" is some kind of subconscious attempt at atoning, and yes, I'm making that judgement call.

-AC

you putting forth two very opposing methods. you're saying that one ought to be direct and unashamed, but saying "i know this music isn't of the highest credibility" is essentially a dressed up, indirect way of saying "this is crap".

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Truth is fact. A fact is an undeniable truth. You're being an idiot.
Chill bro.Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Eg: It's as close to a fact as possible without being one that Jimi Hendrix is better than Britney Spears, but it's not ACTUALLY a fact. As much as we'd all love it to be, it's not.

What is probably meant, is "I know this music isn't of the highest credibility, but I enjoy it.". If that's the case, say it. Don't be ashamed, you've already made the leap to liking the stuff. The only reason people say "This is crap!" is some kind of subconscious attempt at atoning, and yes, I'm making that judgement call.

-AC
Everything you're saying here is right on.

Personally, I regularly admit I like what I'd consider isn't the best of music...but I also admit I like what I think is total crap (and I still maintain you can make a statement like that).

And yeah, Jimi > Brittney is not a fact...but c'mooooon. big grin

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Because I don't think The Streets or Basement Jaxx are your typical pop artists. I was attempting at the beginning of the thread to explain it's about typical pop artists...not just artists who are on popular radio.

I'm talking about the audience you're likely to get at a Nelly Furtado, Justin Timberlake, or Destiny's Child concert, as opposed to a Streets concert.

The Streets or Basement Jaxx are miles apart (and miles better) than most pop music.

So basically you want us to stop brushing aside pop music that we think is shit, just so we...didn't brush them aside? You asked why there's pop hate, we said there isn't, so you used hate-worthy artists as comparison. This seems to be nothing more than justification for YOU liking them, a big thread to make yourself feel better.

Originally posted by manorastroman
you putting forth two very opposing methods. you're saying that one ought to be direct and unashamed, but saying "i know this music isn't of the highest credibility" is essentially a dressed up, indirect way of saying "this is crap".

Of course it's not. I'm saying don't be ashamed of liking any music, why should you be? The only opinion that should matter to you is your own. Why be ashamed of liking Justin just because loads of people would say you're being stupid? It shouldn't matter to Epibites that I think he has shit taste cos he likes Lily Allen, Justin and Backstreet Boys, he likes them, so they're good to him. Nobody else's opinion should matter.

They are less credible in the musical community than say, a Rush whatever, but that doesn't mean he can't like them. THAT is why people often say "THIS IS CRAP! I KNOW IT'S CRAP!", because they want the people who WOULD diss, to say "Oh, well at least he knows...".

Why? Why not just like what you like? Yes, Backstreet Boys are less credible, but so what? He likes them.

Don't be ashamed, don't feel you have to justify yourself for liking less credible artists, but don't come out and act as if you think it's crap, cos you don't. It's just an attempt at covering tracks.

-AC

manorastroman
you might be looking to deeply into it. i'm fairly sure "this is crap" in the non-exclamatory, non-angry sense is the same as "less credible".

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
This seems to be nothing more than justification for YOU liking them, a big thread to make yourself feel better.
laughing That's it. Of course.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Don't be ashamed, don't feel you have to justify yourself for liking less credible artists, but don't come out and act as if you think it's crap, cos you don't. It's just an attempt at covering tracks.

-AC
I went on record from the start of this thread to say that these are good artists with good songs. What in the world are you talking about?


...actually, please don't answer that. It seems you're just here to argue again and simply can't handle what I'm saying about good and bad music.

Forget it.

Nellinator
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Eg: It's as close to a fact as possible without being one that Jimi Hendrix is better than Britney Spears, but it's not ACTUALLY a fact. As much as we'd all love it to be, it's not. No, you are completely wrong. This is not close to being fact. Sorry but this falls in the realm of subjectivity.

EPIIIBITES
That's right...it's not a fact that can be proven...but it's a truth that exists.

Jimi > Brittney is true. Whether you're able to see it or not through your own subjective means is irrelevant. Whether it can be proven is irrelevant. Whether you happen to like Brittney over Jimi is irrelevant.

Jimi > Brittney. It's just the truth. I've always said I can't make a statement like that about most music. But certain music is so bad, that it can safely be called crap. Brittney is crap.

Black Eyed Peas on the other hand make music that probably has the same audience as Brittney, but they're not crap. In fact, they have made some good music...and I happen to like it.

Nellinator
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Even if it's shit?

Why does every debate have to be chock full of comedy and smilies? Yes, I'm here to debate, big whoop. Not sure where that "You take it too seriously." bs came from.

-AC It comes from the FACT that you spend less time actually debating music and more time caught in your alpha male mentality and attacking people's syntax. Also, if you are here to debate you will take into consideration jests and obvious hyperbole so as to be constructive. You do not = alpha male syndrome.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by Nellinator
No, you are completely wrong. This is not close to being fact. Sorry but this falls in the realm of subjectivity.

Yes, that was my point, you idiot. As "obvious" as it is, it's still subjective.

Originally posted by Nellinator
It comes from the FACT that you spend less time actually debating music and more time caught in your alpha male mentality and attacking people's syntax. Also, if you are here to debate you will take into consideration jests and obvious hyperbole so as to be constructive. You do not = alpha male syndrome.

If you want to talk about being constructive, maybe you should be concentrating on the person debating from a point of view that has been proven factually wrong on a great number of occasions. This is a good topic to debate, but the fact that people can't accept when they are wrong is something that prevents constructive debate.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I went on record from the start of this thread to say that these are good artists with good songs. What in the world are you talking about?


...actually, please don't answer that. It seems you're just here to argue again and simply can't handle what I'm saying about good and bad music.

Forget it.

Stop saying that everyone can't handle it whenever you're being questioned. The fact is, you are wrong in the stance you hold. I've proven it and so have many others. Your inability to accept this is what prevents you from indulging in any progressive debate, because you always raise inherently incorrect points based on your already incorrect point of view.

Originally posted by manorastroman
i'm fairly sure "this is crap" in the non-exclamatory, non-angry sense is the same as "less credible".

It's not, and I have just explained in detail to you why it isn't.

It's not always about me looking too deep or being too serious. Did you ever think you might not be looking deep enough?

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The fact is, you are wrong in the stance you hold. I've proven it and so have many others.
I disagree. I'm not wrong. Nobody's proven anything. Live with it and stop trying to argue it.

manorastroman
balls no, you didn't explain it in detail. you made a blanket assumption that it's the result of suppressed guilt...not exactly sound reasoning. my explanation fits much more neatly. most people don't feel like articulating themselves to that degree, because most people don't hang around with people who carry superiority complexes like a knapsack. they find it safe to simply say "i know it's crap" and assume their company will understand them, which i'm sure their company does.

EPIIIBITES
Here it is...

All I ever said was...certain music is crap. I said...

a) It's hard to determine something like if The Beatles are better than The Rolling Stones. Although I have my own opinion, there's really not much I can solidly lay on the table to say..."The Beatles are better".

b) It's also hard to determine if "Dave Matthews Band" sucks, even though I hate them with a passion. I could however say that about an artist like Britney Spears. It's because her music is un-original, doesn't have any substance, it's not innovative, it doesn't have soul, it doesn't have any particularly good instrumentals or lyrics, it's plastic, it's over-produced, it's carefully marketed...it's crap for a number of reasons.

Nellinator
Originally posted by manorastroman
balls no, you didn't explain it in detail. you made a blanket assumption that it's the result of suppressed guilt...not exactly sound reasoning. my explanation fits much more neatly. most people don't feel like articulating themselves to that degree, because most people don't hang around with people who carry superiority complexes like a knapsack. they find it safe to simply say "i know it's crap" and assume their company will understand them, which i'm sure their company does.
Hehe "carry there superiority complex around like a knapsack"...

I agree with this whole post.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I disagree. I'm not wrong. Nobody's proven anything. Live with it and stop trying to argue it.

You are wrong. There is factually no good or no bad taste. It is entirely opinion. I'm going to go bump the subjective music thread and we can continue this there, where you got decimated before.

Originally posted by manorastroman
balls no, you didn't explain it in detail. you made a blanket assumption that it's the result of suppressed guilt...not exactly sound reasoning.

Of course it's sound reasoning. It's based on the fact that these artists are guilty pleasures for a lot of people, and it's been said in this thread alone.

Originally posted by manorastroman
my explanation fits much more neatly. most people don't feel like articulating themselves to that degree, because most people don't hang around with people who carry superiority complexes like a knapsack.

You call it a superiority complex, I don't. I'm here defending the right to say "I like this music." regardless of what anybody thinks of you or your opinion. If Epibites said Justin Timberlake was amazing, or that his songs were good, I'd disagree, I might even make a little fun, but why on EARTH should that matter to him? He could do the same to me and I'd shrug it off because his opinion of my taste doesn't matter, as mine shouldn't of his.

Nobody should feel the need to say "This is crap.", if they like it.

Originally posted by manorastroman
they find it safe to simply say "i know it's crap" and assume their company will understand them, which i'm sure their company does.

So your whole argument isn't that I was wrong, it was that people say "This is crap!" as a way of cutting corners?

I didn't disagree, I was just going into detail to clear up any misconceptions about the term. I know what he means when he says "This is crap!", as he acknowledged my interpretation of it as correct.

Don't be mad because there are people out there who can be articulate and accurate without making a gigantic effort. It does come easy to some of us.

Shoo.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You are wrong. There is factually no good or not bad taste. It is entirely opinion. I'm going to go bump the subjective music thread and we can continue this there, where you got decimated before.



Of course it's sound reasoning. It's based on the fact that these artists are guilty pleasures for a lot of people, and it's been said in this thread alone.



You call it a superiority complex, I don't. I'm here defending the right to say "I like this music." regardless of what anybody thinks of you or your opinion. If Epibites said Justin Timberlake was amazing, or that his songs were good, I'd disagree, I might even make a little fun, but why on EARTH should that matter to him? He could do the same to me and I'd shrug it off because his opinion of my taste doesn't matter, as mine shouldn't of his.

Nobody should feel the need to say "This is crap.", if they like it.



So your whole argument isn't that I was wrong, it was that people say "This is crap!" as a way of cutting corners?

I didn't disagree, I was just going into detail to clear up any misconceptions about the term. I know what he means when he says "This is crap!", as he acknowledged my interpretation of it as correct.

Shoo.

-AC

i love it when you talk dirty.

you say cut corners like it's a conscious decision--i don't believe it is. most people don't ****ing care, hence the "looking too deeply" comment.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
you say cut corners like it's a conscious decision--i don't believe it is. most people don't ****ing care, hence the "looking too deeply" comment.

No, I say "cut corners" because that is exactly what it is. Saying "This is crap!" doesn't often mean they find the music to be shit, just that they recognise it isn't exactly the most credible, and yes, there is a difference between credibility and quality.

Most people don't care, but welcome to a discussion board, where we interact with each other and therefore an interpersonal understanding is required. If you "don't f*cking care", fine, but then don't b*tch when you get pulled up and corrected.

Don't want that? Be correct, be articulate.

Anyone else?

-AC

EPIIIBITES
I think this got missed...
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Here it is...

All I ever said was...certain music is crap. I said...

a) It's hard to determine something like if The Beatles are better than The Rolling Stones. Although I have my own opinion, there's really not much I can solidly lay on the table to say..."The Beatles are better".

b) It's also hard to determine if "Dave Matthews Band" sucks, even though I hate them with a passion. I could however say that about an artist like Britney Spears. It's because her music is un-original, doesn't have any substance, it's not innovative, it doesn't have soul, it doesn't have any particularly good instrumentals or lyrics, it's plastic, it's over-produced, it's carefully marketed...it's crap for a number of reasons.
Thought it had to be done...sorry.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You are wrong. There is factually no good or no bad taste. It is entirely opinion. I'm going to go bump the subjective music thread and we can continue this there, where you got decimated before.
Really...

Alpha Centauri
Yes, you just proved me right.

"It's crap for a number of reasons.", to you. TO YOU. To you, to me, to many people. It's also NOT crap for many reasons to many people.

You said Lily Allen was factually good because lots of people liked her, not only is that wrong, but you're only applying that to artists you like, and it doesn't work that way.

Lily Allen is carefully marketed, plastic and fake, but you like HER. Her music is better than Britney's to me, but I still don't like her music.

It's all subjective when it comes to taste. That's a fact.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Lily Allen is good becasue she makes creative and worthwhile music...which also happens to strike a chord with me.

Forget it. You're never gonna get where I'm coming from.

Drop it.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Lily Allen iss good becasue she makes creative and worthwhile music...which also happens to strike a chord with me.

Forget it. You're never gonna get where I'm coming from.

Drop it.

To YOU she makes creative and worthwhile music. To many, Britney does the same. You are the one who doesn't understand, so you accuse me and everyone who opposes you of not understanding. Worthwhile itself is subjective, nothing is objectively worthwhile to listen to, is it? Stop being silly.

Music taste is subjective, there is no objective good or bad.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Most people don't care, but welcome to a discussion board, where we interact with each other and therefore an interpersonal understanding is required.
-AC

the irony is delicious. i've come to quite admire your off-the-cuff debate style, the way you make up views for the sake of debate; it makes me wonder if you're ANYTHING like your board persona in person.

and i don't have a problem with being articulate. i was arguing for the people; you know, i am the people's champion.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
the irony is delicious.

and i don't have a problem with being articulate. i was arguing for the people; you know, i am the people's champion.

It's easy to lead sheep.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
You're WRONG!
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To YOU she makes creative and worthwhile music. To many, Britney does the same. You are the one who doesn't understand, so you accuse me and everyone who opposes you of not understanding. Worthwhile itself is subjective, nothing is objectively worthwhile to listen to, is it? Stop being silly.

Music taste is subjective, there is no objective good or bad.

-AC
Wrong...simply liking something or not is subjective taste.

But looking at whether an artist who has made an album like "Alright, Still" is better and more creative than an artist who has made "Oops!...I Did It Again" comes down to determing factors and informed opinion.

You're just wrong. Drop it.

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

Most people don't care, but welcome to a discussion board, where we interact with each other and therefore an interpersonal understanding is required.

-AC

i'm sorry, but this one is just too good.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
i'm sorry, but this one is just too good.

Go on, then.

Or are you afraid you've looked before you've leapt and got it completely wrong? Or better yet, instead of yapping at my ankles like a puppy, why don't you apply yourself to the debate at hand? Do you agree with everything Epibites is saying? You clearly said you didn't before.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Wrong...simply liking something or not is what's subjective.

Looking at whether an artist who has made an album like "Alright, Still" is better and more creative than an artist who has made "Oops!... I Did It Again" is up to informed opinion.

You're wrong. Drop it.

Haha, no you're getting confused again.

OPINION, exactly. Informed or not, it is still an opinion, it is still, therefore, subjective.

To be objective is to be based on facts, truths. Lily Allen being ANYTHING that pertains to personal interpretation, is not objective. She is not good, creative or excellent by fact. It's your opinion.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
I added "determining factors" in there.

If someone's opinion is informed becasue they have the ability to determine factors such as innovation, substance, etc... their opinion is worth more than someone who is just going off of taste.

Alpha Centauri

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Go on, then.

Or are you afraid you've looked before you've leapt and got it completely wrong? Or better yet, instead of yapping at my ankles like a puppy, why don't you apply yourself to the debate at hand? Do you agree with everything Epibites is saying? You clearly said you didn't before.


nailed it! is psychology your profession? it should be!

i've said my piece. we all have. i'm just glad i got a little nugget of AC gold out of the deal. where do those nuggets come from, anyway?

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's still their OPINION. Do you not grasp that?
I'm right. You're wrong. Live with it. Some people's opinions are more worthy than others...that's what you gotta understand.

And I still think you need to think about the differnce between subjective taste and opinion. You can't help what your taste is, but you can help your opinion is.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
nailed it! is psychology your profession? it should be!

i've said my piece. we all have. i'm just glad i got a little nugget of AC gold out of the deal. where do those nuggets come from, anyway?

Either say it or bail out. Because I've reduced you to nothing more than blabbering about ME now.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'm right. You're wrong.

Haha, the plight of the loser.

-AC

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'm right. You're wrong. Live with it. Some people's opinions are more worthy than others...that's what you gotta understand.

They are STILL opinion. That's what YOU have to understand.

As long as they are opinion, they will NEVER be truth, NEVER be fact, NEVER be objective.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Either say it or bail out. Because I've reduced you to nothing more than blabbering about ME now.

-AC

say what?

Alpha Centauri
To quote Hannibal Lecter; "If you can't keep up, you'll have to sit at the kiddy table.".

In fact, *Hands you a red, shiny ball.*, play with this.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They are STILL opinion. That's what YOU have to understand.

As long as they are opinion, they will NEVER be truth, NEVER be fact, NEVER be objective.

-AC Fact no...truth yes.

I'm right. You're wrong. Because you're still confusing taste with opinion.

As long as you'll keep from seperating the two, you'll never be able to look at music apart from being subjective.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Fact no...truth yes.

I'm right.

You're still confusing taste with opinion.

fact

Something that actually exists; reality; truth.

Go home, kid.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To quote Hannibal Lecter; "If you can't keep up, you'll have to sit at the kiddy table.".

In fact, *Hands you a red, shiny ball.*, play with this.

-AC

either answer me or bail out, because i've reduced you to blathering on about me at this point.

Alpha Centauri
If you can do no more than claim you have one of my nuggets (Odd, if you ask me.), then either show us what this supposed irony is, or stop saying it, as I said before and you couldn't keep up with.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Oh, I remember this.


Fact!



Fact!


stick out tongue

Alpha Centauri
I'll be waiting for some on topic discussion.

Anyone feel free to join in.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Relax AC. You take this stuff too seriously.

I disagree with you about the basis of my argument. Why is it so impossible for you to live with that?

...or live with most things people disgree with you about?

Alpha Centauri
Why do you assume I'm having trouble living with it? We're in a thread discussing it, so I'm discussing it.

You have trouble with it being wrong, which I constantly and undeniably prove. You just tried to argue with the dictionary by saying fact isn't truth, I proved you wrong again. So if living in ignorance of the differences between fact and opinion, objectivity and subjectivity makes you happy, then do so, just don't expect your arguments to be treated with respect, and don't act like we're the ones misunderstanding you when overwhelming proof is against you.

That's all I'm saying.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you can do no more than claim you have one of my nuggets (Odd, if you ask me.), then either show us what this supposed irony is, or stop saying it, as I said before and you couldn't keep up with.

-AC


ah that! well i found it rather self-evident, but i guess we can't all sit at the big kids table.

you are among the least understanding, least accomodating people on this board. i found it ironic that you would berate me for taking the majority stance on the subject. and with a statement not only violating itself (coming to an understanding would imply a majority, wouldn't it) but violating your entire persona and debate style.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
you are among the least understanding, least accomodating people on this board. i found it ironic that you would berate me for taking the majority stance with a statement not only violating itself (coming to an understanding would imply a majority, wouldn't it) but violating your entire persona and debate style.

You confuse being articulate and clear enough to coincide with messageboard etiquette and courtesy, with accomodating to and catering FOR, the members here. Courtesy and etiquette is typing in a readable manner, making coherent points and clearing up misunderstandings. Catering for is accepting incorrect claims, stances and views simply because you "get" what they mean.

I get what it means to say "This is crap!", but it doesn't retract from the fact that it's cutting corners and a lazy way of essentially saying "This isn't as credible.", where you find it hard to tell the difference between credibility and quality.

I did just say that the reason why you might not be so keen to say it is because you didn't look before you leapt, and I was right.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So if living in ignorance of the differences between fact and opinion, objectivity and subjectivity makes you happy, then do so, just don't expect your arguments to be treated with respect, and don't act like we're the ones misunderstanding you when overwhelming proof is against you.
Well. I think truths exist regardless of being proven factually. That's where my argument lies.

You don't. So we disgree. End of story.

And although I may not have been as respectful with you as I could have been in the past, I've made an effort to tone it down.

You still call people "idiots" left, right, and centre.

You should respect people no matter what their opinion.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Well. I think truths exists regardless of being proven factually. That's where my argument lies.

You don't. We disgree. End of story.

That's a stupid, illogical and ridiculous argument as everything points to you being wrong, factually. This is precisely why it's silly and discourteous for you to debate from such a point.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You still call people "idiots" left, right, and centre.

You should respect people no matter what their opinion.

If you act like an idiot I'll call you one.

Respect is earned. If you haven't earned mine, you won't get it. I don't owe you respect. Like I said, if you want your opinion to be respected, stop saying shit like:

"I think truths exists regardless of being proven factually.".

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You confuse being articulate and clear enough to coincide with messageboard etiquette and courtesy, with accomodating to and catering FOR, the members here. Courtesy and etiquette is typing in a readable manner, making coherent points and clearing up misunderstandings. Catering for is accepting incorrect claims, stances and views simply because you "get" what they mean.

I get what it means to say "This is crap!", but it doesn't retract from the fact that it's cutting corners and a lazy way of essentially saying "This isn't as credible.", where you find it hard to tell the difference between credibility and quality.

I did just say that the reason why you might not be so keen to say it is because you didn't look before you leapt, and I was right.

-AC

you know, people with even a blue-collar knowledge of debating as an art see you like glass. this might be why whirly used to have such a blast with you.

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you act like an idiot I'll call you one.

Respect is earned. If you haven't earned mine, you won't get it. I don't owe you respect. Like I said, if you want your opinion to be respected, stop saying shit like:

"I think truths exists regardless of being proven factually.".

-AC Ok. And you can't prove that killing is wrong...so then I guess it's really not. And I guess I shouldn't say s*&% like "killing is wrong", 'casue that'd be stupid right?

Please.

Just 'casue you can't prove something, doesn't mean it's not true.

Alpha Centauri
Whirly had a "blast" with me cos I was the only thing occupying his time, I found it flattering if a bit annoying.

I, unlike certain people, don't care what people see me like. The fact that people can't handle me and ALWAYS end up debating at me rather than my point, is what makes ME laugh. You have proven yourself to be no exception. I don't go around claiming anything of myself, it's others that do so, and it seems to reflect back on me for some odd reason.

Besides, if you're so up for defending the art of debating, why are you not saying anything to the sheer ridiculous points that EPIIIBITES is making? If you agree with him, then you have no room to speak about the art of anything.

If you wish to discuss ME further, my PM box is open.

-AC

Legendary Thor
There are songs that are good and songs thats suck.I dont hate pop but i dont love it too.

manorastroman
you don't interest me, because i know nothing about you. your debating style interests me, because it's akin to bullying and misdirection.

perhaps you have a hard time differentiating between the two? i haven't given a single personal view this whole thread. i've been taking an angle, one that strikes some sort of balance between the two extremes present (you and epiiibites, if you haven't been keeping track).

EPIIIBITES
Exactly. Even though manorastroman might not fully understand my point, I don't think he would call me an idiot for saying "I think truths exist regardless of being proven factually."

That's where I'm coming from. That's why I say what I do about music actually being bad or acutally being good.

He sees that this is my opinion, and that you (AC) have no right to say that I'm wrong.

Jimi > Britney.

Sorry I can't prove it for you...but it's true. And I'm saying that at least the truth can be suggested at by presenting determing factors.

And as I also said before...

"...looking at whether an artist who has made an album like "Alright, Still" is better and more creative than an artist who has made "Oops!...I Did It Again" comes down to determing factors and informed opinion."

Taste has nothing to with it. It's a truth regrdless of if you like it or not.

And this goes for determining all pop music. It's not all bad because it's pop and people don't tend to like it.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
you don't interest me, because i know nothing about you. your debating style interests me, because it's akin to bullying and misdirection.

Then I'll be happy to discuss it with you, PM me. I fail to see why I need be the focal point of every debate that people can't win.

Originally posted by manorastroman
perhaps you have a hard time differentiating between the two? i haven't given a single personal view this whole thread. i've been taking an angle, one that strikes some sort of balance between the two extremes present (you and epiiibites, if you haven't been keeping track).

I don't bully anybody here. The fact that people are intimidated by me isn't my fault. Why find me intimidating? I don't know, I find the notion ridiculous, but it's the shame of feeling this that causes people to blame ME. I say things and certain people get insulted, that isn't my fault, they got insulted without necessarily the intent to insult them. I am always clear in what I say, but if people still don't get it and prefer to assume rather than ask, then there isn't much more I can do.

I'm not basing that on nothing, I've been told by a number of members. It's silly, and I'm not using it as some kind of positive accolade. Maybe people can't handle the fact that I do know my stuff regardless of them disliking how I put it across, no idea.

The problem is, people dislike my debating style (Whatever that may be.) so much that they will focus on that, rather than the fact that I do talk sense. They concentrate on HOW I talk rather than what I'm saying, and it happens every time I gain the edge in a debate. Once again, you're not exception.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Exactly. Even though manorastroman might not fully understand my point, I don't think he would call me an idiot for saying "I think truths exist regardless of being proven factually."

That's him, not me. What you are doing and saying are both idiotic. I don't know how smart you are outside of music debates, I'm not calling you an idiot in general, I'm calling you an idiot as it pertains to ALMOST every debate we've been in.

I don't feel the need to not call someone an idiot if they're being one.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
That's where I'm coming from. That's why I say what I do about music actually being bad or acutally being good.

You are wrong though, and this has been proven.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
He sees that this is my opinion, and that you (AC) have no right to say that I'm wrong.

But you are, and I have proven so. You confuse informed opinion with fact; I prove you wrong. You say fact and truth are not the same; I prove you wrong. You reply with silliness, I try to get you back on topic; You say "You take things too seriously.". You are a very idiotic debator. He cannot stand for the art of debating if he is defending a man who cannot tell the difference between fact and opinion.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Jimi > Britney.

Sorry I can't prove it for you...but it's true. At least the truth can be suggested by presenting determing factors.

Is it a fact? No. Fact is truth, so is it truth? No. I've proven you wrong, the dictionary proves you wrong, YOU prove YOU wrong.

The more you say it's an informed OPINION, the more you prove me correct. All you have on your side is this ridiculous believe you hold that something can be true, and yet, not be proven. That is ridiculous.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
It seems you still don't get it.

Forget it.

manorastroman
on a side note, "truth" is among the most complex and argued subjects in all of philosophy. so there's probably a whole handful of schools that agree with epiiibites.

Alpha Centauri
Ignorance is apparently bliss for you.

I get it, stop being an idiot.

As long as something is an opinion, informed or not, it will never be fact, truth or objective. End of story. That is how it works.

-AC

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
on a side note, "truth" is among the most complex and argued subjects in all of philosophy. so there's probably a whole handful of schools that agree with epiiibites.

We're not discussing philosophy, we're discussing music, an area where taste is entirely subjective. As it always is.

Informed opinions are just that, opinions. Truth is fact, fact is truth, none of these apply to taste, subjectivity or opinion. You would never find a school that suggests opinion is fact. Ever. Unless it's a special school. Though even then I doubt it.

-AC

manorastroman
actually, there's plenty of subjective-reality based schools that would probably argue that opinion is as good as fact.

but my point is that epiii was trying to draw contrast between truth and fact, to which you replied "truth=fact", to which i replied...

EPIIIBITES
So, for the record, you, Alpha Centauri, are saying that "truth is fact".

'nuff said.

As manorastroman was alluding to, maybe taking a philosophy course or two would benefit you here.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
actually, there's plenty of subjective-reality based schools that would probably argue that opinion is as good as fact.

As good as, not quite, not exactly, not FACT.

Jimi being better than Britney is AS GOOD AS, but it isn't ACTUALLY, is it? No. It's not an undeniable truth. Come back when you grasp that.

Originally posted by manorastroman
but my point is that epiii was trying to draw contrast between truth and fact, to which you replied "truth=fact", to which i replied...

Truth is fact, though. Dictionary defined. Fact is the opposite of opinion.

Epibites thinks informed opinions are fact just because they are more credible. There is no argument toward there being no such thing as MORE credible opinions, just taste as fact, which it can never be.

-AC

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
So, for the record, you, Alpha Centauri, are saying that "truth is fact".

'nuff said.

As manorastroman was alluding to, maybe taking a philosophy course or two would benefit you here.

Taking a philosophy course? Why? Taste is subjective, entirely and factually.

End of story. You not understanding that isn't my problem, it's not something I need to get fixed, I'm not in the wrong.

Informed opinions are still opinions. As good as fact still ISN'T fact.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
As good as, not quite, not exactly, not FACT.

Jimi being better than Britney is AS GOOD AS, but it isn't ACTUALLY, is it? No. It's not an undeniable truth. Come back when you grasp that.



Truth is fact, though. Dictionary defined. Fact is the opposite of opinion.

Epibites thinks informed opinions are fact just because they are more credible. There is no argument toward there being no such thing as MORE credible opinions, just taste as fact, which is can never be.

-AC

you don't know what i grasp. regardless of my personal opinions on the subject, even the angle i've taken for this thread admits that to be true.

i know what epiiibites thinks. you seem confused.

and you also don't seem to grasp the idea of subjective reality, nor the complexity of "truth".

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by manorastroman
you don't know what i grasp. regardless of my personal opinions on the subject, even the angle i've taken for this thread admits that to be true.

Then why sit there arguing something I didn't disagree with? I didn't say there wasn't such a thing, I didn't say being as good as fact didn't exist. I said it's still not fact.

Originally posted by manorastroman
i know what epiiibites thinks. you seem confused.

I know also, he's just wrong. He's saying he can't prove it, absolutely no way to prove it, can't be proven, but it still might be true. I get it, it's just stupid. I'm not going to afford him the courtesy of "Well..." and then discussing it as if it's a credible debate, JUST because it's his belief. He's wrong, it's ridiculous.

Originally posted by manorastroman
and you also don't seem to grasp the idea of subjective reality, nor the complexity of "truth". dictionary defined my ass.

I do grasp the idea of subjective reality, he's quite clearly dwelling in his own little universe, I wouldn't deny that for a second. It's the most obvious trait about the man.

The obviousness that he is talking bullshit is something you're not admitting to because you either wish to disagree with me or you are foolishly giving everyone credit for having an opinion.

As things stand, he is wrong. We can all say "My ass." to things we dislike, but when they prove us wrong...it's a different story.

There's just no need for philosophising here, unless people are trying to be anal. Taste = Subjective. Opinion = Taste, informed or not. Therefore, no music is factually good or bad, which is his stance, which is factually wrong, WHICH you continually ignore in favour of debating me.

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
you are foolishly giving everyone credit for having an opinion.

-AC

wait a minute...i thought that we were on a message board, and had to come to an understanding? hmm

ah well. one point of subjective reality would be that by living in his own little world we are all living in his own little world, to his degree. the constituent parts of his little world are as good as anything you, i, or "reality" might come up with.

in terms of defining truth, philosophy is a much better source than the dictionary, being that truth is a concept AND a word.

just throwing things out there. you know. just throoooooooowing things out there.

Alpha Centauri
Yes, wherein did you make a connection to the part you quoted?

Giving everyone credit for having an opinion and conducting yourself in a way that allows people to understand your posts as far as you are obligated to do so (Ie: Typing correctly.), are connected, how?

Struggling for points now aren't you?

-AC

manorastroman
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yes, wherein did you make a connection to the part you quoted?

Giving everyone credit for having an opinion and conducting yourself in a way that allows people to understand your posts as far as you are obligated to do so (Ie: Typing correctly.), are connected, how?

Struggling for points now aren't you?

-AC

practically crawling at your feet. yes sir, no sir, tell me where to go sir.

Alpha Centauri
Lovely.

So, how about that pop music?

-AC

manorastroman
avril is crap! vin

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Taking a philosophy course? Why? Taste is subjective, entirely and factually.
It's not about taste...for the billionth time!

I'm not talking about taste.

You can't help your taste. Your taste is what it is.

You like pizza...

...blonde girls

...Nickleback

...the colour blue

...whatever!

It'd be stupid to say, "you're dumb becasue you like Paris Hilton's new album".

But you can say, "Paris Hilton's new album isn't actually good music...and as it turns out, what you happen to like is actually pretty bad...sorry."

Some people are cool with that. Most people aren't. That's why most people like you want to maintain that music's just simply subjective and down to taste.

Good on ya then. That way, no one can suggest a band or artist you like actually sucks.

And it's me who wants to live in his own universe?

...please.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
But you can say, "Paris Hilton's new album isn't actually good music...and as it turns out, what you happen to like is actually pretty bad music."

It's not about taste...but about what people happen to like, and whether it's good or bad? Makes a grand total of 0% sense doesn't it?

Of course it's about taste, it has to be because there is NO SUCH THING as objectively good or bad music, so no, you can't say that and have it be true.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Yeah. It's not about taste. Taste means squat. And it's not about proving truths as facts. Facts can't prove everything. It's clear you'll never get my points.

manorastroman seems to getsmy points. You don't.


So why don't you just transform and roll out of here? laughing

EPIIIBITES
Just kidding dude.


...and Avril doesn't suck.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Yeah. It's not about taste. Taste means squat. And it's not about proving truths as facts. Facts can't prove everything. It's clear you'll never get my points.

What the hell are you talking about you idiot? Of course it's about taste. It's about taste because it's about what people like. You cannot tell someone they like factually bad music, because there is no such thing.

Facts prove what is true, anything else is opinion, which is what taste and musical perception are. OPINION.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
manorastroman seems to getsmy points. You don't.

I do get them, they're just stupid.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
So why don't you just transform and roll out of here? laughing

Oh yeah, like my sig.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You cannot tell someone they like factually bad music, because there is no such thing.
Yeah, but you can tell them they like truly bad music.

I say this because I think truth exists apart from fact.

You don't agree.

Fine.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Yeah, but you can tell them they like truly bad music.

I say this because I think truth exists apart from fact.

You don't agree.

Fine.

Precisely, your whole argument is based around something you believe. This would be fine if it wasn't wrong (Objectively.) and stupid (Subjectively.).

Truth does not exist apart from fact. If it cannot be proven beyond all deniability, it isn't A truth. You do not have the right to change that, you cannot change parts of existence.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
AC. Give it up!

Nowhere are you proving what I believe is wrong. You can't. You can't prove killing isn't wrong...so does that mean it's alright just becasue you can't prove it's wrong by using facts?

I say you're wrong. Live with it.


...and, oh yeah...


Smack that!

All on the floor

Smack that!

Give me some more

Smack that!

'Till you get sore

Smack that!

Oh-oooh!

x2

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
AC. Give it up!

Nowhere are you proving what I believe isn't true. You can't. You can't PROVE killing isn't wrong...does that mean it's alright?

How silly. Morals are subjective, so I can't prove killing is wrong or right. Like taste, not wrong or right. Nobody likes factually good or bad music.

You are the one with the burden of proof, not me. I've proven you incorrect with your argument, and your stupid "Truth is different." argument is self-defeating by definition.

I've proven all that I've claimed. You haven't proven anything, you can't, you've admitted such. So it's basically just an airless belief that you are cowardly to hold, because you know you can't prove it.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I say you're wrong. Live with it.

Live with being wrong and you've got a deal.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Who's talking about morals?

I'm talking about the universal truth that killing is wrong.

I think it exists.

You don't.

And that's why we disgree about their being truly good and bad music.


End of discussion.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Who's talking about morals?

You were, when you spoke of killing being wrong or right.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'm talking about the universal truth that killing is wrong.

Go on...

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I think it exists.

Continue...

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You don't.

Clever boy. So think about this, if truths are undeniable, which they are, how can we disagree if one exists or not? It either does or doesn't. The very fact that someone can deny killing being wrong proves that there is no universal truth that killing is wrong, as it cannot be proven either way.

The same applies to music. The very fact that anybody can say "This music is good/bad." proves that there is no universal truth BESIDES the one that taste is entirely subjective and, as a result, there is no factually good or bad music.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
That's why we disgree about their being truly good and bad music.

End of discussion.

No, you're a fool who doesn't understand the difference between truth, fact, opinion and objectivity.

That's just the way it is.

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Who's talking about morals?

I'm talking about the universal truth that killing is wrong.

I think it exists.

You don't.

And that's why we disgree about their being truly good and bad music.


End of discussion.

Alpha Centauri
Either reply properly or not at all.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Smack that!

All on the floor

Smack that!

Give me some more

Smack that!

'Till you get sore

Smack that!

Oh-oooh!

x2

Alpha Centauri
Continue and I'll be forced to take that as an admission of "I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I'm wrong."...

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Who's talking about morals?

I'm talking about the universal truth that killing is wrong.

I think it exists.

You don't.

And that's why we disgree about their being truly good and bad music.


End of discussion. Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Smack that!

All on the floor

Smack that!

Give me some more

Smack that!

'Till you get sore

Smack that!

Oh-oooh!

x2

Alpha Centauri
Fair enough, if sensible debate is beyond you.

-AC

Victor Von Doom
Originally posted by vintageSW77
or just a total weariness of listening to pricks going on about how ****ing fantastic they are e.g Sean ****ing Diddy ****ing Jean or whatever name the dicks call him by this week
its all about RnB and **** all else is pop nowadays
even Gwen Stefani who i would say made a brilliant pop song in WHAT YOU WAITING FOR had to go and jump on the bandwagon and get that nightmare AKON involved in her latest track which from what i hear wasnt even worth the no dout shitload of $$$ she paid for the pleasure


Yeah, she was excellent until Akon. He ruined the magic. The excellent magic.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
AC. Give it up!

Nowhere are you proving what I believe is wrong. You can't. You can't prove killing isn't wrong...so does that mean it's alright just becasue you can't prove it's wrong by using facts?

I say you're wrong. Live with it.



You're an absolute idiot. I hate Lilly Allen etc. So am I factually wrong or right in assessment of this? There is no right or wrong, cretin. People like different types of music because people have different tastes, not because music is divided into bad music and good music. Yes we all do this in our minds and this is done because of taste not fact.

EPIIIBITES
Wow.

Try reading some of the earlier posts before blindly jumping and calling people idiots and cretins.

Very civilized of you!

You liking or hating something has nothing to do with being right or wrong about it being good or bad. It's just your taste. Again, try reading my posts where I show in detail how taste has nothing to do with determining what's good or bad. You can't help what your taste is...but you can help what your opinion of what's good or bad is.

So back to your question (which doesn't really make sense)...yes, you would be wrong (although not factually) if you were to say Lily Allen is bad music.

But again, it has nothing to do with you liking it or not, it has everything to do with it having a number of redeemable qualities that truly bad music (such as Brittney) doesn't have.

Alpha Centauri
He wouldn't be wrong to say Lily Allen is bad. Nor would be be right.

It's taste. "Good" or "Bad" are terms that determine QUALITY, ie: Taste. The music we do or don't like.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Amazing

Alpha Centauri
At least accept responsibility for the fact that you have an outlandish belief that cannot be proven and has absolutely no credible evidence backing it, instead of saying we all don't get it, but...coincidentally, anybody that remotely defends you, does get it.

-AC

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
At least accept responsibility for the fact that you have an outlandish belief that cannot be proven and has absolutely no credible evidence backing it
Accepted...and it's not the first time I've had such beliefs. You should know that. Doesn't mean I'm wrong.

EPIIIBITES
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He wouldn't be wrong to say Lily Allen is bad. Nor would be be right.
I disagree. Accept it.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's taste. "Good" or "Bad" are terms that determine QUALITY, ie: Taste. The music we do or don't like.
You still don't get it...and it seems you never will.

Alpha Centauri
I've accepted that you disagree, you're still wrong, though.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Accepted...and it's not the first time I've had such beliefs. You should know that. Doesn't mean I'm wrong.

You not accepting that you are wrong doesn't mean you aren't wrong, either. You keep saying "I'm not.", but overwhelming evidence says you are.

-AC

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Wow.

Try reading some of the earlier posts before blindly jumping and calling people idiots and cretins.



But again, it has nothing to do with you liking it or not, it has everything to do with it having a number of redeemable qualities that truly bad music (such as Brittney) doesn't have.

I did read all of the pages and all of your posts, all tripe.

What you're talking about in the second part of the above quote is artistic merit, not fact. A lot of music before has got very little artistic merit but still accepted as good by many people.

Your belief is one of the strangest I've ever heard, how can it be fact? You need help mate.

EPIIIBITES
It's not fact. Never said it was.

It's truth.

And not all truths can be factually proven.

I maintain that Lily Allen's music is good, and that Britney's is quite bad. I think that's a truth. No facts to prove it...but doesn't mean it's not truth that exists.

I also maintain that killing is wrong...can't be proven...but I think it's a truth that exists.

Eis
EPIII are you mentally damaged to such an extreme extent that you cannot grasp the absurdly obvious fact that you cannot hold an opinion to be true or factual without proof? However obvious it may seem to you that Britney is a shit singer you cannot prove it, it is therefore irrational to say it is factual or true. Even if Lily Allen is more creative or original than Britney it wouldn't mean shit, a "good" artist does not equal to originality or creativity or elaborateness.

The scale in which you judge singers is completely subjective, Tool are simply not factually better than Britney Spears, they may be more imaginative, whatever, but not better. Can you get that through your thick skull or will you just shrug it off and reply with a happy smilie and a "You just don't get it".

So until you can prove that Lily Allen is factually a good singer, or if you prefer to use the word truth, truthfully a good singer, please refrain from claiming she is.

EDIT: In this case, apprently you don't seem to understand, the words "true" and "fact" are interchangeable. If they aren't then state the reasons. Im sure there are none, by the way.

exanda kane
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
It's not fact. Never said it was.

It's truth.

And not all truths can be factually proven.

I maintain that Lily Allen's music is good, and that Britney's is quite bad. I think that's a truth. No facts to prove it...but doesn't mean it's not truth that exists.

I also maintain that killing is wrong...can't be proven...but I think it's a truth that exists.

I dunno, Toxic's quite a tune when your on acid. And yes, I did rave to it.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>