Radiohead...

Originally posted by who?-kid
Counter arguments aren't your forte, are they ? 😬

Actually, they are. See?

Holding a supportable opinion doesn't seem to be yours...or does it?

Duh-duh-duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. This is so exciting...

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
This is so exciting...

You mean like listening to Radiohead?

Yeah, but not in the sarcastic sense.

Every time I listen to Radiohead I can't stand still. It's so...real, man.

You?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, but not in the sarcastic sense.

Every time I listen to Radiohead I can't stand still. It's so...real, man.

You?

I like Radiohead, although I like Kid A more than the following Albums...I guess I just don't get them. Why, Floo? Why?

But now that you mention it, I kinda love "So Real" ....it's awesome

Love, let me sleep tonight
On your couch..
And remember the smell
And the fabric
Of your simple city dress..

Oh... That was so real
Oh... That was so real
Oh... That was so real

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Actually, they are. See?

Holding a supportable opinion doesn't seem to be yours...or does it?

Duh-duh-duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. This is so exciting...

You are the kind of debater that has nothing to contribute but hides his ignorance and lack of debating skills behind a semi-cool attitude.

Prove me wrong and try contributing something for a change instead of trying to act like a wise guy.

Well, kid, I wouldn't call screaming at each other without reading what is actually said debating skills, but you guys suit yourself.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I don't think I ever read one argument coming from you.... 😕 Not even a lame one.

That's a reflection of your reading skills, rather than my prowess in the field of discussion.

Originally posted by who?-kid
You are the kind of debater that has nothing to contribute but hides his ignorance and lack of debating skills behind a semi-cool attitude.

Yeah, cool. Then, I was like...yeah, whatever.

*saunters off...*

Originally posted by who?-kid
Prove me wrong and try contributing something for a change instead of trying to act like a wise guy.

Can't be bothered; you're an idiot.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
That's a reflection of your reading skills, rather than my prowess in the field of discussion.

Yeah, cool. Then, I was like...yeah, whatever.

*saunters off...*

Can't be bothered; you're an idiot.

What's that? Another thing you just don't get?

Add it to the list, kid.

Originally posted by who?-kid
No. Every attack you did, I countered. You name it dodging, I call it countering.

It's not, though. You kept denying that you called blues etc subgenres of pop, then you said you didn't technically say that. So what do I do? I quote you to no reply.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I know you like to claim in every single post how great your debating skills are, and how you own me, and how this and how that, but that doesn't impress me.

Really it doesn't.

I've never claimed I've owned you, is that a subconscious thing you've got going on?

Originally posted by who?-kid
I don't do those kinds of things, you do it all the time, almost every single post you end with typing something macho.

Gonna say something on topic soon, or have I reduced you to this drivel?

Originally posted by who?-kid
Does that make you feel secure ? Make you feel like you are in control, not me ? Whatever.

I'm waiting. Do you call THIS countering, too?

Originally posted by who?-kid
Angel Dust happened like ten years ago or so (longer I think, am not gonna look it up). Lots has happened since. It's not like I decided back then I wanted to follow everything he does.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by who?-kid
By your own special logic, you have to be a fan when you say something nice about a person. Strange. Even Michael Jackson has a good voice and some good songs. Does that make me a fan ? No.

There're different degrees of being a fan. You like Faith No More, it seems, you claim Patton has an awesome voice, so that makes you a fan to some degree.

It's not hard to grasp. Like the straws you're clutching at.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Stop trying to cover up your mistakes. You misquoted me, plain and simple. Happens to the best, but you do it all the time.

I'm not covering up for anything. You actually denied saying something and I factually proved you did say it, to which you tried some kind of pathetic, weaselly reply, which I then quashed.

Now you've been reduced to this. About one on topic point in your whole post thus far. If you don't care about saving face, why do this?

Originally posted by who?-kid
Again you do it, putting words in my mouth. When did I say I didn't know his band ? 😕 I just mentioned I didn't know this particular album. I'm not gonna quote myself again, you can look it up for yourself.

If you know the band, not knowing the album is a bit stupid.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Fantomas have made more than one album you know.

I own them, I know this. It's Fantômas' masterpiece, so knowing them and not know IT, is slightly odd.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Better late than never.

Must be a relief to have a little something back.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Yeah I already explained that a million times. I am not gonna repeat myself. Still feel bitter about it ?

Bitter about something I proved you wrong on, to the point that you couldn't reply? Your replies got shorter and shorter as I started actually proving things. Only now have you started having more to say, and most of it is off topic waste.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Drop the attitude, you didn't prove me wrong, not even once. Where and when ? You, on the other hand, are full of wild assumptions and misinterpretations.

One misinterpretation out of this whole debate, one. What was the other one? The blues/pop thing? I proved you said that. You denied SAYING it, which you did do. I proved otherwise, so you tried saying "No, what I meant was...", bullshit. I proved you wrong and you didn't reply.

You've actually got nothing in this debate, not against me. That's nothing I'm necessarily proud of as it's not been hard, it's just fact. The only thing you've got is that one misinterpretation, which was my own fault.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Misinterpretations I have to correct because you can't or won't read. This post isn't about arguments, this is again me correcting you because you only read what you want to read.

Still bitter about it? I'm going to go grab the quotes after this.

Originally posted by who?-kid
That's the problem debating with you. You're so full of yourself. You are wrong in all categories and you haven't "proved" a single thing.

I've factually proved many things, but I guess some of us ironically only read what we want to.

I've reduced you to replying at me, not regarding the debate. Why? Because you've got no debate left.

-AC

'Kid, your legendary quote:

Originally posted by who?-kid
Pop music is a huuuuge genre that is divided in lots of sub genres such as rock, country, jazz, chanson, rap, ambient, blues, techno... You just don't get this simple statement.

My reply:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Then again I'm talking to a man who believes blues and rock are offshoots of pop.

Your reply:

Originally posted by who?-kid
You make it seem like I said that blues is a spin off from pop music.

My reply:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You did say that. You said blues, rock et al are spin offs of pop music, subgenres. Which is pathetic.

Your reply:

Originally posted by who?-kid
No I didn't. Stop misquoting me and stop misinterpreting me. I know more about the history of music than most people I know combined.

My reply:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You said that they were subgenres of pop, why are you trying to weasel out of it? Here:

(I quote you)

You never said that? You just don't know what you're saying anymore, do you?

Your reply:

Originally posted by who?-kid
Sigh. Current pop music is a general word that can mean a lot of things.

=> that is "divided", or subdivided if that is more clear to you, not meaning that it's the inspiration duh ! Geez. Learn to read.

My reply:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yes, now complete the sentence.

Divided into? Subgenres. Which, to you, include: Blues and rock.

Which is, of course, bullshit.

You view pop music the genre and popular music the idea, as one. This is why you're getting confused. Blues was popular, it wasn't pop music. The two aren't inherently linked, and if you realised that, it'd save me a lot of educating time.

"Popular" isn't a genre. Because then everyone from Girls Aloud to Madonna to AC/DC to Slayer would be the same genre. They're all popular, but they're not all pop music, are they? No.

To which you gave a grand total of...zero replies.

You got countered, pie-faced, humbled, whatever you want to call it. I've proven you wrong and you can't handle it. The irony is, it's your massive misinterpretation of a the terms "pop music" and "popular" that caused this debacle. I educated you, you stuck your fingers in your ears and went "Lalalalala".

Naturally I'd say I'm disappointed in you, but that'd mean I expected more. What I do expect is some kind of futile attempt to deny everything I've just proven by saying I misquote you.

-AC

I’m sure you’ll agree I’m only gonna counter your biggest mistakes. I can’t keep repeating and explaining myself forever. I’m convinced you’ll understand.

I’ll use – one more time, the last time – my famous quote

Sigh. Current pop music is a general word that can mean a lot of things.
that is "divided", or subdivided if that is more clear to you, not meaning that it's the inspiration duh ! Geez. Learn to read.

I still stand by that. Despite everything you say, I haven’t swallowed or took back even one word. Like always, you misread this and other definitions and talked some nonsense about me having said that Blues and Rock are offshoots of pop...😕

I wasn’t talking about origins or roots of music...(like you don’t know)...

Pop music, like it or not, is popular music, that means any music that can be considered quite popular and that has an amount of followers, albums and so on. This includes – among others – blues and jazz and ambient and techno and whatever. Pop music is, if that is the correct word, the general term. When we look at the different genres of pop music separately, we notice that there are multiple genres such as rock, country etc, with each of course his own origin.

I don’t understand why this is so difficult for you to understand. Even my 11 year old nephew understands it. It's all there, in the definition. I'm 100 pct behind this definition like I was from day one.

I can understand you don’t agree with the definition, fair enough, but I definitely don’t understand why you keep accusing me of having said that blues is a spin off of pop ???

That is so retarded. It's also desperate.

Your quote, in which you - again - put words in my mouth.

You did say that. You said blues, rock et al are spin offs of pop music, subgenres. Which is pathetic.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
There're different degrees of being a fan. You like Faith No More, it seems, you claim Patton has an awesome voice, so that makes you a fan to some degree.

(that's what you get for saying something nice about a singer - won't happen again. From now on I hate every singer - except Thom of course).

I'm not covering up for anything. You actually denied saying something and I factually proved you did say it, to which you tried some kind of pathetic, weaselly reply, which I then quashed.

If you know the band, not knowing the album is a bit stupid.

I heard of the band, I knew it had something to do with Mike Patton, and I knew it was this experimental kind of music. I also knew they have several albums. That's all I know. Like I said 234 times before - I'm not a fan. I follow other kinds of music.

I own them, I know this. It's Fantômas' masterpiece, so knowing them and not know IT, is slightly odd.

Bitter about something I proved you wrong on, to the point that you couldn't reply? Your replies got shorter and shorter as I started actually proving things.

Only now have you started having more to say, and most of it is off topic waste.

I've reduced you to replying at me, not regarding the debate. Why? Because you've got no debate left.

😄 😄 😄 😄

First of all, there WAS NO real debate silly man (I like Radiohead - yeah they're great.). Second, you reply just as much as I do. What was the name again.... oh yeah... being hypocrite.

(still laughing)

Originally posted by who?-kid
I’m sure you’ll agree I’m only gonna counter your biggest mistakes. I can’t keep repeating and explaining myself forever. I’m convinced you’ll understand.

Convincing yourself that your argument works doesn't count in a debate.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I’ll use – one more time, the last time – my famous quote

Oh, go on then.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I still stand by that. Despite everything you say, I haven’t swallowed or took back even one word. Like always, you misread this and other definitions and talked some nonsense about me having said that Blues and Rock are offshoots of pop...

Oh for crying out loud, you said blues and rock are subgenres of pop, sub-genre. As in, spawn of the main genre. What part of this are you not grasping?

Originally posted by who?-kid
I wasn’t talking about origins or roots of music...(like you don’t know)...

You said pop music is a huge genre divided into subgenres such as rock, blues et al. Fact.

Wrong. Pop music is a genre OF popular music. Metal is popular music, it's not POP music. You connect the idea and the genre as one, which is idiotic.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Pop music, like it or not, is popular music, that means any music that can be considered quite popular and that has an amount of followers, albums and so on. This includes – among others – blues and jazz and ambient and techno and whatever. Pop music is, if that is the correct word, the general term. When we look at the different genres of pop music separately, we notice that there are multiple genres such as rock, country etc, with each of course his own origin.

No, you are factually wrong here, 'Kid.

Pop music is a genre among many popular music genres, it's just fact and it's obvious to anyone. Are you implying that Slayer are the same genre as Madonna? Pop musicians?

They are popular artists, that doesn't mean they make pop.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I don’t understand why this is so difficult for you to understand. Even my 11 year old nephew understands it. It's all there, in the definition. I'm 100 pct behind this definition like I was from day one.

Precisely, from day one. Not relevant to what it is today.

As I said before, "Gay" means happy, if you want to be entirely literal. It doesn't applicable mean happy today. It's evolved.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I can understand you don’t agree with the definition, fair enough, but I definitely don’t understand why you keep accusing me of having said that blues is a spin off of pop ???

Spawn, spin off, subgenre. Whatever you want to call it. Calling blues a subgenre of pop music is stupid. It's a genre of popular music, popular music is not a genre, it's a catagory.

Originally posted by who?-kid
That is so retarded. It's also desperate.

Your quote, in which you - again - put words in my mouth.

quote:
You did say that. You said blues, rock et al are spin offs of pop music, subgenres. Which is pathetic.

Subgenres yes, spin offs no. Never said spin off. Never insinuated it too. Before you argue, read the definition again. It's all there.

I'm desperate, yet somehow it's not desperate to say "I said subgenres, not spin-offs."?

Pathetic. You're wrong, and I've proven why you are wrong with reasoning, fact and reference. All you do is say "Nah, pop is pop.". You're abusing the term.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Not at all. I think I know better than you if I'm a fan of Mike Patton yes or no. I don't need you to tell me if I'm a fan or not thank you very much.

(that's what you get for saying something nice about a singer - won't happen again. From now on I hate every singer - except Thom of course).

Hahaha, why are you being so uptight? You claimed he had charisma, an awesome voice, you apparantly like his band, or work by his band. What justifies being a fan, to you? Posters?

What a desperate, hair-splitting fool.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Keep telling yourself that, and one day, you'll actually believe it.

I claimed that you called them subgenres also, if that's the terminology you're comfortable with, you still denied it. It's all in the previous post.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I heard of the band, I knew it had something to do with Mike Patton, and I knew it was this experimental kind of music. I also knew they have several albums. That's all I know. Like I said 234 times before - I'm not a fan. I follow other kinds of music.

Which illustrates my point...you follow other kinds of music? I wonder why...(I don't wonder, I know.).

If you'd heard of the band, who aren't exactly massive, then not knowing their masterpiece is a bit silly. Like saying "I know Judas Priest.", "Do you like British Steel?", "What?".

Originally posted by who?-kid
See above.

Ditto.

Originally posted by who?-kid
You actually counted the words ? Gosh... I'm flattered

No, there was a massively noticeable decrease in the length of your replies visually.

Funny how I have actually reduced you to this.

Originally posted by who?-kid
This is coming from the guy who more than once brought up Mike Patton in the Radiohead thread. That is pretty off topic if you ask me.

I was referring to Radiohead when you brought up Vangelis.

Originally posted by who?-kid
You reduced me to replying at you, not regarding the debate ?

First of all, there WAS NO real debate silly man (I like Radiohead - yeah they're great.). Second, you reply just as much as I do. What was the name again.... oh yeah... being hypocrite.

(still laughing)

Points deduction for over-use of smileys, I expected better than that.

Second, I know there wasn't. You initially made the pathetic claim of, essentially: "If I don't see anything more, there's nothing to reveal.".

It was downhill from there.

-AC

Spawn, spin off, subgenre. Whatever you want to call it. Calling blues a subgenre of pop music is stupid. It's a genre of popular music, popular music is not a genre, it's a catagory.

No, there was a massively noticeable decrease in the length of your replies visually.

Points deduction for over-use of smileys, I expected better han that.

Desperate.

I'll do the first quote last, as it's a gem.

Originally posted by who?-kid
The thought never occurred to you I was sick and tired of repeating myself over and over again and correcting your mistakes ?

No, because you're not correcting them, you're agreeing and disagreeing with yourself, denying and confirming things as you see fit, without worrying about whether they are correct or not.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Some use smileys, other use insults. And you call me "a desperate, hair-splitting fool" ? First you were counting my words, now my smileys ?

Desperate.

If you can't win a debate with words sans smileys, don't enter one. This is desperate, hypocritical and pathetic in one:

Originally posted by who?-kid
You do realize you are playing with words ? No wait, don't answer it.

Says the man who's anchors to this debate are: "I said subgenre, not spin-off.", "Pop music is all popular music.", and the ever-lasting technique of dodge everything in my previous post, except that which isn't regarding the topic.

I believe you called me a hypocrite, I believe you should heed your own words.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, because you're not correcting them, you're agreeing and disagreeing with yourself, denying and confirming things as you see fit, without worrying about whether they are correct or not.

If you can't win a debate with words sans smileys, don't enter one. This is desperate, hypocritical and pathetic in one

Here's another one 😉

I believe you called me a hypocrite

- You accuse me for being off topic, but you do exactly the same thing.

- You even accuse me for replying too much, but you do exactly the same thing.

- You claim it's okay not to like Radiohead, but the moment somebody tells you the reason why he doesn't like Radiohead, you're all over him.

- You complain about too many smileys but are the first to insult.

- You say Fantomas is a million times better than Beaubourg (which is probably true, but that's not the point) but you admitted not having listened to Beaubourg.

- You accused me of being a fan of Michael Patton, when I all said that I liked Angel Dust and his voice.

- You don't accept definitions (my definition and the official definition of pop music which proves my point), and show up with some lame ass Wikipedia definition (a definition that contained beautiful sentences like but over time, pop has gone from 'popular in general' to 'a genre' described as sounding musically similar to rap, but with singing.)

If all this doesn't make you a hypocrite, I give up.

Not.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Whatever.

I don't use much smileys. I use them like once or twice in a long reply. IF I happen to use several smileys (like I did in a previous post) than it means of course that somebody - you - made me laugh real hard.

Here's another one 😉

Since when did words not do the job? If you can't get a point across without smileys, don't bother making it.

Originally posted by who?-kid
True. You ARE a hypocrite after all.

- You accuse me for being off topic, but you do exactly the same thing.

Yes, we're both being off topic, but your replies consist more and more of arguments with me than with my debate, because my debate is correct, as I have proven. To which you retort with: "You haven't.". No proof that I haven't, no counter (that works), just "You haven't.".

Originally posted by who?-kid
- You even accuse me for replying too much, but you do exactly the same thing.

I accuse you of replying AT me, not to my debate. Reply to me all you want if it's regarding my points, I can do this for as long as you like because I'm right.

Originally posted by who?-kid
- You claim it's okay not to like Radiohead, but the moment somebody tells you the reason why he doesn't like Radiohead, you're all over him.

This is actually the first debate I've been in regarding the band in this manner, you're relatively new to this forum, or at least recently, so don't go tell me -- someone who makes a bulk of his posts here -- what I have and haven't done.

Originally posted by who?-kid
- You complain about too many smileys but are the first to insult.

Me intending to insult you and you ending up insulted are two different things. I think your debates are stupid and I think, by definition, you are acting stupid by proposing them.

I'm not sitting here ripping into you.

Originally posted by who?-kid
- You say Fantomas is a million times better than Beaubourg (which is probably true, but that's not the point) but you admitted not having listened to Beaubourg.

Gotta love the way you realised half way through, that it was true anyway, and then said "...but that's not the point.". It's true though, isn't it? That is indeed the point. Thanks.

Me having heard it is then irrelevant, because the outcome is the same. Hearing it is inconsequential. It's like saying "You could have got run over!", when a kid runs across the road safely. Could have, didn't. We both know what I'm saying is true, so me hearing it wouldn't matter, I'd have the same opinion.

Originally posted by who?-kid
- You accused me of being a fan of Michael Patton, when I all said that I liked Angel Dust and his voice.

You're not a fan, you just like his voice and music? That makes a world of sense.

Originally posted by who?-kid
- You don't accept definitions (my definition and the official definition of pop music which proves my point), and show up with some lame ass Wikipedia definition (a definition that contained beautiful sentences like but over time, pop has gone from 'popular in general' to 'a genre' described as sounding musically similar to rap, but with singing.

I accept the definition that "Pop" meant something back then, and back then you would have had a point, but nowadays that's not what it means. Since the 80s pop has been a genre OF popular music, the two were divided.

Popular music is a catagory in which all genres of popular music fit. Metal is popular, pop is popular, rock is popular. Only pop is pop, though. It's a genre of it's own.

Popular music does not equate to being pop music. Slayer are not a pop band, they are not the same genre as Justin Timberlake. Are they both popular? Yes. Pop music? No. Point proven and case closed. You're using an archaic definition that has been rendered all but obsolete and the world during and post-80s proves it.

Furthermore, as I said previously; "Gay" literally, technically is defined as "happy", correct? Does it mean happy in today's world? If you call someone gay, is it the primary response to assume that you mean happy? No. Same thing with pop, nowadays it doesn't mean popular, it's the name of a genre that happens to BE popular.

Fact, not fiction. All you have is "Yeah but my definition says...!" so what? It's obsolete. Not because I say so, because it factually is.

Originally posted by who?-kid
If all this doesn't make you a hypocrite, I give up.

Not.

Hahaha, read that back. "If all this doesn't make you a hypocrite, I give up (replying), not.".

You're replying for the sake of it now? Here's a bit of advice for you, look at that fat chunk of text in the quote above, the on topic part, and reply to it with something that refutes it. Something other than "My definition is right.". Give me proof as to why it's right, back yourself up.

Come at my debate, for once.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Since when did words not do the job? If you can't get a point across without smileys, don't bother making it.

Yes, we're both being off topic, but your replies consist more and more of arguments with me than with my debate, because my debate is correct, as I have proven.

😄

You have proven nothing. You think you have proven a thing or two, but hey, what can I say ?

I accuse you of replying AT me, not to my debate.

This is actually the first debate I've been in regarding the band in this manner, you're relatively new to this forum, or at least recently, so don't go tell me -- someone who makes a bulk of his posts here -- what I have and haven't done.

Me intending to insult you and you ending up insulted are two different things.

I think your debates are stupid and I think, by definition, you are acting stupid by proposing them.

You're not a fan, you just like his voice and music? That makes a world of sense.

WORLD of difference.

You're replying for the sake of it now? Here's a bit of advice for you, look at that fat chunk of text in the quote above, the on topic part, and reply to it with something that refutes it. Something other than "My definition is right.".

Gotta love the way you realised half way through, that it was true anyway, and then said "...but that's not the point.". It's true though, isn't it? That is indeed the point. Thanks.

Btw, I don't even know what it is you're talking about. If it is pop music definition => drop it. Everything has been said, and I don't feel like talking in circles for much longer.

Come at my debate, for once.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Now he goes on complaining about some smileys. Why don't you file a complaint against KMC for giving the people the opportunity to use smileys ?

Is it okay to use a smiley ? Can I ? Ok, here it comes:

😄

He? Who are you talking to? Use what you want, it just doesn't do your debate credibility any favours.

Originally posted by who?-kid
You have proven nothing. You think you have proven a thing or two, but hey, what can I say ?

This is the typical response from you now. Just a straight playground denial, not even a retort, just a "Nah, you haven't.".

Originally posted by who?-kid
Which debate ? Seriously, not joking, which debate ? About Radiohead ? I already said how I felt about them. There's not much to debate.

Yeah, and that's fine. You have whatever opinion you desire, man.

Fact is, this all came from me saying that just because you don't like the music, doesn't mean there's nothing for the music to reveal, which you denied.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I think you post so much you don't know anymore what you've said already.

Says the guys who denied his own quote, twice. You called me a hypocrite, laughable.

You're new in this particular forum, and I'm telling you for a fact I've never debated Radiohead in such a way. This isn't so much Radiohead, it's a musical debate stemming from Radiohead.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Another play with words to prove something. This should be good.

It's not a play with words. If I say I find your posts boring, and you get insulted, that's not my fault, is it? Being insulted doesn't always succeed a direct insult.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I like his voice and Angel Dust. I clearly said that from the beginning didn't I ? Don't like all of his music however. How can I, I even don't know all of his music.

You like his voice and one of his albums, yet you aren't a fan of the man to any degree, whatsoever?

Do you actually realise what you're saying?

Originally posted by who?-kid
You do exactly the same thing. Don't you realize that ?

The difference is that I'm speaking factually, with those fact things. You're not, you're sitting there in denial, throwing out playground retorts such as "Nah, you've not proved anything", rather than countering me.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Come on, again I ask you, stop putting words in my mouth. I know what you think : If I repeat it long enough, he'll give up or he'll start questioning himself.

No, not at all. If you're stupid enough to ignore or deny fact, just so you don't look bad for quitting, then you can only go on for so much longer, and if you can't, then I guess that's the way it goes.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Btw, I don't even know what it is you're talking about. If it is pop music definition => drop it. Everything has been said, and I don't feel like talking in circles for much longer.

Good, because I don't feel like proving you wrong continually. Well, once, I've proven you wrong on that count and I'm just repeating it. You have chosen to explicitly ignore fact, not much I can do there.

Originally posted by who?-kid
Which debate ?

Well since you've given up...I'm sorry, "got tired" of doing the pop one, the original one will do.

You said that you don't like later Radiohead, fine by me. You then implied that as a result, there's nothing for the music to reveal.

This isn't necessarily the case. You not liking it doesn't mean that.

-AC