Originally posted by WrathfulDwarfI think he replied to you after the part he quoted by you and to Bobby after the part where he quoted him.
But I'm not saying Ringo is the greatest. I'm asking who is more skilled than Ringo.AC don't talk about silly. You're quoting me and addressing BobbyD. But thanks for addressing my question.
I might be wrong though. [edit] I am, nevermind.
Also, AC named someone, Terry Bozzio is factually more skilled.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, you're wrong. In terms of his music, he can "suck" according to taste.
Well that is a shame. But, that is not how I think.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriNobody can say with any credibility that he sucks as a musician, but if someone said "He sucks.", as Schecter did about The Beatles, they're not "wrong".
No they are not I suppose, but then let's agree to call it sad if one thinks that way.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriYou think that by picking an artist I enjoy I will be blinded and prove myself a hypocrite? No, because that isn't sensible
Correct, nor was I going to call you one. Perhaps, I want you to finally understand how I think! That's why I think you logic is warped!
Perhaps it's just we get to the same end by different means.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriI'm not mudslinging, but you're yet again trying to objectively claim The Beatles are something they are/are not necessarily. It's entirely opinion.
-AC
So one saying Michael Jordan sucked is opinion? Wayne Gretzky? Pele? I suppose it's subjective then too?
Originally posted by BobbyD
Well that is a shame. But, that is not how I think.
It's not up to you to decide, that's where you're wrong. It's not subjective whether or not it's subjective. It is.
Originally posted by BobbyD
No they are not I suppose, but then let's agree to call it sad if one thinks that way.
I don't get sad when people don't like Prince, I don't give a shit. I like him, why do I need to worry about anyone else?
Originally posted by BobbyD
Correct, nor was I going to call you one. Perhaps, I want you to finally understand how I think! That's why I think you logic is warped!
Perhaps it's just we get to the same end by different means.
No, I just use logic.
Originally posted by BobbyD
So one saying Michael Jordan sucked is opinion? Wayne Gretzky? Pele? I suppose it's subjective then too?
If you didn't enjoy any of their styles of play and thought they sucked, yes, it's subjective. If you said "Pele was an unsuccessful footballer, statistically.", then you'd have to back it up with objective claims.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not up to you to decide, that's where you're wrong. It's not subjective whether or not it's subjective. It is.
Then you paint to wide for some things and not wide enough for others. You're inconsistent.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriExactly!I don't get sad when people don't like Prince, I don't give a shit. I like him, why do I need to worry about anyone else?
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriNo, I just use logic.
Whatever. I'll just dismiss this one.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriBut who in their right minds says Pele was unsuccessful statistically? C'mon AC. Where are you going with this? Who is going to say the Beatles sucked statistically? They rock in sales which is statistical data. They win in polls, statistical yet a sample of opinion nonetheless. You're playing both sides to the same argument.
If you didn't enjoy any of their styles of play and thought they sucked, yes, it's subjective. If you said "Pele was an unsuccessful footballer, statistically.", then you'd have to back it up with objective claims.-AC
But no other band is thought of as highly. You can dismiss this. It's okay-you are entitled to. But that is fact, be it opinion or not that are always often referred to as the greatest.
I like them. You know this. This whole board knows this. I say they are the greatest ever. You can disagree. ..have disagreed. I have backed up my points. You have dismissed them. It's ok. I know where you stand. I know how you think now....almost like I know the back of my hand. ...nor do that I mean that negatively.
Originally posted by BobbyD
Then you paint to wide for some things and not wide enough for others. You're inconsistent.
I'm not being inconsistent, you can't keep up.
Originally posted by BobbyD
But who in their right minds says Pele was unsuccessful statistically? C'mon AC. Where are you going with this? Who is going to say the Beatles sucked statistically? They rock in sales which is statistical data. They win in polls, statistical yet a sample of opinion nonetheless. You're playing both sides to the same argument.
No I'm not. I'd never deny their commercial success, it means nothing besides commercial success and commercial success doesn't mean you are good.
If someone says "The Beatles sucked.", you cannot say "No they didn't." as if it's fact. Because "No they didn't." is as much opinion as "They Beatles sucked.".
Originally posted by BobbyD
But no other band is thought of as highly. You can dismiss this. It's okay-you are entitled to. But that is fact, be it opinion or not that are always often referred to as the greatest.
So what? It means nothing. I'm not denying they are often thought of that way, but there are reasons, many, to disagree. They have a social stigma that people feel they have to agree.
You seem to think they have reached this status 100% fairly, and that's ridiculous.
Originally posted by BobbyD
I like them. You know this. This whole board knows this. I say they are the greatest ever. You can disagree. ..have disagreed. I have backed up my points. You have dismissed them. It's ok. I know where you stand. I know how you think now....almost like I know the back of my hand. ...nor do that I mean that negatively.
You haven't got a clue, that's the sad thing. The more we debate, the more you do NOT get what I'm saying. You will never understand because your bias doesn't allow it, Bob.
I have dismissed your points because they are hardly relevant. You have a tendancy to go off into random Beatlemaniac tangents one moment and then come back the next.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not being inconsistent, you can't keep up.
Uh...hello!?
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriPoint taken. ..though we shall have to agree to disagree on this as part of their brilliance. I say it should stand for something. You say it shouldn't. Tomato, ta-mah-toeNo I'm not. I'd never deny their commercial success, it means nothing besides commercial success and commercial success doesn't mean you are good.
If someone says "The Beatles sucked.", you cannot say "No they didn't." as if it's fact. Because "No they didn't." is as much opinion as "They Beatles sucked."
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriBut, I do not force this on people!They have a social stigma that people feel they have to agree.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriYou seem to think they have reached this status 100% fairly, and that's ridiculous.
Perhaps.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriOkay, see this is where you call my stance being caught up in the fever of Beatlemania. But, it's not. Most Beatlemaniacs rightfully or wrongfully so would have dismissed your argument/points a long time ago as null and void, or someone who clearly does not know anything about music-even though I know otherwise. We shall have to agree to disagree, that's all dude.You haven't got a clue, that's the sad thing. The more we debate, the more you do NOT get what I'm saying. You will never understand because your bias doesn't allow it, Bob.
I have dismissed your points because they are hardly relevant. You have a tendancy to go off into random Beatlemaniac tangents one moment and then come back the next.
-AC
Originally posted by BobbyD
Point taken. ..though we shall have to agree to disagree on this as part of their brilliance. I say it should stand for something. You say it shouldn't. Tomato, ta-mah-toe
You are implying their "brilliance" is there factually, and it's just agree to disagree on how we recognise it. What you need to accept is that it's not fact, they are not factually brilliant, they are not factually shit. They're not factually anything when it comes to personal taste.
Originally posted by BobbyD
But, I do not force this on people!
You do. You may not mean to, but you do.
You've said yourself that people should accept The Beatles as the greatest ever because society says so. Your previous opinions led me to believe you weren't joking.
Originally posted by BobbyD
Okay, see this is where you call my stance being caught up in the fever of Beatlemania. But, it's not. Most Beatlemaniacs rightfully or wrongfully so would have dismissed your argument/points a long time ago as null and void, or someone who clearly does not know anything about music-even though I know otherwise. We shall have to agree to disagree, that's all dude.
Fair enough, I can respect that.
It's a word I use to describe people blindly biased toward The Beatles to any degree. Nothing personal.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
But shouldn't you do that to other fanbases that think their favorite band is greater than anything. Gotta be fair.
Why? Whatever gave you the idea that people are obligated to do such things?
People with either shit taste (Subjective, of course) or low confidence only say those things. I couldn't give a shit what people say about Prince, Tool, Radiohead or anything. I like them, I know how I perceive them. I'll discuss them, sure, but ultimately, I'm not gonna get upset if anyone has a pop, cos I'm confident enough in my taste.
Originally posted by Punkyhermy
Beatles pwn all. enough said.😊
Haha, "Enough" said. As if you could ever contribute more to this thread than "Beatles pwn all.".
-AC
Just a note to anyone who does say ''Beatles are the best band of all time!!''. Please just pay attention to the fact that people are going to feel differently, they're not factually anything more than a successful band. Don't make claims that are factually incorrect and pose them as fact.
I'm sure this has been said before by both AC and Bardock. I am by no means jumping on any bandwagon (unlike many Beatles fans), I just feel strongly about this.
Originally posted by Punkyhermy
Batman pwns all too.
😍
Hiya Punky! batman_wave
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriPeople with either shit taste (Subjective, of course) or low confidence only say those things. I couldn't give a shit what people say about Prince, Tool, Radiohead or anything. I like them, I know how I perceive them. I'll discuss them, sure, but ultimately, I'm not gonna get upset if anyone has a pop, cos I'm confident enough in my taste.
-AC
You know, you only have change Prince, Tool, Radiohead to The Beatles in your post and you've would sound like a Beatles fan.
Guess you aren't much different than a Beatles fan.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarfA beatles fan, yes.
Hiya Punky! batman_waveYou know, you only have change Prince, Tool, Radiohead to The Beatles in your post and you've would sound like a Beatles fan.
Guess you aren't much different than a Beatles fan.
One of those hardcore "Beatles are the best band ever no contest" morons...no, not really.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
You know, you only have change Prince, Tool, Radiohead to The Beatles in your post and you've would sound like a Beatles fan.Guess you aren't much different than a Beatles fan.
If I ever sing their praises, it's about their music or their ability. I'm not in here citing record sales, popular opinion or voting polls. More importantly, I'm not going around claiming my taste is factually anything other than my own taste. It's as subjective as anybody's, but I am comfortable enough with it that I do not give a shit what people think of my taste, because...why should I? Nobody should care what anybody thinks of the music they like.
Your lack of understanding fails you yet again.
It's also rather hypocritical, isn't it? You, in here, telling me not to make fun of, nor pick on or talk down to, people who consider something I don't like as much, the greatest ever.
Hypocritical because:
A) I'm not doing that.
B) You recently did just that in another thread, didn't you? Where was your respect for subjective taste then? Do yourself a favour, WD, grab some consistency of opinion then rejoin us.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I would change morons to fanatics.I mean come on...any band have fanatics...pretty much everything have fanaticism...
So if I were to say The Beatles were fans who got suckered in by massive hype and reputation that actually and factually creates the illusion that they were more than they were...what would YOU say to that WD?
Hmm, this WILL be a most interesting answer.
-AC