Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's not passive, though. That's actually going out of your way to do something because you like the band.
Ok, passive was the wrong word. I mean someone who follows a band in at least a minimal way.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you like a band to the degree that you like Nirvana, that makes you a fan. You have said on numerous occassions that you like them, you like their music, you like their albums. Therefore you are a fan.Secondly, yes. I am a fan of their Follow the Leader album.
Would you say you're a fan of Korn?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
This is all you, though. You're the one sitting there getting massively and pointlessly in depth about this. Let's not look at degrees to which make general people fans, let's look at you.
How about answering my questions. It's either easy, in which case you should just give me an answer and shut me up, or it's hard, in which case the questions are valid.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Look how desperate you are. We're discussing music, and you asked him already. He said he believes a fan is someone who likes the band's music.
Oh, yes, all very good arguments to prove me wrong. “You’re desperate, so you’re wrong”. First, I’m not desperate, and even if I would be that wouldn’t automatically make me wrong.
If you really can’t see the connection between what I said and the discussion at hand, simply because it has nothing to do with music, then my regard of you has lowered quite a bit.
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, if Bier really likes Nirvana and Nirvana Albums he's a fan....if he just enjoys the music but with no particular need or whis to listen to it he isn't. Actually buying 4 Albums of any band would probably be considered fandom though, I agree with that.
I like Nirvana, period. I didn't buy any of their albums btw, my dad bought em. I've rarely listened to any Nirvana in the last year. Just the odd song or two (mostly when it came on random through a playlist). I doubt Id even buy any Nirvana if I didnt have the albums. I heard Nirvana and I liked them. My dad happened to have bought the albums, which he basicely gave to me, cause he thought they might interest me more then him. I listened to them, I like them, not a fan though.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Ok, passive was the wrong word. I mean someone who follows a band in at least a minimal way.
That's you, then. As proven with the part you edited to your Bardock reply.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Would you say you're a fan of Korn?
I'm a fan of that particular album, a couple of other songs. I don't entirely like all their work, but at the basest level I guess I would be considered a fan, yes. If it's a case of black and white, fan or not, then I'm a fan. Not black and white; I'm simply a fan of one album and a few songs.
You, on the other hand, like Nirvana's albums and the band. That makes you a fan without question.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
How about answering my questions. It's either easy, in which case you should just give me an answer and shut me up, or it's hard, in which case the questions are valid.
I answered your question, maybe you missed it. You are asking what percentage of a band's music you have to like to be a fan of them, right? If you like their music, then you're a fan, simply.
As far as YOU are concerned, you like Nirvana, you like their albums, you like the band. This, for sure, is a fan. Regardless of how little you can like, you like a lot, so you're a fan.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Oh, yes, all very good arguments to prove me wrong. “You’re desperate, so you’re wrong”. First, I’m not desperate, and even if I would be that wouldn’t automatically make me wrong.
Someone's got a guilty conscience. I said you were desperate, also wrong, not wrong because you're desperate. I appreciate that English isn't your first language, but come on.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
If you really can’t see the connection between what I said and the discussion at hand, simply because it has nothing to do with music, then my regard of you has lowered quite a bit.
Your regard of ME has lowered? Forgive me for not losing sleep Mr. "I like Nirvana, the band, their albums, their music, but I'm not a fan.".
You are sitting there trying to determine how little someone can like a band without being a fan, but that's irrelevant in relation to you, isn't it? Because you don't like Nirvana a tiny bit. You have said multiple times that you really like them and their music, so this makes you a fan.
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, if Bier really likes Nirvana and Nirvana Albums he's a fan....if he just enjoys the music but with no particular need or whis to listen to it he isn't. Actually buying 4 Albums of any band would probably be considered fandom though, I agree with that.
Then he's a fan, case closed. The only one who disagrees is him.
-AC
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I like Nirvana, period. I didn't buy any of their albums btw, my dad bought em. I've rarely listened to any Nirvana in the last year. Just the odd song or two (mostly when it came on random through a playlist). I doubt Id even buy any Nirvana if I didnt have the albums. I heard Nirvana and I liked them. My dad happened to have bought the albums, which he basicely gave to me, cause he thought they might interest me more then him. I listened to them, I like them, not a fan though.EDIT: Didnt mean to have the bold parts in bold, cant be arsed to fix it.
Purchase isn't relevent, what is relevent is this:
"I like Nirvana, period.", "I listened to them, I like them, not a fan though.".
You are saying you like them, so therefore, you are a fan of the band. If you like their music, the band and/or anything else, you're a fan.
If Nirvana doesn't suit your taste, Chili Peppers? You own those albums. What, are you not a fan of any band you own albums by? Were they all "given" to you?
-AC
The point I was getting at is that either there's a line somewhere where someone becomes a fan (a non-factional line). Or it's black and white and even if you merely like a band for a microscopical bit, you're a fan. I don't live in a black and white world.
If you believe the line that seperates fans and non-fans is factual, I want to see some proof. If you can't prove it, then the line is subjective, and therefore open to interpretation. In that case I'm not wrong.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
The point I was getting at is that either there's a line somewhere where someone becomes a fan (a non-factional line). Or it's black and white and even if you merely like a band for a microscopical bit, you're a fan. I don't live in a black and white world.
You ARE being black and white, though. You can be like me. I'm a fan of A Korn album and the odd song besides that, I'm not an all encompassing fan of the band's music, but I am a fan to some degree, because I like their music to some degree. That's how it works.
"Fan" is being associated with someone who owns all albums, loves them to death and buys all the stuff that comes with it. That's not necessarily what a fan is, that's just one extreme, the other extreme is my position with Korn. I'm nowhere near as much of a fan, but I am still a fan to a degree. I don't go around the net checking up on them, but the fact that I have liked their music and in some cases, still do, makes me a fan to a degree.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
If you believe the line that seperates fans and non-fans is factual, I want to see some proof. If you can't prove it, then the line is subjective, and therefore open to interpretation. In that case I'm not wrong.
I've proven it time and time again, I can't help it if you'll keep ignoring it.
The point is, YOU are a fan of Nirvana and you are a fan of the Chili Peppers. How can you own four albums, like their music and still say "I'm not a fan."? That is ridiculous. You are a fan.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
"I'm a fan of [insert any band here] and they're the best band EVER"^What's wrong with this statement?
(let's see if we share the same opinion)
Nothing's "wrong" with that statement. You can't disprove someone subjectively believing there's a best band ever, musically, regardless of how stupid it may be. It's purely subjective.
The conduit connecting the two is the hypothetical person and Bier, both liking the band. To varying degrees, but both are fans.
One thinks...say, Nirvana, are the best band ever, the other "just" really likes the music and the band. They're both fans.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You ARE being black and white, though. You can be like me. I'm a fan of A Korn album and the odd song besides that, I'm not an all encompassing fan of the band's music, but I am a fan to some degree, because I like their music to some degree. That's how it works."Fan" is being associated with someone who owns all albums, loves them to death and buys all the stuff that comes with it. That's not necessarily what a fan is, that's just one extreme, the other extreme is my position with Korn. I'm nowhere near as much of a fan, but I am still a fan to a degree.
You believe there's essentially two types of people in the world. Fans and people who dislike the band. There's a slight grey formed by the people that are indifferent, but that's hardly worth mentioning when looking at the whole picture. I'm talking about the people that actually have an opinion on a band anyway.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The irony is, the one who says he's not dealing in absolutes is the one who believes you're either a rabid fan or not a fan.-AC
Uh, no. I believe just as much as you do that there are various degrees of fandom, from small to extreme. It’s just that the line is drawn at a different place. I devide people that like a band into more categories, not just fans.
Anyway:
I took this from my Dutch dictionary:
Fan: Enthusiastic lover
I'm not enthusiastic about Nirvana nor a lover of their music
Here's what my English dictionary says:
Fan: An ardent admirer of a pop star
I'm not an ardent admirer when it comes to Nirvana
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
You believe there's essentially two types of people in the world. Fans and people who dislike the band. There's a slight grey formed by the people that are indifferent, but that's hardly worth mentioning when looking at the whole picture. I'm talking about the people that actually have an opinion on a band anyway.
What are you on about?
I do not believe that there are two types of people, that's what YOU are proposing. You believe a fan is someone who is rabid about the band, and yes, that is one kind of fan, but the fact that you overlook is that it's not the only kind. I am, technically, a fan of Korn. Simply because I like one of their albums and parts of their other albums, really. I'm not as much of a fan as someone who does everything they can regarding the band, but I'm still a fan.
You said a fan is someone who likes the band at least passively, and you like Nirvana passively, right? You're not indifferent to them, are you? No. You don't dislike them, do you? No. You own their albums, you've said you really like their albums, their music and the band. So what part are you honestly having problems with?
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Uh, no. I believe just as much as you do that there are various degrees of fandom, from small to extreme. It’s just that the line is drawn at a different place. I devide people that like a band into more categories, not just fans.
Yes, and that's where we differ. You're being stupid, I'm not. You're drawing an unrealistic line and splitting more hairs than Elmer Fudd (Although that would be "Hare", and he was reasonably unsuccessful).
There are many people in this world who like bands to the same degree as you and consider themselves fans, just not major fans. You may be a minor fan, but you're still a fan. You're a fan of the music.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I'm not enthusiastic about Nirvana nor a lover of their music
Are you indifferent to Nirvana?
Do you dislike Nirvana?
Do you hate Nirvana?
Do you like Nirvana?
Do you like their music/albums?
Answer those, with simple "Yes" or "No" answers, please. Simple request, "Yes" or "No", not "Yes, but..." or "No, but...". Just "Yes" or "No".
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Here's what my English dictionary says:Fan: An ardent admirer of a pop star
I'm not an ardent admirer when it comes to Nirvana
I'm an ardent admirer of Slayer, but that means I'm not a fan since they're not pop stars? Stupid addition to the definition there. That's irrelevant.
A fan CAN be an ardent admirer, follower or lover, but it can also be someone who just likes the music. You are assuming that it's black and white, which you intently put out as not being your idea.
We both agree that being a fan isn't black and white, that there are definite degrees of which someone can be a fan. So what makes a fan to you?
"Someone who likes the music passively.", correct? You like Nirvana at least passively. So you're a fan.
All you keep doing is changing your definition and changing your argument. I seriously don't see what's so bad about being a fan of Nirvana, nobody is suggesting you've got Cobain's name tattooed on your penis, just that you're a fan because you like the music passively or more, and you do. You've said so.
If you like them any less than passively, then you don't care, and that's indifference. Saying "I really like their albums" isn't indifference, it indicates and proves a clear preference.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I do not believe that there are two types of people, that's what YOU are proposing. You believe a fan is someone who is rabid about the band, and yes, that is one kind of fan, but the fact that you overlook is that it's not the only kind. I am, technically, a fan of Korn. Simply because I like one of their albums and parts of their other albums, really. I'm not as much of a fan as someone who does everything they can regarding the band, but I'm still a fan.You said a fan is someone who likes the band at least passively, and you like Nirvana passively, right? You're not indifferent to them, are you? No. You don't dislike them, do you? No. You own their albums, you've said you really like their albums, their music and the band. So what part are you honestly having problems with?
What would you call someone who doesn’t dislike a band and is not indifferent towards a band?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yes, and that's where we differ. You're being stupid, I'm not. You're drawing an unrealistic line and splitting more hairs than Elmer Fudd (Although that would be "Hare", and he was reasonably unsuccessful).There are many people in this world who like bands to the same degree as you and consider themselves fans, just not major fans. You may be a minor fan, but you're still a fan. You're a fan of the music.
Ah, now we’re getting somewhere. I can live with you thinking I’m stupid.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Are you indifferent to Nirvana?Do you dislike Nirvana?
Do you hate Nirvana?
Do you like Nirvana?
Do you like their music/albums?
Answer those, with simple "Yes" or "No" answers, please. Simple request, "Yes" or "No", not "Yes, but..." or "No, but...". Just "Yes" or "No".
No, No, No, Yes, Yes
Happy? I’ve never stated otherwise.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm an ardent admirer of Slayer, but that means I'm not a fan since they're not pop stars? Stupid addition to the definition there. That's irrelevant.
Yep, can’t say I agree with that definition. But don’t sweat it, it’s from a dictionary, it’s hardly factual.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
We both agree that being a fan isn't black and white, that there are definite degrees of which someone can be a fan. So what makes a fan to you?"Someone who likes the music passively.", correct? You like Nirvana at least passively. So you're a fan.
Now you’re twisting my words. I corrected that some posts ago. Passive was the wrong word.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
What would you call someone who doesn’t dislike a band and is not indifferent towards a band?
Now you're just being pathetically desperate.
To answer your question though, I'll use your position. You're not indifferent, you don't dislike them, right? So what would I call you? A fan. Why? Because you like them.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
No, No, Yes, YesHappy? I’ve never stated otherwise.
You aren't indifferent, you don't dislike them, but you hate them and like them? That's what your answers imply.
Are you indifferent to Nirvana?: No.
Do you dislike Nirvana?: No.
Do you hate Nirvana?: Yes.
Do you like Nirvana?: Yes.
Do you like their music/albums?: ?
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Yep, can’t say I agree with that definition. But don’t sweat it, it’s from a dictionary, it’s hardly factual.
The funny thing is, when I used the dictionary to prove my point, you debated it, saying it wasn't factual because anyone can make up a language. So you don't really have a leg to stand on.
That definition is fine, besides the "pop star" part. A fan is an ardent follower, but not JUST an ardent follower. That's just one degree.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Now you’re twisting my words. I corrected that some posts ago. Passive was the wrong word.
So what the hell are you on about? Look at the shit you're saying.
"What would you call someone who doesn’t dislike a band and is not indifferent towards a band?"
Why even go into that? You aren't indifferent, disliking or hateful toward the band, far from it, you've said you specifically like them.
You're being so stupid.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Now you're just being pathetically desperate.To answer your question though, I'll use your position. You're not indifferent, you don't dislike them, right? So what would I call you? A fan. Why? Because you like them.
That's what I was looking for. You're saying: you either like a band or you don't, if you like a band, you're a fan. Among the people that have an opinion on a band, there's two groups: fans and people who dislike a band. I disagree with that point of view.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You aren't indifferent, you don't dislike them, but you hate them and like them? That's what your answers imply.Are you indifferent to Nirvana?: No.
Do you dislike Nirvana?: No.
Do you hate Nirvana?: Yes.
Do you like Nirvana?: Yes.
Do you like their music/albums?: ?
Sorry about that, fixed it.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The funny thing is, when I used the dictionary to prove my point, you debated it, saying it wasn't factual because anyone can make up a language. So you don't really have a leg to stand on.
I never said a dictionary was factual, so what are you on about?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That definition is fine, besides the "pop star" part. A fan is an ardent follower, but not JUST an ardent follower. That's just one degree.
Now that is you interpreting the definitions your way. I say the definition is "an ardent follower", period.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
That's what I was looking for. You're saying: you either like a band or you don't, if you like a band, you're a fan. Among the people that have an opinion on a band, there's two groups: fans and people who dislike a band. I disagree with that point of view.
Oh my. You asked me what someone would be if they were not indifferent, but didn't dislike a band. What other options are there?
I used you as an example, someone who doesn't dislike/hate, someone who isn't indifferent. So where do you fall? You LIKE them, indicating that there is an intended preference toward the positive side, making you a fan. I'm not saying you're the same as members of a fan club.
In one instance it is black and white; If you don't dislike them and you're not indifferent, then YOU like them, because you've SAID you do.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
Sorry about that, fixed it.
Point proven.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I never said a dictionary was factual, so what are you on about?
I know you didn't. That's what I said.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I say the definition is "an ardent follower", period.
That's (the "ardent follower" part) A definition, not THE definition. It is entirely applicable and it is correct, that is what a fan CAN be, but it's not only what a fan is.
To wrap this up and finally reveal you as a confused person, I'll show something.
First you churn out this:
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I say the definition is "an ardent follower", period.
Then you say this:
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I believe just as much as you do that there are various degrees of fandom, from small to extreme.
You acknowledge that there are all different degrees of what makes a fan just that, yet you say that a fan is simply an "ardent follower"? Not all fans are ardent followers, like you.
How long are you going to continue this?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Oh my. You asked me what someone would be if they were not indifferent, but didn't dislike a band. What other options are there?I used you as an example, someone who doesn't dislike/hate, someone who isn't indifferent. So where do you fall? You LIKE them, indicating that there is an intended preference toward the positive side, making you a fan. I'm not saying you're the same as members of a fan club.
In one instance it is black and white; If you don't dislike them and you're not indifferent, then YOU like them, because you've SAID you do.
There's more categories IMO. Not minding a band, liking a band a very little bit, but not enough to be an ardent devotee etc.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's (the "ardent follower" part) A definition, not THE definition. It is entirely applicable and it is correct, that is what a fan CAN be, but it's not only what a fan is.To wrap this up and finally reveal you as a confused person, I'll show something.
First you churn out this:
Then you say this:
You acknowledge that there are all different degrees of what makes a fan just that, yet you say that a fan is simply an "ardent follower"? Not all fans are ardent followers, like you.
How long are you going to continue this?
The way I see it, it's not so much that an ardent follower IS a degree of fandom, but there are various degrees OF being an ardent follower. But they are all ardent followers, meaning having at least above average interest.
That's just my point of view. I can live with you thinking I'm a stupid and confused retard AKA disagreeing with me.
I'm off now, will be back tommorow if you continue the debate, which you will probably do.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
There's more categories IMO. Not minding a band, liking a band a very little bit, but not enough to be an ardent devotee etc.
You don't have to be an ardent devotee to be a fan, though, you've even agreed to this.
What's your problem?
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
The way I see it, it's not so much that an ardent follower IS a degree of fandom, but there are various degrees OF being an ardent follower. But they are all ardent followers, meaning having at least above average interest.
Oh, give it a rest. You're like an eel, flip flopping all over the place.
You said this: "I believe just as much as you do that there are various degrees of fandom, from small to extreme."
Ardent following is an extreme degree of fandom. Are you actually struggling so bad that now you are debating yourself?
There are different degrees of fandom; from ardent following/extreme to passive liking/minute, which is you.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
That's just my point of view. I can live with you thinking I'm a stupid and confused retard AKA disagreeing with me.
It's not a matter of disagreeing, I've disagreed with many people on this site that I don't think are retards. I don't actually think you are a literal retard, but I won't lie, I'd probably get a more consistent argument from Helen Keller.
Originally posted by Bierbommetje
I'm off now, will be back tommorow if you continue the debate, which you will probably do.
It's not so much a debate. It's you pulling more b.s out and me squashing it.
-AC