Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
First, I'd like to say thank you for changing the subject.But no, I didn't say relevance was: "talking about modern terms".
Read it again.
Then how is Lily Allen relevant again?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He just ignores everyone who whoops him, or just their points, Rocas.He talks of being a man and not being immature, yet he just ignores my post because he KNOWS I have him beat every single time.
-AC
I'm just going to try. If he ignores me, it'll probably be a godsend.
?
AC. I really feel sorry for you. I really do.
It doesn't much sadder than this.
Go back to the Recently Banned forum where you belong you silly man.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Also, no. I'll stay and hammer home every mistake and idiotic remark you make, seeing as you've been so childish as to ignore me now I've proven you wrong.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
What a true bunch of winners we got here. Again, people out of their league with this stuff, but making themselves look doubly foolish by letting their biases with a certain someone get in the way of using clear reasoning.A really sad display of individual character…and a truly amazing display of the power of gang mentality working on the weak-minded.
Yeah…I’m sure you don’t see it…
I never said that actually. I was just talking about “relevancy”...you know…the point of the post. You wanna hear what I have to say about musical quality, read my defining segments in that “subjective good music?” thread.
So…what I’m about to put forward here is to just explain where you’re wrong, NOT to argue if the individual examples I'll give are justified…(cause I know some of you will miss the point and do that).
I think the song “Angels” is a great song (whether you do or not is beside the point…we’re talking about how I’m defining relevancy)…but I don’t think it’s at all relevant. It doesn’t have to be in order to be great.
I think Jet had a good album. Was it relevant…heck NO! It didn’t have to be to be good.
And I think G Love and Special Sauce are a great band. Are they or were they ever relevant (as I’ve described it). No way. But I think they rock without having to be relevant.
And I know you fools are gonna jump at the chance now and say…wait a sec, G Love are relevant because of this and this! That could be arguable, but I’m not focusing on that…I’m explaining how I think MY interpretation of relevance is different from my interpretation of quality music. And I’ve successfully done so.
Chalk one up for me!
I would too…but when it comes to AC, who makes example after example to show how musically lost he is, I’d wager against it.
That’s 2 for me!
Great! Good point! That doesn’t in any way make her less relevant, does it? What kind of sorry point was that? It's because a) if it’s of the time and her music is truly responding to it, what does it matter if it was done at an earlier time as well? It would only matter if she was singing about stuff that happened ONLY when the Mondays and the Roses were around. What a CRAP point! Oh what, we can't sing about war songs any more cause CCR ad Hendrix did it in the 60s??? Yes, that is what you're saying with your lame example.
But besides that, you’ve missed the bigger point. I claim her music is relevant because she has managed to take what I said about culture, technology and musical standards AND has created music that is a significant contribution to the art of music itself.
Now whether you agree or not with my definition of relevancy is besides the point for this particular argument, (or whether you agree Lily Allen’s music is a significant contribution is also besides the point)...This is about you criticizing MY interpretation of relevance and how I’VE used it wrong according to my criteria. Thing is though, you didn’t get it, and I’ve proven you wrong.
Up by 3.
Nope, actually my definition went totally over your head. No surprise.
Here it is again...
Final score. EPIIIBITES: 4 - Musical 1st Graders: 0
Yeah that’s right…there’s that feeling again where deep down you know you’ve goofed and your brains are scrambling to come up with something to throw back it me just because you’re too tiny too accept defeat.
Point is, although I took time to explain it, most of you clearly did not get what I meant about relevancy. It seems it’s probably too complex…and I know you’re gonna argue that you did…but you clearly didn’t. If you had, you wouldn’t have bothered with the crap you just did (but you’re fools, and you just wanna “win”).
Disgusting.
Epibites = idiot
idiot = ice cream.
Hahaha I win, equals.
Also, you're an idiot.
*edit*
I didn't read the post, because it's bullshit, like all your others. Something just caught my eye though.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I think the song “Angels” is a great song
Don't need any other reply really.
Who are you talking to, you moron?
You keep talking about ganging up, and you post as if there's an audience of similar idiots reading your posts with foam fingers on. You think because everyone disagrees with you, they have a personal vendetta against your excellent opinions? It's more that you are quite factually an idiot. Your comments are laughable, and people reply appropriately. I had your number as soon as you said 'remember me in the Borat thread! Arguing with everyone! Like always, cos I'm just that crazy!?'
You're just an attention whore, with no attention.
You talk about people wanting to win, and make comments like 'Up by 3'.
So, I imagine there are other self-applicable comments you make. Let's have a look:
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
there’s that feeling again where deep down you know you’ve goofed and your brains are scrambling to come up with something to throw back it me just because you’re too tiny too accept defeat.
There's one.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
the point being I'd have to justify myself to people who don't know what they're talking about in the first place.
Oh, you varied the way you do it. You imagined you are 'us'.
Yeah. So anyway,
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I think the song “Angels” is a great song
Great! Good point! That doesn’t in any way make her less relevant, does it?
remind me...was it you that said this
I’ll look for something fresh and new…yes…like Lily Allen.
pick your chin up...there's a good boy
neither fresh nor new nor relevant...0 out of 3...you're doing well son...
not to mention
Aside from that, she's one of the first and definitely the biggest star whose take-off platform came in the form of a virtual community (MySpace)...very telling of the times.
2 words...arctic monkeys...and no i dont like them...and even though they're shite...they're alot more relevant that lily allen...who lets not forget has a celebrity father...and thus isn't exactly best suited to describe youth culture...given that she went to a private school
you say a band is only relevant if they use new technology...so that makes every single guitar band in existence completely irrelevant?
cause i can assure you the white stripes are far more relevant (not to mention musically gifted) than the vast majority of bands who rely on technologically produced dirge.
but its good that you see the flaw in that your intepretation of relevancy is debatable...cause everyone here knows its completely wrong
Originally posted by jaden101
i would hazard a guess at the fact that AC being English and from London makes him better placed to gauge the relevancy of a musician (and i use the term loosly) who is English and from London and who sings about being English and from London, more accurately than someone who is neither from London nor England nor even the United Kingdomnow if by some degree of a miracle she is relevant to you in Canada...then please...take her away
let it also be said that she's not doing anything thousands of other UK Urban acts haven't been doing for the past 10 years...
singing about party drugs...hahaha...that'd be the drugs that the likes of the stone roses and happy mondays were singing about 15 plus years ago
perhaps (as is typical with Northern Americans) you need your relavancy to have absolutely no subtlety about it whatsoever and those artists who put their point across without the need to spell it out for the dumb and ignorant are shunned by the brainless mainstream audience.
Just because people listen to mainstream music doesn't mean their brainless, you stupid, stupid person.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
That's right, I absolutely won't. It defies the point...the point being I'd have to justify myself to people who don't know what they're talking about in the first place. No thanks. The truth is out there...find it yourself.PS. I commend you for having the guts to be honest. Maybe you're not as feeblish as some of these other goofs are.
...and AC, still haven't read your post...that's what you get for being a joke of a conversationalist. You used your weaselish tactics one too many times to be bearable anymore.
Back to relevancy or reuniting bands then...or something.
Do you understand what 'burden of proof' is?
On the original thread topic, I'm hoping that the RATM reunion becomes something more than just a single concert; I did say when that was announced that I wouldn't consider it anymore than just a remote possibility, but it's definitely more of a possibility than it was when the reformation was announced, as Audioslave is gone...
Originally posted by Arctic
Just because people listen to mainstream music doesn't mean their brainless, you stupid, stupid person.
the fact that they dont get subtle references makes them dumb...and the fact that they only listen to mainstream music makes them ignorant...
so off with you youngster...come back when you
a: learn to read things in context
b: formulate a decent opinion
and c: learn the difference between their, there and they're
Originally posted by The Core
What's that one 2Pac song?"Me Against the World"?
If ever there were a relevant musical analogy for a thread..
haha...you notice nobody is siding with EPIII...he claims its a personal vendetta yet most of the people haven't actually had any other discussion with him other than this one...