Thunderbird demo leaked
Reverend Beastly
contained herein. I'm just a messenger.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D8BE-CSM8Tc
Someone else got their hands on the Thunderbird demo previously only
possessed by TDK and put it out there in this less-than-excellent way,
but hey, we get to hear it now! So that's fun!
-Alex
JordanCoo...@gmail.com
tad.
-Jordan
Bibliophilia
<JordanCooperLaL...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just want to note the song appears to be slowed and pitched down a
> tad.
That's just to make it fit the fabulous visuals about TDK.
Bibliophilia
> It sure would be incredible if whoever is responsible for this video
> (which is hilarious, BTW)
Actually, it's not funny. Just mean.
bushman
"Bibliophilia" <cmi...@crs.loc.gov> wrote in message
news:1172774631.9...@31g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
No, it's funny. He had/has it coming.
bushman
Danielle B.
you'll probably come across it soon enough.
On Mar 1, 12:25 pm, Rudyard Kipling <1@2.3> wrote:
> It sure would be incredible if whoever is responsible for this video
> (which is hilarious, BTW) were to put the actual song on a P2P network.
> I would love to hear a high quality copy of this Holy Grail. Not that
> I condone that sort of thing. Just dreaming aloud, really.
>
> RK
J. D. Mack
>
>Someone else got their hands on the Thunderbird demo previously only
>possessed by TDK and put it out there in this less-than-excellent way,
>but hey, we get to hear it now! So that's fun!
>
Is this really the "demo"? Sounds like an outtake full-band recording
to me. Is this really the recording that, when reversed, inspired "On
Earth My Nina"?
J. D.
makebase
I agree. So the guy is eccentric. It's not like he ran over your
puppy with his car.
scratch
it's almost certainly an outtake from the spring '99 recording sessions
(which were all scrapped save "working undercover"). i guess whether or
not you consider that a demo depends on how you define demo. as for
whether or not this recording inspired 'on earth my nina'... who knows.
the vintage is about right that it could be.
Bibliophilia
> "Bibliophilia" <cmil...@crs.loc.gov> wrote in message
Whether he had it coming is a matter of debate, but it's still not
funny.
The video was 98% devoid of wit. If someone's comedic efforts consist
mostly of name-calling, I don't know about you, but that stopped being
funny to me in the 8th grade.
Bibliophilia
Yeah. In the TMBG fandom, dissing people for being eccentric would
take up way too much time. I mean, this is an eccentric bunch on
average. Live and let live sounds more productive.
Quinn Collard
> Yeah. In the TMBG fandom, dissing people for being eccentric would
> take up way too much time. I mean, this is an eccentric bunch on
> average. Live and let live sounds more productive.
I think what bothers people isn't the being "eccentric" but the doing
things like getting a copy of this in order to quote "keep it away from
people like us."
--
Quinn
http://www.museumofidiots.com
"the website that some call eternal, that some call insane"
All the Democrats I've talked to know exactly what they stand for: not
being Republicans. ~The Onion
Raymond DeCampo
You people need to get a life.
Ray
--
[orange divider bar]
This signature is not self-referential.
teil...@gmail.com
> Bibliophilia wrote:
> > Yeah. In the TMBG fandom, dissing people for being eccentric would
> > take up way too much time. I mean, this is an eccentric bunch on
> > average. Live and let live sounds more productive.
> I think what bothers people isn't the being "eccentric" but the doing
> things like getting a copy of this in order to quote "keep it away from
> people like us."
I don't think he did that. I've only talked to him a little but I get
the impression that he's nice but just has trouble communicating well;
the Internet is full of people like that. I see it as a case of people
being jealous but not wanting to admit it, so they blame it on him
since they don't like him anyway. Why does he have an obligation to
give people a song, which the band has apparently told him not to
spread around, just because they really want it? It's amazing how
shitty TMBG fans can be to each other (you've certainly experienced
this).
As for the video, I'm surprised and dismayed that so many people
reacted positively to it. For one thing, the sound quality is awful,
although I guess we're used to that from Dial-A-Song. The video...
well, I already commented on it as teiladnam. I've been trying to
think of a better word than "childish" but, really, that's the best
description. It's like a big tantrum. (I'm of course used to this on a
smaller scale since I have a few friends who don't like TDK and
therefore frequently make jokes about his penis.) The fake-Flans-
quoting part is especially lame. If he started dissing his fans
because of their lifestyle choices when compared to the norm, he'd
probably chase away about 75% of them. Plus John Flansburgh has
personally told me that he hates it when people put words in his
mouth. (Note: not really.)
--
http://www.mandaliet.com
scratch
i can pull up the IM log if absolutely necessary.
> I see it as a case of people
> being jealous but not wanting to admit it, so they blame it on him
> since they don't like him anyway.
there was a discussion thread about this CD on the newsgroup for several
hours before TDK bought it. he bought it specifically so none of us
would get it. he's told me about other instances when he's bid hundreds
of dollars for rare TMBG stuff on ebay for the same reason.
> As for the video, I'm surprised and dismayed that so many people
> reacted positively to it. For one thing, the sound quality is awful,
> although I guess we're used to that from Dial-A-Song. The video...
> well, I already commented on it as teiladnam. I've been trying to
> think of a better word than "childish" but, really, that's the best
> description. It's like a big tantrum. (I'm of course used to this on a
> smaller scale since I have a few friends who don't like TDK and
> therefore frequently make jokes about his penis.) The fake-Flans-
> quoting part is especially lame. If he started dissing his fans
> because of their lifestyle choices when compared to the norm, he'd
> probably chase away about 75% of them. Plus John Flansburgh has
> personally told me that he hates it when people put words in his
> mouth. (Note: not really.)
i'll agree, the video was lame and poorly done...
-scratch
Danielle B.
little socially inept. Sorry Mike, if you read this. :p
teil...@gmail.com
> teilad...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I don't think he did that.
>
> i can pull up the IM log if absolutely necessary.
Okay.
> there was a discussion thread about this CD on the newsgroup for several
> hours before TDK bought it. he bought it specifically so none of us
> would get it.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.music.tmbg/browse_frm/thread/37975a7052c234db/82a6a1fa60408d7d
David Levy: "you made no mention of the specific retailer in your
post, and it happens to be one that my brother checks on a regular
basis. (and has purchased rare TMBG items from in the past)"
Also: "My brother genuinely wanted to distribute the track, but Dot
explicitly told him not to make any copies."
A quote from Steven Shilling that I greatly agree with: "What the hell
is wrong with all you people? Will you listen to what you're saying?
You're mad because Mike got a CD and won't share it with anyone? So
what! If he buys a CD, it's nobody's business but his own! He can do
whatever he wants with it. He has no obligation to share it with
anyone. You think just because you want something really bad, that
means your entitled to someone else's copy of it?? And why
the hell would he want to give copies to any of you when you've done
nothing but harrass him."
Since we're disrespecting the band's wishes here, why don't we just
get pissed off at them for not releasing the song?
~D~
> The high quality copy has been leaked as well. It's going around, and
> you'll probably come across it soon enough.
TDK has been coming over his copy for 5 years.
But I think you mean this:
http://download.yousendit.com/C1433D654CAD2D82
Dar
~D~
> explicitly told him not to make any copies."
Aha, yes. Because HE contacted Dot and ASKED her. What do you think an
employee of the band is going to say when asked "can i distribute the bands
material for free?" If he wanted to distribute it, he would have. The first
recording of Thunderbird in circulation was a live copy from TDK's website.
He contacted Dot because it was a guaranteed way of withholding the track
and being smug about it.
Here's interesting... when I had an advance copy of The Spine (which I still
do, if anyone wants to buy it - it has the alternate version of 'Au
Contraire'!) TDK informed Dot that I had put it on Ebay. She contacted Ebay
(before she contacted me actually - not very nice as it could have cost me
my ebay reputation) and had the sale stopped. But then she wrote me and
apologised over the Ebay debacle and requested that I actually send my
advance copy back to her. She had spoken to manager Jamie and he offered to
send me out a real copy in exchange, upon the real release date. I refused.
After all, I had paid more for the advance copy than the street copy was
worth. So here's my question - why didnt TDK return his copy to her? Its all
very well to take moral highground and claim that you are obeying the bands
edict not to distribute - but would he have returned it if asked? Was he
perhaps asked?
> Since we're disrespecting the band's wishes here, why don't we just
> get pissed off at them for not releasing the song?
They did. It was on The Spine. We all bought it. Way I see it is, we bought
into that song. Its only right that we get to hear it now.
And you can! At: http://download.yousendit.com/C1433D654CAD2D82
...apparently.
Dar
Bryce
> Plus John Flansburgh has personally told me that he
> hates it when people put words in his mouth. (Note:
> not really.)
I just wanted to make sure you knew this joke didn't go unnoticed. It made
my evening.
But while I'm here, I'll add that yes, ridiculing TDK is pointless and
juvenile, but also yes, I am glad to get to hear this thing at last. (The
lyrics are correct! Huzzah! :P )
Bryce
Bibliophilia
> On Mar 2, 5:12 pm, scratch <scra...@the-pentagon.com> wrote:
>
> > teilad...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > I don't think he did that.
>
> > i can pull up the IM log if absolutely necessary.
>
> Okay.
>
AH. Thank you, teilad, now this all makes more sense.
Quinn Collard
> It's amazing how
> shitty TMBG fans can be to each other (you've certainly experienced
> this).
You're definitely right about that, which is why I can be at least
somewhat sympathetic about this stuff. I want to make it clear that
I'm not condoning the video and its ilk; I just wanted to clarify
what the motivation for this stuff probably is.
q.
teil...@gmail.com
Yeah, I figured that. I should probably also make it clear that my
post wasn't completely directed at you; your post was just a good
jumping-off point. It's hard to talk to one people and many person at
the same time.
Also, I wish Google would quit identifying me by my e-mail address
instead of my name.
Chris Kuan
> Also, I wish Google would quit identifying me by my e-mail address
> instead of my name.
Try creating a Profile for yourself, and adding your name there. I have no
idea if it'll work.
--
Chris
Concatenate for email: mrgazpacho @ hotmail . com
JordanCoo...@gmail.com
My thoughts:
While there are some baffling arrangement choices (some oddly impotent
guitar squeels and too subtle keyboard things that aren't very
confident, but maybe it's just a very very very rough mix), I have to
say this version is closer to how I "feel" the song then what's on the
Spine.
It's tougher, rocking, got a better rhythm. However it's still
lacking, and does fall a bit flat.
I feel like this is just a "problem song" that they just couldn't get
right. My theory? The drums. On both versions I think the drums are
lacking energy, and if there was some really out there explosive
drumming, everything could be a lot more exciting. HOWEVER the drums
are better here...My MAIN problem with the Spine version is there are
no 1/8th notes. It's all just THUMP THUMP THUMP THUMP when it should
be duhduhduhduh duhduhduhduh... know what I mean? This is meant to be
a fast song. I bet if it were on their FIRST album the rhythm would
be nuts!
When I first heard the harmonies on the Spine version I hated them!
But now I miss them! Shows what I know! (Though one of the guitar
squeels kind of does the harmony.)
Linnell sounds a bit stiff, and I have to admit his Spine version is a
lot more thoughtful.
Jordan
Raymond DeCampo
To my philistine ears, it doesn't sound like it was worth the fuss that
has been made over it.
~D~
>
> To my philistine ears, it doesn't sound like it was worth the fuss that
> has been made over it.
My friend Russ said exactly the same thing. He can't tell the difference.
You have to remember that the 'fuss' people remember was all pre-spine. The
song had been previewed at shows, years had passed and it was missed off
Mink Car.
My take on the two versions is that neither of them got it quite right, but
its still an awesome song. The guitar based demo is a better arrangement -
more ballsy. But the singing is a bit flat, and the tempo is a tad too slow.
The Spine version was shorter for being a faster tempo and omitting a couple
of lines - but the song needed the variation that the last verse brings in.
I'm glad I have both versions now.
Dar
JordanCoo...@gmail.com
> But the singing is a bit flat, and the tempo is a tad too slow.
Again, the mp3 appears to be slowed down and pitched down literally a
tad.
Jordan
~D~
> tad.
A 'tad' is right! I can play along with it in the key of G (the same key the
spine version is played in) and doesnt sound wildly dischordant or anything.
Just ever so slightly pitched down maybe. But to make a significant
difference to the speed of the recording would require it to go much further
off key. Also, it would be a really shitty ripping program that rips from a
digital source like a CD and makes a digital copy that is pitched
differently.
What we are hearing is nigh-on the speed it was performed at. If you can
hear the difference you can probably also hear dog whistles.
And see fairies.
Darrell
JordanCoo...@gmail.com
> What we are hearing is nigh-on the speed it was performed at. If you can
> hear the difference you can probably also hear dog whistles.
>
I COULD hear the difference, instantly, I could tell it was off.
When I try playing along on my keyboard, it's completely out of tune,
both on the right note (i.e. "The spine" version) and the would-be
note a semitone under it. It's in between and ALTHOUGH IT'S SUBTLE
it's contributing to the track feeling sluggish.
Jordan
Bibliophilia
> On Mar 3, 2:01 pm, "Quinn Collard" <nightmarepers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 2, 6:53 pm, teilad...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > It's amazing how
> > > shitty TMBG fans can be to each other (you've certainly experienced
> > > this).
>
> > You're definitely right about that, which is why I can be at least
> > somewhat sympathetic about this stuff. I want to make it clear that
> > I'm not condoning the video and its ilk; I just wanted to clarify
> > what the motivation for this stuff probably is.
>
> Yeah, I figured that. I should probably also make it clear that my
> post wasn't completely directed at you; your post was just a good
> jumping-off point. It's hard to talk to one people and many person at
> the same time.
So, basically, this settles down to the idea that Mike is not a *bad
person*, but he has lost points with the TMBG community for two
reasons: a) His behavior about copyright, and b) his modus operandi
during pursuit of The Glory of having a very complete collection of
the music of his favorite band.
Namely, that he is aggressive in acquiring rare recordings, perhaps
beyond the bounds of the group's generally agreed-upon rules of
etiquette, and that he is on the forks of the problem that The Glory
in being the world's greatest collector of TMBG only rains down when,
according to group norms, you share the rare stuff, but that is direct
contradiction to what the band has requested.
Did I get it right?
scratch
>
> So, basically, this settles down to the idea that Mike is not a *bad
> person*, but he has lost points with the TMBG community for two
> reasons: a) His behavior about copyright, and b) his modus operandi
> during pursuit of The Glory of having a very complete collection of
> the music of his favorite band.
>
> Namely, that he is aggressive in acquiring rare recordings, perhaps
> beyond the bounds of the group's generally agreed-upon rules of
> etiquette, and that he is on the forks of the problem that The Glory
> in being the world's greatest collector of TMBG only rains down when,
> according to group norms, you share the rare stuff, but that is direct
> contradiction to what the band has requested.
>
> Did I get it right?
>
like i said, he has explicitly told me in the past that he bids "as much
as it takes" on rare TMBG items on ebay "to keep it out of the hands of
people like you".
-scratch
Danielle B.
Bibliophilia
> like i said, he has explicitly told me in the past that he bids "as much
> as it takes" on rare TMBG items on ebay "to keep it out of the hands of
> people like you".
Hm. People like you, scratch? It sort implies that you're ... what,
er, infidels? Pornographers? Against the Constitution? "People
like you" is a loaded phrase, unfortunately, if those were his words.
Bibliophilia
wrote:
NO! TMBG singing a little flat! Never!
scratch
i'm assuming he meant people that might be willing to share.
-scratch
scratch
>
> On Mar 2, 10:18 pm, "~D~" <d...@poop.com> wrote:
>> "Danielle B."
>>
>>> The high quality copy has been leaked as well. It's going around, and
>>> you'll probably come across it soon enough.
>>
>> TDK has been coming over his copy for 5 years.
>>
>> But I think you mean this:
>>
>
> I know what I mean.
have you actually witnessed tdk coming over his copy?
-scratch
Raymond DeCampo
In this case it probably means people who aren't him, which of course is
the point of bidding on any auction.
Bibliophilia
>
> have you actually witnessed tdk coming over his copy?
Oh. Ew. Thank you for that image, which is now stuck in my brain. O.o
It is interesting, though, the idea that someone would be that excited
over something so abstract as the joy of getting a demo no one else
has. :)
Bibliophilia
> Bibliophilia wrote:
> > On Mar 5, 5:22 pm, scratch <scra...@the-pentagon.com> wrote:
>
> >> like i said, he has explicitly told me in the past that he bids "as much
> >> as it takes" on rare TMBG items on ebay "to keep it out of the hands of
> >> people like you".
>
> > Hm. People like you, scratch? It sort implies that you're ... what,
> > er, infidels? Pornographers? Against the Constitution? "People
> > like you" is a loaded phrase, unfortunately, if those were his words.
>
> In this case it probably means people who aren't him, which of course is
> the point of bidding on any auction.
:) You people who aren't me *stink*
hee hee.
Well, maybe, Ray. That's why I asked. :)
Danielle B.
Nope, I haven't witnessed him coming over his Thunderbird Demo copy.
Darangutan
> > the point of bidding on any auction.
If he was prepared to pay any amount to keep TMBG memorabilia from
falling into any hands but his own, then he would have bid for my
spine promo instead of contacting Dot and getting her to stop the
auction.
Did I just say something in defense of TDK? I think I almost did.
Incidentally, at that time I wrote a track-by-track review of The
Spine which was on my website about a month or two before the album
was released. I'd just like to say a big hello to the tosser that took
the review, threw in a few Americanisms to stop it sounding like it
had been written by anyone British, and then posted it to kungfoo.com
as their own work. U am a twot!!
~Dar~
Raymond DeCampo
>>> In this case it probably means people who aren't him, which of course is
>>> the point of bidding on any auction.
>
> If he was prepared to pay any amount to keep TMBG memorabilia from
> falling into any hands but his own, then he would have bid for my
> spine promo instead of contacting Dot and getting her to stop the
> auction.
>
> Did I just say something in defense of TDK? I think I almost did.
That would be interesting since my comments (unattributed, above) were
not meant as an attack.
nixonismyhero
wrote:
> DISCLAIMER: I had nothing to do with the release of this or the video
> contained herein. I'm just a messenger.
>
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=D8BE-CSM8Tc
>
> Someone else got their hands on the Thunderbird demo previously only
> possessed by TDK and put it out there in this less-than-excellent way,
> but hey, we get to hear it now! So that's fun!
>
> -Alex
great song. i love that dropped lyric. also, the video editing is
great when the crowd and "TDK" are going back and forth on each part.
not that i agree with the whole shitting on other fans things, but
interesting the way that portion was done.
its funny, a similar thing happened with phish. they had a contest
where a fan won a copy of a song. it was up to them how to use it. the
fan decided to make it available on livephish.com with proceeds going
to charity. but they gave the option to keep it. maybe its different
because phish encouraged tape trading and whatnot. i can see with tmbg
how its a lot different. more unreleased material, less live
recording. just interesting from that perspective.
i say the motto of the band should be the motto of the fans; "melody,
fidelity, quantity". in other words, can we all just get along?
Jay G.
> "Danielle B."
>> The high quality copy has been leaked as well. It's going around, and
>> you'll probably come across it soon enough.
>
> I think you mean this:
>
> http://download.yousendit.com/C1433D654CAD2D82
I missed getting this song before the link expired. Anyone know where else
I can get a copy of it?
-Jay
the great quux
> its funny, a similar thing happened with phish. they had a contest where
> a fan won a copy of a song. it was up to them how to use it. the fan
> decided to make it available on livephish.com with proceeds going to
> charity. but they gave the option to keep it. maybe its different
> because phish encouraged tape trading and whatnot. i can see with tmbg
> how its a lot different. more unreleased material, less live recording.
> just interesting from that perspective.
headphones jam :) wish they'd get together just to do something like
that again. i wonder if with today's technology you could put the four
of them on a square at corners of the U.S. and have them jam long
distance with only each other's headphones.
David Levy
> Because HE contacted Dot and ASKED her. What do you think an
> employee of the band is going to say when asked "can i
> distribute the bands material for free?" If he wanted to
> distribute it, he would have. The first recording of
> Thunderbird in circulation was a live copy from TDK's website.
> He contacted Dot because it was a guaranteed way of
> withholding the track and being smug about it.
Actually, my brother first inquired with Michael Kahn, who advised him
that Dot probably would grant permission to post the song online.
> So here's my question - why didnt TDK return his copy to her?
> Its all very well to take moral highground and claim that you
> are obeying the bands edict not to distribute - but would he
> have returned it if asked? Was he perhaps asked?
In fact, my brother *offered* to send the CD to Dot. She declined.
Subsequently, I was with Mike when he consulted John and John at an
autograph signing. He stressed the fans' desire to hear the recording
and requested that they release it online. They explained that they
weren't satisfied with it and didn't want it to be distributed. I
blurted out something about people resenting Mike for his refusal to
share the song, and Flansburgh apologized for that and thanked him for
standing his ground.
Mike offered to turn over the CD on the spot, but the Johns also
declined to accept it. Flansburgh commented that it was "in good
hands."
So yeah, while we all wanted a copy of the song (which my brother
refused to even share with me), it irks me to see people treating him
in this manner because he honored the band's wishes.
Thunderbird
Yes, could someone please re-post the song please? I'm sure many
people would be much obliged.
~D~
> Actually, my brother first inquired with Michael Kahn, who advised him
> that Dot probably would grant permission to post the song online.
Wasnt Michael Kahn a record company exec, though? Looking back at your
almost identical post from 4 years ago you said that this Kahn bloke
admitted that Restless had no rights over the song. The fact that he
suggested Dot might say yes doesnt really invalidate my point that your
brother was seeking someone to say 'no'.
> In fact, my brother *offered* to send the CD to Dot. She declined.
Even though that might not have been the right thing for her to say, because
a few years later she asked me to return my promo and I said no.
> Subsequently, I was with Mike when he consulted John and John at an
> autograph signing. He stressed the fans' desire to hear the recording
> and requested that they release it online. They explained that they
> weren't satisfied with it and didn't want it to be distributed. I
> blurted out something about people resenting Mike for his refusal to
> share the song, and Flansburgh apologized for that and thanked him for
> standing his ground.
> Mike offered to turn over the CD on the spot, but the Johns also
> declined to accept it. Flansburgh commented that it was "in good
> hands."
Oh, Captain Oates!!! Why keep announcing what you are going to do over and
over if you're not really hoping that someone will stop you? Of course they
are going to say no! That's their job. What I didnt realise was that the job
of a fan was to obey the band's wishes at all times without question! I
thought the job of a fan was to buy the records and turn up at shows, but
hey I'm old fashioned.
This is all pointless. All of it. He didnt share it with anyone, but now
someone else has. Its too late for your brother to appear in any way
benevolent. Maybe he should have let it out after everyone bought 'Spine'
and had the finished version, when it wouldnt really have mattered.
Darrell
David Levy
> Wasnt Michael Kahn a record company exec, though? Looking back
> at your almost identical post from 4 years ago you said that this
> Kahn bloke admitted that Restless had no rights over the song. The
> fact that he suggested Dot might say yes doesnt really invalidate
> my point that your brother was seeking someone to say 'no'.
No, he really wasn't. My brother had an unrealistic expectation
(reinforced by Michael Kahn), but he truly wanted to share the
recording. Dot's response came as a tremendous disappointment.
> > > So here's my question - why didnt TDK return his copy to her?
> > > Its all very well to take moral highground and claim that you
> > > are obeying the bands edict not to distribute - but would he
> > > have returned it if asked? Was he perhaps asked?
> > In fact, my brother *offered* to send the CD to Dot. She
> > declined.
> Even though that might not have been the right thing for her to
> say, because a few years later she asked me to return my promo and
> I said no.
Was that the right thing for her to say? I have no idea. I'm merely
answering the above questions.
> Why keep announcing what you are going to do over and over if
> you're not really hoping that someone will stop you?
1. You seem to be of the opinion that it would have been okay (from a
moral standpoint) to distribute the recording unless explicitly told
not to. (So why the hell didn't Mike just keep his mouth shut and
share the song?!) From my brother's perspective, the default
assumption was that the recording should *not* have been distributed,
and this would have changed only if he'd received permission to the
contrary.
As I've commented before, I would have simply ripped an MP3 and shared
it with everyone. It's reasonable to disagree with Mike's strict code
of ethics (as I do), but it's beyond absurd to claim that he derived
perverse pleasure from keeping the song all to himself.
2. My brother didn't seek permission from the Johns to distribute the
recording. He asked them to put it online (which is something that
they sometimes do with otherwise unreleased songs). This was not an
unrealistic request.
> What I didnt realise was that the job of a fan was to obey the
> band's wishes at all times without question!
That's what my brother chooses to do, and he has every right. If you
believe that this makes him an asshole, that's fine. I've called him
worse to his face. Just stop inventing ridiculous motives.