Chris Roberts is a piss stain on shoddy music journalism's already badly soiled underpants
Mr.Psychosis
this is one big mo'fucker of a rant. It will involve swearing and generally
unwholesome vocabulary. If there is anyone reading this who normally takes
offence at the mild vulgarity of "Bottom" then please move onto the next
post. You won't be impressed with this.
Right, that's all the wankers out of the way, now onto the smug cunt that's
really pissed me off today. Just to add a bit of background information,
late last night I listened to SOTSOG from beginning to end. Then I played
(WTS)MG? straight after. They both sounded fucking excellent to me, and I
was singing me bollocks off like I normally do. I don't know about anyone
else, but for me listening to Oasis at night on my headphones with the knob
turned up to eleven really brings out the quality of their music. Like Ethel
Skinner (gawd rest 'er soul) once said, to really appreciate Oasis you've
got to play it LOUD. Anyway, I was listening to Oasis very loudly in the
dark, as I lay under my continental quilt (that just happens to lie on an
Englishman's bed - natch) and I once again realised what a great fucking
band Oasis are. Noel's melodies are awe-inspiringly magnificent, his lyrics
are a mixture of the daft and the profound, and Liam's singing is as
impressively impassioned as ever. In other words, they are fucking class,
and no twat's gonna convince me otherwise. I know what I felt last night,
and it was undeniably brilliant. But I'll just stick to the music for now.
So, having decided last night that Oasis are still my favourite band in the
world, I go out today to look around a few record shops just to see what
other bands are about to challenge for that honour. As per usual on my
forays into town, I take a quick look through some of the music publications
in the vain hope of actually spotting some journalistic integrity. However,
amongst the usual bandwagonesque Oasis piss-taking, I noticed a live review
of Oasis' Friday gig at Wembley Stadium in UNCUT magazine by some no-mark
tosser who goes by the name of Chris Roberts. Even by the standards of the
usual anti-Oasis-for-the-sake-of-it journalism I have come to expect and
despise in the last few years, this was vitriolic stuff. Judging by what
this cretin wrote, it would appear that "my favourite band in the world" are
shite, always were shite, and will always be shite until they finally decide
to put themselves out of their shite-infested misery. According to the
"fountain of musical wisdom" that is Chris Roberts, rock'n'roll is dead.
Well that's fucking news to me. Apparently Liam has zero charisma, with
nothing to say. Noel is a talentless plagiarist with no lyrical or musical
ideas to speak of. Oh yeah, and Oasis fans are a bunch of thick bastards who
don't know what decent music is. Needless to say I didn't buy the shitty
magazine.
Well, Chris Roberts you can fuck right off. Your opinion is offensive to me,
and I reserve the right to call you a smug and patronising little
cocksucker. You actually got paid to attend the gig of many people's lives
and you have the fucking nerve to moan about it. What the fuck were you
doing there? Don't give me fucking "journalistic reasons". That gig was for
fans of Oasis. Not for you. Thousands of people went and had a fucking good
time. You went and moaned about it in a national music magazine. You are one
sad fucker. When will people like you (and there are many in your
"profession") going to understand that Oasis are a great fucking rock'n'roll
band? You go on about Lou Reed, and wanting rock'n'roll to be about more
than having a good fucking time. Lou Reed didn't fucking invent rock'n'roll.
The Velvet Undergound had their thing, and it was cool in an avant garde
kind of way (who was it who said avant garde was French for pretentious
bollocks?), but they don't define rock'n'roll. Little Richard, Chuck Berry,
Buddy Holly, etc were there at the start. They knew what rock'n'roll was
about. It was about having a good fucking time. Fans who went to see Oasis
at Wembley had a good fucking time. You went there and hated it. You are the
sad bastard, not us Oasis fans.
And this whole fucking idea that Oasis represent everything that is bad
about modern British music is so fucking off-target it's pointi ng
directly up your own arse. Just as I don't blame Radiohead for the pile of
pretentious, pseudo-intellectual bollocks that is Muse, and just as I don't
blame Nirvana for the manic-depression-as-a-career-move that is Bush, so I
don't blame Oasis for the musical travesty that is the Stereophonics. I am
an Oasis fan. I am not a fan of Travis, OCS or Embrace. I fucking hate it
when Oasis get lumped in with that lot. Oasis are a great fucking band, with
a brilliantly soulful singer and a songwriter of severely underated genius.
They are up there with other soulful bands like Primal Scream, The Roses,
The Verve and The Charlatans. Your smug, self-satisfied opinion of what
constitutes rock'n'roll fills me with contempt for you and the people you
represent in music journalism. Who the fuck are you to tell me what
rock'n'roll should be about? You're nothing to me. The day you write a song
like "Live Forever" or "Slide Away" is the day I respect your fucking
opinion. In other words, I will never respect your fucking opinion. And
don't think you're fucking special just because I've singled you out. You
are no better or worse than any of the other toss-pots who write reactionary
bollocks in the music press. I understand what rock'n'roll is. You think you
do, but you don't. Oasis are a great fucking rock'n'roll band and you're so
fucking anal about what constitutes rock'n'roll that you can't even see it.
You don't have a fucking clue. And I don't even care that you're not reading
this, because I just needed to get it out.
If anyone else wants to read the utterings of someone who has no concept of
how completely shite they really are, just read the review by Chris Roberts
in the october issue of UNCUT. Once you read that, you will realise why I
hate fucking music journalists who are more concerned with furthering their
careers than actually listening to music for the shear enjoyment it can
bring. Oasis are a celebration of rock'n'roll, and this cunt's so far up his
arse he can't even see it. Fuck him, and fuck any cunt of a music journalist
who doesn't agree with me. You are all wrong, and you will be proved wrong
by history. Just fuck right off the lot of you.
Rant fucking over. But the war has just fucking started. Kill all cretinous
music journos. Roberts, you're first. I'm coming after you. Watch your
fucking back.
MyShout
But, as you said, there are always gonna be journalists (And people) who
hate Oasis. Console yourself with the millions that don't!
Who the fuck reads Uncut magazine anyway! Isn't Q the most popular with 100
000 a month? And they haven't given Oasis a bad review since WTS(MG)!
Irrelevant I know, but they do reach more people than that Uncut shite!
Clearly, the opinions of a few music journos aren't gonna impact or
influence the general public. It's those tabloid-journo-bastards at the
Daily Star and The Mirror that want sorting out!
jamiec21
the mag
what i did find amusing was the caption at the top of the page - oasis live
was the main review - and the caption was summat like - "reviews: shows that
you couldnt afford to miss" or very similar words, i can't quite remember -
basically saying you had to be there. Now, you couldn't afford to miss a
shit gig could you, cos you could.
Basically that cunt is like the typical british music journalist - build 'em
up then knock em down.
Even though i thought Liam's voice was shit that night, it was still THE
rock gig of the last 3 years by far, and as Noel sung that night, Rock 'n'
Roll will never die.
by the way, Mr P, as Comic Book Guy would say "best rant ever"!
--
Jamie
"music, music, music, music, let's talk about music"
Noel Gallagher, 1994
"I stare at hotel walls and wonder 'where did it all go right?' "
Noel Gallagher, 1995
"Would Jesus Christ have been a pervert if he'd had a crisp packet on his
head?"
Liam Gallagher, 1997
"If I catch you dickhead, I'll break yer fuckin arse, yer family's arse and
yer mother's fuckin arse! Pack it in!"
Liam Gallagher, 2000 (after getting hit by object on stage)
Go Let It Out - Rare Oasis Mp3's
http://www.acquiesce.freeserve.co.uk/GoLetItOut.html
"Mr.Psychosis" <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
Bish
news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
perhaps fan's of the above may feel the same about you as you
do towards Chris Roberts.
>Fuck him, and fuck any cunt of a music journalist
>who doesn't agree with me. You are all wrong, and you will be proved wrong
>by history.
I disgree with what he said in the review but surely he is
entitled to his own opinion. Not everyone has to like Oasis.
I admit the review was really negative and sounded like he
was really trying to piss Oasis fans off. Which in your case
he succeeds.
You really need to chill out a bit.
The K
They'd look great at the back of one of his books.
On another note i saw Snatch today. brilliant movie - just as [every
positively charged english adjective] as Lock Stock and Fuckin In The Bushes
was used to amazing effect. Everyone in the cinema was entranced by the
whole thing and my boyband loving friends (of the music apparently - but who
knows) thought the music was amazing. Incredible then how they describe
Oasis in general as boring, tuneless and 'not as good as Bon Jovi'. Where
the f*ck do these opinions come from?
And Psychosis - you're right. You listen to Go Let It Out at night, volume
on full, looking up at the faintly illuminated clouds across a glowing red
night sky and it sounds like the best music ever devised/sung/performed.
Until of course, it finishes and Who Feels Love takes it place. Play any
other song, Cloudburst, Take Me Away, Force Of Nature, SMC and it has the
same effect. I can't think of any other band with which you(I) could do
that. Even the Stone Roses, despite their genius, had a songwriting output
significantly less than that of Oasis.
Mr.Psychosis <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
MyShout
other cheek some place else!
There is such a thing as unnecessary and petty criticisms you know. And
Chris Roberts is surely guilty of making them (Much like that cunt Ben
Gilbert at Dotmusic. Funny how Gilbert gave Oasis' Reading appearance a bad
review (He always gives them bad reviws), but Ruth Whatsername of Dotmusic,
what was it she said about Leeds, oh yes "They came, they saw and despite
being slagged off, they conquered!.. but I digress!). Emphasized by the
fact that most reviewers thought the Friday show was pretty good, not as
good as Saturday apparently........ but still excellent nonetheless!
It's true, even fucking Bambi had enemies (I laughed out loud when his
mother had her head blown off! >:-P), but there are limts to what can be
considered objective criticisms!
Bish <paulbish.nospam.@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8q0qoh$hv9$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> "Mr.Psychosis" <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> > pretentious, pseudo-intellectual bollocks that is Muse,
> > the musical travesty that is the Stereophonics.
>
> perhaps fan's of the above may feel the same about you as you
> do towards Chris Roberts.
>
> >Fuck him, and fuck any cunt of a music journalist
> >who doesn't agree with me. You are all wrong, and you will be proved
wrong
> >by history.
>
Mr.Psychosis
MyShout wrote in message <8q0lpn$7ft$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>So, we can assume you don't like Chris Roberts.
That is a fair assumption. That twat is asking for it.
Mr.Psychosis
jamiec21 wrote in message <8q0q0q$e41re$1...@ID-35858.news.cis.dfn.de>...
>yeah, i read that article today in WHSmiths, needless to say i didn't buy
>the mag
I'm demanding here and now the immediate resignation of Chris Roberts from
that particular publication, and until he goes I'm going to boycott it. Not
that I normally buy it anyway. Have you seen the price? It's a fucking
rip-off. Besides, it's a bit too fucking middle-aged for my liking. Mojo
does that sort of thing much better. That thing being to arse-lick ex-music
legends whilst ignoring living ones who haven't earned their spurs. Uncut
are quite happy to put Oasis on the cover to sell their propaganda, but they
are starting to take fucking liberties.
>what i did find amusing was the caption at the top of the page - oasis live
>was the main review - and the caption was summat like - "reviews: shows
that
>you couldnt afford to miss" or very similar words, i can't quite remember -
>basically saying you had to be there. Now, you couldn't afford to miss a
>shit gig could you, cos you could.
Exactly. See my previous point. If it was so shit, why give it a full page
review with a nice big picture of Liam? Cos it will help sell their
magazine, that's why. Because Oasis are an important band. If they had any
integrity, they would have given that page over to another band who they
actually rate. It makes my blood boil.
>Basically that cunt is like the typical british music journalist - build
'em
>up then knock em down.
They build up really, really crap bands too just so they can take great
pleasure in ripping them to shreds when their second album comes along.
Menswear anyone? The poor lads in that band had nervous breakdowns because
of it. It's a good job Noel and Liam are thick-skinned.
>Even though i thought Liam's voice was shit that night, it was still THE
>rock gig of the last 3 years by far, and as Noel sung that night, Rock 'n'
>Roll will never die.
Exactly. Who are you gonna believe? Neil Young, a geezer who has lasted four
decades in music, and who has written many, many classics himself, or Chris
Roberts who has, um, done fuck all except attend a gig by a band he has
never rated just so he can write a full page review saying how shit the band
are. That is one sad fucking way to earn a crust.
Mr.Psychosis
Bish wrote in message <8q0qoh$hv9$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
>"Mr.Psychosis" <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
>
>do towards Chris Roberts.
Except I didn't get paid for my comments, and I didn't publish them in a
national music magazine. And above all, I didn't attend a Muse or
Stereophonics gig with the intention of slagging it off no matter how good
or bad it was. I don't rate either band, so I won't attend any of their
gigs. What's the point? This is an Oasis newsgroup. I am defending the band
that I love. A band that have given me great pleasure over the years. I'm
not going to have some average music journalist (and make no mistake, he is
decidedly average. At least Swells makes an effort to be entertaining)
telling me I've been listening to a pile of shite for the last six years. If
fans of Muse or the Stereophonics were offended, then they have a forum in
which to defend their case if they can be arsed, but the point I was making
was that you shouldn't blame important bands for the piss-poor rip-offs that
follow. It's always happened and always will. I'm fed up of journos using
the likes of Travis and the Stereophonics to have a go at Oasis. They didn't
use the Stone Temple Pilots as a stick to beat Nirvana with, or use Gerry
and the fucking Pacemakers as a reason to slag off The Beatles. We wouldn't
have any musical heroes if we did that. These people exist just to ruin
other more-talented people's careers. That is fucking sad in my book.
>>Fuck him, and fuck any cunt of a music journalist
>>who doesn't agree with me. You are all wrong, and you will be proved wrong
>>by history.
>
>I disgree with what he said in the review but surely he is
>entitled to his own opinion. Not everyone has to like Oasis.
He shouldn't have gone to the fucking gig then. Don't waste a page of your
magazine on a band you so obviously don't rate. Give it to a more deserving
band. I wouldn't have minded so much if he said they'd started out good, but
had gotten shit lately. He would have been wrong, but at least he would have
been a fan of Oasis to start with. But this fool says they were always shit.
How the hell is he in a position to say how good a gig that was?
>I admit the review was really negative and sounded like he
>was really trying to piss Oasis fans off. Which in your case
>he succeeds.
He had a negative attitude to them from the start, and he used that review
as a platform to be controversial in order to make a name for himself. Well,
he has made a name for himself, and it will always be synonymous with being
a complete tosser. I can think of better ways to make a name for yourself.
Like writing some great rock'n'roll tunes, for example. Far more honourable,
IMO.
>You really need to chill out a bit.
And this place needs to start getting more fucking passionate about this
band. If we're not careful, this band I'm assuming we all love is gonna be
made a fucking laughing stock by low-lifes who aren't even fit to blow coke
up Liam's hairy arse through a straw with a bendy bit (for better
penetration). Oasis fans' voices need to be heard. Or are we just gonna
shrug our shoulders and say, "well, you're entitled to your opinion"? Sod
that. I'd rather tell them to fuck off and die in a pool of their own vomit.
Bish
From: "MyShout" <M...@Home.com>
Subject: Re: Chris Roberts is a piss stain on shoddy music journalism's
already badly soiled underpants
> Jeez, aren't you late for your service at the Cathedral Bish? Go turn the
> other cheek some place else!
Sorry but I'm not going to get all worked up on a review
such as Mr Roberts gave in uncut, especially when that
was his obvious intent to begin with.
Bish
Angel Child
"tonight, this is your life, this is your life, ANGEL CHILD of mine"
Mr.Psychosis <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
fountainhead
Mr.Psychosis wrote in message <8q1ad0$r96$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
>I wouldn't have minded so much if he said they'd started out good, but
>had gotten shit lately. He would have been wrong, but at least he would
have
>been a fan of Oasis to start with.
that's what i've said... but it never stopped you telling me to get out
of a.m.o.
f.
--
i could dance you to death on a friday night
founta...@earthling.net - see da shit at http://www.locked.co.uk
death by spanking ::: the alt.music.blur homepage and faq
----------------------- http://www.blurry.co.uk ---------
Mr.Psychosis
fountainhead wrote in message <39c4b...@news1.vip.uk.com>...
>>had gotten shit lately. He would have been wrong, but at least he would
>>have been a fan of Oasis to start with.
>
>of a.m.o.
Tut. Are you still here?
;)
I still don't understand why you're here, because your musical taste seems
so far removed from everything Oasis stand for. And I basically have a
problem with anyone who likes bl*r, to be honest. But I like disagreeing
with you on practically every issue, so you can stay if you want. I was
hoping you would fight the case of the music journalists just so I could
tell you to fuck off to the belle and sebastian newsgroup where you belong.
:)
mad ferret
> And I basically have a
> problem with anyone who likes bl*r, to be honest.
that is the most childish thing i've heard in a long time. i've been
a huge blur fan longer than i've been an oasis fan. i also have a cd
collection with at least 100 other bands and artists. but please
prove me wrong. give me a reason you feel this way about blur fans...
Mr.Psychosis
mad ferret wrote in message ...
Because they don't have a sense of humour.
:)
C'mon. I was winding fountainhead up. I don't dislike all blur fans. Just
the ones who don't like Oasis better.
mad ferret
"Mr.Psychosis" <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote
> C'mon. I was winding fountainhead up. I don't dislike all blur fans.
Just
> the ones who don't like Oasis better.
phew, i'm safe then :-P
Steve McNally
news:8q0kto$eum$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> of Oasis' Friday gig at Wembley Stadium in UNCUT magazine by some no-mark
> tosser who goes by the name of Chris Roberts.
lol - he's a 'no-mark tosser'? What does that make you? People PAY him to
express his views and they appear in Uncut magazine amongst other places.
How much do you get for sounding off on a fucking usenet group mate?
Any kind of consumer journalist runs into this kind of shite, most thrive
off it and delight in doing it all the more. There's nothing more satisfying
than when the letters roll in, and, if you have a good employer who'll back
you all the way, those from solicitors are cheered all the louder. Why do
people like you always take this stuff personally? Oasis is a band, not a
football team or a relative! They can look after themselves. If you like
them fine, just accept that not everyone else does!
And you didn't even buy the fucking magazine!
> Well, Chris Roberts you can fuck right off. Your opinion is offensive to
me,
> and I reserve the right to call you a smug and patronising little
> cocksucker.
Nice, balanced view there.
> You actually got paid to attend the gig of many people's lives
> and you have the fucking nerve to moan about it. What the fuck were you
> doing there?
Getting paid to write about it at a guess? What a bastard! Following your
logic every review of any band should only be written by someone who's
prepared to be positive about it? Bollocks. That's not a review - that's
propoganda. Review encompasses personal opinion and should, more often than
not be preceded by the word critical. Simple really.
> Don't give me fucking "journalistic reasons".
Haven't read the review but it sounds like those were the only reasons he
was there!
> You are one
> sad fucker. When will people like you (and there are many in your
> "profession") going to understand that Oasis are a great fucking
rock'n'roll
> band?
Why can't you understand that it's just his opinion? Like yours is just
yours? Why do you put "profession" in quotations? Sarcasm? Journalism isn't
a valid profession in your eyes?
"Well, Mr Psychosis you can fuck right off. Your opinion is offensive to me,
and I reserve the right to call you a smug and patronising little
cocksucker."
Sound familiar? Get to fuck.
> And this whole fucking idea that Oasis represent everything that is bad
> about modern British music is so fucking off-target it's pointi ng
> directly up your own arse. Just as I don't blame Radiohead for the pile of
> pretentious, pseudo-intellectual bollocks that is Muse, and just as I
don't
> blame Nirvana for the manic-depression-as-a-career-move that is Bush, so I
> don't blame Oasis for the musical travesty that is the Stereophonics.
So you'd be quite happy, no doubt indeed sit there and read in your glee,
had Chris Roberts savaged a Muse, Bush or Stereophonics show?
Can you spell delusional hypocrite fella? Because just remember, that
spewing silently in a library (sorry, WHSmiths) somewhere just like the one
you were in, will be a fan(atic) who thinks the Stereophonics, Muse or Bush
are great rock & roll bands!
> They are up there with other soulful bands like Primal Scream, The Roses,
> The Verve and The Charlatans.
Argh! You have the same taste as me! Except The Verve if you mean Urban
Hymns cos that was bollocks IMO. No doubt if you disagree about that you'll
burst another blood vessel?
> Your smug, self-satisfied opinion of what
> constitutes rock'n'roll fills me with contempt for you and the people you
> represent in music journalism. Who the fuck are you to tell me what
> rock'n'roll should be about?
I was kinda annoyed when I started writing this, but hey, I'm having a bad
day...
This is actually starting to cheer me up now :-)
> And don't think you're fucking special just because I've singled you out.
You
> are no better or worse than any of the other toss-pots who write reactiona
ry
> bollocks in the music press. I understand what rock'n'roll is. You think
you
> do, but you don't. Oasis are a great fucking rock'n'roll band and you're
so
> fucking anal about what constitutes rock'n'roll that you can't even see
it.
> And I don't even care that you're not reading this, because I just needed
to get it out.
I really hope Chris does see this... Slaps on the back all around from his
mates at IPC no doubt... I guarantee, it would be printed out and stuck up
on coffee machines all around the building and crowds would gather as word
spread - all eager to get a look at the rantings of a complete fucking
lunatic!
> If anyone else wants to read the utterings of someone who has no concept
of
> how completely shite they really are
Anyone who got this far in your post already has ;-)
> Once you read that, you will realise why I
> hate fucking music journalists who are more concerned with furthering
their
> careers than actually listening to music for the shear enjoyment it can
> bring.
You can't really believe that? You can't have even thought about what you
were writing?
You think a music journalist can afford to go in to his or her editor and
say. "I'm sorry, but I don't think I'll enjoy reviewing that jj72 album like
you asked me, and I may be negative about it in what I write, so would you
mind giving it to someone else? Don't worry, just deduct a day's pay from my
salary at the end of the month...'. Bollocks you can. They get it, they
listen and they sit down and write. You'll probably spout on about
objectivity now and say they should try and not let their own prejudices and
personal taste get in the way if they have to cover something they don't
like? Again, bollocks. You don't write with passion in the magazine business
(even if you write for trout fisherman or something) you're out, and passion
only comes from inside. From your own personal feelings. Fuck me, magazines
would be even duller than they are now if there was no opinion! No
criticism. If everyone got treated like they were legends and the best thing
since Elvis!
It'd be like TFI Friday in paper form, millions of times over each month!
It'd be a nightmare.
> Fuck him, and fuck any cunt of a music journalist
> who doesn't agree with me. You are all wrong, and you will be proved wrong
> by history. Just fuck right off the lot of you.
> Rant fucking over. But the war has just fucking started. Kill all
cretinous
> music journos. Roberts, you're first. I'm coming after you. Watch your
> fucking back.
What war? What are you talking about? If you bought the magazine regularly
you could maybe take a stand and stop buying it, but that's where your right
to have any influence ends matey. Seeing as you're a 'reader' rather than a
customer you don't really have a complaining leg to stand on do you?
I dunno, I get the feeling maybe you were trying to be funny with that
ending? Finish on a light note?
Didn't quite come off did it?
If you were in any way serious you need to take a loooong, hard look at
yourself - and maybe even consider a little (lot of?) therapy? :-)
CTID,
Steve
Mr.Psychosis
Steve McNally wrote in message ...
>lol - he's a 'no-mark tosser'? What does that make you?
An extremely perceptive individual.
>People PAY him to
>express his views and they appear in Uncut magazine amongst other places.
>How much do you get for sounding off on a fucking usenet group mate?
I don't *want* to get paid for slagging off bands. It's a fucking scummy way
to earn a living. We can all be armchair critics. It takes absolutely no
talent whatsoever. How many of us could write a tune like "Live Forever"?
Getting paid to write sub-standard diatribes in a national magazine doesn't
make you a winner. Noel's a winner. Did that review make Chris Roberts a
winner? Not in my fucking mind it didn't.
>Any kind of consumer journalist runs into this kind of shite, most thrive
>off it and delight in doing it all the more.
You're quite patronising, aren't you? It's almost as if you think I hadn't
already thought of that.
>There's nothing more satisfying
>than when the letters roll in, and, if you have a good employer who'll back
>you all the way, those from solicitors are cheered all the louder.
Please notice I did not write a letter to his magazine. I wouldn't dream of
it. I wrote a ranting post in amo. Seeing as Chris Roberts doesn't even like
Oasis, I doubt if he's going to read it. I was fucking annoyed and I had to
get it out of my system. This seemed the perfect place. I don't need some
patronising response from the likes of you telling me I've been "had" by
Chris Roberts. I know full well it was his attempt to cause a bit of
controversy, and to make a name for himself. I stated as much in my original
post. I wasn't born two days before tomorrow.
>Why do people like you always take this stuff personally?
People like me? What a patronising expression. What I choose to do has
nothing to do with anyone else. I was fucking annoyed a below-average music
journalist like that got paid to write complete bollocks. I was annoyed
because I love the band he was writing complete bollocks about. It's about
having passion. I'm not gonna be some apathetic little shit who goes around
telling everyone "he's entitled to his opinion". I love Oasis, and if some
twat wants to bad-mouth them, then I will do the same to him, if I can be so
arsed. On this occasion I was arsed.
>Oasis is a band, not a football team or a relative!
You're very clever. Next you'll be teaching me how to suck eggs, I presume.
I can't wait.
>They can look after themselves.
As can journalists. Your point being?
>If you like them fine, just accept that not everyone else does!
How very liberal-minded of you. Boring as fuck, but you know, "you're
entitled to you opinion, after all."
>And you didn't even buy the fucking magazine!
I know. So it didn't really help their circulation, did it?
>> Well, Chris Roberts you can fuck right off. Your opinion is offensive to
>>me,
>> and I reserve the right to call you a smug and patronising little
>> cocksucker.
>
>Nice, balanced view there.
Nice boring view there.
>> You actually got paid to attend the gig of many people's lives
>> and you have the fucking nerve to moan about it. What the fuck were you
>> doing there?
>
>Getting paid to write about it at a guess? What a bastard! Following your
>logic every review of any band should only be written by someone who's
>prepared to be positive about it? Bollocks. That's not a review - that's
>propoganda. Review encompasses personal opinion and should, more often than
>not be preceded by the word critical. Simple really.
You're still being patronising, aren't you? I see a pattern developing.
Chris Roberts hated Oasis and everything they represent, and yet he sat
through an entire Oasis gig. So he got paid for it?. Like I said before,
that doesn't make you a winner. He was the loser that day. He hates Oasis,
yet he sat though an entire gig just so he could write how crap they are in
a magazine that will probably be out of circulation within a few years.
Oasis' songs will live forever. I didn't want a review that said Oasis are
fantastic, and they can do no wrong. But I didn't want a review that was so
firmly biased against the band that it was effectively pointless. That
review told me that someone who doesn't like Oasis didn't like an Oasis gig.
Very fucking useful.
>> Don't give me fucking "journalistic reasons".
>
>Haven't read the review but it sounds like those were the only reasons he
>was there!
Nice to see you're so well-informed.
>> You are one
>> sad fucker. When will people like you (and there are many in your
>> "profession") going to understand that Oasis are a great fucking
>> rock'n'roll
>> band?
>
>Why can't you understand that it's just his opinion? Like yours is just
>yours?
Touché.
BANG! That's the sound of you just shooting yourself in the foot. You're
right it was just my opinion. So why not just let me express it? What the
fuck do you care? Don't tell me I suckered you into replying to my post?
That would be a bit silly. The reason I used such provocative language and
forceful opinions in my post was because I wanted to get a response. It
seems it worked. So if I'm naive enough to let Chris Roberts' views get
under my skin, then what does that make you? You really should think about
things more. I was just expressing my view and you couldn't resist
responding. When will "people like you" ever learn?
>Why do you put "profession" in quotations? Sarcasm? Journalism isn't
>a valid profession in your eyes?
I put profession in quotation marks because I don't class what he and the
people like him do as journalism. It's just being paid to slag off people.
That's not journalism. Journalism is a valid profession. Paid character
assassination isn't.
>"Well, Mr Psychosis you can fuck right off. Your opinion is offensive to
me,
>and I reserve the right to call you a smug and patronising little
>cocksucker."
Ha ha. BANG! Once again you shoot yourself in the foot. I thought it was
silly to respond to people who are just looking to get a reaction. I said
that to get a reaction, and you fell for it. Don't worry, I don't take
offense that easily. It's just a shame for you that you are so easily
manipulated. Especially as the whole point of your post was to tell me I was
the victim of just the same thing. It's a shame really. You had good
intentions, but you didn't think it through properly. Forward-planning.
That's the key to wining an argument. Sorry to sound like a "patronising
little cocksucker", but your patronising attitude has started to rub off on
me.
>Sound familiar? Get to fuck.
Charming.
>So you'd be quite happy, no doubt indeed sit there and read in your glee,
>had Chris Roberts savaged a Muse, Bush or Stereophonics show?
>Can you spell delusional hypocrite fella?
Right back atcha, fella. Aren't you the one telling me I'm gullible for
getting annoyed about a review, when I so obviously wound you up with my
post? I'm a fan of Oasis, so I defended Oasis. I wouldn't write a review
about a Muse, Stereophonics or Bush gig because I couldn't be arsed to sit
through an entire set. It would be silly.
>Because just remember, that
>spewing silently in a library (sorry, WHSmiths) somewhere just like the one
>you were in, will be a fan(atic) who thinks the Stereophonics, Muse or Bush
>are great rock & roll bands!
That's their problem, not mine.
>> They are up there with other soulful bands like Primal Scream, The Roses,
>> The Verve and The Charlatans.
>
>Argh! You have the same taste as me! Except The Verve if you mean Urban
>Hymns cos that was bollocks IMO. No doubt if you disagree about that you'll
>burst another blood vessel?
I haven't burst any blood vessels. I like Urban Hymns and I like Richard
Ashcroft's new album. Early Verve mean very little to me. Your opinion
doesn't bother me. Chris Roberts' does. That's my prerogative. For someone
who supposedly isn't bothered about other people's opinions, you seem
strangely concerned about mine. Enough to drag this thread out longer than
it needed to be. I had decided to give up on it. My initial ire is now over.
But you just couldn't resist, could you? What does it feel like to be a
victim of someone just looking to get a response?
>> Your smug, self-satisfied opinion of what
>> constitutes rock'n'roll fills me with contempt for you and the people you
>> represent in music journalism. Who the fuck are you to tell me what
>> rock'n'roll should be about?
>
>I was kinda annoyed when I started writing this, but hey, I'm having a bad
>day...
>This is actually starting to cheer me up now :-)
I'm happy too. :-)
>I really hope Chris does see this... Slaps on the back all around from his
>mates at IPC no doubt... I guarantee, it would be printed out and stuck up
>on coffee machines all around the building and crowds would gather as word
>spread - all eager to get a look at the rantings of a complete fucking
>lunatic!
I started this thread to create a bit of a stir in amo, which seems to be a
little quiet at the moment, IMO. I love arguments, and I wanted someone like
you to come along and give me one. I thought it might have been
fountainhead, but I think he was clever enough to see through it. Do you
honestly think I was that pissed off by his review? It was a ploy to get a
reaction. So you see, you are the gullible one. If you had any sense, you
would have just read my post with a smug little grin on your face, but you
had to respond to tell me how I was wrong. By doing that, you completely
ruined your argument about not responding to people who are so obviously
looking to provoke a reaction.
>> If anyone else wants to read the utterings of someone who has no concept
>of
>> how completely shite they really are
>
>Anyone who got this far in your post already has ;-)
You still don't get it, do you?
>> Once you read that, you will realise why I
>> hate fucking music journalists who are more concerned with furthering
>their
>> careers than actually listening to music for the shear enjoyment it can
>> bring.
>
>You can't really believe that?
Yes, I do.
>You can't have even thought about what you were writing?
Yes, I did. You said yourself music journalists write pieces like that to
get a reaction. They want a reaction, because if they get a reaction then
they will get further in their careers. That was my point.
>You don't write with passion in the magazine business
>(even if you write for trout fisherman or something) you're out, and
passion
>only comes from inside. From your own personal feelings. Fuck me, magazines
>would be even duller than they are now if there was no opinion!
And so would this newsgroup. Which is exactly why I posted this thread.
Can't you see that? Are you that blind to the concept of expressing
opinions. Your opinion was: "Why can't you understand that it's just his
opinion? Like yours is just yours?" Very fucking passionate. My opinion was:
"Chris Roberts is a piss stain on shoddy music journalism's already badly
soiled underpants." I think mine was far more passionate.
>If everyone got treated like they were legends and the best thing
>since Elvis!
>It'd be like TFI Friday in paper form, millions of times over each month!
>It'd be a nightmare.
Okay, sorry. So you *don't* want me to say Chris Roberts is a genius, and I
agree with everything he wrote? Make up your mind. I slagged him off, and
you didn't like it. If I praise him I am an arse-licker. I expressed an
opinion about the twat. You felt the need to defend him, rather than the
band Oasis. Frankly, that says a lot about you.
>> Fuck him, and fuck any cunt of a music journalist
>> who doesn't agree with me. You are all wrong, and you will be proved
wrong
>> by history. Just fuck right off the lot of you.
>> Rant fucking over. But the war has just fucking started. Kill all
>cretinous
>> music journos. Roberts, you're first. I'm coming after you. Watch your
>> fucking back.
>
>What war? What are you talking about?
It was a joke. A provocative ending designed to wind a few people up. In
your case it succeeded.
>If you bought the magazine regularly
>you could maybe take a stand and stop buying it, but that's where your
right
>to have any influence ends matey. Seeing as you're a 'reader' rather than a
>customer you don't really have a complaining leg to stand on do you?
>I dunno, I get the feeling maybe you were trying to be funny with that
>ending?
Bingo!
>Finish on a light note?
A provocative note, maybe.
>Didn't quite come off did it?
Oh, but it did.
>If you were in any way serious you need to take a loooong, hard look at
>yourself - and maybe even consider a little (lot of?) therapy? :-)
Good job I wasn't really. I'm perfectly fine. You just made my day.
BTW, did it ever occur to you that I might be a writer too, and that I am
not averse to using the same tactics as a certain Chris Roberts just to get
a reaction?
Bish
"Mr.Psychosis" <mr.psy...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8q5op0$hfp$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...
> I started this thread to create a bit of a stir in amo, which seems to be
a
> little quiet at the moment, IMO. I love arguments
Ahh you fuckin' troll :-)
Bish.