(PDC) best ever songs
Giuseppe Gazerro
http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_songsddd.html
I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
ever, so as to say.
:)
The least biased, the most *objective*, if objective can be an issue in a
best ever list.
No underground acts, no nostalgia, no radiohead in the top ten
(as much as I love them)
The very best, the greatest, period.
What do you think?
--
beppe
www.giuseppegazerro.com
http://www.youtube.com/GiuseppeGazerro
Giuseppe Gazerro
"Stefan Ram" <r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:time-capsule-...@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de...
> "Giuseppe Gazerro" <giusepp...@tin.it> writes:
>>I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever*
>>list
>>ever, so as to say.
>
> Sounds are stored on a special large and expensive hardware
> to make sure that it will be possible to hear them even in
> 500 or 5000 years. But this means that there is only room
> for some artists. It has been decided that one song sung by
> Bob Dylan will be stored within this device and you have to
> decide which song this will be. Which song would you choose?
>
Paradixically Hark The Herald Angels Sing 21#30 Revisited
Giuseppe Gazerro
"Stefan Ram" <r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:time-capsule-...@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de...
> "Giuseppe Gazerro" <giusepp...@tin.it> writes:
>>list
>>ever, so as to say.
>
> Sounds are stored on a special large and expensive hardware
> to make sure that it will be possible to hear them even in
> 500 or 5000 years. But this means that there is only room
> for some artists. It has been decided that one song sung by
> Bob Dylan will be stored within this device and you have to
> decide which song this will be. Which song would you choose?
Paradoxically Hark The Herald Angels Sing 12#30 Revisited
Janice
wrote:
> http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_songsddd.html
>
> I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
> ever, so as to say.
> The very best, the greatest, period.
>
> What do you think?
It is certainly a classic best-of list, but I don't think Pink Floyd
is properly represented with Comfortably Numb. Plus, no best-ever
rock list is complete without White Bird by It's a Beautiful Day.
IMO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0J77CRMeTA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq6-34DS-ao
~`~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The sunsets come
The sunsets go
The clouds Float by
And The Earth Turns slow
Janice
> A time capsule is to be prepared for future generations.
> Sounds are stored on a special large and expensive hardware
> to make sure that it will be possible to hear them even in
> 500 or 5000 years. But this means that there is only room
> for some artists. It has been decided that one song sung by
> Bob Dylan will be stored within this device and you have to
> decide which song this will be. Which song would you choose?
I Shall Be Released
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILlRPIKOrPA
~`~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some place so high above this wall.
Martin
> A time capsule is to be prepared for future generations.
> Sounds are stored on a special large and expensive hardware
> to make sure that it will be possible to hear them even in
> 500 or 5000 years. But this means that there is only room
> for some artists. It has been decided that one song sung by
> Bob Dylan will be stored within this device and you have to
> decide which song this will be. Which song would you choose?
Must Be Santa
ocontraire
Great site, thanks for the link, beppe. Although my list would
have Presley's "Don't be cruel" as #1, followed by LARS, natch.
Zepp never did anything for this old geezer, and Mick's "Memo to
Turner"
(from "Perform." soundtrack) defin. in the top 10, along w/ The
Dan's "Dr. Wu"
Terrific site. MANY THANKS
Martin
> Zepp never did anything for this old geezer
Me neither. I can't really make sense of these lists, but Be Bop A
Lula outside the Top 100 seems wrong. It should be in the Top 10,
along with Somethin' Else
Just Walkin'
wrote:
Where is Guy Marks with Loving You Has Made Me Bananas?
Or Bimbo by Jimmie Reeves?
Or Gilligan's Stairway by Little Roger and the Goosebumps, the true
number one song of all time?
gemjack
wrote:
>"Giuseppe Gazerro" <giusepp...@tin.it> writes:
>>I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
>>ever, so as to say.
>
> A time capsule is to be prepared for future generations.
> Sounds are stored on a special large and expensive hardware
> to make sure that it will be possible to hear them even in
> 500 or 5000 years. But this means that there is only room
> for some artists. It has been decided that one song sung by
> Bob Dylan will be stored within this device and you have to
> decide which song this will be. Which song would you choose?
Either It's All Right Ma or LARS. Seriously. 5000 years from now
they would give a good glimpse.
-gj
gemjack
<giusepp...@tin.it> wrote:
>
>http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_songsddd.html
>
>I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
>ever, so as to say.
>:)
>The least biased, the most *objective*, if objective can be an issue in a
>best ever list.
>
>No underground acts, no nostalgia, no radiohead in the top ten
>(as much as I love them)
>
>The very best, the greatest, period.
>
>What do you think?
I think it would be a cool setlist. Except #183.
-gj
rwalker
<giusepp...@tin.it> wrote:
>
>http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_songsddd.html
>
>I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
>ever, so as to say.
>:)
>The least biased, the most *objective*, if objective can be an issue in a
>best ever list.
>
>No underground acts, no nostalgia, no radiohead in the top ten
>(as much as I love them)
>
>The very best, the greatest, period.
>
>What do you think?
Any list that puts "Stairway to Heaven" at No. 1 makes my head hurt.
badlands420
> Any list that puts "Stairway to Heaven" at No. 1 makes my head hurt.
Any list that includes that song should be shredded, burned, and pissed on.
Giuseppe Gazerro
"rwalker" <rwa...@despammed.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:8veoj5tki6dl4jmcd...@4ax.com...
>
> Any list that puts "Stairway to Heaven" at No. 1 makes my head hurt.
Same feeling I have when people deny it being arguably the greatest song
ever.
^_^
badlands420
> Same feeling I have when people deny it being arguably the greatest song
> ever.
I'd rather listen to Wiggle Wiggle until the end of eternity than Stairway
to Heaven once.
ocontraire
> "rwalker" <rwal...@despammed.com> ha scritto nel messaggionews:8veoj5tki6dl4jmcd...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > Any list that puts "Stairway to Heaven" at No. 1 makes my head hurt.
>
> Same feeling I have when people deny it being arguably the greatest song
> ever.
> ^_^
>
> --
> beppe
>
> www.giuseppegazerro.comhttp://www.youtube.com/GiuseppeGazerro
When you look up in Encycl. Britt. the word "schlock" , I'm afraid
"Stairway...." would be illustrated. That tune was an example of
all
that was wrong with "classic rock radio". It played incessantly on
all radio stations, and unfortun. still does.
Sorry beppe, but I do like the site. Thanks.
gemjack
Ooh, I don't know 'bout that.....
-gj
badlands420
> I always find it telling that the music you love AND the music you
> despise all seems to come from the same spectrum.
Oh god, not this again. It's been over four years and you still periodically
feel the need to shove my musical tastes into some convenient little box
you've constructed for them. First I was a guitar god worshipper, then I was
a knuckle-dragging hard rock purist, then I was a stodgy old-time blues
purist. Since you now know each of these to be as incorrect as any other,
what brand new box are you putting me in now?
PS- Marcus, please come back.
badlands420
> It's all the same spectrum. Bluesy guitar heroes, basically.
And yet there's nothing that annoys me more than flashy self-indulgent
bluesy guitar solos. Interesting.
>And it figures that "Stairway to Heaven" would incense you,
See, this is what I'm talking about, announcing that another person is
"incensed" because they dislike one particular song. This sort of rmotional
projection is something you often do with Marcus. When he's not around, you
just transfer the same shit onto someone else, because apparently you have
no reason to live unless you're engaged in an online dick measuring contest
wherein you malign the perceived inferiority of someone else's musical or
cultural tastes. Do you not see this? I mean really?
> because it's in
> your favored hard-rock realm yet doesn't have much "blues" in it.
Wait, you just got done saying I'm all about "bluesy guitar heroes." Now
you're saying hard rock is my "favored realm." Remember what I was saying
about how you whimsically switch boxes whenever it's convenient? Case in
point.
I'm not getting into an idiotic flame war with you. I don't know why you
place such great import in my listening habits, but I can assure you that
your characterizations thereof remain laughably incorrect (and despite your
protestations to the contrary which are sure to ensue, I really am laughing
at you) and your frame of reference nonexistent. Put more simply, you're
making an ass of yourself over something that simply does not matter. Now go
right ahead and have the uncontested last word.
PS- It's times like these when the accusations of hollow posturing that you
routinely level against others seem particularly ironic. Have a nice day.
Dr_dudley
On Dec 30, 11:26 am, "Giuseppe Gazerro" <giuseppegaze...@tin.it>
wrote:
> http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_songsddd.html
>
> I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
> ever, so as to say.
> :)
> The least biased, the most *objective*, if objective can be an issue in a
> best ever list.
>
> No underground acts, no nostalgia, no radiohead in the top ten
> (as much as I love them)
>
> The very best, the greatest, period.
>
> What do you think?
>
Eh, cumpari!
I'm not certain the world is ready to know what i thnik, but i'll
agree that this is one of the top ten top ten lists.
As to the objections 'round hear concerning LZ's "StH", i remember
some years back when the still-vital WNEW (102.7 on your FM dial) in
NYC broadcast their annual AllTime Top 100 Rock Songs, and Stairway
didn't place first. I was at work, and we kind of looked at each other
like OMG WTF!?! What could surpass that song as Number One?
Turned out that year to be Argent's "God Gave Rock and Roll to You".
I can say that i'd prefer to see that song on the list you've linked
to as a replacement to either, or both, Rush songs.
Here's a U2B of Argent performing it on the Old Grey Whistle Test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsG5V-o6uxY
The blurb states that the video is blocked in some countries. If so,
see if this works:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ymR_kWcx0I
That said, i don't remember the OGWT; i don't think it was ever re-
broadcast in the States. I know that any U2B i've ever seen from it
has been top-shelf, even if i don't care for the artist.
I guess the closest we had was Don Kirshner's "Rock Concert" where Mr.
Kirshner would introduce woodenly & unhiply some really great stuff,
even if i didn't care for the artist. Almost randomly from U2B, three
performances:
Rush:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UojjPdfamPY
Ramones:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAyjDQhN-zk
Ike & Tina:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_1uA5i2JPs
Felice Anno Nuovo!
dudley
+++
Speaking of Whistle, Julius LaRosa:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsg73N0eUZk
rwalker
<giusepp...@tin.it> wrote:
>
>"rwalker" <rwa...@despammed.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:8veoj5tki6dl4jmcd...@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> Any list that puts "Stairway to Heaven" at No. 1 makes my head hurt.
>
>
>Same feeling I have when people deny it being arguably the greatest song
>ever.
>^_^
We'll have to agree to disagree then. It's not even Led Zeppelin's
best song, as far as I'm concerned.
badlands420
> Because a lot
> of their tracks aren't that great on paper, but are great in terms of
> performance, groove, etc.
Unfortunately, most of their best songs were stolen from Howlin' Wolf, Sonny
Boy Williamson, Willie Dixon, etc.
Giuseppe Gazerro
"ocontraire" <marcel...@yahoo.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:83beae6b-a380-4eeb-a97b-
< When you look up in Encycl. Britt. the word "schlock" , I'm afraid
< "Stairway...." would be illustrated. That tune was an example of
<all
<that was wrong with "classic rock radio". It played incessantly on
<all radio stations, and unfortun. still does.
< Sorry beppe, but I do like the site. Thanks.
Sorry?
What for?
gemjack
Stolen, and improved.
-gj
badlands420
> Hey, wait a minute...I thought you said blues and hard-rock were totally
> different mentalities.
Next time you accuse someone of a straw man, I'm going to think of this post
and have a good laugh.
badlands420
> Stolen, and improved.
Spoken like a man who has never heard the source material.
Also, you do realize you're condoning a criminal act, don't you?
gemjack
wrote:
>
>> Stolen, and improved.
>
>Spoken like a man who has never heard the source material.
Uh huh.
(sigh) I spent more than a few years listening to all the Robert
Johnson songs, Willie, lots and lots off BB King, Muddy, Howling, Lead
Belly, (never cared for Bo Diddley), Blind Lee Hooker, Slim, Hound Dog
(Taylor), Sonny Boy, Eddie/Son House... you get the picture... back
when I wanted to learn the gee-tar as a young pre-teen. I'd lay money
on the line I know more old blues than 99.9% of people who think they
do. Problem is it's rough. Beautifully rough, but rough and short
nonetheless. I snapped eventually and it was years before I could
listen to the originals again. And if you know your history, the old
blooz guys all stole from each other too. It's tradition!
�It�s not where you take things from � it�s where you take them to.�
Jean-Luc Godard
But I do wish they (LZ) had at least claimed (as Dylan did on his
debut with IMTOD) the songs as 'trad arr.' But no one was fooled,
Willie Dixon eventually was paid, and no one has done the songs more
justice than Zep. Even if I can't listen to them but once every
decade.
>Also, you do realize you're condoning a criminal act, don't you?
I do that often actually.
-gj
badlands420
> Make all the empty noise you like and continue to disingenuously split
> hairs,
"Disingenuous" is another of your big buzz words. You probably don't even
realize how utterly predictable and formulaic your material often is.
>but I have your narrow tastes pegged.
You say this as though you're Sherlock Holmes exposing the identity of the
true killer. Even if this statement were true, would you mind telling me
exactly what it would prove, or why you take such pleasure in thinking you
know the exact parameters of other people's tastes?
> Now, see if you can find 32
> other threads in which to insert a preoccupied reference to Howlin' Wolf.
You know what the weirdest thing about you is? I don't get the impression
that you even enjoy music, or that you glean any pleasure or joy from
listening to it. Your enjoyment of music seems to be limited to scoffing at
the way *other people* interact with it. It's like you use music as a
vehicle to satiate your deep need (which is obvious and profound) to feel
superior to other people. You're really no different from Jinx in this way,
except that his haughty condescension is purely Dylan-centric and in general
slightly more insane. I don't know what's gone wrong for either of you in
the real world that creates these emotional voids and the need to fill them,
or whether writing obnoxious self-aggrandizing newsgroup posts helps to
salve the wounds of inadequacy from which you both so clearly suffer, but at
any rate, you have my empathy.
badlands420
>> You say this as though you're Sherlock Holmes exposing the identity of
>> the
>> true killer. Even if this statement were true, would you mind telling me
>> exactly what it would prove, or why you take such pleasure in thinking
>> you
>> know the exact parameters of other people's tastes?
I would still appreciate a straight answer to either of these questions.
However, if all you have to offer is more lame obfuscation, please save
yourself the trouble of replying at all.
badlands420
> It's really not a pleasure. I'd rather that people's parameters were NOT
> so easily observed.
You're still willfully avoiding the point, and you damn well know it. I will
ask again in the simplest terms I can think of: If someone else's tastes are
more limited than your own, how does that make them inferior?
> Thanks for lamely snipping the rest of my post.
Yeah, because you totally didn't snip vast sections of my prior two posts.
When you get into these manic states of yours, your hypocrisy and lack of
self-awareness can be absolutely breathtaking.
badlands420
> I'd lay money
> on the line I know more old blues than 99.9% of people who think they
> do. Problem is it's rough. Beautifully rough, but rough and short
> nonetheless.
The artists you list represent a fairly large timeframe and a wide spectrum
of recording quality. If we're talking Son House, Robert Johnson, Charley
Patton, pretty much anything pre-war, then yeah, that stuff is often so
rough as to be unlistenable. But there's a far cry between 1930 and
1955-onward. Everything from Chess and Sun from that period on (including
the most famous works of Muddy, Wolf, Walter, etc.) is of impeccable
quality. In fact, better than any modern digital recording to my ears.
badlands420
> I didn't say they were inferior...I just said their predictable
> narrowness bores me.
If other people's musical tastes are so important to you can be rendered
"bored" by them, then I strongly suggest you take up a hobby.
Smart people are never bored, Eric.
badlands420
> And what does it say about your need for a "hobby" and yardstick for
> importance that the mere mention of acts like Nirvana, KISS and
> (sometimes?) Zeppelin sends you into a fuming, defensive snit? There is
> probably another example or two which I've forgotten.
This is the same type of baiting behavior for which you routinely criticize
others. If you hadn't figured it out by now, I'm not playing this game with
you.
badlands420
> But I'll remember your chiding shots about others' tastes being too
> important to me, the next time I see you moaning about how other RMDers
> don't appreciate Dylan enough from your own "rockin', kick-ass band"
> angle.
This is another of the many priceless aspects of your schtick. Somebody
posts, on a Bob Dylan newsgroup, that they think Bob Dylan has a rockin'
band that kicks ass, and you spend FOUR YEARS talking crap about it. And you
think no one really laughs at you? Seriously?
badlands420
> As if you've harped on that point just once. As if your point was simply
> that the band kicks ass, rather than berating others for not properly
> emphasizing the aforementioned ass-kicking.
When did this happen? This is a specific accusation, so please be specific
in substantiating it.
> Your "cavalier" flaming style is so tired. Yeah, yeah...it's all just a
> big hoot for swaggering, he-man Badlands. Well, unless someone happens
> to praise a hard-rock band he doesn't like.
Do you see me flaming anyone right now? Someone here is dishing out a good
number of personal insults and character attacks, but it's not me.
> It's not "baiting"...it's a point showing the dire inconsistency of your
> "Fiddledeedee, who cares about such trivia?" posturing.
Cool, now you've used your entire triumvirate of preferred buzz words. I was
beginning to fear I was no longer worthy.
> There's not one artist who makes me as "angry" as you get when the above
> are mentioned.
You know what would be fun? I think you should put your money where your
mouth is and write a list of the artists and/or albums you think are in my
library. If you're comfortable authoritatively announcing how "narrow and
limited" someone's tastes are, it would stand to reason that you'd be
willing to elaborate, would it not? Besides, if you found yourself unwilling
to accomodate this request, it would amount to a tacit admission that you've
been talking out your ass this whole time, and that your stereotyped
characterization of my tastes is only so much meaningless bluster. At times,
I've known you to be a man who's unwilling to announce conclusions based on
facts that are not in evidence; a man who cites his sources and cares about
his intellectual integrity. At other times, however, I've known you to be a
man who utterly abandons these principles and engages in the most lazy and
loathsome forms of hyperbole without a second thought. I'm curious, which
will it be this time?
Again, I have no interest in a flame war and no desire to insult you. You
may continue to insult me at your liesure, if that's what floats your boat.
I just hope, regardless of the public indignation you're sure to express in
response to this, that you'll let yourself read what I've written with an
open mind, and actually think about it. Happy New Year.
badlands420
> Oh, come on. You know you have done this.
That's it, back up your false allegations by announcing someone else's
thoughts. This is your second clumsy ad hominem (the first, slightly more
ridiculous one was "your tastes make me bored.") If someone said the same
thing to you, you'd go apoplectic in pointing out their cowardice and
dishonesty.
>Sorry, but I wouldn't have a clue how to find the relevant posts with
>Google.
Wow. Did you think twice about hitting the post button on this one? If not,
you really should have. This is a Marcus move. "What I say is true, but I
can't be bothered to cite a source." When he pulls this fallacy, your head
practically explodes with righteous indignation.
badlands420
reading whatever long-winded load of crap you just wrote. But don't feel
bad, I'm sure nobody else read it either.
One question: What sort of person spends this much time and effort obsessing
over something they claim to find boring?
"poisoned rose" <pros...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:prose1235-3B6D0...@news.eternal-september.org...
> "badlands420" <mike...@uranus.net> wrote:
>
>> > Oh, come on. You know you have done this.
>>
>> That's it, back up your false allegations by announcing someone else's
>> thoughts. This is your second clumsy ad hominem (the first, slightly more
>> ridiculous one was "your tastes make me bored.") If someone said the same
>> thing to you, you'd go apoplectic in pointing out their cowardice and
>> dishonesty.
>
> It's not your *thoughts*, dummy. It's what you have explicitly posted.
> As you very well know.
>
> You're just wasting the newsgroup's time with silly head games, like you
> always do.
>
> The straight-up, effective rebuttal would be for you to protest "I never
> said that" and/or "That's not something I believe." But you know you
> can't honestly do this. So, instead you send me on a snipe hunt, and
> demand "proof" of what you said. This shady maneuver achieves two
> wonderful tricks: 1) it's the one reply which spares you from having to
> clarify your position 2) it puts all the pressure on me to contribute
> further content or else "fail," while you can sit on your buns and not
> add a thing.
>
>> >Sorry, but I wouldn't have a clue how to find the relevant posts with
>> >Google.
>>
>> Wow. Did you think twice about hitting the post button on this one? If
>> not,
>> you really should have. This is a Marcus move. "What I say is true, but I
>> can't be bothered to cite a source." When he pulls this fallacy, your
>> head
>> practically explodes with righteous indignation.
>
> You're just playing silly head games, like you always do. See above.
> Either say straight out that you have never complained about eggheaded
> others here fixating too much on lyrical analysis at the expense of
> enjoying Dylan's rockin' band, or admit that you have. Anything else is
> just empty filibustering.
>
> Of course, you clipped the rest of my post (about the artists you enjoy)
> in typically dishonest fashion. Over and over I give you the chance to
> knock me down with straightforward facts, and you sleazily wimp out.
> Actually, you pulled the exact same strategy which you pulled with the
> above "rocking band" issue: You scuttled away from giving any sort of
> forthright answer, and once *again* tried to transfer all the burden of
> argument to me.
>
> So shoddy. So very, very shoddy. Really, why bother?
>
> I wonder which one or two sentences of this post you'll pick out to
> ridicule, while clipping the rest.
>
> Now...since you demanded it, I did make a pointless, unnecessary effort
> to find you some relevant posts about your big beef. They may not be the
> best examples, but Google is very erratic nowadays and it's a subject
> which kinda defies searching by keywords (I tried "band" and "lyrics").
> If you reply, this is probably where you'll want to start artfully
> cutting text.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/676a198241fe2e09
> Here, you criticize other fans for craving a "life-altering experience,"
> and not being content to hear a rocking band with good tunes.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/4b9037cf96a0989f
> Here, you criticize other fans for fixating too much on lyrics and
> overlooking Dylan as "rock musician."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/0cd8a928d117cf63
> Here, you criticize someone else for fussily disliking a song based on
> lyrics, while not appreciating that it simply "rocks."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/ddfffcf43f18e1b8
> Here, you criticize other fans for fixating too much on lyrics, rather
> than music.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/9b1078afed48ac94
> Yet another post with the same theme.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/543f39d015d48344
> Yet again.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/6019a2454f7368cc
> Yet again.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/8aad2be514630565
> Yet again.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/6b78c446b75d7937
> Yet again.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/a1e23ed12a0ec7ce
> Here's a post where you paint a Dylan concert as an "utterly kickass
> rock and roll show" at the core, and criticize other "old fart" fans for
> finding the show too loud and rockin'.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.dylan/msg/8761828b788ed540
> And here's your longer personal review of a concert, where you
> determinedly fixate on "rockin' band"-type details, going so far as to
> even describe one song as "AC/DC heavy" (groan).
>
> I'd say these posts more than adequately illustrate the posting pattern
> which I previously mentioned. Now, because I'm highly experienced in
> arguing with charlatans like you, I suspect your reply will adopt one of
> three tactics:
>
> 1) Just clip out and ignore all this "evidence" which you made a grand
> show of demanding to see.
>
> 2) Emptily chortle at me for wasting the time to find these posts.
>
> 3) Play the victim card, and call me a "stalker."
>
> I'm guessing you'll lean on both #1 and #2.
badlands420
> What a sorry sack of dung you are.
This is very high-minded discourse. You should be proud.
badlands420
> This exchange has been a beautiful illustration of the difference
> between someone who antagonizes due to having strong ideas, and someone
> who antagonizes just because he wants to be a dick.
What it's a beautiful illustration of is how upset and frustrated you'll
become when someone refuses to engage you in a flame war when you're
desperately trying to instigate one. Don't even bother denying this. The
insults and character attacks you've been feverishly hurling speak for
themselves. The next time you excoriate someone for using vulgar epithets,
I'll be there to guffaw at your hypocrisy.
> We're lucky that Nelson from "The Simpsons" can't join this newsgroup.
> The "HA-ha" duel between him and Badlands would NEVER end.
You watch cartoons?
badlands420
> HA-ha
The next time you take someone to task for being unresponsive and snipping
content, I may repost this just for fun.
Just Walkin'
wrote:
> http://digitaldreamdoor.nutsie.com/pages/best_songsddd.html
>
> I'll be banal, but this list sounds to me as the best *best song ever* list
> ever, so as to say.
> :)
> The least biased, the most *objective*, if objective can be an issue in a
> best ever list.
>
> No underground acts, no nostalgia, no radiohead in the top ten
> (as much as I love them)
>
> The very best, the greatest, period.
>
> What do you think?
>
> --
> beppe
>
> www.giuseppegazerro.comhttp://www.youtube.com/GiuseppeGazerro
Giuseppe Gazerro
"Just Walkin'" <kens...@comcast.net> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:d064585b-e4a0-4da8-af53-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTCYLbFxTpI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M54tPfY0z0c&feature=related
--
beppe
www.giuseppegazerro.com
http://www.youtube.com/GiuseppeGazerro