GNR albums and Warrant

[EmilyGNR]

Forums concern discussions and discussion necessitates, a certain degree of consent and dissent. A fanbase which merely, agrees and supports their chosen band would be tedious in the extreme. I do not really post here too much because, I, I suppose, possess an opinion that is too critical (of new guns) for this place - and absolutely loath censorship. In my opinion though, a fan who criticises a band - in a fairly objective and non pejorative fashion - is the superior fan (to a blind worshiper). It takes a superior fan to be that passionate about a subject and to know their subject so well, that they know when that said subject gets it, wholly wrong. Did Beatles fans unilaterally applaud Let it Be? Did Metallica fans unanimously love St Anger and support Lars's Napster tirade? No way did they. No way. It only seems to be Guns N' Roses fans who have this problem with, support, and dissent, freedom and censorship - much of it emanates from the man and Team Brazil itself of course (Axl seems to like to surround himself with people who only support him).

Ask yourself this: if you are faced with two positive - but, slightly different - reviews of an album (let's say, Chinese Democracy), one by a critical fan, and one by a blind supporter, whose review would you be more impressed with? A blind supporter is naturally going to love everything and agree with everything - is this the sort of review people would be impressed with, here?

The signal-to-noise ratio on forums does seem to be worsening, and eventually you get the feeling like you?re at one of those parties where all anyone is doing is bitching and griping.

 It doesn?t matter what they?re bitching about so much as, sooner or later, that?s all you can really hear.
Eventually the polite, reasonable people stop feeling like it?s a group of people they want to hang around. So they leave, and those who remain start to see only those who agree with them? and, because that?s all they see, they think that?s all there is.

They think Everyone feels as they do, according to them. Once the tipping point is passed, you?re left with the extremes? those who hate, and those who dislike the haters enough to endure the toxic atmosphere to try and combat them. Each clash between those groups drives more of the others away.

One need only attend a concert to see there are plenty of positive, enthusiastic fans out there? and while a cynic might suggest liking ?those people? means we want to hear only praise regarding GNR and nothing else that?s simply not true.

 It?s possible to like something overall and yet dislike parts of it, or to be disappointed overall in something you were hoping to like, and in either case to have a positive discussion regarding what you?ve disliked,there is no need to be adversarial or disrespectful.

Personally I?d really like to seek out positive interactions and not engage with those who are out to attack, belittle, undercut, ridicule and whine as well as complain about every move, every decision, every day nonstop without fail. Toxic people are boring and depressing to be around.

[GNR2014]

It's funny that you mention a 'signal to noise' ratio, considering the band we are talking about... 

[mortismurphy]

Forums concern discussions and discussion necessitates, a certain degree of consent and dissent. A fanbase which merely, agrees and supports their chosen band would be tedious in the extreme. I do not really post here too much because, I, I suppose, possess an opinion that is too critical (of new guns) for this place - and absolutely loath censorship. In my opinion though, a fan who criticises a band - in a fairly objective and non pejorative fashion - is the superior fan (to a blind worshiper). It takes a superior fan to be that passionate about a subject and to know their subject so well, that they know when that said subject gets it, wholly wrong. Did Beatles fans unilaterally applaud Let it Be? Did Metallica fans unanimously love St Anger and support Lars's Napster tirade? No way did they. No way. It only seems to be Guns N' Roses fans who have this problem with, support, and dissent, freedom and censorship - much of it emanates from the man and Team Brazil itself of course (Axl seems to like to surround himself with people who only support him).

Ask yourself this: if you are faced with two positive - but, slightly different - reviews of an album (let's say, Chinese Democracy), one by a critical fan, and one by a blind supporter, whose review would you be more impressed with? A blind supporter is naturally going to love everything and agree with everything - is this the sort of review people would be impressed with, here?

The signal-to-noise ratio on forums does seem to be worsening, and eventually you get the feeling like you?re at one of those parties where all anyone is doing is bitching and griping.

 It doesn?t matter what they?re bitching about so much as, sooner or later, that?s all you can really hear.
Eventually the polite, reasonable people stop feeling like it?s a group of people they want to hang around. So they leave, and those who remain start to see only those who agree with them? and, because that?s all they see, they think that?s all there is.

They think Everyone feels as they do, according to them. Once the tipping point is passed, you?re left with the extremes? those who hate, and those who dislike the haters enough to endure the toxic atmosphere to try and combat them. Each clash between those groups drives more of the others away.

One need only attend a concert to see there are plenty of positive, enthusiastic fans out there? and while a cynic might suggest liking ?those people? means we want to hear only praise regarding GNR and nothing else that?s simply not true.

 It?s possible to like something overall and yet dislike parts of it, or to be disappointed overall in something you were hoping to like, and in either case to have a positive discussion regarding what you?ve disliked,there is no need to be adversarial or disrespectful.

Personally I?d really like to seek out positive interactions and not engage with those who are out to attack, belittle, undercut, ridicule and whine as well as complain about every move, every decision, every day nonstop without fail. Toxic people are boring and depressing to be around.

I agree with the general tenure of your post, however, I would not say this is an accurate description of the posters under discussion here, i.e. GenerationX and Ginger King, who, I feel are fairly balanced in their appraisal of the situation; it is therefore a bit of a straw man argument. I do not see too many cries for a 'reunion with Slash', jokes about Ashba's commercialism, or posts concerning Axl's expanding waist line, emanating from them. These are all frequent topics on other boards. If you want 'toxic people', who ''attack, belittle', do as you so describe, I can certainly point you in the right direction. I have been on enough Guns N' Roses fora over the years to know that, the majority of fans - fans who were actually hardcore supporters of the 'nu' band to a certain point - are more negative than the posters being discussed here. I, for instance, could probably be described as more negative than generationx (which is one of the reasons why I do not post here much I suppose).
 
As I said, look at the other forums.

[EmilyGNR]

Forums concern discussions and discussion necessitates, a certain degree of consent and dissent. A fanbase which merely, agrees and supports their chosen band would be tedious in the extreme. I do not really post here too much because, I, I suppose, possess an opinion that is too critical (of new guns) for this place - and absolutely loath censorship. In my opinion though, a fan who criticises a band - in a fairly objective and non pejorative fashion - is the superior fan (to a blind worshiper). It takes a superior fan to be that passionate about a subject and to know their subject so well, that they know when that said subject gets it, wholly wrong. Did Beatles fans unilaterally applaud Let it Be? Did Metallica fans unanimously love St Anger and support Lars's Napster tirade? No way did they. No way. It only seems to be Guns N' Roses fans who have this problem with, support, and dissent, freedom and censorship - much of it emanates from the man and Team Brazil itself of course (Axl seems to like to surround himself with people who only support him).

Ask yourself this: if you are faced with two positive - but, slightly different - reviews of an album (let's say, Chinese Democracy), one by a critical fan, and one by a blind supporter, whose review would you be more impressed with? A blind supporter is naturally going to love everything and agree with everything - is this the sort of review people would be impressed with, here?

The signal-to-noise ratio on forums does seem to be worsening, and eventually you get the feeling like you?re at one of those parties where all anyone is doing is bitching and griping.

 It doesn?t matter what they?re bitching about so much as, sooner or later, that?s all you can really hear.
Eventually the polite, reasonable people stop feeling like it?s a group of people they want to hang around. So they leave, and those who remain start to see only those who agree with them? and, because that?s all they see, they think that?s all there is.

They think Everyone feels as they do, according to them. Once the tipping point is passed, you?re left with the extremes? those who hate, and those who dislike the haters enough to endure the toxic atmosphere to try and combat them. Each clash between those groups drives more of the others away.

One need only attend a concert to see there are plenty of positive, enthusiastic fans out there? and while a cynic might suggest liking ?those people? means we want to hear only praise regarding GNR and nothing else that?s simply not true.

 It?s possible to like something overall and yet dislike parts of it, or to be disappointed overall in something you were hoping to like, and in either case to have a positive discussion regarding what you?ve disliked,there is no need to be adversarial or disrespectful.

Personally I?d really like to seek out positive interactions and not engage with those who are out to attack, belittle, undercut, ridicule and whine as well as complain about every move, every decision, every day nonstop without fail. Toxic people are boring and depressing to be around.

I agree with the general tenure of your post, however, I would not say this is an accurate description of the posters under discussion here, i.e. GenerationX and Ginger King, who, I feel are fairly balanced in their appraisal of the situation; it is therefore a bit of a straw man argument. I do not see too many cries for a 'reunion with Slash', jokes about Ashba's commercialism, or posts concerning Axl's expanding waist line, emanating from them. These are all frequent topics on other boards. If you want 'toxic people', who ''attack, belittle', do as you so describe, I can certainly point you in the right direction. I have been on enough Guns N' Roses fora over the years to know that, the majority of fans - fans who were actually hardcore supporters of the 'nu' band to a certain point - are more negative than the posters being discussed here. I, for instance, could probably be described as more negative than generationx (which is one of the reasons why I do not post here much I suppose).
 
As I said, look at the other forums.

I was basically describing the tone and content of those "other" communities, I still look but haven't posted in them for years.

I don't think Dgenx is being sincere about his supposed interest in the band, consider the following:

D-GenerationX
Yesterday, 12:01 PM

" I still tell people GNR is my favorite band ever. But I have never, ever, ever meant it as anything that has happened since 1994."

Either he is lying there or being disingenuous here, I can provide many more examples. I'm far from ignorant about other forums, I don't participate in them, but certainly know what they are about.

Why do you feel the need to defend people like this?

[D-GenerationX]

When people tell me to "lighten up" or "just get over it", I find it insulting and rude.  After all, they are basically telling me that my feelings/concerns are of little importance.

Well, I'm not.

I'm telling you that we are talking about a freakin' rock band here.  We aren't debating abortion, civil rights, or foreign policy.  I think some of the level of outrage and general "how dare you!!" bit could be turned down some.

That's all.

[D-GenerationX]

Forums concern discussions and discussion necessitates, a certain degree of consent and dissent. A fanbase which merely, agrees and supports their chosen band would be tedious in the extreme. I do not really post here too much because, I, I suppose, possess an opinion that is too critical (of new guns) for this place - and absolutely loath censorship. In my opinion though, a fan who criticises a band - in a fairly objective and non pejorative fashion - is the superior fan (to a blind worshiper). It takes a superior fan to be that passionate about a subject and to know their subject so well, that they know when that said subject gets it, wholly wrong. Did Beatles fans unilaterally applaud Let it Be? Did Metallica fans unanimously love St Anger and support Lars's Napster tirade? No way did they. No way. It only seems to be Guns N' Roses fans who have this problem with, support, and dissent, freedom and censorship - much of it emanates from the man and Team Brazil itself of course (Axl seems to like to surround himself with people who only support him).

Great post here.

Its hard to take someone seriously that thinks everything is super duper all the damn time.  Objectivity and credibility suffers greatly.

Which also goes for confusing fandom with blind devotion.  Those examples you gave were great ones.  If those other band's fanbases operated like ours, saying that you felt 'Let It Be' was not up to par would have you labeled a fake fan and someone that should go like some other band.  They don't need your kind around here.

Crazyness.

Ask yourself this: if you are faced with two positive - but, slightly different - reviews of an album (let's say, Chinese Democracy), one by a critical fan, and one by a blind supporter, whose review would you be more impressed with? A blind supporter is naturally going to love everything and agree with everything - is this the sort of review people would be impressed with, here?

It sure seems that way. 

When a review of an album comes out that is way over the top negative, its discredited.  Its author is unfair, and let's be honest, probably an asshole in real life.  We've all seen that play out time and again with this band.

A glowing review finding no faults with anything?  Well, that guy gets it.  He just speaks the truth.

Think about that.

[D-GenerationX]

I don't think Dgenx is being sincere about his supposed interest in the band, consider the following:

D-GenerationX
Yesterday, 12:01 PM

" I still tell people GNR is my favorite band ever. But I have never, ever, ever meant it as anything that has happened since 1994."

Either he is lying there or being disingenuous here, I can provide many more examples. I'm far from ignorant about other forums, I don't participate in them, but certainly know what they are about.

Why do you feel the need to defend people like this?

It's always nice to meet a fan.  I also post over at MYGNR if you are looking to round out your collection.  Same username.

I stand by that statement.  I happen to enjoy some of the stuff that has happened since 1994, but let's get real here.  The general public barely acknowledges the current band as a thing. 

This exchange :

Me : "Favorite band of alltime?  That's easy.  Guns N' Roses"

Other guy : "Yeah, I like them too.  Hey, know what's a great song?  'Street Of Dreams'."

Yeah, that exchange never happens. 

Guns N' Roses to most people is the original line-up.  I know that gets some people fired the fuck up, but that's life in the big city.  In a general conversation with people, waxing poetic about 'Shackler's Revenge' will get you shoulder shrugs.  No one knows what the hell you are even talking about.

And I'm not a convert guy.  I'm not going to start pounding on the desk and insist they give the current band a shot.  I'd put 'There Was A Time' in my top 10 GNR songs ever.  That puts me in probably less than 1% of the people in a conversation about GNR that goes on somewhere other than these boards.

[Ginger King]

I don't think Dgenx is being sincere about his supposed interest in the band, consider the following:

D-GenerationX
Yesterday, 12:01 PM

" I still tell people GNR is my favorite band ever. But I have never, ever, ever meant it as anything that has happened since 1994."

Either he is lying there or being disingenuous here, I can provide many more examples. I'm far from ignorant about other forums, I don't participate in them, but certainly know what they are about.

Why do you feel the need to defend people like this?

It's always nice to meet a fan.  I also post over at MYGNR if you are looking to round out your collection.  Same username.

I stand by that statement.  I happen to enjoy some of the stuff that has happened since 1994, but let's get real here.  The general public barely acknowledges the current band as a thing. 

This exchange :

Me : "Favorite band of alltime?  That's easy.  Guns N' Roses"

Other guy : "Yeah, I like them too.  Hey, know what's a great song?  'Street Of Dreams'."

Yeah, that exchange never happens. 

Guns N' Roses to most people is the original line-up.  I know that gets some people fired the fuck up, but that's life in the big city.  In a general conversation with people, waxing poetic about 'Shackler's Revenge' will get you shoulder shrugs.  No one knows what the hell you are even talking about.

And I'm not a convert guy.  I'm not going to start pounding on the desk and insist they give the current band a shot.  I'd put 'There Was A Time' in my top 10 GNR songs ever.  That puts me in probably less than 1% of the people in a conversation about GNR that goes on somewhere other than these boards.

It?s true.  I know it?s a reality that some would rather ignore, but if you walk out on the street right now and ask who?s the guitarist for Guns n Roses, more people say Slash than Ashba or BBF.  I?ve had many conversations with my friends who, when I ask them if they want to go to a GnR concert, say, ?are they still around??  The current lineup has given them nothing to distinguish themselves, so at best they are viewed by many as Axl and Friends.

It?s been said here that the current lineup should be viewed the same as the UYI lineup, because the UYI did not have all original members, and Gilby and Matt did not contribute to the songs.  Point taken, but the UYI still had 3 original members?and Axl, Slash and Duff are the iconic figures in Guns (us forum people know that Izzy?s contributions should not be discounted either).  It?s been 20+ years since UYI?with sporadic activity from the band (and multiple changing parts).  The general public has moved on from Guns n Roses.  Maybe that's what they want, maybe they don't care about winning over the hearts and minds of the general public, but let's not pretend that they are the same as the past because the name is the same.

I know this will be looked at as me being negative and a hating ginger-troll?but it?s not me being negative (or wanting a reunion).  It?s an honest assessment of where this band is today in the macro environment (outside of the forum world).  Can it change?  Of course.  Would I like it to change?  Of course.  Do I think they have to release new music for it to change?  Of course.  Am I demanding they do it to satisfy my selfish desires and fill the dark void in my heart?  Of course not. 

There?s been a lot of good buzz about GnR this year, and IMO, they have the opportunity to capitalize on it and re-establish themselves (if they want to). 

[D-GenerationX]

There?s been a lot of good buzz about GnR this year, and IMO, they have the opportunity to capitalize on it and re-establish themselves (if they want to). 

I hope its not lost on Axl that on those rare occasions he does attend some public event, he's almost always treated very warmly. 

People would rather see him out there in some capacity.

[GypsySoul]

I in no way think he's moving heaven and earth to get a new release out.  That he's trying his damndest, but keep getting thwarted by that evil label, lawyers, what have you.

You keep repeating this over and over and over in almost every thread.

By your logic, Axl has to be the most powerful individual in the entire music industry. 

Axl is sooooo powerful that one of the top record labels with all their high & mighty lawyers plus some of the industries top management teams all cower and quake while year after year tossing millions upon millions at him hoping against hope that Axl will emerge from the pits of his demonic kingdom to grant theirs and our GNR dreams.

For argument sake let's say you're correct.  That Axl does hold all the power and that the poor poor label/lawyers/whomever have been and continue to be hostages to his whims & folly.  GOOD FOR AXL!!!!  How is that not the most fucking awesome amazing mind-blowing thing ever!!!  That a choirboy from the middle-class mid-west became the end-all word to how these major players in the music industry can conduct their business!!!

IMO, you give Axl way too much credit disguised as blame because you, like the rest of us, have ZERO knowledge of what has been and is transpiring behind the scenes.

[D-GenerationX]

IMO, you give Axl way too much credit disguised as blame because you, like the rest of us, have ZERO knowledge of what has been and is transpiring behind the scenes.

Yet you know enough to tell me I'm wrong.

Its nice when things work out, isn't it?  Just one of life's happy accidents.

[GeorgeSteele]

It?s true.  I know it?s a reality that some would rather ignore, but if you walk out on the street right now and ask who?s the guitarist for Guns n Roses, more people say Slash than Ashba or BBF.  I?ve had many conversations with my friends who, when I ask them if they want to go to a GnR concert, say, ?are they still around??  The current lineup has given them nothing to distinguish themselves, so at best they are viewed by many as Axl and Friends.

It?s been said here that the current lineup should be viewed the same as the UYI lineup, because the UYI did not have all original members, and Gilby and Matt did not contribute to the songs.  Point taken, but the UYI still had 3 original members?and Axl, Slash and Duff are the iconic figures in Guns (us forum people know that Izzy?s contributions should not be discounted either).  It?s been 20+ years since UYI?with sporadic activity from the band (and multiple changing parts).  The general public has moved on from Guns n Roses.  Maybe that's what they want, maybe they don't care about winning over the hearts and minds of the general public, but let's not pretend that they are the same as the past because the name is the same.

I know this will be looked at as me being negative and a hating ginger-troll?but it?s not me being negative (or wanting a reunion).  It?s an honest assessment of where this band is today in the macro environment (outside of the forum world).  Can it change?  Of course.  Would I like it to change?  Of course.  Do I think they have to release new music for it to change?  Of course.  Am I demanding they do it to satisfy my selfish desires and fill the dark void in my heart?  Of course not. 

There?s been a lot of good buzz about GnR this year, and IMO, they have the opportunity to capitalize on it and re-establish themselves (if they want to). 

I think this summarizes the main disconnect that I have with those who continually criticize the band's failure to release more music in the post-Old GNR era.  I want the band to release more new music because I expect that I will love the music more than anything else put out there these days (as I did with CD).  But I don't care if they ever re-establish themselves with the general public.  All I care is that they're popular enough to make it worth their while to continue touring and continue making new music. 

If you see 'new music' as mainly a vehicle for the band to reach its late 80s / early 90s mainstream popularity or anything close to that, then you're setting yourself up to be disappointed.  That's just not going happen.  That was lightning in a bottle. 

Basically, unlike with the Old GNR music, when you're listening to CD or any other music they release from this point on, the vast majority of people will have no idea of what you're listening to (maybe some will recognize Axl's voice).  I think that making peace with that is the key to enjoying what this band has to offer from here on out.   

[D-GenerationX]

If you see 'new music' as mainly a vehicle for the band to reach its late 80s / early 90s mainstream popularity or anything close to that, then you're setting yourself up to be disappointed.  That's just not going happen.  That was lightning in a bottle. 

Very true.

But its so, so frustrating to see people point to this as a reason to not do anything.  "It's not 1991 anymore, you know".  That whole bit.

No shit its not.  But when has anyone ever said they want a new GNR album because they want to see #1 singles and albums?  It's a phony argument.  No one has said that in the history of ever. 

[GeorgeSteele]

If you see 'new music' as mainly a vehicle for the band to reach its late 80s / early 90s mainstream popularity or anything close to that, then you're setting yourself up to be disappointed.  That's just not going happen.  That was lightning in a bottle. 

Very true.

But its so, so frustrating to see people point to this as a reason to not do anything.  "It's not 1991 anymore, you know".  That whole bit.

No shit its not.  But when has anyone ever said they want a new GNR album because they want to see #1 singles and albums?  It's a phony argument.  No one has said that in the history of ever. 

And nobody points to 1991 as a reason not to do anything.  It's just an observation that the band has more challenges to deal with now than they did then. 

And who's not doing anything?  Axl publicly stated that CDII is just about done, etc.  We'll have that in our hands in due time, definitely not as soon as you or I would like, but so what? 

[D-GenerationX]

And who's not doing anything?  Axl publicly stated that CDII is just about done, etc.  We'll have that in our hands in due time, definitely not as soon as you or I would like, but so what? 

That interview was awesome.  The most positive thing that happened in the GNRverse in 5 years.

I, like many, had grown rather numb to Dizzy, Richard, or whoever tell us they were working on it.  Axl saying it is a game changer.

[jarmo]

I don't know.  Just doesn't ring true to me.

Statements like yours come across as your way of striking back indirectly because you can't do it directly.  If anyone laments the prolonged inactivity or lack of progress, obviously, you can't refute that directly.  Those facts are what they are.  So you pivot to how we must be unhappy with our lives.  Yeah, that must be it.  Let's not talk about the actual band's foibles, because that's inconvenient.  So let's shift to how unhappy we must be with life because you dare utter a critical word about a rock band on the internet during a work day.

Just makes no sense to me.  This is rock band.  I find it impossible to believe no one is living their life because of something a rock band does or does not do.  Its a just a way for you to change the subject.

Well, for one, not everybody who posts shit about GN'R on the Internet is old enough to actually have a job. So your excuse of posting to kill time at work falls flat right there.

Like I said, just because you can't imagine something happening doesn't meant it can't. Just because something is true for you, doesn't mean its true for everyone else. I thought you knew this already.

If you honestly believe that all these whiny people love GN'R and they have no motives other than wanting the band to succeed, I might have a bridge to sell you. Now, before the generalization brigade arrives, I didn't say everybody is like that.

And yes, there's probably some people who are unhappy with something and they feed off the attention they get by becoming somebody on a GN'R forum.
That's my belief. Once again, it might not make sense to you. My experiences differ from yours.

And I'm talking any subject.  Politics, religion, sports, artists.  You check your credibility at the door if you can't ever bring yourself to say some stuff is wrong.

You can always find things to complain about if that's your goal.

Other people see things differently. They don't necessarily get any satisfaction from pointing out others' mistakes, instead they look for a bigger picture. The whys and hows.



/jarmo

[mortismurphy]

Forums concern discussions and discussion necessitates, a certain degree of consent and dissent. A fanbase which merely, agrees and supports their chosen band would be tedious in the extreme. I do not really post here too much because, I, I suppose, possess an opinion that is too critical (of new guns) for this place - and absolutely loath censorship. In my opinion though, a fan who criticises a band - in a fairly objective and non pejorative fashion - is the superior fan (to a blind worshiper). It takes a superior fan to be that passionate about a subject and to know their subject so well, that they know when that said subject gets it, wholly wrong. Did Beatles fans unilaterally applaud Let it Be? Did Metallica fans unanimously love St Anger and support Lars's Napster tirade? No way did they. No way. It only seems to be Guns N' Roses fans who have this problem with, support, and dissent, freedom and censorship - much of it emanates from the man and Team Brazil itself of course (Axl seems to like to surround himself with people who only support him).

Ask yourself this: if you are faced with two positive - but, slightly different - reviews of an album (let's say, Chinese Democracy), one by a critical fan, and one by a blind supporter, whose review would you be more impressed with? A blind supporter is naturally going to love everything and agree with everything - is this the sort of review people would be impressed with, here?

The signal-to-noise ratio on forums does seem to be worsening, and eventually you get the feeling like you?re at one of those parties where all anyone is doing is bitching and griping.

 It doesn?t matter what they?re bitching about so much as, sooner or later, that?s all you can really hear.
Eventually the polite, reasonable people stop feeling like it?s a group of people they want to hang around. So they leave, and those who remain start to see only those who agree with them? and, because that?s all they see, they think that?s all there is.

They think Everyone feels as they do, according to them. Once the tipping point is passed, you?re left with the extremes? those who hate, and those who dislike the haters enough to endure the toxic atmosphere to try and combat them. Each clash between those groups drives more of the others away.

One need only attend a concert to see there are plenty of positive, enthusiastic fans out there? and while a cynic might suggest liking ?those people? means we want to hear only praise regarding GNR and nothing else that?s simply not true.

 It?s possible to like something overall and yet dislike parts of it, or to be disappointed overall in something you were hoping to like, and in either case to have a positive discussion regarding what you?ve disliked,there is no need to be adversarial or disrespectful.

Personally I?d really like to seek out positive interactions and not engage with those who are out to attack, belittle, undercut, ridicule and whine as well as complain about every move, every decision, every day nonstop without fail. Toxic people are boring and depressing to be around.

I agree with the general tenure of your post, however, I would not say this is an accurate description of the posters under discussion here, i.e. GenerationX and Ginger King, who, I feel are fairly balanced in their appraisal of the situation; it is therefore a bit of a straw man argument. I do not see too many cries for a 'reunion with Slash', jokes about Ashba's commercialism, or posts concerning Axl's expanding waist line, emanating from them. These are all frequent topics on other boards. If you want 'toxic people', who ''attack, belittle', do as you so describe, I can certainly point you in the right direction. I have been on enough Guns N' Roses fora over the years to know that, the majority of fans - fans who were actually hardcore supporters of the 'nu' band to a certain point - are more negative than the posters being discussed here. I, for instance, could probably be described as more negative than generationx (which is one of the reasons why I do not post here much I suppose).
 
As I said, look at the other forums.

I was basically describing the tone and content of those "other" communities, I still look but haven't posted in them for years.

I don't think Dgenx is being sincere about his supposed interest in the band, consider the following:

D-GenerationX
Yesterday, 12:01 PM

" I still tell people GNR is my favorite band ever. But I have never, ever, ever meant it as anything that has happened since 1994."

Either he is lying there or being disingenuous here, I can provide many more examples. I'm far from ignorant about other forums, I don't participate in them, but certainly know what they are about.

Why do you feel the need to defend people like this?

I cannot speak for him but there has been only one album of original material released, post 1994 (1991 in fact). Also, Guns N' Roses existed in a complete vacuum, 1994 - late-1999 (Oh My God) and again, 2003-2006, so by default, these are naturally going to be GN'R's two worst periods.

The thing is with Guns N' Roses, there situation is different to other bands. For other bands of a certain age, e.g. The Stones, Metallica, you have albums - and whole eras - which, according to their fan bases, 'stink'. The fans openly acknowledge this. You will not find too many Stones fans defending Jagger's late 70s early '80s attempts at disco (Miss You aside), or Metallica fans, St Anger. New GN'R do not really have this. They just have this one album surrounded by sporadic and rather aimless batches of touring. Seemingly, you are 'on board' or 'not' with this scenario. It would be interesting if New GN'R had released, say, three albums. Would some of the hardcore supporters be able to bring themselves to say, ''I disliked album two, preferring album one and three instead'' and be able to list their reasons why, e.g. 'The production work on two is shitty'? I doubt it as there is inherent 'negativity'' present in such a statement - just as there is positives ('the production on one and three is excellent'). It seems New gnr fans are expected to have this one big unilateral opinion - everybody is happy and everything the band do is equally perfect and we all live in Na Na land! The act of criticising a band, placing some albums above others (the much used, 'top 10' list), disagreeing with certain decisions the band makes, is however normal activity for most fans (of other groups).

[Ginger King]

It?s true.  I know it?s a reality that some would rather ignore, but if you walk out on the street right now and ask who?s the guitarist for Guns n Roses, more people say Slash than Ashba or BBF.  I?ve had many conversations with my friends who, when I ask them if they want to go to a GnR concert, say, ?are they still around??  The current lineup has given them nothing to distinguish themselves, so at best they are viewed by many as Axl and Friends.

It?s been said here that the current lineup should be viewed the same as the UYI lineup, because the UYI did not have all original members, and Gilby and Matt did not contribute to the songs.  Point taken, but the UYI still had 3 original members?and Axl, Slash and Duff are the iconic figures in Guns (us forum people know that Izzy?s contributions should not be discounted either).  It?s been 20+ years since UYI?with sporadic activity from the band (and multiple changing parts).  The general public has moved on from Guns n Roses.  Maybe that's what they want, maybe they don't care about winning over the hearts and minds of the general public, but let's not pretend that they are the same as the past because the name is the same.

I know this will be looked at as me being negative and a hating ginger-troll?but it?s not me being negative (or wanting a reunion).  It?s an honest assessment of where this band is today in the macro environment (outside of the forum world).  Can it change?  Of course.  Would I like it to change?  Of course.  Do I think they have to release new music for it to change?  Of course.  Am I demanding they do it to satisfy my selfish desires and fill the dark void in my heart?  Of course not. 

There?s been a lot of good buzz about GnR this year, and IMO, they have the opportunity to capitalize on it and re-establish themselves (if they want to). 

I think this summarizes the main disconnect that I have with those who continually criticize the band's failure to release more music in the post-Old GNR era.  I want the band to release more new music because I expect that I will love the music more than anything else put out there these days (as I did with CD).  But I don't care if they ever re-establish themselves with the general public.  All I care is that they're popular enough to make it worth their while to continue touring and continue making new music. 

If you see 'new music' as mainly a vehicle for the band to reach its late 80s / early 90s mainstream popularity or anything close to that, then you're setting yourself up to be disappointed.  That's just not going happen.  That was lightning in a bottle. 

Basically, unlike with the Old GNR music, when you're listening to CD or any other music they release from this point on, the vast majority of people will have no idea of what you're listening to (maybe some will recognize Axl's voice).  I think that making peace with that is the key to enjoying what this band has to offer from here on out.   

No, I don?t expect the current lineup to get back to the AFD or UYI popularity?it?s impossible.  What I hope is that they can achieve a level of independence and be looked at without the shadow of the past.  To do that, or at least to try and do that, IMO, they need to release new music.  There?s been some progress mentioned in that regard and I hope it turns out to be true.

Also, IMO, everyone?s side projects and other endeavors (it seems like everyone but Axl has one) distracts from being looked at as a band, and creates the impression that being in GnR is more of a means to help facilitate other passions.
 
I would love it if each member could answer the question, ?what do you do?? with:  ?I?m in Gun and fucking Roses.  Period.  End of Story.? 

[GypsySoul]

IMO, you give Axl way too much credit disguised as blame because you, like the rest of us, have ZERO knowledge of what has been and is transpiring behind the scenes.

Yet you know enough to tell me I'm wrong.

Its nice when things work out, isn't it?  Just one of life's happy accidents.

IMO stands for IN MY OPINION and gave MY opinion as to why I think it's ludicrous to believe that the record label (or whomever) is an innocent bystander or victim in the business of GNR.  Yet you fail to give any reasoning as to why you believe the label (or whomever) is at Axl's mercy.

I truly hope I'm the one who is wrong and that you are totally correct that Axl does have all that control and power in every aspect and decision concerning what does or does not happen with GNR.
 

[D-GenerationX]

Well, for one, not everybody who posts shit about GN'R on the Internet is old enough to actually have a job. So your excuse of posting to kill time at work falls flat right there.

No it doesn't, because its the truth.  I am speaking only about myself and the tired rhetoric you try and force feed me.  No one else is part of this conversation.

If you want to try and run that "you must hate your life" shit up the flagpole towards someone else, you do that.  Doesn't apply to me.