One Man's Plan To Reunite Guns N' Roses (Mini-Doc)

[pilferk]

But there is nothing there!! When a forum ceases to have posts, it basically ceases. Do you know how many forums have become ghost towns? What is the purpose of advocating a policy which can only lead to your own demise?

Like I said...I giggle.

It's not your forum. You don't like it here. You don't like the content, general opinions, or editorial policy.  You have zero vested interest in whether the lights stay on.

So how is anyone supposed to take seriously that your concern is ACTUALLY traffic levels? Your concern, honestly, is that you be allowed to speak your mind.  And this is just one (intellecually bent) way to try to justify why you should be allowed to. And, I suspect, a way to try to inflate your own sense self importance and to try to portray yourself as "important" to the community.  Honestly...you're not either (nor am I, and I have no illusions I am).

You're not the one paying to keep the lights on, jarmo is.  They'll stay on, traffic or no, until he feels the need to shut them out. Right?

Not to mention: Do you think traffic and hits are his primary reason for leaving those lights on? I don't.

Thus, even if the argument were sincere, it would be a moot point.

But keep doing it.  I enjoy the giggles.

You take yourself far too seriously.

Says the guy sweating other peoples web traffic....

The fact is....only one of us is trying to justify a reason to continue posting, and using a site he has no vested interest in's web hits to try to bolster his argument.

I'd say thats pretty good evidence of someone who takes what they say too seriously, and an overinflated sense of self importance.

I'm simply pointing out you..you probably arent to be taken seriously. Given context and history. Especially not on this particular topic.

But you sure do provide some giggles!

[D-GenerationX]

A fair enough point but it does not rob us of the quizzical nature and freedom to ask, ''why?''. When Axl talks about a trilogy then does not release it, it is human instinct to ponder on 'what went wrong?'. It is a bit of a cop out (as a fan) to go, ''it is how Axl operates'' and leave it at that.

Yeah, I agree.  We sure play pretty fast and loose with what things he's said in the past that are able to be referenced.

The trilogy thing, that's on Bach though.  Did Axl himself ever say that?  I'm not sure he did.

But move past that one example.  Axl going on about how "we don't feel we have a label"?  Bring that one up freely.  That's on the approved list.  

"We've already recorded the second half of Chinese". Can't use that one as freely.  Because what does he mean by that?  Maybe its this, maybe its that, etc.  

Look, let's just cut the shit.  Axl statements where he's passing the buck, no worries.  Bring that shit on.  Part of the official record.

Axl's direct statements about things he's said and hasn't delivered on?  Well...let's hold off on that one.  We don't have "the facts" on that one.

[jarmo]

So, let me ask you for the fifth time, would you buy the hypothetical box set that you'd be interested in but wouldn't want to tell the record company to release? Yes/No?




/jarmo

[pilferk]

A fair enough point but it does not rob us of the quizzical nature and freedom to ask, ''why?''. When Axl talks about a trilogy then does not release it, it is human instinct to ponder on 'what went wrong?'. It is a bit of a cop out (as a fan) to go, ''it is how Axl operates'' and leave it at that.

Yeah, I agree.  We sure play pretty fast and loose with what things he's said in the past that are able to be referenced.

The trilogy thing, that's on Bach though.  Did Axl himself ever say that?  I'm not sure he did.

But move past that one example.  Axl going on about how "we don't feel we have a label"?  Bring that one up freely.  That's on the approved list.  

"We've already recorded the second half of Chinese". Can't use that one as freely.  Because what does he mean by that?  Maybe its this, maybe its that, etc.  

Look, let's just cut the shit.  Axl statements where he's passing the buck, no worries.  Bring that shit on.  Part of the official record.

Axl's direct statements about things he's said and hasn't delivered on?  Well...let's hold off on that one.  We don't have "the facts" on that one.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

I mean, seriously...the diametrically opposed povs espoused here do exactly the same thing, here. You are just as "guilty" as the people supporting the pov opposite yours. And theres absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Explain away, or contextualize, the comments that dont fit into your pov, take the ones that do as the gospel truth.

Dude..thats discussion. Other than adopting a hive mind, or becomng stepford fans, i'm not sure what you're looking for, here. You essentially described, above, every debate, ever, in history. We all interpret things different ways...nothing wrong with that. Is there?

I dont see the phrases in question edited or censored...so they are not verboten. They are just interpreted differently, given the inherited context. No?

[D-GenerationX]

Dude..thats discussion. Other than adopting a hive mind, or becomng stepford fans, i'm not sure what you're looking for, here. You essentially described, above, every debate, ever, in history. We all interpret things different ways...nothing wrong with that. Is there?

I disagree.  In all my time here I have never seen either of the following occur :

A quote from Axl where he is passing the buck that we are told can be taken with a grain of salt.

A quote from Axl where something he said but he never delivered is accepted as him dropping the ball.

Can you think of any?  That's a serious question, not a flippant one.

Your point about debate is valid, but is it valid here?  If you want to tell me that I am more likely to "blame Axl" than others here, that's obviously valid.  But when the other side "blames Axl" precisely never, how interested is anyone in a debate?

The only debate I ever see referenced is why people asking (what are deemed) uncomfortable questions can't just leave.

And hey, that is what it is.  I know the deal, and I deal with it.  But I'm not sure I have to accept this is some bastion of open dialogue and dissenting viewpoints, do I?

You and I had a beef today.  We talked it out, and it ended with me making my case in spots, and conceding a number of points to you.  No hard feelings either way.

Take a second and consider this.  The people that come after me...have I ever made a good point, ever?

[jarmo]

A person avoiding simple yes/no questions shouldn't talk about "uncomfortable questions".

I get it, you're avoiding me.
"Uncomfortable questions". Funny.




/jarmo

[pilferk]

Dude..thats discussion. Other than adopting a hive mind, or becomng stepford fans, i'm not sure what you're looking for, here. You essentially described, above, every debate, ever, in history. We all interpret things different ways...nothing wrong with that. Is there?

I disagree.  In all my time here I have never seen either of the following occur :

A quote from Axl where he is passing the buck that we are told can be taken with a grain of salt.

A quote from Axl where something he said but he never delivered is accepted as him dropping the ball.

Can you think of any?  That's a serious question, not a flippant one.

Many. Of both. By various posters....including you, gingerking, mortis,  jaeball, bacon, and many others, through 13 years of posting here.

Your language, above, though, slghtly implies that you are looking for those things from "them"...meaning those with the viewpoint opposite yours. Thats much more rare. I can really only speak for my own postings and say i have acknowledged both as equal possibilities where appropriate.

But the flip side is also true. I can only recall very rate cases where its been acknowledged, from those espousing a specific pov, that axl is offering up an explanation for a change necessitated by someone else, or that there might be good reason for a change in deliverables/promises.

Which was my point. You expect the one side to "budge", and bemoan the rarity of that event. I'm pointing you to the mirror. Both sides are just as unwavering.

Your point about debate is valid, but is it valid here?  If you want to tell me that I am more likely to "blame Axl" than others here, that's obviously valid.  But when the other side "blames Axl" precisely never, how interested is anyone in a debate?

Again, how often does one sife "cut axl a break"? It might not be never, but its pretty fucking close.

Pointer: You are not making your case to the opposite team in a debate. They are firmly tied to their position. You're pitching to "the judges".

I'd point out,  too, that if people werent interested in the debate/discussion, they wouldnt post. Sometimes, debate isnt about changing minds. Its just about the content, itself.

And finally.....you've also touched on why my time here is kess an less, and more and more sporadic.

The only debate I ever see referenced is why people asking (what are deemed) uncomfortable questions can't just leave.

I disagree. I think that question, sometimes, is raised. I dont think its the majority f the postings made. And...nobody has actually shown anyone involved, here, the proverbial door...so you have to think the question is, at least mostly, in earnest.

[pilferk]

And hey, that is what it is.  I know the deal, and I deal with it.  But I'm not sure I have to accept this is some bastion of open dialogue and dissenting viewpoints, do I?

You seem to be defining "open dialogue" as "eventually everyone agrees with me". I dont think thats realistic. I dont even think its realistic to expect much movement in overall position. I think you present your case, probably repeat yourself a couple times and/or add some nuance, and then agree to disagree.  That doesnt happen here, nearly enough, as both sides perpetuate beating horses long past dead.

BUT:

I haven't seen anything you post deleted or edited.

You havent been banned.

You seem to present a dissenting pov, often and well.

There seem to be replies.

Right?

Those fit my definitions as "open dialogue with dissenting opinions"

You and I had a beef today.  We talked it out, and it ended with me making my case in spots, and conceding a number of points to you.  No hard feelings either way.

Take a second and consider this.  The people that come after me...have I ever made a good point, ever?

 Maybe not. But we give and take in our discussions..both of us, i think. Thats the way we roll.

So the question is, BESIDES me, have any of them made a good point, ever? The ones who "come after you". Again, it goes both ways, and theres a trust and repore that gets you to that place. I see both sides do the exact same things, over and over, and then point the finger at "the other side" for doing it.

Part of it,  honestly, is the "jarmo as the site owner vs jarmo as a member of the community" stuff, too. His posts get taken as having more weight/importance/gravitas because he owns the place. Maybe thats as it should be, but i think a lot of "stuff" crops up around what is jarmo's opinion, and what is jarmo's site policy. Most of the time, Jarmo disagreeing, or arguing against you, doesnt mean a topic is verboten. It means he disagrees.

[D-GenerationX]

Many. Of both. By various posters....including you, gingerking, mortis,  jaeball, bacon, and many others, through 13 years of posting here.

Could you hit me with some examples?  Not trying to be a dick, but I seriousy can't think of one of either.

Not that my memory is infallible, but I do read the site every day.

Your language, above, though, slghtly implies that you are looking for those things from "them"...meaning those with the viewpoint opposite yours. Thats much more rare. I can really only speak for my own postings and say i have acknowledged both as equal possibilities where appropriate.

Somewhat, yes.

Tony Soprano said in one episode that "'Remember when' is the lowest form of conversation."  I disagree, however.  To me, the lowest form is "Yeah, me too."  Just never found that all that compelling.  I will always be more interested in talking with someone coming at something from a different angle.

I go out of my way to watch the cable news network that leans the other way, because I'm looking for a different viewpoint.

Take you and I.  We don't agree on much.  But I still think we have productive conversations, because I will find myself seeing something a different way, sometimes.  That has more value to me than an echo chamber where we just confirm each other's biases.

[jarmo]

Pilferk, you're trying to have a discussion with a person who admitted that he can only focus on two or maybe three topics at once. Just keep that in mind.
Also, a person who claims he'd be the first to admit he was wrong. But that rarely happens because it's easier to skip the parts/posts he's wrong about, than to admit being wrong.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

I haven't seen anything you post deleted or edited.

You havent been banned.

You seem to present a dissenting pov, often and well.

There seem to be replies.

Right?

Hahaha

Well, in order :

- yes it has
- yes it has
- been threatened with it more than once
- thank you
- yes, and to be fair, only very few are totally unreasonable

[pilferk]

Many. Of both. By various posters....including you, gingerking, mortis,  jaeball, bacon, and many others, through 13 years of posting here.

Could you hit me with some examples?  Not trying to be a dick, but I seriousy can't think of one of either.

Not that my memory is infallible, but I do read the site every day.

Besides the sly shot you took above by calling it "passing the buck"?

I'll look for some specific examples, real and implied. There have been many in the next album thread, and others in the various business discussions. Might not get quotes til tomorrow, at least.

But you're essentially asking me to find posts from "your side" that question axls quotes about other people being responsible for "stuff" ( and not axl), and places where axl promised product, failed to deliver, and was "blamed".

I mean....the whole "slash is a liar" discussion is rife with the first part. As were the lawsuit discussions (both over gh and the subsequent suit by slash and duff). Hell the goldstein thread and the discussion of there being no way it was all dougs fault that the euro tour was cancelled (how could acl not know) is a great example.

And you bring up the best example of axl being accused of dropping the ball: the second half od chinese. Its starting with the next album thread, too...because there is an assumption (despite how cds release pkayed out) that there will be nothing this year. Also, back in '06...tons of it related to axl not having releaed cd when the irond were hot.

You honestly dont temember places where ANYONE has done that?

Your language, above, though, slghtly implies that you are looking for those things from "them"...meaning those with the viewpoint opposite yours. Thats much more rare. I can really only speak for my own postings and say i have acknowledged both as equal possibilities where appropriate.

Somewhat, yes.

Tony Soprano said in one episode that "'Remember when' is the lowest form of conversation."  I disagree, however.  To me, the lowest form is "Yeah, me too."  Just never found that all that compelling.  I will always be more interested in talking with someone coming at something from a different angle.

I go out of my way to watch the cable news network that leans the other way, because I'm looking for a different viewpoint.

Take you and I.  We don't agree on much.  But I still think we have productive conversations, because I will find myself seeing something a different way, sometimes.  That has more value to me than an echo chamber where we just confirm each other's biases.

I'm with you on the productive type discussion. My preference, too. But you cant get that with everyone...for lots of reasons.

Not everyone works that way. It can still "work".  And sometimes, with work, you can morph things to be more in line with what youre looking for. But it takes (at least) two to tango.

[pilferk]

I haven't seen anything you post deleted or edited.

You havent been banned.

You seem to present a dissenting pov, often and well.

There seem to be replies.

Right?

Hahaha

Well, in order :

- yes it has
- yes it has
- been threatened with it more than once
- thank you
- yes, and to be fair, only very few are totally unreasonable

If it has, i havent seen it. But fair enough.

It doesnt seem to happen often, or when i'm around. And i dont see you having a real lack of input, mostly.

Threatened, but in the cases i remember, it was about content (ie: attacking the poster, not the post), not topic/ideas (well, unless you consider calling someone an idiot an idea) And...threatened or not..you are still here. So.....

Im just sayin...theres a lot more open dialogue with dissenting opinions than many people think. Rep isnt quite reality.

[D-GenerationX]

I get it, you're avoiding me.

Let's get this out of the way, just so we don't go through this every day.

What's the upside of me trying to talk to you lately?

Whenever we have a sustained conversation about anything anymore, literally...anything, you just get upset.  If you object to the term, then swap it out for anything that conveys "visibly unhappy with".  And as you grow increasingly "visibly unhappy with", you lash out with a bunch of posturing and threats.

So I'm supposed to be in a rush to answer your often completely antagonistic questions.  Which, let's be fair, I rolled with for a long time.  I did.  I thought we got some good stuff out of it.  Made some points, had some laughs.

But lately, once I hit you with something you either can't refute, or simply don't like for whatever reason, at that point, "I'm going to be gone soon"?

Well...what's in any of that for me?  You following me around trying to bait me like a feisty umpire?  And the second I disagree with you, I better watch it?

Who's seeking *that* out?  It's a completely adversarial situation with no way forward.

I'm not saying its forever, because that's a mighty long time.  But at least for a little while.

It's just not productive.

[jarmo]

I do not get upset about your posts. Stop believing yourself.


You come to this fan site and blurt out all kinds of deep thoughts that you may or may not have, yet you don't feel the need to stand up for any of it.

You just like to go by as you know everything better than everybody else. Your "this makes sense to me, and I know my stuff so it must be that way" routines are only fantasies. Pilferk already pointed it out to you. Your "free thinking" is exclusively used to come up with all these negative scenarios that only exist in your mind, and then are typed out on a keyboard, for the rest of us to "marvel" at.


You made an ignorant comment about not wanting to "sell" the idea of a certain hypothetical boxset to the label. Now, what kind of life experience do you possess that makes you think you know whether or not that particular product would be a viable release? I'm curious.

Also, you failed to answer my simple question that can be answered with one word. Instead, you did your usual dance around the issue. So much for unconformable questions.

Instead of "yes" or "no", we get "I'd be interested". Interested in what? Obtaining it illegally without paying? Looking at it? What?

Are you aware that bands who have less fans and are less popular than GN'R have released boxsets? Do you believe that boxsets are aimed at the masses or do you think they are marketed towards a certain little group of said bands' fanbases?

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you'd like to think of yourself as intelligent. Am I correct?
So how come you think of one thing, in this case "Nobody would buy it, so it makes no sense to put it out" isn't followed by a minute or two of free thinking where you can come up with maybe one or two reasons why it would make sense? I mean, just for the hell of it!

This isn't the first case when this has happened. It seems like you often can't figure out any possible explanations to anything that would explain a certain matter. You always the take simple way out and that is "this is how it is because the idea is already in my mind".

I find it somewhat puzzling how the people championing free thinking are so uninterested in using it for anything other than negativity.
If you manage to use it for the opposite, that's productive. Then you've learned something new.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

I don't think its a viable pitch. 

If I am a person in a decision making capacity at the label, I don't see that as a viable commercial release.  A box set of outtakes, from an incarnation of the band that never made any sort of mark to begin with.

Forget the casual rock fan.  You don't even have consensus amongst dedicated GNR fans that it's a good idea.

End of the day, its a business.  The release does not make business sense.

Would I like it?  Sure.  I also have over 400 GNR bootlegs on a hard drive.  I'm a hard sell as the representative of your average consumer on this one.

And finally, I'm told time and again that there are all sort of factors preventing ONE RELEASE.  He can't get one album out.  Its the damn industry, its the damn label, its the damn kids today and their Spotify.  No shortage of reasons there hasn't been a single album in 7 years, going on 8.

But let's toss all that aside and argue for something triple that length, at triple that cost, with a long gone line-up that no one knows, and all for a smaller audience that might actually buy it anyway.

What business sense does this make?

You really want to do this?  Get a current album out.  Re-establish yourself.

Don't simply sit around "taking a serious look at what you are doing in the regard" of simply *talking* about a remix album of your LAST album, that didn't catch on.

Re-establish the brand.  Then we can talk about luxury projects like box sets of rarities and outtakes.

But right now, they hang up on you.  No matter how much I, personally, might be interested in such a thing.

And there you have it.

[mortismurphy]

The argument concerns a sarcastic comment by Jarmo regarding the number of inclusions from a new album into a setlist.

Yeah, and considering that you're here instead of some AC/DC site talking about how exciting it is that they added three new songs to their setlist a few weeks ago must mean it doesn't really matter to you that much! 

Probably because I am not as big an AC/DC fan as you make out. It is you who are obsessed with this, me being a DC fan, thing, remember?

[mortismurphy]

But there is nothing there!! When a forum ceases to have posts, it basically ceases. Do you know how many forums have become ghost towns? What is the purpose of advocating a policy which can only lead to your own demise?

Like I said...I giggle.

It's not your forum. You don't like it here. You don't like the content, general opinions, or editorial policy.  You have zero vested interest in whether the lights stay on.

So how is anyone supposed to take seriously that your concern is ACTUALLY traffic levels? Your concern, honestly, is that you be allowed to speak your mind.  And this is just one (intellecually bent) way to try to justify why you should be allowed to. And, I suspect, a way to try to inflate your own sense self importance and to try to portray yourself as "important" to the community.  Honestly...you're not either (nor am I, and I have no illusions I am).

You're not the one paying to keep the lights on, jarmo is.  They'll stay on, traffic or no, until he feels the need to shut them out. Right?

Not to mention: Do you think traffic and hits are his primary reason for leaving those lights on? I don't.

Thus, even if the argument were sincere, it would be a moot point.

But keep doing it.  I enjoy the giggles.

You take yourself far too seriously.

Says the guy sweating other peoples web traffic....

The fact is....only one of us is trying to justify a reason to continue posting, and using a site he has no vested interest in's web hits to try to bolster his argument.

I'd say thats pretty good evidence of someone who takes what they say too seriously, and an overinflated sense of self importance.

I'm simply pointing out you..you probably arent to be taken seriously. Given context and history. Especially not on this particular topic.

But you sure do provide some giggles!

You are over analysing (as usual) a rather flippant remark by me. Jarmo pointed out that the place has been peaceful in my absence. I merely replied that it has been 'completely dead' and that Jarmo's own post count declines when there is ever an absence of 'whiners'. Yes, I do take post traffic as some sort of indication of, a successful forum, but your straw man remarks about Jarmo's ownership are unnecessary and rather, stating the obvious.

I am trying to envision the type of forum desired if posters like me disappeared. From my perspective it could only exist of,

Poster A: ''jee, golly gosh. Axl sure is swell''
B: ''sure is. Isn't Chinese Democracy a good album?''
A: ''Sure is. Cannot wait for another residency''
B: ''whoop e doo da''

If you remove every possible source of, negativity, that is all you are left with really.

[pilferk]

You are over analysing (as usual) a rather flippant remark by me. Jarmo pointed out that the place has been peaceful in my absence. I merely replied that it has been 'completely dead' and that Jarmo's own post count declines when there is ever an absence of 'whiners'. Yes, I do take post traffic as some sort of indication of, a successful forum, but your straw man remarks about Jarmo's ownership are unnecessary and rather, stating the obvious.

I'm not over analysing, anything (though I know how much you hate it when people actually look at your words substantively because of how poorly they often hold up under scrutiny).  YOU engaged ME when I commented (in less than 50 words)  that I find such remarks, fippant or not, funny.  To me, they are.  The fact YOU find the fact I see them as funny as being worthy of extended argument, or objection, speaks more of you, and to your posts and posting, than anything I've done in this conversation. Talk about overanalyzing an off handed comment...here's my original post that lit this off:

I always find it very interesting when people who really disagree with the site's general tone and editorial policy then worry about site traffic, and use it as justification of their own ramblings.

It's so logically and intellectually bent, it makes me giggle.

Man, I must have really hit a nerve! Talk about someone who takes themselves too seriously....gods forbid someone find humor at your expense.

Your "flippant remark" gets pointed out, a lot, by various posters in the same types of conversations...and most of those posters feel the same way about the site.  And I chuckle every time.  Because those comments are disingenious and intellectually bent at their core. The fact you took issue with my giggles, again, speaks more about YOU than it does about me.

You commented on post traffic/activity levels.  As a justification for why you should continue to post (or as a counterpoint to jarmo saying it was nice while you were "away", which amounts to the same thing).  Wiggle away to try to get off the hook, but you did. If you want to be intellectually bent (more than you have been in this tangent), and deny that. or try to tell everyone you meant something differrent...go for it.  Nobody will buy what you're selling, though. It's obvious and clear what you meant. "If I'm not here, nobody posts, so you/this place is better off with me posting".

That's intellecutally bent, and I find it quite funny.

To sum up:

1) Whether you use traffic as a metric for success is irrelevant.  You're not paying to keep the lights on.

2) You have said, time and again, that you disagree with pretty much every administrative "thing" the site represents/does. So you generally don't like the way the place is run.

3) Since you have zero vested interest in the construct continuing, it's intellectually bent to cite the place being "dead" as justification as to why you should post.  Because whether there is traffic or not has ZERO effect on you. Nothing. Because of both 1 and 2, above. In fact, one would think, if the lights go off due to low traffic (it won't) that would, in fact, prove you point.

It's a very simple logical path to walk down.  It's not a straw man (I'm not sure you really know what that term means, in terms of the logical fallacy terminology). I'm not setting up an argument, ascribing it to you, so I can knock it down.  I'm observing performed behavior and chuckling at the humor it generates.

It's incredibly funny to watch you, and others, do the same thing over and over. It's amusing. I giggle.

Why you think you need to question WHY I find it funny, and get a long, drawn out, explanation as to why I giggle, I have no idea.  But, there you have it.  The joke has now been explained to death, to the guy who "doesn't get it".

I am trying to envision the type of forum desired if posters like me disappeared. From my perspective it could only exist of,

Poster A: ''jee, golly gosh. Axl sure is swell''
B: ''sure is. Isn't Chinese Democracy a good album?''
A: ''Sure is. Cannot wait for another residency''
B: ''whoop e doo da''

If you remove every possible source of, negativity, that is all you are left with really.

See, that's a different argument, entirely.  And not the conversation we're having.  Since I made no comment to indicate that a) I think you should leave or b) that I think the contrarian POV should be eliminated at htgth, I'd point out that YOU just set up the straw man. Interesting, no? In any event, you should make THAT point to "whoever" you're having THAT conversation with. Maybe it will make sense in that context.

It certainly would have been less funny, and made more sense, as a response to jarmos comments.

[jarmo]

I don't think its a viable pitch. 

If I am a person in a decision making capacity at the label, I don't see that as a viable commercial release.  A box set of outtakes, from an incarnation of the band that never made any sort of mark to begin with.

#1: It would be from Guns N' Roses
#2: It would feature unreleased material sung by Axl Rose from a period of "mystery".

Forget the casual rock fan.  You don't even have consensus amongst dedicated GNR fans that it's a good idea.

I did forget them. I already asked whether or not you are aware of these boxsets being marketed toward the masses or not.
That's why they often release a regular or double cd of the "best" bits for the average Joe to buy download. Or at least if there's a new version of the original album involved, they release that as a stand alone.

Would I like it?  Sure.  I also have over 400 GNR bootlegs on a hard drive.  I'm a hard sell as the representative of your average consumer on this one.

You also got those bootlegs for free. Doesn't really say anything other than you like free stuff!

Would you buy it?

And finally, I'm told time and again that there are all sort of factors preventing ONE RELEASE.  He can't get one album out.  Its the damn industry, its the damn label, its the damn kids today and their Spotify.  No shortage of reasons there hasn't been a single album in 7 years, going on 8.

But let's toss all that aside and argue for something triple that length, at triple that cost, with a long gone line-up that no one knows, and all for a smaller audience that might actually buy it anyway.

Haha. It's only supposed to be a lighthearted discussion about a hypothetical boxset of outtakes from a period when we didn't have a lot of news to talk about.
There was no argument when the hypothetical material should be released. Nothing. So all your other arguments are void. Sorry.

Once again, you proved that your free thinking capabilities are kinda limited.

Probably because I am not as big an AC/DC fan as you make out. It is you who are obsessed with this, me being a DC fan, thing, remember?

You're the one going on about how great they are! Neil Young and them.

So you pretty much admitted that you're not really a fan of anything. Yet you come to this band's fan site...




/jarmo