General "Not In This Lifetime... Tour" thread *1st POST UPDATE NOV 30*

[Thorned Rose]

Yeah I know. It doesn't matter like I said.

Just before the reunion news... and all of those years we were robbed of Guns N' Roses music... that was robbed. Don't play pretend lol.

Say what you want... he's got the name and I guess Duff and Slash are "hired guns" right?

what a fucking joke

[pilferk]

All well said, pilferk.

Thorned Rose is hardly the first one to lean on some fiction, coupled with some sort of vague "that's not how it should be" type rationale to explain away how it all went to hell.

But you make that argument NOW??  Both guys are back and happy days are here again.

Who gives a shit what happened in 1995?

The answer is: Because, though they're back...Thorned Rose doesn't like "the way" they're back.

If we're not back to 1990, with everyone having an equal say, and equal stake, and equal % in the partnership...well, that's just not gonna work.  

Slash and Duff "shouldn't" just be considered anything less than equal partners in anything Guns n Roses.  That's the beef.

And the world "should" be filled with kittens and rainbows and unicorns...and we should all be billionaires.

But we're not.  Because that's not the way the world works. And pining away for things to be the way we think they "should" be is pretty pointless.  Things are the way they are, for the reasons they are.  In this case, Slash and Duff WERE equal partners in making the decision that led to them NOT being equal partners anymore.

It's not all on Axl. It's not all on Doug. They all played their part, and nobody was "screwed", in the sense they were pressured into something they were uncomfortable signing their name to. It's that simple.

[Thorned Rose]

You can cut it up and slice it up however you want to make it seem liberal or "okay".

Like I said, and you've said it doesn't really matter. I'm done talking about it. In essence... Slash and Duff make Guns N' Roses just as much as Izzy and Steven do....

[pilferk]

Yeah I know. It doesn't matter like I said.

Just before the reunion news... and all of those years we were robbed of Guns N' Roses music... that was robbed. Don't play pretend lol.

Say what you want... he's got the name and I guess Duff and Slash are "hired guns" right?

what a fucking joke

Fuck that, nobody was robbed of anything.  What happened, happened.

They couldn't work together anymore. It's that freaking simple.  Happens to many, many bands.  Happens in many businesses. ALL OF THEM decided it was time to part company, by hook or by crook.  Not one of them set out to deprive you of music or a product you paid for.  There was no intent to take something from you that you owned.

Now they think they can work together again. Great!

And yes, Axl has control of the name.  I'm sure there is some sort of new creative partnership that's been formed, but, at the end of the day, Axl owns the name, and will continue to own the name, from now until the end of time.  And anyone who plays under the banner of Guns n Roses does so at his discretion.  If that bugs you...too fucking bad. Seriously. That's the way it is.  Slash and Duff seem to have made peace with it. Why can't you?

[pilferk]

You can cut it up and slice it up however you want to make it seem liberal or "okay".

Like I said, and you've said it doesn't really matter. I'm done talking about it. In essence... Slash and Duff make Guns N' Roses just as much as Izzy and Steven do....

I'm telling you what happened. I'm giving you facts, without spin.  It's "ok", in that it was legal, above board, and Slash and Duff signed their name to it.  You can not like it....but that's what it is.

Creatively, you can argue whatever you want in terms of material you like, etc, and who contributed to what.

But...the facts are the facts.  Legally, in the real world, what you're saying simply isn't true.

You can use your illusion, let it take you where it may....

[jarmo]

and all of those years we were robbed of Guns N' Roses music... that was robbed. Don't play pretend lol.

I'm assuming you and your ideas constitutes as "we" in this case. Don't speak on behalf of other people unless you know their opinion on the matter. 
LOL.



/jarmo

[pilferk]

and all of those years we were robbed of Guns N' Roses music... that was robbed. Don't play pretend lol.

I'm assuming you and your ideas constitutes as "we" in this case. Don't speak on behalf of other people unless you know their opinion on the matter. 
LOL.



/jarmo

I honestly can't believe this topic is coming up AGAIN! In light of the information that's come up in the past couple years and ESPECIALLY in light of the fact the're going to be back up on stage playing together, again, VERY soon.

I mean...you can't really argue that Slash and Duff aren't OK with it, when they have, again, signed on the dotted line (you'd assume) and are going to share a stage with Axl again.  They're over it. They've made peace with it. They're seemingly OK with it.

But....here we go again.

Blech..I'm out.   This would be roughly the 20th time I've participated in this same sort of discussion...too old, too stale, and especially in light of the current situation, too irrelevant.

I said it before recent events: You could HAVE a full blown reunion and some people would still find SOMETHING to bitch about....

[D-GenerationX]

Any bad feelings Slash or Duff may have can't be all that prevalent 20 years later, or they wouldn't be doing this.

Same thing with Axl, really.  If he was still as pissed as he was even 5-6 years ago, this never happens.

In a quiet moment, I'm sure all 3 guys know they fucked up. 

But, you can't turn back time.  So you make the best of the present, which they have done.

[pilferk]

Any bad feelings Slash or Duff may have can't be all that prevalent 20 years later, or they wouldn't be doing this.

Same thing with Axl, really.  If he was still as pissed as he was even 5-6 years ago, this never happens.

In a quiet moment, I'm sure all 3 guys know they fucked up. 

But, you can't turn back time.  So you make the best of the present, which they have done.

Another round of shots of patron.

My bar tab is gonna be HUGE...

[sandman]

You can cut it up and slice it up however you want to make it seem liberal or "okay".

Like I said, and you've said it doesn't really matter. I'm done talking about it. In essence... Slash and Duff make Guns N' Roses just as much as Izzy and Steven do....

I hate to get involved in this silly argument, as I'm sure there are hundreds of pages on it in the "Dead Horse" section, but as Axl correctly pointed out, you cannot be forced to sign a contract. if you are, the contract is voidable. look it up. 

regardless of when they gave Axl the rights, in the end, the thing that actually matters is that Slash quit. if he didn't, none of the lineups over the years would have ever happened.

Steven was kicked out, they replaced him and continued with the name. Izzy quit, they replaced him and continued with the name. Slash quit, they replaced him and continued with the name.

Slash quitting screwed over all the diehard fans that were there from the beginning. 

I copied and pasted the following from a website....

Defining Duress

In the previous ?held-at-gunpoint? example, the idea of duress was taken to an extreme. The actual definition of duress is simply a measurement of coercion or force not necessarily because a weapon has been drawn. Any type of threats, intended harm or stress put upon a person in order to get them to perform an act they would not normally perform would be considered duress. A contract is not validly signed unless it is signed by each participant?s own accord and own free will.

This can lead to some loose definitions of duress, of course, but any type of coercion placed on a contract can indeed render it invalid; after all, that allows one person to take advantage of another person against their will.

[JAEBALL]

You can cut it up and slice it up however you want to make it seem liberal or "okay".

Like I said, and you've said it doesn't really matter. I'm done talking about it. In essence... Slash and Duff make Guns N' Roses just as much as Izzy and Steven do....

I hate to get involved in this silly argument, as I'm sure there are hundreds of pages on it in the "Dead Horse" section, but as Axl correctly pointed out, you cannot be forced to sign a contract. if you are, the contract is voidable. look it up. 

regardless of when they gave Axl the rights, in the end, the thing that actually matters is that Slash quit. if he didn't, none of the lineups over the years would have ever happened.

Steven was kicked out, they replaced him and continued with the name. Izzy quit, they replaced him and continued with the name. Slash quit, they replaced him and continued with the name.

Slash quitting screwed over all the diehard fans that were there from the beginning. 

I copied and pasted the following from a website....

Defining Duress

In the previous ?held-at-gunpoint? example, the idea of duress was taken to an extreme. The actual definition of duress is simply a measurement of coercion or force not necessarily because a weapon has been drawn. Any type of threats, intended harm or stress put upon a person in order to get them to perform an act they would not normally perform would be considered duress. A contract is not validly signed unless it is signed by each participant?s own accord and own free will.

This can lead to some loose definitions of duress, of course, but any type of coercion placed on a contract can indeed render it invalid; after all, that allows one person to take advantage of another person against their will.

The only thing I disagree with is the term that Slash "quit". Hard to walk in another man shoes...but I don't think a lot of people would have agreed to be an employee of Guns N Roses at that time in his position.

Pilferk and Dx have been spot on... Thankfully it is all over and done with...

April 8th will be a dream come true for me... and I suspect it is going to be very well worth the wait.

[D-GenerationX]

April 8th will be a dream come true for me... and I suspect it is going to be very well worth the wait.

I'll be here refreshing the page every 20 seconds that night.  Me, and everyone not actually in the building, I imagine.

[JAEBALL]

April 8th will be a dream come true for me... and I suspect it is going to be very well worth the wait.

I'll be here refreshing the page every 20 seconds that night.  Me, and everyone not actually in the building, I imagine.

Yeah .. I'll be there.. but a live feed would be amazing... I caught a little bit of the Metallica show the night before the super bowl...and the quality was amazing.

I'm sure GNR nation would be so in to something like that.

[Thorned Rose]

What I'm interested in is if we'll be able to know the lineup before the show right? I hope we know that at least. I would think the AFD together for that first show in Vegas would be incredible.

Also I'm really wanting to see if they keep it safe with a UYI era setlist with 2-3 CD songs or if they do something new and surprising. Like the opening song.... "This is a new song..."

OMG

[D-GenerationX]

I doubt it.

We didn't find out about Ron until he walked on stage on 5/12/06.

[pilferk]

April 8th will be a dream come true for me... and I suspect it is going to be very well worth the wait.

I'll be here refreshing the page every 20 seconds that night.  Me, and everyone not actually in the building, I imagine.

I hope jarmo has aquired extra bandwidth, server space/backups/mirrors, etc...because HTGTH is going to undergo a huge "stress test" that night, and I'd be shocked if we don't break it.

[Thorned Rose]

Lets blow it up!!! No... I hope I'm able to come here and check out what is going on.

So there is no live stream for the Vegas stuff?

[D-GenerationX]

Lets blow it up!!! No... I hope I'm able to come here and check out what is going on.

So there is no live stream for the Vegas stuff?

I doubt that was ever in the cards.

We might get lucky with Coachella.  But as others have said, any individual band can opt out of the stream if they push it.

[sofine11]

Any bad feelings Slash or Duff may have can't be all that prevalent 20 years later, or they wouldn't be doing this.

Same thing with Axl, really.  If he was still as pissed as he was even 5-6 years ago, this never happens.

In a quiet moment, I'm sure all 3 guys know they fucked up. 

But, you can't turn back time.  So you make the best of the present, which they have done.

Especially when you consider that it was only four years ago that Axl made the "Not in this liftetime." comment. Something must have changed in their relationship to make this happen and I really believe Duff was a big part of helping mend those fences.

People have been saying Axl had "no choice" but to reunite after DJ split.  I'm calling bollocks all over that.  This is Axl Rose.  You're telling me he wouldn't be fine taking a few years if needed to figure things out or to hire a new guitarist eventually?  If you believe that, then you haven't been paying much attention over the last 20 odd years.

**Also, I wouldn't be surprised if DJ, well aware of the upcoming reunion/regrouping, was allowed by Axl and management to draft a resignation letter out of respect for both his standing and time in the band, to make it appear he was leaving the band, rather than being ousted. High ranking employees of corporations are often given this option to save face during times of change.**

[D-GenerationX]

**Also, I wouldn't be surprised if DJ, well aware of the upcoming reunion/regrouping, was allowed by Axl and management to draft a resignation letter out of respect for both his standing and time in the band, to make it appear he was leaving the band, rather than being ousted. High ranking employees of corporations are often given this option to save face during times of change.**

I also believe this.