Destruction is coming - Appetite For Destruction deluxe editions out June 29th

[jamesdm]

A youtube link would be great.

[patcooper]

A youtube link would be great.

its a apple exclusive video

[jamesdm]

I know but can be ripper. 

[patcooper]

I know but can be ripper. 

copyright.already few taken down . one only lasted minutes lol

[adydas78]

Saw the preview of It's So Easy video on Apple. You can buy for $1.99. Not very good looking though. Concert footage with a shaky camera. I don't care much for it.

[adydas78]

There you go. An old copy but basically this is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXoewFenQ00

[GNR4L]

Great video ! what a time to be alive.

[zombux]

There you go. An old copy but basically this is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXoewFenQ00

not really, this "new" version is quite a lot different from the old bootleg version

[PermissionToLand]

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Pretty sexist to read anything into the fact the person who wrote that article is a woman to be honest. It's not something I'd even considered let alone focused on. Why does it make any difference?
Don't you think it's a little patronising and judgmental to say women 'generally have atronger reactions' to lyrics? Like they are more easily offended? I find tjat pretty sexist to be honest.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, huh? Or are you just trying soo hard to paint me as a hypocrite that you're not concerned with any kind of logic? I even quoted the guy and you still manage to miss it; he was the one who pointed out the journalist was a woman: "a faaaar left female journalist". You're literally asking me what I asked him; "why does it matter?" IDK how you could even manage to get it that wrong...

No, it's not sexist because women are statistically FAR more likely to be raped. You are trying way too hard, bud.

[allwaystired]

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Pretty sexist to read anything into the fact the person who wrote that article is a woman to be honest. It's not something I'd even considered let alone focused on. Why does it make any difference?
Don't you think it's a little patronising and judgmental to say women 'generally have atronger reactions' to lyrics? Like they are more easily offended? I find tjat pretty sexist to be honest.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, huh? Or are you just trying soo hard to paint me as a hypocrite that you're not concerned with any kind of logic? I even quoted the guy and you still manage to miss it; he was the one who pointed out the journalist was a woman: "a faaaar left female journalist". You're literally asking me what I asked him; "why does it matter?" IDK how you could even manage to get it that wrong...

No, it's not sexist because women are statistically FAR more likely to be raped. You are trying way too hard, bud.

Let's look again at what you put. after quoting me....

"The disagreement wasn't the issue, it was that you dismissed her opinion as "crazy uptight". Maybe you should think about why women generally have stronger reactions to objectifying lyrics, instead of dismissing them as uptight or emotional."

Please point out where I said anything about the writer being a woman. reading comprehension really isn't a problem - you attributing comments and quoting comments to different people clearly is.

Secondly, as you've dragged me into a conversation about whether women should or shouldn't be offended by things..... you're saying it's OK for women to be more offended by lyrics because they're more likely to be raped?! Are you off your rocker? You do realise how offense you're being right? And how judgmental towards women that is?

[izzyjim]

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Well it's more than a meme, it says that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1".
There's no dismissing here, in fact I'm not gonna get caught in this war of words, it was just to make a point... Godwin was right.  That's all I wanted to say.

[patcooper]

There you go. An old copy but basically this is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXoewFenQ00

new video is very different

[Wooody]

You know how I view GNR lyrics, as an innocent description of crazy times in the 80's. Not Axl's or anyone's point of view.

You cannot deny the 80's was a crazy time to be alive. With the brewing of chaos that caused the LA Riots.

And in Axl we have a very humane witness, he honestly wants to get out from the chaos, but at the same time he feels tempted by it, and I think that is why we all felt related by it, because we all have temptations.

Point your finger when you are free from sin !

[Johnnyblood]

There you go. An old copy but basically this is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXoewFenQ00

Kinda doubt they?d promote the deluxe re release of AFD with the version that was used as trial evidence against Axl.

[adydas78]

There you go. An old copy but basically this is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXoewFenQ00

new video is very different

Yes indeed. The S&M scenes, were edited out . Which doesn't make it a new version, makes it a censored version, that kids can safely get from Apple.

http://www.metalsucks.net/2018/05/21/thirty-years-after-it-was-made-guns-n-roses-have-finally-released-the-its-so-easy-video-sort-of/

[PermissionToLand]

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Pretty sexist to read anything into the fact the person who wrote that article is a woman to be honest. It's not something I'd even considered let alone focused on. Why does it make any difference?
Don't you think it's a little patronising and judgmental to say women 'generally have atronger reactions' to lyrics? Like they are more easily offended? I find tjat pretty sexist to be honest.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, huh? Or are you just trying soo hard to paint me as a hypocrite that you're not concerned with any kind of logic? I even quoted the guy and you still manage to miss it; he was the one who pointed out the journalist was a woman: "a faaaar left female journalist". You're literally asking me what I asked him; "why does it matter?" IDK how you could even manage to get it that wrong...

No, it's not sexist because women are statistically FAR more likely to be raped. You are trying way too hard, bud.

Let's look again at what you put. after quoting me....

"The disagreement wasn't the issue, it was that you dismissed her opinion as "crazy uptight". Maybe you should think about why women generally have stronger reactions to objectifying lyrics, instead of dismissing them as uptight or emotional."

Please point out where I said anything about the writer being a woman. reading comprehension really isn't a problem - you attributing comments and quoting comments to different people clearly is.

Secondly, as you've dragged me into a conversation about whether women should or shouldn't be offended by things..... you're saying it's OK for women to be more offended by lyrics because they're more likely to be raped?! Are you off your rocker? You do realise how offense you're being right? And how judgmental towards women that is?

Apparently reading comprehension is a very big problem because you still aren't getting it even after I explained it for you. Go back to my post, I wasn't quoting you, I was quoting Bridge. If you can't figure out that I was quoting multiple people when it clearly says each poster's name over the quote, that's your issue. Christ...

You're not even making a coherent point with that second half... apparently you don't even know what the words "judgmental" and "offensive" mean. It's offensive to say that women are allowed to feel how they want and be offended about things that affect them? No, it would be offensive to say they don't have a right to feel how they want and be offended, or to dismiss their offense as being "overly emotional" (a classic misogynist trope, BTW) instead of trying to understand where they're coming from. You are bending over backwards to try and twist my words into something hypocritical, and you can't even see how obvious it is? You should have just cut your losses before you went and made a fool of yourself.

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Well it's more than a meme, it says that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1".
There's no dismissing here, in fact I'm not gonna get caught in this war of words, it was just to make a point... Godwin was right.  That's all I wanted to say.

It's really not more than a meme. From the wikipedia page for Godwin's law: "Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool"

People seem to think Godwin was a philosopher. No, he was just some random guy on a Usenet group in the '90s who coined it. And the very purpose of that memetic tool is to dismiss the argument of anyone who mentions Hitler. In fact, Godwin himself said "The best way to prevent future holocausts, I believe, is not to forbear from Holocaust comparisons". So even Godwin admits that the "law" is flawed.

[izzyjim]

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Well it's more than a meme, it says that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1".
There's no dismissing here, in fact I'm not gonna get caught in this war of words, it was just to make a point... Godwin was right.  That's all I wanted to say.

It's really not more than a meme. From the wikipedia page for Godwin's law: "Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool"

People seem to think Godwin was a philosopher. No, he was just some random guy on a Usenet group in the '90s who coined it. And the very purpose of that memetic tool is to dismiss the argument of anyone who mentions Hitler. In fact, Godwin himself said "The best way to prevent future holocausts, I believe, is not to forbear from Holocaust comparisons". So even Godwin admits that the "law" is flawed.

Nope, not gonna let you drag me into this.
Have fun trolling someone else. 

[allwaystired]

Yeah, we've all heard of Godwin's Law (which is just a meme, not the intellectual rule some think it is). Dismissing any reference to Hitler is just ignorant. Imagine a Fascist actually trying to recreate Hitler's reign and everyone is too afraid to call it what it is because of that stupid idea. Citing Godwin is just a way of dismissing any accusations of authoritarianism, racism, etc. It's no different than crying "PC police!" to try and turn it around on the person calling you out because you have no actual defense. They're both the Fallacy Fallacy; attacking the way something is argued instead of the point being made. Which is adjacent to tone policing as well.

Well it's more than a meme, it says that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1".
There's no dismissing here, in fact I'm not gonna get caught in this war of words, it was just to make a point... Godwin was right.  That's all I wanted to say.

It's really not more than a meme. From the wikipedia page for Godwin's law: "Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool"

People seem to think Godwin was a philosopher. No, he was just some random guy on a Usenet group in the '90s who coined it. And the very purpose of that memetic tool is to dismiss the argument of anyone who mentions Hitler. In fact, Godwin himself said "The best way to prevent future holocausts, I believe, is not to forbear from Holocaust comparisons". So even Godwin admits that the "law" is flawed.

Nope, not gonna let you drag me into this.
Have fun trolling someone else. 

Yeah I think that's the approach I'm taking. The guy is nuts, insanely aggressive, and can't even see that he's been wrongly attributing quotes to me. Life's too short.

[sakuL]

Anyone can send me a PM link to the video if you have it?

[patcooper]

There you go. An old copy but basically this is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXoewFenQ00

new video is very different

Yes indeed. The S&M scenes, were edited out . Which doesn't make it a new version, makes it a censored version, that kids can safely get from Apple.

http://www.metalsucks.net/2018/05/21/thirty-years-after-it-was-made-guns-n-roses-have-finally-released-the-its-so-easy-video-sort-of/

but the kids can see Erins great ass