Interview New interview w/Dizzy Reed [Sight of Sound]

[Guest NGOG]

Who gives a shit about a camp that had nothing to do with why the band was being inducted?

In what fantasy world should the terms not favour the classic line versus the new lineup? And what other role would there be for the new band other than to play a song? Is Tommy going to make a speech about all of his accomplishments while in GNR?

Chinese Democracy was listed in the discography; it wasn't there reason why GNR was being inducted. Bit of a difference.

It wasn't the R&R HOF that made Axl's decision not to attend, it was Axl's. By virtue of demanding equal (or even somewhat less than) consideration for his new act, Axl's making his decision known. If someone demands x, y, and z, it's not the organization that has to warp reality to meet those demands that's forcing a person's decision. The night was meant to celebrate the band that made amazing music 25 years ago, not some band that's been a little more than a joke for the last fifteen.

The camp I am referring to is led by a certain Axl Rose. I think you will find that nobody was more important to the success of old GNR than Axl Rose. If, as an organizer, you want to make the Hall of Fame as significant an event as possible, then obviously you should seek to have Axl Rose present. To have Axl present, you have to make him feel comfortable. To make him feel comfortable, you do not ask that he spend the night with Slash, Steve, Matt, Duff and Gilby. That's a very simple logic. Naturally, you're going to give Axl the opportunity to surround himself with a band of musicians he is part of. By showing that courtesy, you make the person more amenable to doing something cool (i.e. standing with the old band).

Can you point out where I said the terms should favour the current line-up? You're just creating an unnecessary strawman argument to make up for your unpragmatic logic. A fair arrangement would be:

- Axl being allowed to sit with the new band and their families/as opposed to awkwardly forcing the old band on top of one and other

- the new band playing a song early on in the ceremony

- the old band appearing onstage together

- Because of the positive way the induction was approached, Axl sings a song with the old band

I didn't say Chinese Democracy contributed to GNR being inducted, but thanks for another one of your signature strawman arguments. I was just refuting your point that the Hall of Fame had no regard for the relatively small efforts of the new band. Given that they included Chinese Democracy as part of the honoured discography, you are factually wrong.

Let's deal in reality: When you are more important than the other band members, exponentially in certain cases (Adler, Sorum, even Duff if you're talking artistically), you have a right to have your demands respected by a corporate event. Not entirely heeded, but respected. Based on what we've been told: They did not make it easy for the new band to at least be present, and they objected to the new band playing. Besides appeasing fans that feel entitled to some sort of weird closure to a proverbial car crash, why would Axl accept those terms? Pragmatically speaking, nobody in his position would.

[downzy]

Great post downzy. Lol @ Axl for demanding his band to be there like the manchild that he is.

Thanks... I get why Axl decided not to go, but I have a hard time understanding the logic behind those who place the blame on the R&R HOF. Axl decided he was better off not attending. Sucks for him, sucks for the fans. But whatever, that's on him and no point crying about it now.

However, as far as I know, nobody else (other than Dizzy, but who gives a fuck what Dizzy wants) from those being inducted were making demands regarding the event.

Axl makes demands (like ridiculous ones), he doesn't get them, and now it's the R&R HOF's fault. Fucking classic.

[EvH]

God, I want the complete pro-shot of Mr. Brownstone from the HOF. So frustrating that only a snippet of it is online.

Edited May 13, 2014 by EvH

[Guest NGOG]

Great post downzy. Lol @ Axl for demanding his band to be there like the manchild that he is.

I thought you were done contributing to this topic. Does Downzy really have to create your strawman arguments for you?

[downzy]

Who gives a shit about a camp that had nothing to do with why the band was being inducted?

In what fantasy world should the terms not favour the classic line versus the new lineup? And what other role would there be for the new band other than to play a song? Is Tommy going to make a speech about all of his accomplishments while in GNR?

Chinese Democracy was listed in the discography; it wasn't there reason why GNR was being inducted. Bit of a difference.

It wasn't the R&R HOF that made Axl's decision not to attend, it was Axl's. By virtue of demanding equal (or even somewhat less than) consideration for his new act, Axl's making his decision known. If someone demands x, y, and z, it's not the organization that has to warp reality to meet those demands that's forcing a person's decision. The night was meant to celebrate the band that made amazing music 25 years ago, not some band that's been a little more than a joke for the last fifteen.

The camp I am referring to is led by a certain Axl Rose. I think you will find that nobody was more important to the success of old GNR than Axl Rose. If, as an organizer, you want to make the Hall of Fame as significant an event as possible, then obviously you should seek to have Axl Rose present.

I stopped reading here. Because you're being ridiculous. Yeah, it would have been great to have Axl Rose there, but at what cost? Should DJ take over from Slash during the SCOM solo? Should Izzy stop playing because Fortus needs to strum a few bars? There's a limit to what the R&R HOF can do without turning the night into a train wreck. Axl could have shown up, said his two cents, and walked off. He chose not to. Why? Because he couldn't get his way. Well fuck him. Nobody else was making demands. I don't give a shit how important he was to the success of the classic era - he isn't the band nor is he bigger than the band's accomplishments. It's not as though the efforts of Slash, Duff, Izzy, Matt/Steven were nothing either. There would be no WTTJ, SCOM, or Paradise City without those guys. Those solos you like in Estranged? Wouldn't exist if Slash wasn't part of the band. So fuck off with your "Axl should get his way because he's more important." It's disrespectful to the guys who actually showed up, said nothing but classy things about the band, the fans, and their former lead singer who continually acts like a 5 year old, and gave the fans at least something in a decent performance.

Edited May 13, 2014 by downzy

[Nosaj Thing]

If anything, Slash/Duff/Steven proved they are the real GN'R that night. I'd welcome an album with those three plus Gilby.

Agreed.

The Real GN'R showed-up and rocked-out.

Fake GN'R wrote letters and complained about the money.

This.

Best Guns N' Roses show since Argentina, 1993.

[Guest NGOG]

Who gives a shit about a camp that had nothing to do with why the band was being inducted?

In what fantasy world should the terms not favour the classic line versus the new lineup? And what other role would there be for the new band other than to play a song? Is Tommy going to make a speech about all of his accomplishments while in GNR?

Chinese Democracy was listed in the discography; it wasn't there reason why GNR was being inducted. Bit of a difference.

It wasn't the R&R HOF that made Axl's decision not to attend, it was Axl's. By virtue of demanding equal (or even somewhat less than) consideration for his new act, Axl's making his decision known. If someone demands x, y, and z, it's not the organization that has to warp reality to meet those demands that's forcing a person's decision. The night was meant to celebrate the band that made amazing music 25 years ago, not some band that's been a little more than a joke for the last fifteen.

The camp I am referring to is led by a certain Axl Rose. I think you will find that nobody was more important to the success of old GNR than Axl Rose. If, as an organizer, you want to make the Hall of Fame as significant an event as possible, then obviously you should seek to have Axl Rose present.

I stopped reading here. Because you're being ridiculous.

Then I'll stop reading here. Saying something is ridiculous is a weak way of showing that it is ridiculous. If I say something that is truly ridiculous, your counterpoint will show that. But alas, you failed to address any of my specific points. Memories of the Mandela thread are coming back, you genuinely believe in your own ignorance.

[downzy]

Who gives a shit about a camp that had nothing to do with why the band was being inducted?

In what fantasy world should the terms not favour the classic line versus the new lineup? And what other role would there be for the new band other than to play a song? Is Tommy going to make a speech about all of his accomplishments while in GNR?

Chinese Democracy was listed in the discography; it wasn't there reason why GNR was being inducted. Bit of a difference.

It wasn't the R&R HOF that made Axl's decision not to attend, it was Axl's. By virtue of demanding equal (or even somewhat less than) consideration for his new act, Axl's making his decision known. If someone demands x, y, and z, it's not the organization that has to warp reality to meet those demands that's forcing a person's decision. The night was meant to celebrate the band that made amazing music 25 years ago, not some band that's been a little more than a joke for the last fifteen.

The camp I am referring to is led by a certain Axl Rose. I think you will find that nobody was more important to the success of old GNR than Axl Rose. If, as an organizer, you want to make the Hall of Fame as significant an event as possible, then obviously you should seek to have Axl Rose present.

I stopped reading here. Because you're being ridiculous.

Then I'll stop reading here. Saying something is ridiculous is a weak way of showing that it is ridiculous. If I say something that is truly ridiculous, your counterpoint will show that. But alas, you failed to address any of my specific points. Memories of the Mandela thread are coming back, you genuinely believe in your own ignorance.

Too bad you stopped reading, because I explain exactly why your point about bending to Axl's demands was ridiculous. LOL. I didn't say you were being ridiculous without giving my reasons.

Hey, I'm not the one around here who's username is used as an insult. Not sure you're in the best position to be commenting on the ignorance of others.

[maynard]

Great post downzy. Lol @ Axl for demanding his band to be there like the manchild that he is.

I thought you were done contributing to this topic. Does Downzy really have to create your strawman arguments for you?

Shut up kid, go find some news for us.

[Guest NGOG]

Too bad you stopped reading, because I explain exactly why your point about bending to Axl's demands was ridiculous. LOL. I didn't say you were being ridiculous without giving my reasons.

Hey, I'm not the one around here who's username is used as an insult. Not sure you're in the best position to be commenting on the ignorance of others.

No you didn't. In typical Downzy fashion, you created a number of exaggerated images to make up for how unpragmatic your logic is. Dj taking over Slash, Fortus taking over Izzy; nobody is visualizing such preposterous scenarios but you.

Taking a series of reasonable compromises - to ensure the presence of GNR's 'big 2' - does not equate to things being bent in Axl's favour. Aside from the religious fervour you feel about old GNR, what is so diabolically evil about the new band playing a song during some part of the ceremony? If that meant Axl being more amenable to a cool gesture, then why not?

My username was associated with an article that through no fault of my own, caused a lot of resentment. I just did what is essentially 'my purpose' on the forum. I am also quite unpopular because my views do not fit the status quo. However, neither of those factors diminish my arguments one iota.

[downzy]

Too bad you stopped reading, because I explain exactly why your point about bending to Axl's demands was ridiculous. LOL. I didn't say you were being ridiculous without giving my reasons.

Hey, I'm not the one around here who's username is used as an insult. Not sure you're in the best position to be commenting on the ignorance of others.

No you didn't. In typical Downzy fashion, you created a number of exaggerated images to make up for how unpragmatic your logic is. Dj taking over Slash, Fortus taking over Izzy; nobody is visualizing such preposterous scenarios but you.

Taking a series of reasonable compromises - to ensure the presence of GNR's 'big 2' - does not equate to things being bent in Axl's favour. Aside from the religious fervour you feel about old GNR, what is so diabolically evil about the new band playing a song during some part of the ceremony? If that meant Axl being more amenable to a cool gesture, then why not?

My username was associated with an article that through no fault of my own, caused a lot of resentment. I just did what is essentially 'my purpose' on the forum. I am also quite unpopular because my views do not fit the status quo. However, neither of those factors diminish my arguments one iota.

So in this fantasy world of yours where the R&R HOF is in the business of having two distinct bands playing under the same name, what song would the current lineup play? Would it be off something from Chinese Democracy or a song that helped get the band inducted?

And if it's an older song, why would anyone in attendance and watching at home want to watch a bunch of guys who had nothing to do with its creation and popularity perform it when the guys who were responsible its success are present, sitting at the sidelines? What purpose would it serve other than to stroke the ego of some selfish asshole? Other than maybe ten or twenty people on a fan forum who believe Slash is the devil because Axl told them so, I can't see such a performance be of any interest to anyone other than Axl.

Does the band get introduced twice? What about speeches? Does everyone from the old band have to leave the stage for Axl to come up? How long do you want to extend the show so that Axl gets everything he wants? I mean, fuck the other bands who were being honoured that night, let's give GNR extra time because some self-involved narcissist can't play nice with the guys who helped him become a rock star.

Again, if Axl wants to be petty and demand separate performance and speaking time, then I'm glad he didn't show up. Accepting such demands would have turned the night into a train wreck. You keep labelling such demands as reasonable. Funny, because other than you, Axl, and Dizzy, I don't see anyone else who shares that opinion. And yet it's my logic that is "unpragmatic."

[T-Minus]

I agree with almost all of what downzy has posted.

Maybe Axl is afraid that whilst the others are on top of their game (as proved in the performance) he would have let the side down? Playing in that situation would show his voice up for what it is these days and he wouldn't have maracas, tambourines, sub-triangle and 2 keyboards along with pre-recorded backing vocals to hide his voice.

[Guest NGOG]

So in this fantasy world of yours where the R&R HOF is in the business of having two distinct bands playing under the same name, what song would the current lineup play? Would it be off something from Chinese Democracy or a song that helped get the band inducted?

And if it's an older song, why would anyone in attendance and watching at home want to watch a bunch of guys who had nothing to do with its creation and popularity perform it when the guys who were responsible its success are present, sitting at the sidelines? What purpose would it serve other than to stroke the ego of some selfish asshole? Other than maybe ten or twenty people on a fan forum who believe Slash is the devil because Axl told them so, I can't see such a performance be of any interest to anyone other than Axl.

Does the band get introduced twice? What about speeches? Does everyone from the old band have to leave the stage for Axl to come up? How long do you want to extend the show so that Axl gets everything he wants? I mean, fuck the other bands who were being honoured that night, let's give GNR extra time because some self-involved narcissist can't play nice with the guys who helped him become a rock star.

Again, if Axl wants to be petty and demand separate performance and speaking time, then I'm glad he didn't show up. Accepting such demands would have turned the night into a train wreck. You keep labelling such demands as reasonable. Funny, because other than you, Axl, and Dizzy, I don't see anyone else who shares that opinion. And yet it's my logic that is "unpragmatic."

The song the new band would play is a non-issue. Given that Chinese Democracy was part of the honoured discography, they could certainly play something from that record.

The second 'point' you have made is yet another one of your strawman arguments. The new band wouldn't play because of an overwhelming consensus, they would play because that is the desire of Axl (who is far and above the biggest draw). Steven, Matt, Gilby and Duff (at least in 2012) are all part of what you could describe as camp Slash. The continued relevance of their careers is dictated by their association with Slash. Naturally therefore, Axl will try to stipulate a performance by his band (as a precondition to the two camps briefly reuniting). I'm not sure why you feel entitled to Axl giving you a personal closure. He is a businessman and artist, obviously he is going to use a public event to facilitate those interests (especially when the historical relevance of the night depended on his participation). Frankly, you should get over it.

I find it amusing that you feel only ten or twenty people would be in favour, or at least neutral to the current line-up performing. Perhaps you are being willfully ignorant, but the new band have performed to millions of people. Many would like the new band enough for them to play a song, and others will be pragmatic enough to realize that it is necessary for a certain end.

Very dramatic, aren't you? Few of those scenarios are being seriously visualized, it's just you creating dramatic images to compensate for your ignorance. So the GNR element of the show may require 3 to 5 extra minutes, can you explain how that equates to the entire night going down in tatters?

Edited May 14, 2014 by NGOG

[maynard]

Add "pragmatic" to the Axl Defense Force Vocabulary.

[Guest NGOG]

Add "pragmatic" to the Axl Defense Force Vocabulary.

Add an argument to the debate.

[DR DOOM]

Out of the 5, it's Axl's career that I like the most/ actually sort of follow...I like the songs on CD and all that (though the leaks were better) but I couldn't argue that New GNR deserve to be inducted into the RNRHOF, especially this current lineup- sounds like crazy talk to me.

If the performance had featured any of the guys in GNR right now except Axl I'd think it was disgraceful.

[downzy]

So in this fantasy world of yours where the R&R HOF is in the business of having two distinct bands playing under the same name, what song would the current lineup play? Would it be off something from Chinese Democracy or a song that helped get the band inducted?

And if it's an older song, why would anyone in attendance and watching at home want to watch a bunch of guys who had nothing to do with its creation and popularity perform it when the guys who were responsible its success are present, sitting at the sidelines? What purpose would it serve other than to stroke the ego of some selfish asshole? Other than maybe ten or twenty people on a fan forum who believe Slash is the devil because Axl told them so, I can't see such a performance be of any interest to anyone other than Axl.

Does the band get introduced twice? What about speeches? Does everyone from the old band have to leave the stage for Axl to come up? How long do you want to extend the show so that Axl gets everything he wants? I mean, fuck the other bands who were being honoured that night, let's give GNR extra time because some self-involved narcissist can't play nice with the guys who helped him become a rock star.

Again, if Axl wants to be petty and demand separate performance and speaking time, then I'm glad he didn't show up. Accepting such demands would have turned the night into a train wreck. You keep labelling such demands as reasonable. Funny, because other than you, Axl, and Dizzy, I don't see anyone else who shares that opinion. And yet it's my logic that is "unpragmatic."

The song the new band would play is a non-issue. Given that Chinese Democracy was part of the honoured discography, they could certainly play something from that record.

The second 'point' you have made is yet another one of your strawman arguments. The new band wouldn't play because of an overwhelming consensus, they would play because that is the desire of Axl (who is far and above the biggest draw). Steven, Matt, Gilby and Duff (at least in 2012) are all part of what you could describe as camp Slash. The continued relevance of their careers is dictated by their association with Slash. Naturally therefore, Axl will try to stipulate a performance by his band (as a precondition to the two camps briefly reuniting). I'm not sure why you feel entitled to Axl giving you a personal closure. He is a businessman and artist, obviously he is going to use a public event to facilitate those interests (especially when the historical relevance of the night depended on his participation). Frankly, you should get over it.

I find it amusing that you feel only ten or twenty people would be in favour, or at least neutral to the current line-up performing. Perhaps you are being willfully ignorant, but the new band have performed to millions of people. Many would like the new band enough for them to play a song, and others will be pragmatic enough to realize that it is necessary for a certain end.

Very dramatic, aren't you? Few of those scenarios are being seriously visualized, it's just you creating dramatic images to compensate for your ignorance. So the GNR element of the show may require 3 to 5 extra minutes, can you explain how that equates to the entire night going down in tatters?

Like I said earlier, look at the company you keep with respect to the positions you hold here. If you feel the grounded and centred position is that of Axl, Dizzy, and Team Brazil, then logic and reason hold different meanings with yourself (not surprising, since your hold on either are usually dubious at best in most of your posts).

People have been showing up to see Axl's GNR for the last 14 years because it was the only band doing a Guns N' Roses show. When given the choice between what Axl has presented over the last decade and a half and the group of guys who were responsible for making GNR the household name that it is, nobody (save for the ten or twenty people who still frequent HTGTH regularly) would choose the former.

And you're right. As a fan of GNR, I am entitled to a little respect. The night was meant to be a celebration of not only the band that once was, the members who made important contributions to the band's legacy, but also its fans. But once again, Axl proves incapable of putting his own selfish needs ahead of his fans. Called me entitled, but considering the guy never puts anyone but himself (and certainly not his fans) first, there was an opportunity to do something for the people that made him the millionaire rockstar that he is today. And once again, he chose to side with petty grievances and act like the perpetual five year old that he has consistently portrayed himself to be.

But keep drinking the kool-aid and telling yourself that it wasn't Axl who fucked up but the big bad men in Cleveland (or NYC) who attempted to celebrate the band that was being recognized. It would have been sooo reasonable to have two bands play under one banner. While we're at it, let's set up two microphones at opposing ends of the stage because one man can't be within punching distance of his former bandmate. That wouldn't be awkward or stupid. Let's continue to believe that the man making unreasonable demands is reasonable in this situation despite a history of proving otherwise. And let's continue to mock the 90 percent of the general public (and those who post here regularly) who think such assertions are batshit crazy.

In all seriousness, I applaud your continual support of a man who surely does not deserve it. If you lived in Toronto, you would make such a great Leafs fan.

Edited May 14, 2014 by downzy

[Guest NGOG]

Like I said earlier, look at the company you keep with respect to the positions you hold here. If you feel the grounded and centred position is that of Axl, Dizzy, and Team Brazil, then logic and reason hold different meanings with yourself (not surprising, since your hold on either are usually dubious at best in most of your posts).

People have been showing up to see Axl's GNR for the last 14 years because it was the only band doing a Guns N' Roses show. When given the choice between what Axl has presented over the last decade and a half and the group of guys who were responsible for making GNR the household name that it is, nobody (save for the ten or twenty people who still frequent HTGTH regularly) would choose the former.

And you're right. As a fan of GNR, I am entitled to a little respect. The night was meant to be a celebration of not only the band that once was, the members who made important contributions to the band's legacy, but also its fans. But once again, Axl proves incapable of putting his own selfish needs ahead of his fans. Called me entitled, but considering the guy never puts anyone but himself (and certainly not his fans) first, there was an opportunity to do something for the people that made him the millionaire rockstar that he is today. And once again, he chose to side with petty grievances and act like the perpetual five year old that he has consistently portrayed himself to be.

But keep drinking the kook-aid and telling yourself that it wasn't Axl who fucked up but the big bad men in Cleveland (or NYC) who attempted to celebrate the band that was being recognized. It would have been sooo reasonable to have two bands play under one banner. While we're at it, let's set up two microphones at opposing ends of the stage because one man can't be within punching distance of his former bandmate. That wouldn't be awkward or stupid. Let's continue to believe that the man making unreasonable demands is reasonable in this situation despite a history of proving otherwise. And let's continue to mock the 90 percent of the general public (and those who post here regularly) who think such assertions are batshit crazy.

In all seriousness, I applaud your continual support of a man who surely does not deserve it. If you lived in Toronto, you would make such a great Leafs fan.

More dramatics and strawman arguments, it baffles me how anybody buys into your empty rhetoric. We aren't discussing either logic or reason, this debate is about pragmatism. I'll repeat myself for you again: Unlike Steven Adler or Matt Sorum, somebody of Axl's PR value has a right to give their input when it comes to a corporate event. Given that they can draw a significant crowd, they are absolutely entitled to stipulate arrangements that will benefit their business interests. Sorry, but exclusively appearing with the old band only benefits the old band (and whatever Slash, Duff, Steve, Matt and Gilby are currently doing themselves). Why would Axl agree to that? Lofty idealism is not a sufficient answer to that question, just so you know in advance.

If that is true, then why have Axl's band always performed at larger venues than any band formed by the old members? Including Velvet Revolver (which was a blatant attempt at mimicking the appeal of the old band). Also, assuming your speculation holds up, why have none of their records outperformed Chinese Democracy? Stop trying to rouse people with your impassioned feelings for the old band, and produce some facts.

Was that supposed to make me shed a tear or something? Get over yourself. The rosey closure you're pining for is making my skin crawl. The music industry doesn't work that way. If it doesn't benefit you, you don't do it. Resign yourself to that. Axl being a millionaire is a moot point, you make it sound it like we've just handed him our money. He is an artist whose art we appreciate. Therefore we buy it. There is no charity at play, nobody owes anyone anything.

When are you going to stop creating ridiculous imagery that nobody has seriously visualized? Big bad men, distant microphones - WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about? The organizers were bullish about it being an old band-only event. I'm not talking about being inducted, I'm talking about the general event. By failing to be pragmatic - and allowing an 'evil' for something great to take place - they destroyed the intrigue around a potentially historic night.

But by all means, continue to respond with your strawman/playing to the emotions of the fans shtick. Keep thinking that the last word makes you right.

Edited May 14, 2014 by NGOG

[downzy]

Like I said earlier, look at the company you keep with respect to the positions you hold here. If you feel the grounded and centred position is that of Axl, Dizzy, and Team Brazil, then logic and reason hold different meanings with yourself (not surprising, since your hold on either are usually dubious at best in most of your posts).

People have been showing up to see Axl's GNR for the last 14 years because it was the only band doing a Guns N' Roses show. When given the choice between what Axl has presented over the last decade and a half and the group of guys who were responsible for making GNR the household name that it is, nobody (save for the ten or twenty people who still frequent HTGTH regularly) would choose the former.

And you're right. As a fan of GNR, I am entitled to a little respect. The night was meant to be a celebration of not only the band that once was, the members who made important contributions to the band's legacy, but also its fans. But once again, Axl proves incapable of putting his own selfish needs ahead of his fans. Called me entitled, but considering the guy never puts anyone but himself (and certainly not his fans) first, there was an opportunity to do something for the people that made him the millionaire rockstar that he is today. And once again, he chose to side with petty grievances and act like the perpetual five year old that he has consistently portrayed himself to be.

But keep drinking the kook-aid and telling yourself that it wasn't Axl who fucked up but the big bad men in Cleveland (or NYC) who attempted to celebrate the band that was being recognized. It would have been sooo reasonable to have two bands play under one banner. While we're at it, let's set up two microphones at opposing ends of the stage because one man can't be within punching distance of his former bandmate. That wouldn't be awkward or stupid. Let's continue to believe that the man making unreasonable demands is reasonable in this situation despite a history of proving otherwise. And let's continue to mock the 90 percent of the general public (and those who post here regularly) who think such assertions are batshit crazy.

In all seriousness, I applaud your continual support of a man who surely does not deserve it. If you lived in Toronto, you would make such a great Leafs fan.

More dramatics and strawman arguments, it baffles me how anybody buys into your empty rhetoric. We aren't discussing either logic or reason, this debate is about pragmatism. I'll repeat myself for you again: Unlike Steven Adler or Matt Sorum, somebody of Axl's PR value has a right to give their input when it comes to a corporate event. Given that they can draw a significant crowd, they are absolutely entitled to stipulate arrangements that will benefit their business interests. Sorry, but exclusively appearing with the old band only benefits the old band (and whatever Slash, Duff, Steve, Matt and Gilby are currently doing themselves). Why would Axl agree to that? Lofty idealism is not a sufficient answer to that question, just so you know in advance.

If that is true, then why have Axl's band always performed at larger venues than any band formed by the old members? Including Velvet Revolver (which was a blatant attempt at mimicking the appeal of the old band). Also, assuming your speculation holds up, why have none of their records outperformed Chinese Democracy? Stop trying to rouse people with your impassioned feelings for the old band, and produce some facts.

Was that supposed to make me shed a tear or something? Get over yourself. The rosey closure you're pining for is making my skin crawl. The music industry doesn't work that way. If it doesn't benefit you, you don't do it. Resign yourself to that. Axl being a millionaire is a moot point, you make it sound it like we've just handed him our money. He is an artist whose art we appreciate. Therefore we buy it. There is no charity at play, nobody owes anyone anything.

When are you going to stop creating ridiculous imagery that nobody has seriously visualized? Big bad men, distant microphones - WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about? The organizers were bullish about it being an old band-only event. I'm not talking about being inducted, I'm talking about the general event. By failing to be pragmatic - and allowing an 'evil' for something great to take place - they destroyed the intrigue around a potentially historic night.

But by all means, continue to respond with your strawman/playing to the emotions of the fans shtick. Keep thinking that the last word makes you right.

I'll end it with this, you're confusing the delusions of a very delusional man with pragmatic considerations. Most here, and most of the public, do not consider Axl's requests as pragmatic. You, and a few others, do.

And nobody has the "PR value" to justify what Axl was demanding. Considering the night went pretty well without him, I think you might be overstating his "PR value."

[John Bonham]

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatismh blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah pragmatism

[Nosaj Thing]

Downzy wiped the floor, as always. Thanks for the laughs, man.

[maynard]

[Guest NGOG]

Downzy wiped the floor, as always. Thanks for the laughs, man.

That's your view, and merely because his argument suits yours. Instead of cheerleading for other posters, try contributing an insightful argument yourself.

Are you still visiting this thread? I thought your brain got overwhelmed a few pages back?

[Nosaj Thing]

That's your view, and merely because his argument suits yours. Instead of cheerleading for other posters, try contributing an insightful argument yourself.

No shit, it's really my view? I mean, are you completely sure it is? I thought it wasn't! Thanks for pointing that out.

And no, there's no need for me to add any kind of humiliation, Downzy said it all. Sorry if that hurts ya.

[Guest NGOG]

That's your view, and merely because his argument suits yours. Instead of cheerleading for other posters, try contributing an insightful argument yourself.

No shit, it's really my view? I mean, are you completely sure it is? I thought it wasn't! Thanks for pointing that out.

And no, there's no need for me to add any kind of humiliation, Downzy said it all. Sorry if that hurts ya.

You're not particularly gifted at satire, but I'll explain something else to you: Because you agree with the sentiments of an argument, doesn't necessarily mean the argument is stronger than an argument you disagree with.

I think you have a flawed understanding of "humiliation" if you think being opposed on a GNR forum is humiliating. I don't think a poster like you is capable of humiliating somebody in a debate, but sure, let's pretend it's because you don't need to.