"Dear Fans of LIVE...", A message from TGF Options

[crazy1]

Ed didn't put them on coffee. And how is this much different. Are you also saying Live's merch wasn't overpriced?

Oh yes he did put his kids on his coffee! I think he calls it Wild Child or something......

[LiveRoCkS77]

I think what you said before about Chad and the boys and Ed cooling off, in this hypothetical situation, would be the best thing. Surely, people don't always hold grudges, and often say things when they're angry that they take back.

But that doesn't mean its not a hypocrisy to denounce Ed to the world when it comes to music and friendship and the band, and then promote his new album out of respect; a complete 180. Even if it was the best of a mending heart, I didn't mean that Chads hypocrisy would be excluded of your assessment. So you're really getting angry at nothing.

Meanwhile, hypocrisy is trying to try to teach people the nature of relaxing an animosity, while speaking about it in a dramatic fit of rage.

Dramatic fit of rage?? Does that fit your infantile justification complex??

You don't know me, and if you did, you'd know I talk like this to people quite the opposite. In a nonchelant manner I don't think you're capable of perceiving or understanding. I tell it to people like it is, no rage or anger involved whatsoever.

It's more of a laughable contempt I have for idiots like you who walk around like they know everything. Fact is, you know absolutely jack shit buddy. You considered none of what I mentioned to you and presumed, as Nick did, that it was something else entirely.

Nobody except them knows if it was in fact "Gracious" or contractual. You are the only one carrying on here like you're an almighty know it all. You know jack shit, end of story. Stop trying to sound smart and put away your dictionary.

[Bremang]

Oh yes he did put his kids on his coffee! I think he calls it Wild Child or something......

never denied this...just gotta read.

[Bremang]

Dramatic fit of rage?? Does that fit your infantile justification complex??

You don't know me, and if you did, you'd know I talk like this to people quite the opposite. In a nonchelant manner I don't think you're capable of perceiving or understanding. I tell it to people like it is, no rage or anger involved whatsoever.

It's more of a laughable contempt I have for idiots like you who walk around like they know everything. Fact is, you know absolutely jack shit buddy. You considered none of what I mentioned to you and presumed, as Nick did, that it was something else entirely.

Nobody except them knows if it was in fact "Gracious" or contractual. You are the only one carrying on here like you're an almighty know it all. You know jack shit, end of story. Stop trying to sound smart and put away your dictionary.

Thats wrong of me if I presumed your attitude or anything else on this thread. I hear you loud and clear about me being a know-it-all or a total idiot. I would prefer not to be either of these things.

As for not responding to your claims, I would really want to respond to them. I thought I tried to. If I missed something, please tell me the claim, I'll try to respond to it methodically and directly. I honestly would like to know because I like your passion about the subject, and I want to know exactly what makes sense to you and to see if we can understand the logic behind whats being said.


BTW, I don't claim to know it was contractual to mention Ed. I was saying that it could have been contractual, in which case, Eds mention in the newsletter might not have been a favor from TGF.

This post has been edited by Bremang: May 27 2010, 2:43 pm

[Senghe]

You know what, if they'd just been that 'gracious' in the beginning instead of bitching and whining on social networking sites, it would have saved a lot of anger, ill will and vitriol on this forum.

But then again, where would the fun have been in that.

[Pokey]

You know what, if they'd just been that 'gracious' in the beginning instead of bitching and whining on social networking sites, it would have saved a lot of anger, ill will and vitriol on this forum.

Nick: Well Said.

[Merica]

Woah woah woah... when did Ed have vocal surgery?

[LiveRoCkS77]

Thats wrong of me if I presumed your attitude or anything else on this thread. I hear you loud and clear about me being a know-it-all or a total idiot. I would prefer not to be either of these things.

As for not responding to your claims, I would really want to respond to them. I thought I tried to. If I missed something, please tell me the claim, I'll try to respond to it methodically and directly. I honestly would like to know because I like your passion about the subject, and I want to know exactly what makes sense to you and to see if we can understand the logic behind whats being said.
BTW, I don't claim to know it was contractual to mention Ed. I was saying that it could have been contractual, in which case, Eds mention in the newsletter might not have been a favor from TGF.

No, you were speaking as if it WAS contractual to Ed. I'm not saying it wasn't, don't get me wrong. But the way you were speaking to people, it seemed as if you were in the know or something. But my point is that none of us know for sure, either way.

My bone to pick with you is that you spoke to tiger as if he were being presumptuous about something, and in the next paragraph, being exactly that yourself. When in fact, tiger was speaking based on his numerous experiences in his personal interactions with the band. Combined with the general consensus of the three remaining live memebers, it seems completely reasonable and logical to me that he had a leg to stand on. a leg you were trying to cut out from under him.

I suggest you go back and read what you were writing. I suggest everybody think twice on matters like this before they speak. What bothers me is that there are a shitload of different scenarios that could have led to this happening, yet due to all the blinders on, they were largely ignored. Any one of you could be right on this subject. But what's the point of arguing about it unless somebody knows for sure?

Bottom line to me reardless, is that it's nice to see all their names on the same page again, minus the anymosity.

[LivesMeltdown]

Bottom line to me reardless, is that it's nice to see all their names on the same page again, minus the anymosity.

[Bremang]

No, you were speaking as if it WAS contractual to Ed. I'm not saying it wasn't, don't get me wrong. But the way you were speaking to people, it seemed as if you were in the know or something. But my point is that none of us know for sure, either way.

My bone to pick with you is that you spoke to tiger as if he were being presumptuous about something, and in the next paragraph, being exactly that yourself. When in fact, tiger was speaking based on his numerous experiences in his personal interactions with the band. Combined with the general consensus of the three remaining live memebers, it seems completely reasonable and logical to me that he had a leg to stand on. a leg you were trying to cut out from under him.

I suggest you go back and read what you were writing. I suggest everybody think twice on matters like this before they speak. What bothers me is that there are a shitload of different scenarios that could have led to this happening, yet due to all the blinders on, they were largely ignored. Any one of you could be right on this subject. But what's the point of arguing about it unless somebody knows for sure?

Bottom line to me reardless, is that it's nice to see all their names on the same page again, minus the anymosity.

Here are my first three posts.

If it came from the Live mailing list, Ed might have been mentioned in the newsletter due to contractual obligations.

It was a fansoflive letter, they were probably contractually obliged to mention Ed on it. It wasn't likely to be out of the goodness of their heart.

I recieved this from fol@friendsoflive.com
Contract probable.

Now in that second post, I might be leaning into the realm of the contract being very probable. But in every other post where I mention this concept, and there are plenty at this point, I merely mention legal obligations as a possibility. And at no point, did I try to claim it was definite, or that I knew for sure. I used it to diffuse the numerous claims at the beginning of the thread saying that TGF definitely mentioned Ed as a favor. If you can quote one instance where I was "speaking as if it was contractual", opposed to just speaking that it is hypothetically possible, then I'll denounce it right now, and give you my current opinion.


As for Tiger, it was a little hefty to call T. out of context. But Tiger was coining curiosity over the newsletter as "conspiracy theories", presumptuously talking about "proof" of smearing Ed, as well as presuming and regarding the newsletter as more "evidence" of TGF being graceful. For all we know, Ed might have been the one who called for this newsletter, and it could have his obligation to include TGF, and it might have been decided amongst management that it would be signed off by TGF...could have been Ed thought his news would be better received by TGF, pushed for this, and TGF agree. Or Ed could have been using TGF in this business move, against TGF's wishes due to a contract, or even out of spite! All possible scenarios.

I also like seeing all of them in the same announcement, it adds just a tiny bit to the idea that the 4 boys could be running game on the fans, and are still connected professionally.

[Bremang]

Woah woah woah... when did Ed have vocal surgery?

He lost his voice and needed surgery to get it back in 2003.

This post has been edited by Bremang: May 28 2010, 1:38 pm

[thefunkyredcaboose]

The only thing I need to know about any "contract" is that EddieK doesn't send me e-mails from FOL anymore.

[Pokey]

The only thing I need to know about any "contract" is that (Admin Nick) doesn't send me e-mails from FOL anymore.

Fixed that up for ya.

[OutToDry]

yep, that should answer the speculation.

[Merica]

He lost his voice and needed surgery to get it back in 2003.

Damn. I never knew that. What brought it on? Did he completely lose it?