From The Sky Down : scenes not on the DVD

[soapit]

In defense of soapit, independant of whether or not he/she has a point, you don't have to have paid for something to have an opinion as to whether or not the price or something, or the way in which something is marketed, is effectively gouging someone.  It's just an opnion and in that sense, makes sense, but one is not bound to agree with the opinion.

i agree with this. pretty much 100%

although wrt to your first bit i think it pretty much shows i do have a point, just one that not everyone agrees with (which you'd be foolish to expect).

i'm a fella by the way

[shorne]

I got the super deluxe and I don't feel gouged... just disappointed that I got a concert I already have.  But hey, you can't have it all.

[soapit]

I got the super deluxe and I don't feel gouged... just disappointed that I got a concert I already have.  But hey, you can't have it all.

so you would be one of those that doesnt agree with my assessment of the set. luckily its not one of those right or wrong things.

[shorne]

Well I don't think you're going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.  I think the fans in the forum are a special sect that would probably shell out gazillions for the best farts of the band and would be disappointed that Larry's silent but deadly fart of 1979, which turned off the Arista agent was omitted.  Of course I'm joking... my point is we are a fickle bunch probably because we have access to a bunch of rare stuff- audio and video.  But I think a lot of other fans out there are just fine with what came out because quite frankly, they don't follow the band in a semi-cultish way in the way that we do and just plain don;t know what's all out there and are therefore quite happy with what they get.

I'll close by saying... anything could always be better in hindsight.  Do I think the set is perfect?  No.  But I think it's pretty cool and bordering on great.

[singnomore]

yes the people who were most upset at the 'gouging' to begin with to the point of not purchasing any of them (like me) are obviously going to be the people most annoyed by any additional 'gouging' that comes up. it makes sense.

But you haven't bought it, so how can you possibly complain about being gouged? It actually makes no sense whatsoever.

i'm not complaining about BEING gouged (of course). if i have complained it's relating to the fact that this band that been so important to me is engaging in such flagrant super/uber fan gouging (and especially relating to an anniversary release of a super important album to me personally).

so it does actually make perfect sense. whether or not you understand it is another question.

I think bwm does understand what your saying but is simply trying to balance of the emotional impact your feeling with the physical gouging of the pocket?

no, he said it didnt make any sense. so i explained how it did. thats all. the confusion might have come from him imagining things i have wrote which i did not (in this case that i was being gouged). he seems to do this a bit. he doesnt seem to read others posts very carefully.

to address your point...its all based on some kind of emotion isnt it? we're not talking about physical ie. literal gouging here.

Of course that goes without saying and I was just playing back words used in the discussion. Its all down to interpretation as opposed to necessarily imagining what's being said. In a way i think you are all in danger of agreeing 

[bwm231163]

“yes the people who were most upset at the 'gouging' to begin with to the point of not purchasing any of them (like me)”

“a band engaging in flagrant price gouging for a box set (and as a side effect not buying this box set), but isnt really that upset at all”

“This band that been so important to me is engaging in such flagrant super/uber fan gouging.”

“its just a band”

i see people who make things up about others as beneath me.
plus i'm not really convinced your understanding much of this anyway.
theres no point adding more when you seem to be struggling with the existing material but i'll give you one last hint to help you....

You are claiming I’m misrepresenting you, but in reality your views are a bit over the place as shown by the quotes above. The fact that you have had to resort to trying to patronise me shows that you are really struggling to defend your position.

When the AB formats were announced, I decided that I had no interest in the Uber set. It was more money than I would pay for an album reissue and I am not a big collector of U2 paraphernalia. At this point do you think I:

a)   Looked at the other editions available and decided which one presented the best value for me, while feeling pleased for the collectors who I knew would love the Uber set.
Or
b)   Railed against the injustice of the existence of the Uber, declared that U2 are gouging those who want to buy it and generally have the view that existence of an edition of a U2 album that I did not want to buy is a personal affront and betrayal of their fans.

It is fine to dislike and criticise the reissue and decide not to buy any of the editions. But when people use the fact that they don’t like it to cast aspersions over U2 and their motivations, then I think it goes too far. I have no interest in the Uber set or the FTSD standalone, but I have no problem with the band making them available for those who want them.

[soapit]

assuming you are thinking i am a subscriber to option b), once again you feel the need to present an extreme version of my viewpoint rather than discuss what i have actually said. if you feel you are being patronised maybe you could have a look at the way you go about your discussions and maybe people would treat you more like an adult.

But when people use the fact that they don’t like it to cast aspersions over U2 and their motivations, then I think it goes too far.

so this is the crux of it. a different viewpoint than your own involving aspersions being cast over the band is going too far. as i guess in some way i have done that (saying they are gouging) that explains why you are not giving my viewpoint the acceptance that i have given to yours.

how exactly do you see this resolving? a confession my opinion was invalid all along? me and people like me stop posting the opinion on fan boards if they cast aspersions on the band? you might need to be a bit more realistic and accepting.

for the record i believe either a) or b) would be a perfectly valid response. option a) may even be eligible for some kind of award for altruism which i'd be available to present.

oh and you don't need to tell me yet again your feelings/behaviour on the box set and sky down release. i understood and accepted it as valid the first time. i can only say (for the last time), i have nothing but good feelings about the fact you feel/behaved that way and hope it goes on forever.

[zootv]

I got the super deluxe and I don't feel gouged... just disappointed that I got a concert I already have.  But hey, you can't have it all.

+ 1

[fardreamer]

I got the super deluxe and I don't feel gouged... just disappointed that I got a concert I already have.  But hey, you can't have it all.

+ 1

This

[bwm231163]

if you feel you are being patronised maybe you could have a look at the way you go about your discussions and maybe people would treat you more like an adult.

Actually, I always find that style of debate very childish and vacuous. It is invariably a sign of not being to able to adequately explain or defend opinions. It is similar to people who use profanity and personal insults (which I’m not suggesting you do, btw).

So I think one reason we have been winding each other up a bit is that we have a different attitude to debate. I think debate and the challenging of different viewpoints is one of the points of discussion forums. Especially if you post contentious opinions, I think you should be prepared to defend them. So if you accuse U2 of gouging fans you should be prepared to properly defend that view and explain why, especially to someone who you believe has been “gouged”.

In contrast, your call for “acceptance” of views would in reality mean never really engaging in questioning others’ opinions. Freedom of expression is of course very important and you have every right to post whatever views on the bands motives that you like. But likewise, I have the right to question and challenge those views, especially when I think some of your criticisms have been disproportionate to the supposed transgression (i.e. you don’t like a tracklist, hence U2 are betraying their fans).

Anyway, for the first time this thread I may have to agree with you on a couple of things. We probably have been going on a bit too long about this, and after all it’s “only a band”.

[Johnny Feathers]

I've already put my two cents in the other thread about the FTSD release, but yeah, I think the band has handled this poorly.  To the point that I'm not buying either the AB or FTSD sets.  Now, I am RECEIVING a Super AB set for Christmas, which I will inevitably enjoy.  But I will not be buying the FTSD stand-alone set, which in any other arrangement, I most certainly would have.  Take out the FTSD disc from the Super set and lower its overall price, and I'd buy the standalone FTSD set.  (Remove even more of the redundant material and drop the price further, and I might already have bought the AB set myself.)  I have very limited patience in paying multiple times for something I already paid for, and I think if U2 gave half a mind to this very problem, we wouldn't be having this debate.  (Ok, I guess they gave exactly HALF a mind, by allowing owners of the Super/Uber sets to stream the director's cut.  Still.)  I also think there are other bands who have, or would have, handled all of this better.

[sulphur76]

I got the super deluxe and I don't feel gouged... just disappointed that I got a concert I already have.  But hey, you can't have it all.

+ 1

Sure you can, you just have to buy three different versions to compile it.

[soapit]

So I think one reason we have been winding each other up a bit is that we have a different attitude to debate. I think debate and the challenging of different viewpoints is one of the points of discussion forums. Especially if you post contentious opinions, I think you should be prepared to defend them. So if you accuse U2 of gouging fans you should be prepared to properly defend that view and explain why, especially to someone who you believe has been “gouged”.

In contrast, your call for “acceptance” of views would in reality mean never really engaging in questioning others’ opinions. Freedom of expression is of course very important and you have every right to post whatever views on the bands motives that you like. But likewise, I have the right to question and challenge those views, especially when I think some of your criticisms have been disproportionate to the supposed transgression (i.e. you don’t like a tracklist, hence U2 are betraying their fans).

happy for you to question me to try and understand my point of view on any issue. i'm less happy answering questions which are trying to disprove that my point of view is permissible in a sane world.

when you started out with your opinion "actually makes no sense", and when your question related to something i didnt actually say i saw little point in spending time answering said question. debates are fine on here but this issue has no right or wrong viewpoint so i dont know why you would want to waste your time trying to prove the other side is wrong about something like that?  i have now made a couple of attempts to explain my original point more fully and now theres nothing more i can say on it. my existing posts contain enough for you to figure out any questions you have/had.

a quicker, less annoying way to get your questions answered it to put yourself in someone elses shoes (metaphorically) and you'll probably be able to figure out answers to many of these questions on your own.

[shorne]

One of the hallmark signs of a cult is the idea that free thinking, even that which challenges another's viewpoint, is tantamount to heresy.  It upsets the cult of happiness and conformity.  Just accept and understand the viewpoint and understand that different people conceptualize concepts differently.  It seems to me that people try to undertand others' arguments using their own conceptualizations... no wonder people get insensed... different people are trying to reconcile different conclusions with same conceptualizations of the premises on which each argument is based.  Maybe read, unnderstand, reply with another argument and refrain from the ad hominem slights.

[jw]

I'm making a motion that all debate technique discussions be moved to the Community section.  Anybody second me?