Tool - 10,000 Days (lyrics, dance, cd, album, fan)

sleepy jack · 12-17-2007, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

As I said before Ethan, your first post had no reason why you felt it was filler. Your second, and third, and even fourth might have. But not your first. Did we understand that now?

Yeah but the point remains you're focusing on a petty point that I threw on as an afterthought and getting all pissy over it despite the fact I later explained it.

Quote:

And I'd be reacting this way had you posted this about any other band I like. And now you say you don't like the music, even if the lyrics are good. I thought you said your opinion of the lyrics were they were bad? Either way, it's both my and your opinion.

That was a general statement that could've been applied to any band, not specifically Tool. Hence why I never once referred to any specific band.

Quote:

And Fal, when the Americans overthrew English rule, we threw the Brit's anal retentive style of perfect English out the window. Something I'm sure you noticed as well. Me using or misusing any word, is not relevant in a musical discussion. But if you two are telling me you both don't have the intelligence to understand what I was trying to get across, it was a: metaphor, anallogy, example, reason, something to get my point across. Get it now? I'm sure you did before, but hey, we all need to act like smartasses every once in a while. And that's not personal either. Note the "all".

We understand it just like we understand what is and what isn't a metaphor.

Barnard17 · 12-17-2007, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

I'm sure you did before, but hey, we all need to act like smartasses every once in a while. And that's not personal either. Note the "all".

No, it's a snide poorly veiled attack.

Something which I find quite ironic. Which, in itself, is ironic. Donchathink?

Ace · 12-17-2007, 09:07 PM

The first two points of that most are valid points to be talking about, but you still feel the need to act like a smartass with your last one. Once again, if you don't understand what example I was getting across, perhaps I overestimated your intelligence. Also not personal, as I am not saying you, personally, are an idiot or a smartass. Now back to the point. I have no problem with you explaining your reasons afterward, I just made my point about not needing to post "filler is filler" without explaining why you felt it filler. Now that you've done it, that's all fine and dandy. I'd be defending any band whatsoever, if I listened to their song and read the lyrics, and decided in my opinion that it wasn't filler. It has nothing to do with the fact that I like the band in question. As I said before, if you wish to have a musical discussion over anything in general, and as long as both ends have valid points, it's something I can enjoy and have no problem with whatsoever.

sleepy jack · 12-17-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

The first two points of that most are valid points to be talking about, but you still feel the need to act like a smartass with your last one. Once again, if you don't understand what example I was getting across, perhaps I overestimated your intelligence. Also not personal, as I am not saying you, personally, are an idiot or a smartass.

You're right, you're just insulting my intelligence and getting self-righteous about everything. I expanded on everyone of my points, you havn't tried to counter them or even back up your own when you do.

Quote:

Now back to the point. I have no problem with you explaining your reasons afterward, I just made my point about not needing to post "filler is filler" without explaining why you felt it filler. Now that you've done it, that's all fine and dandy.

I explained it awhile ago and you've continued to go on about it being useless. I'm glad you finally realize we can stop discussing it.

Quote:

I'd be defending any band whatsoever, if I listened to their song and read the lyrics, and decided in my opinion that it wasn't filler. It has nothing to do with the fact that I like the band in question. As I said before, if you wish to have a musical discussion over anything in general, and as long as both ends have valid points, it's something I can enjoy and have no problem with whatsoever.

Yes, I wish to have musical discussions hence why I joined a music forum. I've been making valid points, you're the one who keeps going off about irrelevant subjects and dodging the actual issues here which are: The quality of the lyrics, something I've commented on a few times with no reply and filler; something which you've sort of touched on but not really since you havn't actually replied to my explanation on why I said it you've just been going on about the fact I actually said it.

Ace · 12-17-2007, 09:26 PM

No reply? I made my reply on the lyrics AND filler point before you even decided to post (why you even did post is a mystery). I said in nearly every post, you commenting on why you thought it was filler afterwards, was just fine. You seem to keep dodging why I posted in the first place. I just said you should have explained it in your first post, rather than just call it filler. I'm not making my whole argument around that point, it's just something you ignored for a while. And that was the end of the discussion right there. The entire reason the discussion was even started. I said that ages ago. "If you had explained why you felt it filler in the first post, it would have been good musical criticism." Pardon the paraphrase. But that right there was my entire point, and the only thing I was implying the entire time. I don't know why it's taken so many posts to finish. If you don't like a band, make a valid comment about it, and move on. That is mainly what I'm getting at.

sleepy jack · 12-17-2007, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

No reply? I made my reply on the lyrics AND filler point before you even decided to post (why you even did post is a mystery).

Um, you just said song with lyrics like that are too good to be filler. I replied to both those points. Here are, I think my most extensive replies to those points.

"The lyrics are banal, comparing man to monkey is extremely cliche. Maynard isn't a good lyricist, Tool fanboys go on and on about how he's amazing but he's really not, he's completely average, that song is no exception. I can think of several songs about war that are way better written then that. Your Revolution is a Joke is a fairly recent one by a mediocre band (Funeral for a Friend) and even THEY do better."

"Lyrics don't save a song, it doesn't take a fan to realize that. When someone calls something filler you can go on about it being unique and fans liking it or whatever that's valid, going "it has good lyrics!11" doesn't change anything, especially when the lyrics really aren't that good."

Quote:

I said in nearly every post, you commenting on why you thought it was filler afterwards, was just fine. You seem to keep dodging why I posted in the first place. I just said you should have explained it in your first post, rather than just call it filler.

I replied to what you posted in the first place, you didn't just say once I should've explained. Even after I explained you kept going on and on about how I should, I explained, you need to shut up about it. I've even-reposted it several times.

Quote:

I'm not making my whole argument around that point, it's just something you ignored for a while.

I explained it only two posts after I said filler is filler, I didn't ignore it for awhile.

Quote:

And that was the end of the discussion right there. The entire reason the discussion was even started.

*sigh* I explained it two pages ago, this discussion wasn't even necessary. Several times I've tried to drag it back to what I said but you keep insisting on arguing this.

Quote:

I said that ages ago. "If you had explained why you felt it filler in the first post, it would have been good musical criticism." Pardon the paraphrase. But that right there was my entire point, and the only thing I was implying the entire time. I don't know why it's taken so many posts to finish. If you don't like a band, make a valid comment about it, and move on. That is mainly what I'm getting at.

God this is starting to get annoying. I MADE MY VALID COMMENTS, I MADE BOTH THEM OVER TWO PAGES AGO SHUT THE FUCK UP. I WILL, ONCE AGAIN, REPOST THEM SINCE YOU CAN'T SEEM TO COMPREHEND I MADE THEM MAYBE YOU WILL ACTUALLY REPLY TO THEM INSTEAD OF BITCHING ABOUT THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.

"The lyrics are banal, comparing man to monkey is extremely cliche. Maynard isn't a good lyricist, Tool fanboys go on and on about how he's amazing but he's really not, he's completely average, that song is no exception. I can think of several songs about war that are way better written then that. Your Revolution is a Joke is a fairly recent one by a mediocre band (Funeral for a Friend) and even THEY do better."

"Lyrics don't save a song, it doesn't take a fan to realize that. When someone calls something filler you can go on about it being unique and fans liking it or whatever that's valid, going "it has good lyrics!11" doesn't change anything, especially when the lyrics really aren't that good."

Ace · 12-17-2007, 09:49 PM

.......Actally no. You never said that in the first post. That was my entire point, and the point still stands

. Just think, we could have got that done with forever ago. Dance around it, ignore it, repeatedly tell me it doesn't matter that you didn't explain the first time, that you went on to explain it afterwards. Ramble on, do whatever. I know it's hard to accept it, but until you can say, "You're right, Josh, I should have made my point in the first post rather than simply say 'filler is filler'", then my point still stands. But with your points on the subject, that's all good and I appreciate you explaining them.

sleepy jack · 12-17-2007, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

.......Actally no. You never said that in the first post. That was my entire point, and the point still stands

. Just think, we could have got that done with forever ago. Dance around it, ignore it, repeatedly tell me it doesn't matter that you didn't explain the first time, that you went on to explain it afterwards. Ramble on, do whatever. I know it's hard to accept it, but until you can say, "You're right, Josh, I should have made my point in the first post rather than simply say 'filler is filler'", that point still stands. But with your points on the subject, that's all good and I appreciate you explaining them.

I made those posts two pages ago, you haven't replied to them you've just kept whining about how I should've posted it in my first post. Boohoo, I posted both them not even two posts later, yet you've managed to drag this debate on for two pages, going on three. Why don't you get off your self-righteous ass and actually argue the points instead of continually pointing out the obvious? What's the matter, do you have no counter-argument?

Ace · 12-17-2007, 09:59 PM

Have no argument? I made my point that the song is way beyond filler, and even you can't say that it IS filler. Seriously Ethan, why did you even post in this thread? My post was to Rainard to get his opininon on the matter, and you're two cents isn't needed in everything. Do you see me posting about how much Bright Eyes suck? No. Although that is my opinion, I'm not going to go into one of their threads and call something filler, when even I can listen to one of their songs and see that it's not. (Saying that I would think that about one of their songs, and this is just an example. I can't say I know that any of their work would be filler.) Act your age, and realize that my entire point was that it is NOT filler. If anything on that cd is filler, it would be Lipan Conjuring. I can see absolutely no artistic talent in that track whatsoever. THAT is filler.

sleepy jack · 12-17-2007, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

Have no argument? I made my point that the song is way beyond filler, and even you can't say that it IS filler. Seriously Ethan, why did you even post in this thread? My post was to Rainard to get his opininon on the matter, and you're two cents isn't needed in everything. Do you see me posting about how much Bright Eyes suck? No. Although that is my opinion, I'm not going to go into one of their threads and call something filler, when even I can listen to one of their songs and see that it's not. (Saying that I would think that about one of their songs, and this is just an example. I can't say I know that any of their work would be filler.) Act your age, and realize that my entire point was that it is NOT filler. If anything on that cd is filler, it would be Lipan Conjuring. I can see absolutely no artistic talent in that track whatsoever. THAT is filler.

So let me get this straight, you can post about the band since you like them and back it up with faulty logic but if I do that and offer a sound argument it's being immature and wrong? That's amazing logic right there.