Do you believe that the MEN show will be Morrissey's only UK date of the year?

[Maurice E]

It's been announced as such but then again so were the first dates in Scotland last year.
I hope it is, for the sake of Morrissey's integrity, but I hope it isn't coz I'd like to see him at a London (or at least non-arena) show.
Does it really matter whether it turns out to be true or not?
My only advice to fans would be not to panic-buy a super-inflated ticket off an Ebay tout (as the prices they'll seek in the first few days will be hugely distorted).

[Uncleskinny]

I don't know if it is the only one or not. However, I think there may be a lot of fan anger if it turns out not to be, seeing as the poster, TTY and the Facebook page have all said it is the only date. I mean they wouldn't want us to panic buy to fill out the MEN, would they?

P.

[leedoggpimp]

if the man gig sells quickly then i'm sure they will add more dates... there is a big gap between the turkey and england date so i could see a dublin or london date being added.

[Thewlis]

if the man gig sells quickly then i'm sure they will add more dates... there is a big gap between the turkey and england date so i could see a dublin or london date being added.

Dublin doesn't count as UK, right?

[joe frady]

Does the Pope shit in the woods?

[Mozzer's Left Eyebrow]

It's been announced as such but then again so were the first dates in Scotland last year.
I hope it is, for the sake of Morrissey's integrity, but I hope it isn't coz I'd like to see him at a London (or at least non-arena) show.
Does it really matter whether it turns out to be true or not?
My only advice to fans would be not to panic-buy a super-inflated ticket off an Ebay tout (as the prices they'll seek in the first few days will be hugely distorted).


I don't know if it is the only one or not. However, I think there may be a lot of fan anger if it turns out not to be, seeing as the poster, TTY and the Facebook page have all said it is the only date. I mean they wouldn't want us to panic buy to fill out the MEN, would they?

P.

Even if he does, I don't think it calls into question his integrity, and I don't think he could give two fucks about "fan anger" (which is only ppl posting on here anyway, doesn't actually have any impact on ticket sales). I'm going to Manchester and I'll go if he plays in London too - the more times the better in my book. We know how he operates, he's been pulling this bullshit for years and we still all fall for it - willingly lol. Morrissey directly told everyone on this website to go fuck themselves - and we are still all here, throwing our money at him. Who's the idiot in this situation?

Also, re his new songs: tune-wise a couple of them are a bit duff, but generally I think they're all ace - his lyrics are the best they've ever been IMO. What's not to like? I don't understand ppl on here sometimes. I'm just glad he's still around, that cunt has been keeping me entertained since I was 13! He's the best pop star ever created, let him do what the fuck he wants.

[Anonymous]

Even if he does, I don't think it calls into question his integrity, and I don't think he could give two fucks about "fan anger" (which is only ppl posting on here anyway, doesn't actually have any impact on ticket sales). I'm going to Manchester and I'll go if he plays in London too - the more times the better in my book. We know how he operates, he's been pulling this bullshit for years and we still all fall for it - willingly lol. Morrissey directly told everyone on this website to go fuck themselves - and we are still all here, throwing our money at him. Who's the idiot in this situation?

Speak for yourself. The only idiots here are people like you: the ones that fully understand that he's taking the piss out of you while you continue to throw your money at him. He lost any remaining integrity years ago (and his new songs are shit).

[Uncleskinny]

Even if he does, I don't think it calls into question his integrity, and I don't think he could give two fucks about "fan anger" (which is only ppl posting on here anyway, doesn't actually have any impact on ticket sales).

As I said, I have no idea if it is or is not the only show, but if it is not, we have been lied to. If that's the kind of integrity you like, good luck to you.

P.

[joe frady]

Personally, I would think there are more things worthy of one's anger than whether or not Morrissey told a slight porky, as it were, in a pop concert announcement. He did precisely the same thing with last year's UK dates and I don't recall anyone getting that bothered about it; Moz/'the promoters' justified it with the old 'Due to overwhelming public demand...' schtick. He's been consistently pulling these wee pedaladas for twenty years, since Wembley Arena in the summer of '91. If you aint used to it by now then you jolly well should be. It's all just part of the game. It's got buckley's to do with 'integrity'.

[leedoggpimp]

he needs to play a better setlist.. nobody gives a crap about his b-sides and lame cover songs.

[Anonymous]

Even if he does, I don't think it calls into question his integrity, and I don't think he could give two fucks about "fan anger" (which is only ppl posting on here anyway, doesn't actually have any impact on ticket sales). I'm going to Manchester and I'll go if he plays in London too - the more times the better in my book. We know how he operates, he's been pulling this bullshit for years and we still all fall for it - willingly lol. Morrissey directly told everyone on this website to go fuck themselves - and we are still all here, throwing our money at him. Who's the idiot in this situation?

Also, re his new songs: tune-wise a couple of them are a bit duff, but generally I think they're all ace - his lyrics are the best they've ever been IMO. What's not to like? I don't understand ppl on here sometimes. I'm just glad he's still around, that cunt has been keeping me entertained since I was 13! He's the best pop star ever created, let him do what the fuck he wants.

Dear Mozzer's Left Eyebrow,

I'm so glad that I've found someone that kisses Morrissey's arse more than I do. Everything he does is brilliant. We are just his minions. The musicians he works with impair him. I will willingly eat up, regurgitate and then eat up again any "this-is-the-only-date-in-the-UK-my-Viva-Hate-reissue-is-completely-definitely-worth-buying" bullshit that he throws at me.

Let's meet up in Manchester and have sex whilst both wearing Morrissey masks.

Love,
Gracie Fields

[JJKelsall]

I hope it isn't, just because I haven't seen Morrissey live before and would really like it if he came somewhere closer to home. Still, I shall be definitely getting a ticket for this concert as soon as I can!

[Mozza220559]

Nah, he wont just do Manc he'll announce more dates later

[Luke Action McClure]

TTY - new dates confirmed:

02 June - London, Putney Leisure Centre
05 June - DFS in New Malden

[lindsey1151]

TTY - new dates confirmed:

02 June - London, Putney Leisure Centre
05 June - DFS in New Malden
Is that true?

[Mozza220559]

Morrissey to host benefit gig at Dewhurst's on the 6th of July in Stockport

[nothappynotsad]

he needs to play a better setlist.. nobody gives a crap about his b-sides and lame cover songs.

Agree, but his b-sides have been better than the singles since 2005. Lol. I agree about the covers, too.

[goinghome]

As I said, I have no idea if it is or is not the only show, but if it is not, we have been lied to. If that's the kind of integrity you like, good luck to you.

P.

We're hardly experts on integrity round here, althought at least this posthttp://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/121487-Manchester-Date-Added-Manchester-Arena-Saturday-28-July-TTY-Update?p=1986708897&viewfull=1#post1986708897 was removed.

[Maurice E]

Would you believe it, Morrissey has deceived his fans again.
Any Scottish people conned into buying tickets for the Manchester date, the only UK date of 2012?

[Oh my god, it's Robby!]

Would you believe it, Morrissey has deceived his fans again.
Any Scottish people conned into buying tickets for the Manchester date, the only UK date of 2012?

this is not the first time Scottish people have been conned, and I doubt it will be the last...

[joe frady]

Would you believe it, Morrissey has deceived his fans again.
Any Scottish people conned into buying tickets for the Manchester date, the only UK date of 2012?

There now, did that feel good?

I wasn't 'conned' into buying my tickets for the Manchester concert, because I never believed for a second that this would be the only UK date of 2012. Neither did you. And neither should any Morrissey fan who's been aware and around for the last 10 - 20 years.
I lie. You lie. "Everyone lies". Grow up and get used to it :thumb:

[Anonymous]

There now, did that feel good?

I wasn't 'conned' into buying my tickets for the Manchester concert, because I never believed for a second that this would be the only UK date of 2012. Neither did you. And neither should any Morrissey fan who's been aware and around for the last 10 - 20 years.
I lie. You lie. "Everyone lies". Grow up and get used to it :thumb:


If you found yourself in the company of Steven and he needed to defecate so urgently that there was no way he was going to make it to the bathroom in time, you'd let him shit in your mouth and then, worried that you hadn't humiliated yourself quite enough to please your master, you'd apologise to him because your shitty tongue was too dirty to clean his stinking hole.


If anybody needs to "grow up", sir, it is you.

[DAVIE]

If you found yourself in the company of Steven and he needed to defecate so urgently that there was no way he was going to make it to the bathroom in time, you'd let him shit in your mouth and then, worried that you hadn't humiliated yourself quite enough to please your master, you'd apologise to him because your shitty tongue was too dirty to clean his stinking hole.

If anybody needs to "grow up", sir, it is you.

Which Moderator allowed this shite to be om here?? :mad:

[Kewpie]

Which Moderator allowed this shite to be om here?

Can you explain in which part of the above anonymous post actually VIOLATING the site TOS?

[DAVIE]

you'd apologise to him because your shitty tongue was too dirty to clean his stinking hole.

That bit

[dave.jay1@ntlworld.com]

...Erm, nothing to do with me, but I think the references to "Coprophilia" may just have been a bit "Much"...because, as we all know, Morrissey ONLY passes Golden nuggets....containing Blessed pearls...
.FFS sake!!! STOP ALLOWING THIS ANONYMOUS POSTING NOW!!! you are KILLING this Site....fuckin' ell, some of the registered users are bad enough!!

[DAVIE]

STOP ALLOWING THIS ANONYMOUS POSTING NOW!!! you are KILLING this Site....fuckin' ell, some of the registered users are bad enough!!

Agreed. Get this fucking shite off here NOW!! Your pathetic attempts at making this forum popular HAVE FAILED! It's a massive failure...so just admit it! :mad:

[Iona Mink]

Can you explain in which part of the above anonymous post actually VIOLATING the site TOS?





you'd apologise to him because your shitty tongue was too dirty to clean his stinking hole
That bit

I'd imagine Kewps that it could be argued to fall under Section 6.1.



You agree to not use the Service to:

upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;

Although personally for me, Dave's farting in a bath full of custard is equally vulgar and unnecessary. Granted I may be a little too old to be hip with the kids and all that. Carry on Dave.

[DAVIE]

I'd imagine Kewps that it could be argued to fall under Section 6.1.



Although personally for me, Dave's farting in a bath full of custard is equally vulgar and unnecessary. Granted I may be a little too old to be hip with the kids and all that. Carry on Dave.

Why aren't the forum community listened to though? It's pathetic...the majority of us don't like any anonymous posting. But "they" only care about themselves.

[CrystalGeezer]

Can you explain in which part of the above anonymous post actually VIOLATING the site TOS?

The poster inferred that Joe Frady would have Morrissey shit in his mouth. It's character assassination, no different than a Nazi baby picture which warranted a ban.

[Iona Mink]

Why aren't the forum community listened to though? It's pathetic...the majority of us don't like any anonymous posting. But "they" only care about themselves.

To be honest Davie, I don't mind it. I've actually posted anonymously when I can't be bothered to log in. I don't see the validity of my post being dependent on a username. But I know that it bothers you. Maybe you should start a poll and try to get a sense if, like you say, people are not keen non the idea. And definitely report things when you think anonymous posting is being abused.

I think that way you'll be able to put together a good argument for scrapping the idea.

[Kewpie]

The poster inferred that Joe Frady would have Morrissey shit in his mouth. It's character assassination, no different than a Nazi baby picture which warranted a ban.

Do you realise the banned user you referred is actually taking advantage of anonymous posting?

[DAVIE]

Maybe you should start a poll and try to get a sense if, like you say, people are not keen non the idea. And definitely report things when you think anonymous posting is being abused.

I think that way you'll be able to put together a good argument for scrapping the idea.

I was hoping somebody else would do it...even if I did, nothing would change. They are all stuck in their ways.

[CrystalGeezer]

Do you realise the banned user you referred is actually taking advantage of anonymous posting?

Yeah, I thought of that actually. :( Annoying.

But I do think that post did cross a TOS line by putting Joe's name in an unfavorable light on a main page posting, no less. It should have been moderated. Joe is a positive contributer to solo, he shouldn't have to be subjected to that kind of "free speech."

[Kewpie]

Yeah, I thought of that actually. :( Annoying.

But I do think that post did cross a TOS line by putting Joe's name in an unfavorable light on a main page posting, no less. It should have been moderated. Joe is a positive contributer to solo, he shouldn't have to be subjected to that kind of "free speech."

I trust that joe won't be upset about such a petty insult.

*EDIT*

Personally I'm not happy reading Maurice E's post which he used a word deceived.

When Manchester Arena date announcement was made it was said that the only UK date in 2012, but Morrissey is entitled to change his mind.

[DAVIE]

I trust that joe won't be upset about such a petty insult.

It should be there though!! That's the whole damned point!

[CrystalGeezer]

I trust that joe won't be upset about such a petty insult.

*EDIT*

Personally I'm not happy reading Maurice E's post which he used a word deceived.

When Manchester Arena date announcement was made it was said that the only UK date in 2012, but Morrissy is entitled to change his mind.

Yeah but think about what the readers of the forum think when subjected to that mental imagery. It doesn't add to the discussion, the reason for Anonymous posting I am lead to believe, adding to discussion while not being identified. It's just simple trolling for a laugh. What Joe thinks of the post is not relevant, what is is the manner in which the thought, under the scrutiny of Anonymous moderation, contributes to the discussion. Anonymous posters are held to a higher standard because they refuse to log in and be accountable for their thoughts. The bar should be set higher for them in terms of tastefullness of which this post was not tasteful.

[Kewpie]

Yeah but think about what the readers of the forum think when subjected to that mental imagery. It doesn't add to the discussion, the reason for Anonymous posting I am lead to believe, adding to discussion while not being identified. It's just simple trolling for a laugh. What Joe thinks of the post is not relevant, what is is the manner in which the thought, under the scrutiny of Anonymous moderation, contributes to the discussion. Anonymous posters are held to a higher standard because they refuse to log in and be accountable for their thoughts. The bar should be set higher for them in terms of tastefullness of which this post was not tasteful.

Have you read site administrator's comment?
http://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/121222-Main-page-forum-joined-discussions-and-moderated-unregistered-posts?p=1986719704#post1986719704

You are too spoilt to have too much leniency in here.

[DAVIE]

Have you read site administrator's comment? ("http://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/121222-Main-page-forum-joined-discussions-and-moderated-unregistered-posts?p=1986719704#post1986719704/)

You are too spoilt to have too much leniency in here.

So are anonymous posters! They are spoilt rotten for the amount of freedom they get in the forum.



Yeah but think about what the readers of the forum think when subjected to that mental imagery. It doesn't add to the discussion, the reason for Anonymous posting I am lead to believe, adding to discussion while not being identified. It's just simple trolling for a laugh. What Joe thinks of the post is not relevant, what is is the manner in which the thought, under the scrutiny of Anonymous moderation, contributes to the discussion. Anonymous posters are held to a higher standard because they refuse to log in and be accountable for their thoughts. The bar should be set higher for them in terms of tastefullness of which this post was not tasteful.

They can't accept mistakes...FACT!

[CrystalGeezer]

Have you read site administrator's comment?
http://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/121222-Main-page-forum-joined-discussions-and-moderated-unregistered-posts?p=1986719704#post1986719704

You are too spoilt to have too much leniency in here.

So if I said that it's possible that you will log off and lick David T's butthole later today, a direct response to your post, that would be acceptable? I don't see the logic in this post being acceptable. And calling me spoiled because my ideas are subversive is not a responsible "moderator" thought either.

There is something gravely wrong with this logic.

[davidt]

So if I said that it's possible that you will log off and lick David T's butthole later today, a direct response to your post, that would be acceptable? I don't see the logic in this post being acceptable. And calling me spoiled because my ideas are subversive is not a responsible "moderator" thought either.

There is something gravely wrong with this logic.

If what you said was really how you felt, fine. But it appears it's more of a reaction to this post you were offended by and want censored.

[CrystalGeezer]

If what you said was really how you felt, fine. But it appears it's more of a reaction to this post you were offended by and want censored.

It was an example, I do not think that.

But you maintain the thought that, in a nutshell, Joe Frady is a sycophant to Morrissey and would apologize to him that his tongue was too dirty to lick his ass clean, is imagery that is acceptable under the terms of the TOS because the anonymous poster is expressing his opinion?

What protection does Joe Frady have under the TOS to not be humiliated? Section one says that content uploaded that is "defamatory, vulgar, obscene" is not permitted. You made a provision to have these discussions in an area called the pigsty, yet suddenly in the spirit of free speech an opinion can be defamatory?

[joe frady]

If you found yourself in the company of Steven and he needed to defecate so urgently that there was no way he was going to make it to the bathroom in time, you'd let him shit in your mouth and then, worried that you hadn't humiliated yourself quite enough to please your master, you'd apologise to him because your shitty tongue was too dirty to clean his stinking hole.

If anybody needs to "grow up", sir, it is you.

I'd rather eat shit than talk it. Sir.

[davidt]

It was an example, I do not think that.

But you maintain the thought that, in a nutshell, Joe Frady is a sycophant to Morrissey and would apologize to him that his tongue was too dirty to lick his ass clean, is imagery that is acceptable under the terms of the TOS because the anonymous poster is expressing his opinion?

What protection does Joe Frady have under the TOS to not be humiliated? Section one says that content uploaded that is "defamatory, vulgar, obscene" is not permitted. You made a provision to have these discussions in an area called the pigsty, yet suddenly in the spirit of free speech an opinion can be defamatory?

As I said, it is over the top, a borderline case in trolling but part of the post is a response and not a violation. I don't think Joe would be anything close to 'humiliated', if so then perhaps the anonymous poster was on to something.

[CrystalGeezer]

As I said, it is over the top, a borderline case in trolling but part of the post is a response and not a violation. I don't think Joe would be anything close to 'humiliated', if so then perhaps the anonymous poster was on to something.

So if you can qualify the post in question as setting out to humiliate Joe (if he was humiliated then maybe the nature of the post was on to something), then why does that not in itself prove that the intention of the opinion was to harm his character, and not just to offer an "opinion"?

[Anonymous]

What protection does Joe Frady have under the TOS to not be humiliated?

If he were to shut up, that'd be a good place to start.

If, however, you're asking what protection he has from being criticised by other people, then the answer is, his right of reply. That's kinda how (and why) freedom of expression works.

[Anonymous]

I'd rather eat shit than talk it. Sir.

It's a shame you feel the need to choose since you do both so ably.

[joe frady]

As I said, it is over the top, a borderline case in trolling but part of the post is a response and not a violation. I don't think Joe would be anything close to 'humiliated', if so then perhaps the anonymous poster was on to something.

Excuse me? Would you mind just clarifying what you mean there? About the anonymous poster 'being on to something'? If you wouldn't mind.

[davidt]

Excuse me? Would you mind just clarifying what you mean there? About the anonymous poster 'being on to something'? If you wouldn't mind.

What I am getting at is if what something someone said actually bothers you, or touches a nerve perhaps they are on to something. If it doesn't bother you at all and easily ignored or dismissed, then there wasn't any substance in it to begin with.

Trolls are effective if they cause a reaction which this post certainly did.

[CrystalGeezer]

What I am getting at is if what something someone said actually bothers you, or touches a nerve perhaps they are on to something. If it doesn't bother you at all and easily ignored or dismissed, then there wasn't any substance in it to begin with.

Trolls are effective if they cause a reaction which this post certainly did.

Wouldn't this post warrant moderation then?

[davidt]

Wouldn't this post warrant moderation then?

As I said, it was borderline. I don't like the imagery personally but that's my preference, it doesn't mean it should be censored for everyone to see. I saw that the post itself was a genuine response so I let it go. If that type of imagery were to persist with no particular point then it would be censored.

[CrystalGeezer]

As I said, it was borderline. I don't like the imagery personally but that's my preference, it doesn't mean it should be censored for everyone to see. I saw that the post itself was a genuine response so I let it go. If that type of imagery were to persist with no particular point then it would be censored.

Well David, while I certainly applaud and appreciate the venue you have provided that allows for free speech, I find this post was damaging to Joe Frady's reputation and not just an opinion, but an attack.

That is my opinion.

[Mozza220559]

You lot are lame

[Kewpie]

Well David, while I certainly applaud and appreciate the venue you have provided that allows for free speech, I find this post was damaging to Joe Frady's reputation and not just an opinion, but an attack.

That is my opinion.

Have you actually read joe's posts?

He's capable of handling some derogatory attacks, no need for intervening.

[Iona Mink]

I don't know why but I always thought Joe was not a he but rather a she.

[nothappynotsad]

What protection does Joe Frady have under the TOS to not be humiliated? Section one says that content uploaded that is "defamatory, vulgar, obscene" is not permitted. You made a provision to have these discussions in an area called the pigsty, yet suddenly in the spirit of free speech an opinion can be defamatory?

I guess that means you would be banned many times over for all the comments you've made outside the Pigsty about doing things or having things done to your pussy. Because, you know, that's not vulgar or obscene at all.

[CrystalGeezer]

Have you actually read joe's posts?

He's capable of handling some derogatory attacks, no need for intervening.

That's irrelevant. The post in question damaged the character of the poster. Joe could be the meanest human in the world, the post in question was an attempt to create a laughable and unsavory image of Joe which damages his character.

[Kewpie]

That's irrelevant. The post in question damaged the character of the poster. Joe could be the meanest human in the world, the post in question was an attempt to create a laughable and unsavory image of Joe which damages his character.

It's one way to read the post, but not all the users are agree with your opinion.

Stop complaining, you are given a tool to ignore anonymous posts.

[nothappynotsad]

That's irrelevant. The post in question damaged the character of the poster. Joe could be the meanest human in the world, the post in question was an attempt to create a laughable and unsavory image of Joe which damages his character.

I don't think the anonymous comment has made anyone think any less of Joe Frady than they already did before. :D

[davidt]

That's irrelevant. The post in question damaged the character of the poster. Joe could be the meanest human in the world, the post in question was an attempt to create a laughable and unsavory image of Joe which damages his character.

If, for example, Morrissey said something about Madonna that could be seen as damaging to her character, should that opinion be censored?

[Iona Mink]

If, for example, Morrissey said something about Madonna that could be seen as damaging to her character, should that opinion be censored?

On the whole I actually agree with you but this statement is pretty weak. The differences are


This is a site which is about Morrissey. And as such his words would and should have greater value/importance/interest than that of a random anonymous poster
that Madonna is a public figure and so is subject to more scrutiny than a private person.


It's apples and oranges when comparing the two.

[davidt]

On the whole I actually agree with you but this statement is pretty weak. The differences are


This is a site which is about Morrissey. And as such his words would and should have greater value/importance/interest than that of a random anonymous poster
that Madonna is a public figure and so is subject to more scrutiny than a private person.


It's apples and oranges when comparing the two.

I see what you are saying, things said about public figures are different. I just used it as an example of the type of thinking regarding censorship and 'damage to reputation'.

[CrystalGeezer]

If, for example, Morrissey said something about Madonna that could be seen as damaging to her character, should that opinion be censored?

If Morrissey's stage had a TOS that said things uploaded couldn't be "defamatory, vulgar and obscene," these are your words stipulated in section 1 of the TOS. The anonymous post is inappropriate by your definition, regardless of the parties involved. Free speech within the confines of not defaming another person.

[joe frady]

I don't know why but I always thought Joe was not a he but rather a she.

Troll! ;)


What I am getting at is if what something someone said actually bothers you, or touches a nerve perhaps they are on to something. If it doesn't bother you at all and easily ignored or dismissed, then there wasn't any substance in it to begin with.

Trolls are effective if they cause a reaction which this post certainly did.

Sorry David, maybe this is the kind of rationale that message board moderators must deal in, but I've read this multiple times and it's just the most surreal logic.

[davidt]

If Morrissey's stage had a TOS that said things uploaded couldn't be "defamatory, vulgar and obscene," these are your words stipulated in section 1 of the TOS. The anonymous post is inappropriate by your definition, regardless of the parties involved. Free speech within the confines of not defaming another person.

Part of the post was obscene, part of it wasn't. I suppose I can add spoiler tags around the offensive parts if that would make the most sense as a compromise.

[CrystalGeezer]

Part of the post was obscene, part of it wasn't. I suppose I can add spoiler tags around the offensive parts if that would make the most sense as a compromise.

What part of the post was not obscene? How would you edit the post to reflect opinion?

[davidt]

What part of the post was not obscene? How would you edit the post to reflect opinion?

Do you see the edited post now?

[CrystalGeezer]

Do you see the edited post now?

Great. But the damage has been done to Joe's character since its been quoted. Your edit does not effect the quotes.

[davidt]

Great. But the damage has been done to Joe's character since its been quoted. Your edit does not effect the quotes.

Those who quoted are free to edit their own posts.

I don't understand this going on about 'character damage'. How can an anonymous post damage someone if there is nothing behind it? If I were to monitor and edit every post that had some sort of insult hurled at someone I would probably get little else done.

[Anonymous]

...damage has been done to Joe's character since its been quoted. Your edit does not effect the quotes.


Well David, while I certainly applaud and appreciate the venue you have provided that allows for free speech, I find this post was damaging to Joe Frady's reputation and not just an opinion, but an attack.

That is my opinion.

Here's my opinion: you need to get a fucking grip on yourself. Now that a handful of people have read a rude comment about somebody who posts on a message board, what do you think is going to happen? Do you think any of those people are going to go to bed tonight and lie awake into the small hours mulling it all over? Will they deliberate over the question of whether it is literally true that some otherwise anonymous character calling himself "Joe Frady" on the Internet would be a willing human toilet for Morrissey? Maybe they'll discuss it with friends and canvass their opinions? Perhaps, from that one post on a message board, a universal consensus will develop and Joe will be shunned by peers and acquaintances! Maybe he'll have to up sticks, move elsewhere and be forced to reinvent himself to avoid the ignominy of it all!

Yeah, it's possible. Maybe it's more realistic, though, to think that whoever read what I posted might take it as an exaggerated criticism of somebody whose love for a celebrity tends toward embarrassing obsequiousness and then move on.

[Maurice E]

There now, did that feel good?
I wasn't 'conned' into buying my tickets for the Manchester concert, because I never believed for a second that this would be the only UK date of 2012. Neither did you. And neither should any Morrissey fan who's been aware and around for the last 10 - 20 years.
I lie. You lie. "Everyone lies". Grow up and get used to it :thumb:

This is a pretty new trick of Morrissey's. In 30 years of concerts, until 2011 he'd never claimed that the first announced date is to be the only one of the year and then gone back on his word.
The following quote is from Uncle Skinny, not me.
'I think there may be a lot of fan anger if it turns out not to be, seeing as the poster, TTY and the Facebook page have all said it is the only date.'
It's one extra concert that's been announced, rather than a whole string of dates, so I guess it could be worse.
But I'm getting really sick of Morrissey, having followed him closely for 22 years, which is why I hardly post here anymore.
I do still hope, however, that he manages to turn things around.

[CrystalGeezer]

Those who quoted are free to edit their own posts.

I don't understand this going on about 'character damage'. How can an anonymous post damage someone if there is nothing behind it? If I were to monitor and edit every post that had some sort of insult hurled at someone I would probably get little else done.

I understand what you're saying and I agree. It doesn't take a doctorate in linguistics to see that the intent of the post was not offered as an opinion, but rather malicious. That is what I have a problem with, justifying maliciousness as free speech. I'm not talking an insult, I'm talking about painting a very twisted picture for us to ponder that defames Joe's name. Joe is "the one whose mouth Morrissey pooped in" now. That is not free speech David. Surely you must see that.

[Maurice E]

I trust that joe won't be upset about such a petty insult.

*EDIT*
Personally I'm not happy reading Maurice E's post which he used a word deceived.
When Manchester Arena date announcement was made it was said that the only UK date in 2012, but Morrissy is entitled to change his mind.

And, personally, I'm not particularly happy that a moderator on this site can't even spell Morrissey's name correctly.
Morrissey tells everyone, using a number of different media, that Manchester will be his only show.
He then announces an extra concert, and you think the word 'deceived' is inappropriate.
Do you really, honestly, believe that you are fit to be a moderator?

[Kewpie]

And, personally, I'm not particularly happy that a moderator on this site can't even spell Morrissey's name correctly.
Morrissey tells everyone, using a number of different media, that Manchester will be his only show.
He then announces an extra concert, and you think the word 'deceived' is inappropriate.
Do you really, honestly, believe that you are fit to be a moderator?

OMG, just because I didn't use spell checker and misspelt Morrissey's name which upset a grumpy forum user.

I have to get a new pair of glasses.

It's not up to you to decide who is fit to be a forum moderator.

[smiler]

I suspect the reason you have allowed unregistered posting suddenly was because the forum/site has been rather quiet of late and the lack of traffic was putting you in a spin. Now banned posters can continue to post and you can make a handful of people appear like many more, alas i think you are probably slowly killing the site in the process.

It a shame to visit this site (which prides itself on being "free") and see it dominated by a handful of people who are fixed on picking and knocking Morrissey, always looking for the bad and the negative, baying for his retirement, enjoying his slightest misfortune and wishing him ill. Its always the same obsessed people and they usually claim to feel "let down" which is laughable, many of them are even moderators on this site. Look at the forums - this isn't freedom of speech and it isn't reflective of Morrissey fans, its become an anti-morrissey site and Davidt and co have shaped the content this way (perhaps without realising) probably because they can't get there own way, because Morrissey won't be their "friend" they stamp their feet and cry. The tone is far from "free" on this site and the front page leads the way and the TandC's are ignored when it suits. The moderators claim they haven't the time to moderate properly and yet they are always on here especially when there is something negative to say.

[davidt]

And, personally, I'm not particularly happy that a moderator on this site can't even spell Morrissey's name correctly.
Morrissey tells everyone, using a number of different media, that Manchester will be his only show.
He then announces an extra concert, and you think the word 'deceived' is inappropriate.
Do you really, honestly, believe that you are fit to be a moderator?

Typos on Morrissey's name and also personal opinions aren't a factor in moderation. Opposing opinions can be good. I agree with you on your point, the Manchester show was promoted as the only UK show, then suddenly a few months after tickets had gone on sale, it's not.

He could have at least acknowledged the previous statement, similar to how he acknowledged that he had broken the promise of never mentioning record labels again in his last statement.

[Anonymous]

I suspect the reason you have allowed unregistered posting suddenly was because the forum/site has been rather quiet of late and the lack of traffic was putting you in a spin. Now banned posters can continue to post and you can make a handful of people appear like many more, alas i think you are probably slowly killing the site in the process.

It a shame to visit this site (which prides itself on being "free") and see it dominated by a handful of people who are fixed on picking and knocking Morrissey, always looking for the bad and the negative, baying for his retirement, enjoying his slightest misfortune and wishing him ill. Its always the same obsessed people and they usually claim to feel "let down" which is laughable, many of them are even moderators on this site. Look at the forums - this isn't freedom of speech and it isn't reflective of Morrissey fans, its become an anti-morrissey site and Davidt and co have shaped the content this way (perhaps without realising) probably because they can't get there own way, because Morrissey won't be their "friend" they stamp their feet and cry. The tone is far from "free" on this site and the front page leads the way and the TandC's are ignored when it suits. The moderators claim they haven't the time to moderate properly and yet they are always on here especially when there is something negative to say.

Here, borrow my hanky.

[davidt]

I suspect the reason you have allowed unregistered posting suddenly was because the forum/site has been rather quiet of late and the lack of traffic was putting you in a spin. Now banned posters can continue to post and you can make a handful of people appear like many more, alas i think you are probably slowly killing the site in the process.

It a shame to visit this site (which prides itself on being "free") and see it dominated by a handful of people who are fixed on picking and knocking Morrissey, always looking for the bad and the negative, baying for his retirement, enjoying his slightest misfortune and wishing him ill. Its always the same obsessed people and they usually claim to feel "let down" which is laughable, many of them are even moderators on this site. Look at the forums - this isn't freedom of speech and it isn't reflective of Morrissey fans, its become an anti-morrissey site and Davidt and co have shaped the content this way (perhaps without realising) probably because they can't get there own way, because Morrissey won't be their "friend" they stamp their feet and cry. The tone is far from "free" on this site and the front page leads the way and the TandC's are ignored when it suits. The moderators claim they haven't the time to moderate properly and yet they are always on here especially when there is something negative to say.

Wrong about the traffic, I haven't made any decisions on the way the site works based on that.

And as for it not being free, are you suggesting I delete 'positive' posts from the site?

[smiler]

Typos on Morrissey's name and also personal opinions aren't a factor in moderation. Opposing opinions can be good. I agree with you on your point, the Manchester show was promoted as the only UK show, then suddenly a few months after tickets had gone on sale, it's not.

He could have at least acknowledged the previous statement, similar to how he acknowledged that he had broken the promise of never mentioning record labels again in his last statement.

Another good example of your negativity. Morrissey has made it very clear that he doesn't make long term plans, things change. He never directly made a promise (unlike in the example you chose when he actually stated "i promise not to mention it again" *record companies). In this instance (the only uk gig) it was just part of the announcement for the Manchester gig and wasn't a direct quote. Who knows who said it and if it was true at the time. yet you lot jump on this news with delight - look see he's a liar! The telling thing is that you appear to have missed the news that we get an extra gig! - thats good news right? Or would you rather have it that he never plays again. Has anyone actually come forward and said "i feel cheated i got a ticket and he lied". I am sure (if there really is someone like that out there) that they could get a refund if you ask or just sell the ticket on ebay they might make some money. But i am guessing that there is no such person and this is a none story created and nutured by the mods to make a (mute) point.

[Kewpie]

Another good example of your negativity. Morrissey has made it very clear that he doesn't make long term plans, things change. He never directly made a promise (unlike in the example you chose when he actually stated "i promise not to mention it again" *record companies). In this instance (the only uk gig) it was just part of the announcement for the Manchester gig and wasn't a direct quote. Who knows who said it and if it was true at the time. yet you lot jump on this news with delight - look see he's a liar! The telling thing is that you appear to have missed the news that we get an extra gig! - thats good news right? Or would you rather have it that he never plays again. Has anyone actually come forward and said "i feel cheated i got a ticket and he lied". I am sure (if there really is someone like that out there) that they could get a refund if you ask or just sell the ticket on ebay they might make some money. But i am guessing that there is no such person and this is a none story created and nutured by the mods to make a (mute) point.

joe frady posted that he didn't find Morrissey deceived him.

An anonymous user insulted him that he's a sycophant using derogatory language.

Some users demanded this particular derogatory comment should be deleted.

Then you jumped on the band wagon and started criticising site administrator and moderators.

[smiler]

Wrong about the traffic, I haven't made any decisions on the way the site works based on that.

And as for it not being free, are you suggesting I delete 'positive' posts from the site?

no its just that you focus on the negative in every story, possibly as a subconscious attempt at revenge

[smiler]

No one twisted the actual announcement, but you.

explain - that makes no sense

[CrystalGeezer]

Another good example of your negativity. Morrissey has made it very clear that he doesn't make long term plans, things change. He never directly made a promise (unlike in the example you chose when he actually stated "i promise not to mention it again" *record companies). In this instance (the only uk gig) it was just part of the announcement for the Manchester gig and wasn't a direct quote. Who knows who said it and if it was true at the time. yet you lot jump on this news with delight - look see he's a liar! The telling thing is that you appear to have missed the news that we get an extra gig! - thats good news right? Or would you rather have it that he never plays again. Has anyone actually come forward and said "i feel cheated i got a ticket and he lied". I am sure (if there really is someone like that out there) that they could get a refund if you ask or just sell the ticket on ebay they might make some money. But i am guessing that there is no such person and this is a none story created and nutured by the mods to make a (mute) point.

Ummm. I bought a ticket and travelled 800 miles (one way) and two states to see him and he added a date down the street after the fact and I was a tad peeved. :straightface: And I've been called his most dysfunctional sycophantical fan. :p

[Kewpie]

explain - that makes no sense

joe frady posted that he didn't find Morrissey deceived him.

An anonymous user insulted him that he's a sycophant using derogatory language.

Some users demanded this particular derogatory comment should be deleted.

Then you jumped on the band wagon and started criticising site administrator and moderators.

[davidt]

no its just that you focus on the negative in every story, possibly as a subconscious attempt at revenge

I suppose you could look at it that way, but I am just calling it as I see it.

[smiler]

joe frady posted that he didn't find Morrissey deceived him.

An anonymous user insulted him that he's a sycophant using derogatory language.

Some users demanded this particular derogatory comment should be deleted.

Then you jumped on the band wagon and started criticising site administrator and moderators.

Whlist i am glad you see it as a bandwagon you forgot the following in your helpful summary:

Site owner and moderators jump to the defense of "anonymous" claiming "free speech"

which is what prompted my original post

what does that have to do witn the content of my post and your suggestion that i "twisted" the announcemnt anyway?

[smiler]

Ummm. I bought a ticket and travelled 800 miles (one way) and two states to see him and he added a date down the street after the fact and I was a tad peeved. :straightface: And I've been called his most dysfunctional sycophantical fan. :p

well okay but i bet you had a good time - did you go to both shows? - Do you think Morrissey did that intentionally to con you out of money? Were you pleased that you got to see him again or did you think the earlier show was a waste of money/time? I am pretty sure this kind of thing has happened before and it turned out Morrissey had nothing to do with it as he wasn't directly involved with how the concert was promoted.

[Kewpie]

Whlist i am glad you see it as a bandwagon you forgot the following in your helpful summary:

Site owner and moderators jump to the defense of "anonymous" claiming "free speech"

which is what prompted my original post

what does that have to do witn the content of my post and your suggestion that i "twisted" the announcemnt anyway?

This site's purpose is not to glorify Morrissey, but give a platform to discuss all aspects relate to him.

He is also a human being who often makes wrong decisions.

Maurice E quoted Uncleskinny's earlier post which he expressed his thought, I don't find nothing wrong with it.

However, you picked on Uncleskinny's comment and now criticising all the moderators.

Only one moderator posted it, other four did not.

You find numerous negative opinions and insulting comments about Morrissey in other sites, but come here to criticise this site.
It might be Morrissey's public persona attracts negative reactions.
Generally people in showbiz are subject of insult and mockery, you can't filter negative opinions.

If you filter criticism, you have to filter constructive criticism as well.

[CrystalGeezer]

well okay but i bet you had a good time - did you go to both shows? - Do you think Morrissey did that intentionally to con you out of money? Were you pleased that you got to see him again or did you think the earlier show was a waste of money/time? I am pretty sure this kind of thing has happened before and it turned out Morrissey had nothing to do with it as he wasn't directly involved with how the concert was promoted.

Well, I have no illusions that there isn't conning going on. For instance, the Bakersfield show was announced as SOLD OUT on Ticketmaster the afternoon of, but there were more than a hundred empty seats to be sold at the window. I think there might've been an "announcement" about tickets being "released." THat must be code for tickets that were never sold to begin with. That's the tour promoter though, I'm not sure Morrissey is directly involved in holding out on announcing dates in order to generate sales, but maybe. I suppose there is a business aspect to it all. I did go to both shows, it was very costly. I did have a good time, but had I known the LA dates were going to appear I would not have bought Albuquerque tickets and hotel and gas, etc.. I can identify with the folks from Scotland saying WTF? after purchasing MEN Arena tickets on the promise it was the only UK date. It doesn't taste right, something weird about it.

[Anonymous]

Well, I have no illusions that there isn't conning going on. For instance, the Bakersfield show was announced as SOLD OUT on Ticketmaster the afternoon of, but there were more than a hundred empty seats to be sold at the window. I think there might've been an "announcement" about tickets being "released." THat must be code for tickets that were never sold to begin with. That's the tour promoter though, I'm not sure Morrissey is directly involved in holding out on announcing dates in order to generate sales, but maybe. I suppose there is a business aspect to it all. I did go to both shows, it was very costly. I did have a good time, but had I known the LA dates were going to appear I would not have bought Albuquerque tickets and hotel and gas, etc.. I can identify with the folks from Scotland saying WTF? after purchasing MEN Arena tickets on the promise it was the only UK date. It doesn't taste right, something weird about it.

Wait... you're complaining about seeing MORE shows than you would have otherwise? What's wrong with you? Also, you do realize that the distance between EDI and MAN is a cheap, not very long train ride, right? You've looked at a map? They'll live and be happy that they get 2 chances instead of one to see him. Or at least the non-drama queen crybabies will.

And, sorry but sold out on Ticketmaster means jack shit on just about any show they sell. Tickets always go on sale the day of. The promoter and venue ALWAYS hold tickets back. I'd say maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of the ones available actually go on sale on Ticketmaster during the main "sale". If you're dealing with a non-TM venue it's usually a little more straightforward and sold out is a lot more likely to mean sold out, give or take a dozen tickets or so.

[CrystalGeezer]

Wait... you're complaining about seeing MORE shows than you would have otherwise? What's wrong with you? Also, you do realize that the distance between EDI and MAN is a cheap, not very long train ride, right? You've looked at a map? They'll live and be happy that they get 2 chances instead of one to see him. Or at least the non-drama queen crybabies will.

And, sorry but sold out on Ticketmaster means jack shit on just about any show they sell. Tickets always go on sale the day of. The promoter and venue ALWAYS hold tickets back. I'd say maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of the ones available actually go on sale on Ticketmaster during the main "sale". If you're dealing with a non-TM venue it's usually a little more straightforward and sold out is a lot more likely to mean sold out, give or take a dozen tickets or so.

Okay fine. But what if this was my first Morrissey show. I go online to get a ticket and it says Sold Out. I hear that "tickets are being released" so I scramble and buy one of those. Then I go to the show and see that there are hundreds of empty seats. What is my impression of the marketing of this show? I feel duped. I don't think that's what Morrissey wants his audience to be feeling, going into a show bitter that "Hey wait a minute, there were seats all along." Or "Hey wait a minute...this wasn't his only show in the UK." It's shit PR and for what? To create a false buzz to manipulate a few extra tickets sales? Shady. I'm just saying from the perspective of a ticket holder it's not awesome business practice to manipulate your clientele.

I go to this chain of cafe's in California called Panera, they bake their own bread. (read: they heat up frozen loaves of bread). ANyway, I was sitting at one the other day reading my book when a buzzer went off and EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE yelled "Hot bread!" There was something very phoney about it. It;s a chain, they;re getting paid minimum wage, could give a shit yet their manager has coached them to get all excited about the bread being done. That same phoniness is what I felt seeing all the empty seats at robabank theater. I'm sure it's a standard industry practice to hype sales in every possible way, but it feels manipulative.

[smiler]

Okay fine. But what if this was my first Morrissey show. I go online to get a ticket and it says Sold Out. I hear that "tickets are being released" so I scramble and buy one of those. Then I go to the show and see that there are hundreds of empty seats. What is my impression of the marketing of this show? I feel duped. I don't think that's what Morrissey wants his audience to be feeling, going into a show bitter that "Hey wait a minute, there were seats all along." Or "Hey wait a minute...this wasn't his only show in the UK." It's shit PR and for what? To create a false buzz to manipulate a few extra tickets sales? Shady. I'm just saying from the perspective of a ticket holder it's not awesome business practice to manipulate your clientele.

I go to this chain of cafe's in California called Panera, they bake their own bread. (read: they heat up frozen loaves of bread). ANyway, I was sitting at one the other day reading my book when a buzzer went off and EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE yelled "Hot bread!" There was something very phoney about it. It;s a chain, they;re getting paid minimum wage, could give a shit yet their manager has coached them to get all excited about the bread being done. That same phoniness is what I felt seeing all the empty seats at robabank theater. I'm sure it's a standard industry practice to hype sales in every possible way, but it feels manipulative.

okay but even if it was deliberate it is still a jump to say Morrissey is directly deceiving people rather than a promoter

[CrystalGeezer]

okay but even if it was deliberate it is still a jump to say Morrissey is directly deceiving people rather than a promoter

Yes, it is a jump. I think a lot of people in Morrissey's circle stand to profit from him and influence his decisions when he slips into kid mode, which he does. I do not think Morrissey is the impetus of the deception, though he will always take the fall for it. I suspect there are a LOT of dynamics almost impossible to begin trying to explain with Morrissey. In short, I do not feel deception is his motivation. He really does just love singing. Ask Johnny Marr.

[nothappynotsad]

okay but even if it was deliberate it is still a jump to say Morrissey is directly deceiving people rather than a promoter

Promoters don't release information via True-To-You. Morrissey does.
http://true-to-you.net/morrissey_news_120408_01

[smiler]

This site's purpose is not to glorify Morrissey, but give a platform to discuss all aspects relate to him.

He is also a human being who often makes wrong decisions.

Maurice E quoted Uncleskinny's earlier post which he expressed his thought, I don't find nothing wrong with it.

However, you picked on Uncleskinny's comment and now criticising all the moderators.

Only one moderator posted it, other four did not.

You find numerous negative opinions and insulting comments about Morrissey in other sites, but come here to criticise this site.
It might be Morrissey's public persona attracts negative reactions.
Generally people in showbiz are subject of insult and mockery, you can't filter negative opinions.

If you filter criticism, you have to filter constructive criticism as well.

Isn't the purpose of a fan site to glorify a little? - why not? I wasn't even suggesting that myself rather it was just a plea not to focus disproportionately on the negative.

I wasn't talking about uncleskinny's post i don't even know which one you mean? - there are plently of other examples. It seems to be most of the mods including you and the owner who hold or promote this negative view.

I find it hard to follow your posts - they don't make sense or follow on from the other posts your quote?

"If you filter criticism, you have to filter constructive criticism as well" - no you don't - why? by all means keep the constructive criticism its the insulting, derogatory (as you yourself descibed it) posts that need filtering.

"It might be Morrissey's public persona attracts negative reactions." - and here we have another example of your agenda - Morrissey's "public persona" (a phrase which presupposes a deception,) has let you down again somehow, although you won't say it directly but this is the reason for example that you defend anonymous over Joe. Its because you agree with anonymous in his attack perhaps not in the choice of language but in the point of view - i.e. those that defend Morrissey are unjustified in doing so (they are blind sycophanic fans) and are therefore open to attack based on "free speech"

[smiler]

Promoters don't release information via True-To-You. Morrissey does.
http://true-to-you.net/morrissey_news_120408_01

then why does it read "Morrissey's only UK concert of 2012 will be at Manchester Arena" and not "My only UK concert of 2012 will be...."?

[CrystalGeezer]

Isn't the purpose of a fan site to glorify a little? - why not? I wasn't even suggesting that myself rather it was just a plea not to focus disproportionately on the negative.

I wasn't talking about uncleskinny's post i don't even know which one you mean? - there are plently of other examples. It seems to be most of the mods including you and the owner who hold or promote this negative view.

I find it hard to follow your posts - they don't make sense or follow on from the other posts your quote?

"If you filter criticism, you have to filter constructive criticism as well" - no you don't - why? by all means keep the constructive criticism its the insulting, derogatory (as you yourself descibed it) posts that need filtering.

"It might be Morrissey's public persona attracts negative reactions." - and here we have another example of your agenda - Morrissey's "public persona" (a phrase which presupposes a deception,) has let you down again somehow, although you won't say it directly but this is the reason for example that you defend anonymous over Joe. Its because you agree with anonymous in his attack perhaps not in the choice of language but in the point of view - i.e. those that defend Morrissey are unjustified in doing so (they are blind sycophanic fans) and are therefore open to attack based on "free speech"

In David and his team of moderator's defense, they have a right lean towards a negative viewpoint, don't you think? Though I feel they've been pretty darn fair since the meltdown considering everything and your assessment of their moderator skillz is a tad post hoc logic. Something went wrong, some complete lack of communication happened. Yet they post the "news" and provide an avenue for discussion diligently.

[smiler]

Yes, it is a jump. I think a lot of people in Morrissey's circle stand to profit from him and influence his decisions when he slips into kid mode, which he does. I do not think Morrissey is the impetus of the deception, though he will always take the fall for it. I suspect there are a LOT of dynamics almost impossible to begin trying to explain with Morrissey. In short, I do not feel deception is his motivation. He really does just love singing. Ask Johnny Marr.

Its even more likely that he just doesn't make firm long term plans (as he has indicated many times) and so statements that predict his future actions longterm may not hold up. His plans (if he actually made any) change dependent on how he feels. The statement was most likely true at the time, (and probably not directly endorsed by Morrissey anyway) - simple as that.

[nothappynotsad]

then why does it read "Morrissey's only UK concert of 2012 will be at Manchester Arena" and not "My only UK concert of 2012 will be...."?

Are you so stupid that you don't know how True-To-You works?

[smiler]

In David and his team of moderator's defense, they have a right lean towards a negative viewpoint, don't you think? Though I feel they've been pretty darn fair since the meltdown considering everything and your assessment of their moderator skillz is a tad post hoc logic. Something went wrong, some complete lack of communication happened. Yet they post the "news" and provide an avenue for discussion diligently.

i am not sure exactly what you mean but i will say this, I don't think the mods/owner have a "right" at all. i think the "meltdown" was completly their own doing. I think Morrissey is mostly correct about this site and it is he that has been wronged by obssesive superfans who demand his friendship and once spurned set their site on revenge. yes they do post the "news" and provide an avenue for discussion but i think the negative "let down" view point (their view point) is pervasive.

I think the mindset of some of these superfans (those that gain some direct contact with the man after he recognised the dedication) is that if they want to get really close to him (i.e. "friends") then they must prove they are not sycophantic (the ultimate sin for the super fan ironically) they achieve this by being hyper critical or hyper honest. When the unwarranted criticism is challenged they cry censorship and suggest Morrissey is surrounded by "yes men" or that he has simply lost the plot. When in reality this mindset is just another stage of their obssession.

[smiler]

Are you so stupid that you don't know how True-To-You works?

are you really so deluded that you think you do? Do you really think Morrissey dictates/writes/approves all that content himself?

[nothappynotsad]

are you really so deluded that you think you do? Do you really think Morrissey dictates/writes/approves all that content himself?

I guess you just answered my question...

[CrystalGeezer]

i am not sure exactly what you mean but i will say this, I don't think the mods/owner have a "right" at all. i think the "meltdown" was completly their own doing. I think Morrissey is mostly correct about this site and it is he that has been wronged by obssesive superfans who demand his friendship and once spurned set their site on revenge. yes they do post the "news" and provide an avenue for discussion but i think the negative "let down" view point is pervasive.

Whatever, the point's moot now. Lots of feelings were hurt by that rash stunt yet the site chugs along, one of the few things consistent in the world of Morrissey.

Who was wronged by superfans? Morrissey? Or David? :squiffy:

PS Keep in mind I am basing my opinions not on backstage knowledge or ANY knowledge of any situation, just conduct I witness here. I log on, post crazy shit on the site that allows crazy shit to be posted then go watch television. That is my life.

[smiler]

Whatever, the point's moot now. Lots of feelings were hurt by that rash stunt yet the site chugs along, one of the few things consistent in the world of Morrissey.

Who was wronged by superfans? Morrissey? Or David? :squiffy:

Morrissey is the one who has been wronged

[joe frady]

And I've been called his most dysfunctional sycophantical fan. :p

I beg to differ friend :thumb:

[smiler]

I guess you just answered my question...


Spit it out - if you have something to say, say it - how exactly is TTY run in your mind? we are listening...

[CrystalGeezer]

Morrissey is the one who has been wronged

Who are the superfans and what do they have to do with solo? I guess I lost your train of thought.

[smiler]

Whatever, the point's moot now. Lots of feelings were hurt by that rash stunt yet the site chugs along, one of the few things consistent in the world of Morrissey.

Who was wronged by superfans? Morrissey? Or David? :squiffy:

PS Keep in mind I am basing my opinions not on backstage knowledge or ANY knowledge of any situation, just conduct I witness here. I log on, post crazy shit on the site that allows crazy shit to be posted then go watch television. That is my life.

and long may that continue

[CrystalGeezer]

I beg to differ friend :thumb:

I certainly can't win the "Biggest Fan" pissing contest, (or pooping contest as the case might be :D) I don't own a single single. I can find a heiroglyph of a bird in the shadow of his mouth on a photo, that's GOTTA count for something though. :p

[smiler]

Who are the superfans and what do they have to do with solo? I guess I lost your train of thought.

those that dedicate much of there lives to following Morrissey and getting close to him - for example davidt and some of the mods - those that used to follow the tour endlessly and were known to Morrissey as a result and were sometimes allowed backstage. I'm not saying all of the super fans fall into this mindset just the ones that become truely obessed and lose sight of the reality (which is probably most of them.) its a very strange dynamic.

[CrystalGeezer]

those that dedicate much of there lives to following Morrissey and getting close to him - for example davidt and some of the mods - those that used to follow the tour endlessly and were known to Morrissey as a result and were sometimes allowed backstage. I'm not saying all of the super fans fall into this mindset just the ones that become truely obessed and lose sight of the reality (which is probably most of them.) its a very strange dynamic.

Oh, I don't know any of that. I guess I've heard some stories but I try to listen to them sort of half-heartedly. Stories are often stories and time makes them even storier if you know what I mean. From my perspective as a regular poster, they do a consistent and fair job here.

[smiler]

Oh, I don't know any of that. I guess I've heard some stories but I try to listen to them sort of half-heartedly. Stories are often stories and time makes them even storier if you know what I mean. From my perspective as a regular poster, they do a consistent and fair job here.

I don't think they are stories as such, its pretty clear. Morrissey was once very complementary about this site on the radio and in the press. From the content of the site at the time it appeared that davidt had some access to Morrissey or his team. it was even suggested that Morrissey read the site often and even posted himself - davidt certainly put the hours in as a dedicated fan and it appears that work was being recognised. Several fans have become close to Morrissey this way over the years, Julia being the most well know. Often that closeness creates problems usually because the fan in their obsession project things onto their idol that are impossible for Morrissey to live up to in reality. Or because the fan becomes hyper critical in order to stave off the charge of sycophancy. In this case it appears davidt started posting negative gossip on the front page from "unnamed sources" within team Morrissey - probably with the half hope that they may provoke some kind of contact from Morrissey personally. When contact came in the form of a legal letter davids obsessed heart was broken and from there things got worse and worse. Now Morrissey hates david and david is left to pretend that he is a Morrissey Journalist rather than a Morrissey fan and that this isn't and never was a Morrisey fan site (one which glorifies) but is somehow an independent Morrissey related free platform with no agenda (which happens to be very negative and happens to run by someone Morrissey coincidently hates.)

[CrystalGeezer]

I don't think they are stories as such, its pretty clear. Morrissey was once very complementary about this site on the radio and in the press. From the content of the site at the time it appeared that davidt had some access to Morrissey or his team. it was even suggested that Morrissey read the site often and even posted himself - davidt certainly put the hours in as a dedicated fan and it appears that work was being recognised. Several fans have become close to Morrissey this way over the years, Julia being the most well know. Often that closeness creates problems usually because the fan in their obsession project things onto their idol that are impossible for Morrissey to live up to in reality. Or because the fan becomes hyper critical in order to stave off the charge of sycophancy. In this case it appears davidt started posting negative gossip on the front page from "unnamed sources" within team Morrissey - probably with the half hope that they may provoke some kind of contact from Morrissey personally. When contact came in the form of a legal letter davids obsessed heart was broken and from there things got worse and worse.

Alright, I know nothing about any of this and I'm not sure it's even relevant, but at the end of the day this is where people come to talk about Morrissey stuff whether he likes it or not. Meat eaters buy tickets and records whether he likes it or not. Some things one cannot control and one of those is that this is the hotbed for Morrissey talk and it;s not all gloom and negative like you say, smiler. We go weeks with nothing but insight and calm, kind discussion. Then there's an announcement and you visit and there's a ton of trolls, but drama attracts trolls. I felt rather offended at your initial post that this place is so negative, it really isn't. It's not a pillowfight in a marshmallow factory, but it's not all bad. You just see some bad and immediately dismiss. It also sounds like you're reading a lot of backstory into the situation. People move on. Sometimes things do get better.

[Guernie]

Well said Crystal ! This is the sight for real discussion on Moz . I do get on TTY at times to see concert reviews but for actual talk it has ............. nothing that beats the real people and views on Solo . Many of the trolls on this sight seem to the "unnamed" that really do like to stir the pot and take shots at Moz .

[nothappynotsad]

Spit it out - if you have something to say, say it

Didn't I already? I'm pretty sure I already called you stupid in a previous post.


how exactly is TTY run in your mind? we are listening...

Morrissey makes career move. Gives information to Julia to post. Julia posts it.

Is that too complex of a process to understand? Do you really think Morrissey has no say in a website he writes statements for exclusively?
How could someone who has been here since 2006 be so ignorant to how things work? Next thing you know, you'll be asking who Julia is...or Jake...or what Morrissey's sexuality is.

[davidt]

I don't think they are stories as such, its pretty clear. Morrissey was once very complementary about this site on the radio and in the press. From the content of the site at the time it appeared that davidt had some access to Morrissey or his team. it was even suggested that Morrissey read the site often and even posted himself - davidt certainly put the hours in as a dedicated fan and it appears that work was being recognised. Several fans have become close to Morrissey this way over the years, Julia being the most well know. Often that closeness creates problems usually because the fan in their obsession project things onto their idol that are impossible for Morrissey to live up to in reality. Or because the fan becomes hyper critical in order to stave off the charge of sycophancy. In this case it appears davidt started posting negative gossip on the front page from "unnamed sources" within team Morrissey - probably with the half hope that they may provoke some kind of contact from Morrissey personally. When contact came in the form of a legal letter davids obsessed heart was broken and from there things got worse and worse. Now Morrissey hates david and david is left to pretend that he is a Morrissey Journalist rather than a Morrissey fan and that this isn't and never was a Morrisey fan site (one which glorifies) but is somehow an independent Morrissey related free platform with no agenda (which happens to be very negative and happens to run by someone Morrissey coincidently hates.)

You have me figured out, this never was meant to be a fan site. No fans allowed. I actually do delete all positive anonymous comments but some unfortunately manage to get through when I am too preoccupied making up negative stories about Morrissey for the front page.

[Oh my god, it's Robby!]

so anyways, back on task, I think people can feel conned without anybody intending that they be conned :o
as others have stated, Moz likely only really had the one show(in the UK) planned for the year :straightface:
how can the situation changing for the better possibly be worse?
on a personal note, I find it funny talking about him adding dates and the "problem" of this :rolleyes:
whereas in the past the usually gripes were about canceled shows, so I guess this is progress :thumb:

[smiler]

Didn't I already? I'm pretty sure I already called you stupid in a previous post.



Morrissey makes career move. Gives information to Julia to post. Julia posts it.

Is that too complex of a process to understand? Do you really think Morrissey has no say in a website he writes statements for exclusively?
How could someone who has been here since 2006 be so ignorant to how things work? Next thing you know, you'll be asking who Julia is...or Jake...or what Morrissey's sexuality is.

wow you are dumb - well done what a revelation, so in short you actually think Morrissey dictated the phrase "Morrissey's only uk show...." himself. Lol

ps I've been here way longer than 2006

[smiler]

You have me figured out, this never was meant to be a fan site. No fans allowed. I actually do delete all positive anonymous comments but some unfortunately manage to get through when I am too preoccupied making up negative stories about Morrissey for the front page.

no need to avoid the point or deliberatley misunderstand david. Its not a fan site because it doesn't "glorify" (god forbid) its apparently just a platform for debate - right? Obviously fans are allowed but so are haters. (which is fine as long as you moderate fairly) I never said you made up stories yourself but you certainly posted untrue gossip on the front page and as a result got legal letters from Morrissey telling you to stop - didn't you? That was the start of the breakdown of your relationship with Morrissey

[nothappynotsad]

wow you are dumb - well done what a revelation, so in short you actually think Morrissey dictated the phrase "Morrissey's only uk show...." himself. Lol

ps I've been here way longer than 2006

So, you're claiming if it isn't written in the third person, the source of the information published on True-To-You isn't Morrissey?
If I actually gave a damn about you, I would find it sad how limited your capacity for intelligent thought is...but alas, I don't.

[Oh my god, it's Robby!]

Obviously fans are allowed but so are haters.

perhaps "haters" are kind of fan, particularly when it comes to an artist like Morrissey
I mean you don't really don't think people like some who have posted above do not listen to his music, do you?
perhaps a few do not anymore, but more likely is just they have this weird, peculiar vision of him as a person in their head
& they find themselves not seeing him as having lived up to "what they want him to be"
it really has nothing to do with him really, its all just a projection
and well, for a long time, this site is(was) a "home" for many of them, where else would they go?

[smiler]

So, you're claiming if it isn't written in the third person, the source of the information published on True-To-You isn't Morrissey?
If I actually gave a damn about you, I would find it sad how limited your capacity for intelligent thought is...but alas, I don't.

I am not claiming that at all but it is you that is claiming that Morrissey either directly writes all the content himself, dictates it or proof reads it all. To the point that if the TTY site says "Morrissey's only uk show...." you know apparently for a fact that this information and slant came directly from Morrissey and or was endorsed by him. Thats what you saying isn't it (just spit it out man). You think Morrissey 100% endores and proof reads every sentence in TTY and that the source of every story (which ever way it is grammatically presented - i.e. sometimes Morrissey delivers these messages in the first person and sometime he dictates information as if he isn't himself - lol) is always Morrissey rather than for example a promoter or other third party. - right?

[Uncleskinny]

I am not claim that at all but you are claiming that Morrissey either directly writes all the content himself, dictates it or proof reads it all. To the point that if the TTY site says "Morrissey's only uk show...." you know apparently for a fact that this information and slant came directly from Morrissey and or was endorsed by him. Thats what you saying isn't it (just spit it out man). You think Morrissey 100% endores and proof reads every sentence in TTY and that the source of every story (which ever way it is grammatically presented - i.e. sometimes Morrissey delivers these messages in the first person and sometime he dictates information as if he isn't himself - lol) is always Morrissey rather than for example a promoter or other third party. - right?

I find it odd that you are slagging someone off for an assertion rather than fact, and yet your own assertion couldn't be backed by fact either. Or maybe I'm doing your impeccable sources a disservice.

P.

[nothappynotsad]

perhaps "haters" are kind of fan, particularly when it comes to an artist like Morrissey
I mean you don't really don't think people like some who have posted above do not listen to his music, do you?
perhaps a few do not anymore, but more likely is just they have this weird, peculiar vision of him as a person in their head
and they find themselves not seeing him as having lived up to "what they want him to be"
it really has nothing to do with him really, its all just a projection
and well, for a long time, this site is(was) a "home" for many of them, where else would they go?

Nice attempt at burying my comment.
http://oi46.tinypic.com/2s0xmgz.jpg

Obviously, they go to Georgia.

[smiler]

I find it odd that you are slagging someone off for an assertion rather than fact, and yet your own assertion couldn't be backed by fact either. Or maybe I'm doing your impeccable sources a disservice.

P.

say what? - If you have something to add just say it. I didn't start the "slagging", read back. Also all I said was that we don't know that Morrissey endorsed that statement ("only uk concert") that is all. Others have suggestted differently like they know for sure Morrissey endorsed it because thats how TTY works.... Now which assertion did i make that can't be backed up by fact exactly?

[smiler]

Nice attempt at burying my comment.
http://oi46.tinypic.com/2s0xmgz.jpg

Obviously, they go to Georgia.

what you on about now?

[Anonymous]

Great. But the damage has been done to Joe's character since its been quoted. Your edit does not effect the quotes.

"Joe" constantly complains about what Morrissey is wearing, declared that he loves liars, that he is a liar and that everybody lies. No. Not everybody lies. Some people contradict themselves occasionally because they are in a transitional stage so that what they say is not that consistent as their moods swing while they have not fully embraced reality yet, but there are a lot of people who do not lie intentionally. People who say that they love liars and that they lie are a totally different class of people.

Besides, the image was gross but so are actual "pearl necklasses" and the sex practises of certain people who use this website. Did we really want to read that you wanted your penis in and out of your vagina? Certainly not me. BUT the anonymous used this out of proportion imagery to make clear HOW arsecrawling he thinks "Joe" is, not that he'd actually do it, because we all know that "Joe" would first go to St James's Street with Morrissey to dress him differently before he did anything described. :P In any case it clearly shows HOW annoyed anonymous was by "Joe's" desperate attempt to yet again portray himself as this unconditional lover of Morrissey that he is not.

Bottom line is that there are people really annoyed that did not know earlier that there MIGHT be an Edinburgh date and that Joe's uses the opportunity to... see above.
To get all hung up on the imagery is a bit short sighted.

[smiler]

So, you're claiming if it isn't written in the third person, the source of the information published on True-To-You isn't Morrissey?
If I actually gave a damn about you, I would find it sad how limited your capacity for intelligent thought is...but alas, I don't.

I am suggestting that if the statement isn't written in the first person then the exact wording of that statement is unlikely to be directly from Morrissey, perhaps the information therein or even the gist but not the exact wording. If it was his exact wording then it would be presented in the first person just like many of the statements on TTY are.

[nothappynotsad]

I am not claiming that at all but it is you that is claiming that Morrissey either directly writes all the content himself, dictates it or proof reads it all. To the point that if the TTY site says "Morrissey's only uk show...." you know apparently for a fact that this information and slant came directly from Morrissey and or was endorsed by him. Thats what you saying isn't it (just spit it out man). You think Morrissey 100% endores and proof reads every sentence in TTY and that the source of every story (which ever way it is grammatically presented - i.e. sometimes Morrissey delivers these messages in the first person and sometime he dictates information as if he isn't himself - lol) is always Morrissey rather than for example a promoter or other third party. - right?

Every post you make is a facepalm within a facepalm.


say what? - If you have something to add just say it. I didn't start the "slagging", read back. Also all I said was that we don't know that Morrissey endorsed that statement ("only uk concert") that is all. Others have suggestted differently like they know for sure Morrissey endorsed it because thats how TTY works.... Now which assertion did i make that can't be backed up by fact exactly?

He obviously said what he wanted to say. You just aren't getting it.


what you on about now?

When someone posts a comment at 7:25, deletes it, and reposts the same comment again at 7:50 so it puts his comment on the new page and knocks your comment back to the previous one, it is obvious what happened. Especially when he already has it in for you based solely on who you fell in love with.

[smiler]

Every post you make is a facepalm within a facepalm.



He obviously said what he wanted to say. You just aren't getting it.



When someone posts a comment at 7:25, deletes it, and reposts the same comment again at 7:50 so it puts his comment on the new page and knocks your comment back to the previous one, it is obvious what happened. Especially when he already has it in for you based solely on who you fell in love with.

once again just say it! - you think Morrissey is 100% responsible for the wording of every TTY statement - just say it man! But of course you won't say it because its simply retarded.

I don't know anything about who you fell in love with or why?

[davidt]

no need to avoid the point or deliberatley misunderstand david. Its not a fan site because it doesn't "glorify" (god forbid) its apparently just a platform for debate - right? Obviously fans are allowed but so are haters. (which is fine as long as you moderate fairly) I never said you made up stories yourself but you certainly posted untrue gossip on the front page and as a result got legal letters from Morrissey telling you to stop - didn't you? That was the start of the breakdown of your relationship with Morrissey

No I am not aware of anything posted that was actually untrue, what are you referring to? I may make mistakes sometimes but who doesn't? I try to clear up anything with the absolute truth if I can. If it's the question about whether the crew was paid after the 2002 tour, from what I have heard that was actually true. There was a legal threat but no actual follow-up.

[nothappynotsad]

once again just say it! - you think Morrissey is 100% responsible for the wording of every TTY statement - just say it man! But of course you won't say it because its simply retarded.


Speaking of retarded...


I don't know anything about who you fell in love with or why?

You don't know anything about anything, do you?

[smiler]

No I am not aware of anything posted that was actually untrue, what are you referring to? I may make mistakes sometimes but who doesn't? I try to clear up anything with the absolute truth if I can. If it's the question about whether the crew was paid after the 2002 tour, from what I have heard that was actually true. There was a legal threat but no actual follow-up.

there was no follow up because you removed the article - right? and you removed it because you couldn't back it up with any hard facts - and it appears you still can't (its still just a rumour you heard) although nothing came of the story did it, the crew didn't sue for example.

[davidt]

once again just say it! - you think Morrissey is 100% responsible for the wording of every TTY statement - just say it man! But of course you won't say it because its simply retarded.

I don't know anything about who you fell in love with or why?

It's pretty much the official site, so even if he did not necessarily write it, yes, I would say he is 100% responsible for statements such as this.

[davidt]

there was no follow up because you removed the article - right? and you removed it because you couldn't back it up with any hard facts - and it appears you still can't (its still just a rumour you heard) although nothing came of the story did it, the crew didn't sue for example.

Wrong again, the story is still here:
Rumor - tour crew and band from last year's tour not paid yet? (http://www.morrissey-solo.com/article.pl?sid=03/04/27/1615232) - April 28, 2003.

There was no follow-up on the legal threat because the rumor was true as far as I know. Anyway, I didn't actually state that Morrissey was the one that did not pay them, at the time I thought it may have been some tour manager or something.

[Skylarker]

There was no follow-up on the legal threat because the rumor was true as far as I know.

Man, you're alright.

[smiler]

Speaking of retarded...



You don't know anything about anything, do you?

yawn.

[smiler]

Wrong again, the story is still here:
Rumor - tour crew and band from last year's tour not paid yet? (http://www.morrissey-solo.com/article.pl?sid=03/04/27/1615232) - April 28, 2003.

There was no follow-up on the legal threat because the rumor was true as far as I know. Anyway, I didn't actually state that Morrissey was the one that did not pay them, at the time I thought it may have been some tour manager or something.

Oh I must have confused it with the other times you have been threatened with legal action for post rumours and gossip

[davidt]

Oh I must have confused it with the other times you have been threatened with legal action for post rumours and gossip

You must have projected these 'other times' in your mind to support your argument because when pressed to actually find proof you can't find any as there are no 'other times'.

[Uncleskinny]

Oh I must have confused it with the other times you have been threatened with legal action for post rumours and gossip

Examples of which are....?

P.

[smiler]

You must have projected these 'other times' in your mind to support your argument because when pressed to actually find proof you can't find any as there are no 'other times'.

well there was certainly an alleged leaked email that also produced the threat of legal action

[davidt]

well there was certainly an alleged leaked email that also produced the threat of legal action

Yes, there was that but that wasn't something I posted so the threat of legal action would be against the person that posted it, not me. Also, they claimed copyright on it so that means it was true, not gossip or rumor.

[smiler]

Yes, there was that but that wasn't something I posted so the threat of legal action would be against the person that posted it, not me. Also, they claimed copyright on it so that means it was true, not gossip or rumor.

lol forgot about that did you?

[Uncleskinny]

lol forgot about that did you?

Obviously not, as he quoted it back to you.

Lol.

P.

[davidt]

Obviously not, as he quoted it back to you.

Lol.

P.

Doesn't look like his ears are open. I just clarified that it doesn't fit his original statement ("Oh I must have confused it with the other times you have been threatened with legal action for post rumours and gossip"), but he still seems confused.

[smiler]

Obviously not, as he quoted it back to you.

Lol.

P.

He demanded another example so I gave him one and then he had to say "oh yeah well okay there was that one aswell" - massive lol

[smiler]

Doesn't look like his ears are open. I just clarified that it doesn't fit his original statement ("Oh I must have confused it with the other times you have been threatened with legal action for post rumours and gossip"), but he still seems confused.

so lets clarify - where you threated with legal action by Morrissey due to a post on your site which was subsequently remove by you? - yes or no?

[Uncleskinny]

He demanded another example so I gave him one and then he had to say "oh yeah well okay there was that one aswell" - massive lol

I can't begin to imagine where you take this line of argument from here. Is that it?

Lol.

[Uncleskinny]

so lets clarify - where you threated with legal action by Morrissey due to a post on your site which was subsequently remove by you? - yes or no?

You might want to continue this when you (a) can spell and (b) are sober.

P.

[davidt]

so lets clarify - where you threated with legal action by Morrissey due to a post on your site which was subsequently remove by you? - yes or no?

No. I was not threatened with any legal action for that as I complied with their demands.

[smiler]

No. I was not threatened with any legal action for that as I complied with their demands.

hahaha really? so what did the original letter say would happen if you didn't comply?

[smiler]

You might want to continue this when you (a) can spell and (b) are sober.

P.

^rattled

[davidt]

hahaha really? so what did the original letter say would happen if you didn't comply?

It said I would be liable for copyright infringement as standard DMCA takedowns go, I complied as they followed all the proper steps. You can read it here (http://www.morrissey-solo.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/22/0746214).

[smiler]

It said I would be liable for copyright infringement as standard DMCA takedowns go, I complied as they followed all the proper steps. You can read it here (http://www.morrissey-solo.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/22/0746214).

I read it when i happened - thanks

[joe frady]

I don't think the anonymous comment has made anyone think any less of Joe Frady than they already did before. :D

I think less of him than I did before.

[Anonymous]

Let's use real world examples - pick a few posts from the last week or so. Describe in detail what action you would take regarding the posts if you had the choice. Would you edit them or delete them altogether?

Here's a thread posted by a moderator fanning the flames of the "Morrissey said there wouldn't be any more UK dates and ZOMG he added another one so he's a LIAR" debate:

http://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/123231-Adding-another-date-makes-you-feel-being-deceived-by-Morrissey


And here's an example of the kind of crap that spawned that little attempt at a bigger argument:


Would you believe it, Morrissey has deceived his fans again.
Any Scottish people conned into buying tickets for the Manchester date, the only UK date of 2012?

As for what to do, the original argument about the horror of another concert date added could have been ended quickly with a "he's human and why is an extra date a bad thing? act like adults or take your need to fight over nothing to the pigsty or this gets deleted" post, followed up by actual action if it continued.

As for the second, deleting it and either warning or firing the moderator for continuing a ridiculous argument wouldn't be outside the realm of civil behavior.

[Kewpie]

Here's a thread posted by a moderator fanning the flames of the "Morrissey said there wouldn't be any more UK dates and ZOMG he added another one so he's a LIAR" debate:

http://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/123231-Adding-another-date-makes-you-feel-being-deceived-by-Morrissey


And here's an example of the kind of crap that spawned that little attempt at a bigger argument:


Originally Posted by Maurice E
Would you believe it, Morrissey has deceived his fans again.
Any Scottish people conned into buying tickets for the Manchester date, the only UK date of 2012?

As for what to do, the original argument about the horror of another concert date added could have been ended quickly with a "he's human and why is an extra date a bad thing? act like adults or take your need to fight over nothing to the pigsty or this gets deleted" post, followed up by actual action if it continued.

As for the second, deleting it and either warning or firing the moderator for continuing a ridiculous argument wouldn't be outside the realm of civil behavior.

Silly people jump on to anything.
I was taking the piss. :rolleyes: