Article: New Morrissey interview on Greek website LiFO (July 4, 2012)

[smiler]

No he didn't. He said this..."I told Merck I'd be willing to work with him / Morrissey on changes to the site and that was pretty much it"...and this..."I just mentioned I was open to changes, but again, I had no idea what he had in mind as it wasn't discussed."

You make it sound like it was blind acquiescence.

P.

Well it certainly wasn't a flat no was it?

[Uncleskinny]

Well it certainly wasn't a flat no was it?

But you said he'd said yes. You posted that. Now you say he didn't. How can we EVER believe anything you post, ever? *sobs* I'm going to have to give in to this relentless battery of evidence.

P.

[davidt]

but you did agree in principle to working with Morrissey in changing the site? Seems like a simple request to ask having agreed you were "open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site" and then subsequently outlining what "probably wouldn't have worked" to outline what might have worked. My point is you must have been prepared to make some changes on Morrissey instruction - right?

No actual 'agreement', I told Merck I am open to discussions and changes which I have always been anyway. Yes, I am prepared to make some changes if I feel it makes sense and good for the site in general. For instance, if he wanted anonymous posts moderated that made sense, and I have since implemented that. If he had suggestions in improvements that would be great also, there are a number of things he could do. A quick example, if he wanted to have someone take a picture of a setlist after each show and send it in that would save me and others work and dealing with fake / incorrect setlists, etc. He could even come in and post as himself if he feels there is something incorrect and needs to be corrected. And who knows, if he was respectful of the efforts that go into the site perhaps there would be less hostility.

[smiler]

No actual 'agreement', I told Merck I am open to discussions and changes which I have always been anyway. Yes, I am prepared to make some changes if I feel it makes sense and good for the site in general. For instance, if he wanted anonymous posts moderated that made sense, and I have since implemented that. If he had suggestions in improvements that would be great also, there are a number of things he could do. A quick example, if he wanted to have someone take a picture of a setlist after each show and send it in that would save me and others work and dealing with fake / incorrect setlists, etc. He could even come in and post as himself if he feels there is something incorrect and needs to be corrected. And who knows, if he was respectful of the site perhaps there would be less hostility.

so when you were asked "Would you be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site" you should have simply said no because the only things you were prepared to "give" (all of those things mentioned above) can have been achieved by simply creating an account as any other normal user? - so why the discussion?

[smiler]

But you said he'd said yes. You posted that. Now you say he didn't. How can we EVER believe anything you post, ever? *sobs* I'm going to have to give in to this relentless battery of evidence.

P.

What? eh? one more time:

David said yes to "would you be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site?" - he could have said no.

[Uncleskinny]

but he could do all of those things by simply creating an account as a normal user? - so why the discussion?

What is wrong with you? Do you have a pathological need to go to bed having the last word? Do you not understand anything?

P.

[Anonymous]

Not sure why you continue being a fucking idiot with everything you post?

hahahaha! Post of this topic so far. Game over, even the most sickenly obsessive fans of Morrissey know that he has blindingly obvious flaws.
Nasty ones at that too.

He, like most perople wh breathe can be a cunt.

troubled joe

[Uncleskinny]

What? eh? one more time:

David said yes to "would you be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site?" - he could have said no.

Are you mad? This is what YOU said "But it appears David didn't say that in the meeting? He just said "Yes"". YOU said that, David did not. YOU made up the sentence, made it up, to which YOU are now referencing. You are really genunely blinkered to a preposterous degree.

P.

[Anonymous]

I quoted your point in my post? how did you miss that? - and he didn't (apparently) clarify that in the meeting though did he.

Let me break it down for you: davidt had already indicated that he wouldn't be willing to censor content here, under instruction from Morrissey or his business associates, before you claimed otherwise.

[smiler]

Are you mad? This is what YOU said "But it appears David didn't say that in the meeting? He just said "Yes"". YOU said that, David did not. YOU made up the sentence, made it up, to which YOU are now referencing. You are really genunely blinkered to a preposterous degree.

P.

What are you on about? davidt said early in this thread "I said I would be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site"

[Uncleskinny]

What are you on about? davidt said early in this thread "I said I would be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site"

All right. All right. I give in against this relentless assault. You win.

P.

[Iona Mink]

What are you on about? davidt said early in this thread "I said I would be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site"

I'm lost. What is your point again?

[smiler]

All right. All right. I give in against this relentless assault. You win.

P.

hahahaha

[smiler]

I'm lost. What is your point again?

nothing really just helping uncleskinny to keep up

[Iona Mink]

nothing really just helping uncleskinny to keep up

No seriously, do you think David should have said "no, I wouldn't be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site" or are you just bickering for the sake of bickering?

[davidt]

nothing really just helping uncleskinny to keep up

You don't really have a point, do you?

[mcrickson]

I'm lost. What is your point again?

This.
Smiler seems more upset about this whole interview than David is. In the meantime, our attention is directed away from some chuckle-worthy Morrissey comments and the news that the autobiography is now not coming out in December to instead focusing on something that didn't even progress further than a cursory meeting that happened over a year ago.

[Kewpie]

hahahaha

[smiler]

No seriously, do you think David should have said "no, I wouldn't be open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site" or are you just bickering for the sake of bickering?

yes because apparently that what he meant - "open to working with Morrissey on changes to the site" actually meant nothing more than if Morrissey creates an account and logs on then he can shape the site just like any other user.

[Uncleskinny]

This.
Smiler seems more upset about this whole interview than David is. In the meantime, our attention is directed away from some chuckle-worthy Morrissey comments and the news that the autobiography is now not coming out in December to instead focusing on something that didn't even progress further than a cursory meeting that happened over a year ago.

Indeed. A distraction from the salient point at hand, Morrissey's untruth. Still, I'm sure we can rely on further frivolous and vexatious posts to distract from this, by the loyal and misguided cohorts. Bravo!

Right, I'm off. Goodnight.

P.