In support of DavidT's concert ban

No1uno

Member of the Month™
Subscriber
Let's just step back a moment. Wether you believe that morrissey lost it when he banned DavidT (I found a thread from 2011 - DavidT banned for life) or whether you think DavidT is vile for running solo like he does.

You as a person, who has control of your life and business dealings. Should you have the power to say who you want around you for whatever reason?

I actually think morrissey absolutely has this right to ban David from the shows. Do I think it may be for petty reasons, yes. But each person has the right to decide. Morrissey has made it very clear that he does not like a lot of different people for different reasons. Why should his decision to not like David be any different. It shouldn't matter to me that David runs this site. Morrissey doesn't like it and by extension doesn't lake DavidT

I can just imagine morrissey coming onstage to give his heart and soul to us through song, and to think that could be squashed with the disgust he may feel at the site of seeing David in the crowd. Like if thatcher, or Charles was front row. It would just destroy the show maybe for him and I'm sure change how he performs.

We all have people we despise, we generally do everything we can to stay away from them. I would just imagine it would be very hard for me to be at ease and feel normal if I was to do something I love with the forced sight of what I hate in view.

If it gives the fans a better show and makes morrissey feel better, I'm in support of David's ban. Again do I think it's stupid, yes. But we all do stupid shit for our own self worth reasons.

I also think David has the right to run this site however he wants. I think David knows, you roll with the punches when you take a stand and stick to principles
 
Let's just step back a moment. Wether you believe that morrissey lost it when he banned DavidT (I found a thread from 2011 - DavidT banned for life) or whether you think DavidT is vile for running solo like he does.

You as a person, who has control of your life and business dealings. Should you have the power to say who you want around you for whatever reason?

I actually think morrissey absolutely has this right to ban David from the shows. Do I think it may be for petty reasons, yes. But each person has the right to decide. Morrissey has made it very clear that he does not like a lot of different people for different reasons. Why should his decision to not like David be any different. It shouldn't matter to me that David runs this site. Morrissey doesn't like it and by extension doesn't lake DavidT

I can just imagine morrissey coming onstage to give his heart and soul to us through song, and to think that could be squashed with the disgust he may feel at the site of seeing David in the crowd. Like if thatcher, or Charles was front row. It would just destroy the show maybe for him and I'm sure change how he performs.

We all have people we despise, we generally do everything we can to stay away from them. I would just imagine it would be very hard for me to be at ease and feel normal if I was to do something I love with the forced sight of what I hate in view.

If it gives the fans a better show and makes morrissey feel better, I'm in support of David's ban. Again do I think it's stupid, yes. But we all do stupid shit for our own self worth reasons.

I also think David has the right to run this site however he wants. I think David knows, you roll with the punches when you take a stand and stick to principles

If the mindset is David does what he wants with his business and Morrissey does what he wants with his business, then yeah, neither of them is obligated to the other in any way.

Having said that, I have clients that are a dream and clients that are annoying as hell, but I put on my professional pants and work hard for all of them. It doesn't affect my performance, so I don't relate to David-in-the-audience freakouts.
 
If the mindset is David does what he wants with his business and Morrissey does what he wants with his business, then yeah, neither of them is obligated to the other in any way.

Having said that, I have clients that are a dream and clients that are annoying as hell, but I put on my professional pants and work hard for all of them. It doesn't affect my performance, so I don't relate to David-in-the-audience freakouts.

Interesting.....I had never seen Morrissey live until recently in Florida. He and his band put on one of the most powerful performances I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot. He and the band gave it everything they had ...but something happened near the end. He obviously became disgusted with some of the fans in and near the front rows. Fans that weren't paying attention....fans coming and going to the bar like the "walking Dead" drinks in hand. I think it affected him because he feeds on the energy from the people in the front. He even seemed to cut the show short because of this..

I don't know how the hell he tours and performs as he does...and it's obviously a strain on body and soul. He's definitely not a laid back performer. Not a crooner like Sinatra..He's very sensitive to negative behavior he feels directed towards him as an artist and a performer. I wish it wasn't so...but it is.

I don't know what to think about david t.....I don't know what went wrong...he was supposed to be a fan. What does that even mean anymore?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am absolutely opposed to Morrissey banning David from his gigs.

Morrissey is a brand, yes. But it isn't a one man show. Just as a movie director isn't the sole creator of a film. It is a collaborative effort. Many creatives have contributed: the song writers, producers, tour crew, backup bands, and the fans themselves. The fans contribute to the overall success of a show. And many fans are opposed to one of their own being discriminated against. Just as the film director cannot decide who can and a cannot watch his film, a singer or performance artist cannot decide who gets to see their performance which takes place in a public space.

No one should have to be treated unfairly because of Moz's mental illness. If he has a phobia against little people--they make him panic--should he be able to ban all persons under five feet from his concerts? Perhaps, instead, such an unwell man should not be allowed to performing public?

David is not excluding anyone from participating. Moz is free to post and say whatever he wants on Solo. He is choosing not to. David isn't taking away or limiting anyone's freedom. Morrissey is. Morrissey is not the libertarian you are making him out to be. He is a dictator. Heil Morrissey!
 
So, are Mike Joyce, Andy Rourke, Johnny Rogan, Kristeen Young, Toni Visconti, Siouxsie Sioux, etc (the list is too long) all banned from Moz's show too? Sure, no more guest list but if they pony up the money for tix, but are they banned?
 
David is not excluding anyone from participating. Moz is free to post and say whatever he wants on Solo. He is choosing not to. David isn't taking away or limiting anyone's freedom. Morrissey is. Morrissey is not the libertarian you are making him out to be. He is a dictator. Heil Morrissey!

Not sure this is correct. People get their accounts banned here. -MR
 
Not sure this is correct. People get their accounts banned here. -MR

They ban themselves for their bad behavior which violates the terms of service. David has never violated the terms of service for a concert venue. If David smoked pot at a venue and was banned for violating the rules, then fine. What rules did he break? None.
 
They ban themselves for their bad behavior which violates the terms of service. David has never violated the terms of service for a concert venue. If David smoked pot at a venue and was banned for violating the rules, then fine. What rules did he break? None.

That wasn't the statement you made. The statement you made was "David is not excluding anyone from participating". This is incorrect. David has rules for the forum and apparently Morrissey has rules for who attends his concerts. To him, David broke the rules and is banned. The rules may make little sense to a grown-up but they apparently do to Morrissey.

Also, David is not banned from any venues specifically so that's not really an argument you can make apply to this.
 
That wasn't the statement you made. The statement you made was "David is not excluding anyone from participating". This is incorrect. David has rules for the forum and apparently Morrissey has rules for who attends his concerts. To him, David broke the rules and is banned. The rules may make little sense to a grown-up but they apparently do to Morrissey.

Very interesting way to make the comparison. Morrissey has a TOS for his shows. Just like David is the final arbitor here, morrissey is at his concert.
 
That wasn't the statement you made. The statement you made was "David is not excluding anyone from participating". This is incorrect. David has rules for the forum and apparently Morrissey has rules for who attends his concerts. To him, David broke the rules and is banned. The rules may make little sense to a grown-up but they apparently do to Morrissey.

Also, David is not banned from any venues specifically so that's not really an argument you can make apply to this.

Morrissey has a TOS? Since when? Is it legally binding? Static? David's is. And Morrissey the singer should not be able to dictate the TOS at a venue owned and operated by persons other than himself. If he wants to ban David from a PRIVATE concert in his home, fine. We are talking about a public space here.
 
Morrissey has a TOS? Since when? Is it legally binding? Static? David's is. And Morrissey the singer should not be able to dictate the TOS at a venue owned and operated by persons other than himself. If he wants to ban David from a PRIVATE concert in his home, fine. We are talking about a public space here.

Is the TOS here legally binding? No. Has it never changed? Yes, minor changes occur. How many instances of Morrissey throwing away his friends do you need before you'll admit that he has an internal idea of the types of behavior that will get you removed from his life completely.

Also, the venues may be owned and operated by someone other than Morrissey, but they are not public spaces. Try getting into one without a ticket and see how far that gets you. My understanding is that the venue is rented to the artist for the evening. The artist defines seating, prices, etc not the building owner. I see very little difference between that and a private concert on land he owns.
 
Is the TOS here legally binding? No. Has it never changed? Yes, minor changes occur. How many instances of Morrissey throwing away his friends do you need before you'll admit that he has an internal idea of the types of behavior that will get you removed from his life completely.

Also, the venues may be owned and operated by someone other than Morrissey, but they are not public spaces. Try getting into one without a ticket and see how far that gets you. My understanding is that the venue is rented to the artist for the evening. The artist defines seating, prices, etc not the building owner. I see very little difference between that and a private concert on land he owns.

Some public spaces you need permission or tickets to enter. Pubic doesn't mean free.

Even if Morrissey has the legal right to ban David, it does not mean it is morally correct or sound. It isn't. I'm sticking with that.
 
That wasn't the statement you made. The statement you made was "David is not excluding anyone from participating". This is incorrect.

Although David and the moderators can ban a username, anonymous posting is still permitted. Therefore, the "banned" user can still use the site. Because he allows anonymous users to post, nobody can be excluded.

David has rules for the forum and apparently Morrissey has rules for who attends his concerts. To him, David broke the rules and is banned. The rules may make little sense to a grown-up but they apparently do to Morrissey.

Unless what you call Morrissey's "rules" are made clear as part of the terms on which a concert ticket is sold, they have no authority whatsoever. It's a long time since I bought a ticket to see him perform, but I doubt that one of the stipulations made is that people cannot attend a Morrissey concert only on the provision that they neither criticise him nor permit others to publicly do so.
 
Although David and the moderators can ban a username, anonymous posting is still permitted. Therefore, the "banned" user can still use the site. Because he allows anonymous users to post, nobody can be excluded.

You assume banning by user name is the only way to ban someone. You also don't remember that all anonymous posts must be approved by a moderator.
 
Interesting.....I had never seen Morrissey live until recently in Florida. He and his band put on one of the most powerful performances I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot. He and the band gave it everything they had ...but something happened near the end. He obviously became disgusted with some of the fans in and near the front rows. Fans that weren't paying attention....fans coming and going to the bar like the "walking Dead" drinks in hand. I think it affected him because he feeds on the energy from the people in the front. He even seemed to cut the show short because of this..

I don't know how the hell he tours and performs as he does...and it's obviously a strain on body and soul. He's definitely not a laid back performer. Not a crooner like Sinatra..He's very sensitive to negative behavior he feels directed towards him as an artist and a performer. I wish it wasn't so...but it is.

I don't know what to think about david t.....I don't know what went wrong...he was supposed to be a fan. What does that even mean anymore?

I don't understand letting one or a few spoil something the majority enjoys. It's such an oppressive mentality -- one student misbehaves so the entire class has recess rescinded. Perplexing.

I don't know what David views himself as. Certainly a fan can offer a reasoned critique, however the sport of vilification that can go on here at times isn't about being a fan, or even about Morrissey, really. That's an issue of the unfulfilled, and this just happens to be a fan site where it can oxymoronically go on virtually unmoderated. Obviously there is no conflict in David's mind or he wouldn't run it this way, but I don't think you can definitively say he feels one way or another about Moz based on that.

Inversely, those who deify Morrissey are free to slobber all over the boards as well. This doesn't seem as contradictory as the vile bile, since after all, it is a fan site, but does that mean David is defined by the Glory-Be-To-Moz posts? You can't assign that to him either.

Perhaps he's like the majority of us who get drowned out by the obstinate hysteria of the spectrum ends -- likes the art and at times questions the artist.
 
You assume banning by user name is the only way to ban someone. You also don't remember that all anonymous posts must be approved by a moderator.

That's true, but a person who has previously posted under a banned username, can still post - and have posted. Either the mods don't "recognise" anonymous posters whose usernames have been banned, or they don't mind that they post anonymously.

In either case, pretty much anybody and everybody gets to contribute their thoughts here. Crucially, DavidT doesn't exclude people, or try to shut them up, simply because they're critical of him or his website. That's an important distinction, in my opinion.

The Interwebz are now more relevant and more important than pop songs. Nowadays, I don't need a celebrity to sing songs to me about my life. Because of people like DavidT, I can say what I want and I can speak for myself.
 
That's true, but a person who has previously posted under a banned username, can still post - and have posted. Either the mods don't "recognise" anonymous posters whose usernames have been banned, or they don't mind that they post anonymously.

As a mod, I don't think you're going to convince me of your idea of how things work here.
 
As a mod, I don't think you're going to convince me of your idea of how things work here.

I'm not trying to convince you. I'm stating a fact: people whose usernames have been banned still post here anonymously, and at will.

Well done on being a moderator. I'm impressed.
 
I'm not trying to convince you. I'm stating a fact: people whose usernames have been banned still post here anonymously, and at will.

Well done on being a moderator. I'm impressed.

By stating "a person" who has been banned can post you concluded any person who has been banned can post. You're wrong.

And thanks, impressing nobodies is what I'm especially good at.
 
Back
Top Bottom