Pearl Jam to play Oracle OpenWorld

Kel Varnsen

teeman wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

This doesn't really upset me. I mean the band has played SNL how many times? And back when they played the show NBC was owned by GE. And with all the divisions GE has (including ones that make military equipment, ones that make nuclear reactors, and ones in the oil and gas field) supporting GE should upset people way more than supporting a company that makes computer equipment. If anyone can explain why it doesn't I would be interested.

It's moreso the fact that's it's a corporate convention/conference. Don't think they played GE's yearly company meeting.

Still playing SNL pretty directly benefited GE as a company the same way playing this event is benefiting Oracle. Plus knowing how hard it is to get tickets to SNL I am sure the studio audience had a number of GE/NBC big wigs in it. Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

DPrival78

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

what about oracle's partnership with monsanto?

https://blogs.oracle.com/exadatapartner ... _seeds_for

Hugh Freaking Dillon

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Still playing SNL pretty directly benefited GE as a company the same way playing this event is benefiting Oracle. Plus knowing how hard it is to get tickets to SNL I am sure the studio audience had a number of GE/NBC big wigs in it. Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

even I think this one is a major stretch. playing SNL wasn't a private gig. if this was being televised, I'm sure it would be a different story.

Kel Varnsen

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Still playing SNL pretty directly benefited GE as a company the same way playing this event is benefiting Oracle. Plus knowing how hard it is to get tickets to SNL I am sure the studio audience had a number of GE/NBC big wigs in it. Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

even I think this one is a major stretch. playing SNL wasn't a private gig. if this was being televised, I'm sure it would be a different story.

So is it the fact that the show is private that is upsetting people, not who is benefiting from the show? Would a private show for people who work for the Red Cross upset people just as much, assuming it wasn't televised? I personally don't really care I am just trying to figure out what the guidelines are for some people as to what upsets them about this kind of thing.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

Kel Varnsen wrote:

So is it the fact that the show is private that is upsetting people, not who is benefiting from the show? Would a private show for people who work for the Red Cross upset people just as much, assuming it wasn't televised? I personally don't really care I am just trying to figure out what the guidelines are for some people as to what upsets them about this kind of thing.

I think it's more the "corporate" aspect to this. I'm sure you could come up with any relation of everything they've ever done to being corporate. For example, the SNL-GE analogy. What about playing in a stadium/arena that is owend and operated by a coporation of some kind? Does the venue sell Coca Cola? Should the band not play those? That's what I meant about the SNL-GE thing being a bit of a stretch.

I think what people are upset about is the perception that they are playing a corporate party, for people who are linked to that corporation directly, not by six degrees of seperation.

LineOneMightyFine

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I think what people are upset about is the perception that they are playing a corporate party, for people who are linked to that corporation directly, not by six degrees of seperation.

ding ding ding

PJ_Soul

Kel Varnsen wrote:

teeman wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

This doesn't really upset me. I mean the band has played SNL how many times? And back when they played the show NBC was owned by GE. And with all the divisions GE has (including ones that make military equipment, ones that make nuclear reactors, and ones in the oil and gas field) supporting GE should upset people way more than supporting a company that makes computer equipment. If anyone can explain why it doesn't I would be interested.

It's moreso the fact that's it's a corporate convention/conference. Don't think they played GE's yearly company meeting.

Still playing SNL pretty directly benefited GE as a company the same way playing this event is benefiting Oracle. Plus knowing how hard it is to get tickets to SNL I am sure the studio audience had a number of GE/NBC big wigs in it. Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

It's not the same at all.

Kel Varnsen

PJ_Soul wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

teeman wrote:

It's moreso the fact that's it's a corporate convention/conference. Don't think they played GE's yearly company meeting.

Still playing SNL pretty directly benefited GE as a company the same way playing this event is benefiting Oracle. Plus knowing how hard it is to get tickets to SNL I am sure the studio audience had a number of GE/NBC big wigs in it. Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

It's not the same at all.

But why is one so much worse? I am just curious why people are so outraged about this?

PJ_Soul

Kel Varnsen wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Still playing SNL pretty directly benefited GE as a company the same way playing this event is benefiting Oracle. Plus knowing how hard it is to get tickets to SNL I am sure the studio audience had a number of GE/NBC big wigs in it. Plus like I said why is it so much worse to be supporting a company that makes servers and Openoffice, compared to a company that actually makes nuclear reactors and military equipment?

It's not the same at all.

But why is one so much worse? I am just curious why people are so outraged about this?

This whole thread explains that... so if you haven't read it, do, and your question will be answered.

H.Chinaski

i don't like this :nono:

darthvedder

drummerboy_73 wrote:

Wait just a minute - I think I've misunderstood something here...Pearl Jam is NOT playing a private show for that lady from the Matrix?

Whoa! There is no spoon?

stargirl69

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

honest question to anyone:

do you still love the band's music, and if so:

can this alone make you not listen to them anymore?

or are you a lover of ten through binaural and this just makes it easier to cut the cord?

I will always love the bands music but I have been increasingly disliking the route they have been taking with various issues and this most recent development has only afforded me the final decision that I will not be renewing this year.

jordan k

Heres the thing I dont understand: Why begrudge the band from making a few bucks?

Vedd Hedd

In summation:

People who work in IT or with Oracle are not actual people. They are greedy for working in the computer industry. And the fact that they attend a conference for their jobs means they suck as human beings. And as such, they don't deserve to hear the awesomeness that is Pearl Jam.

Only those without jobs in IT, or those who work for charity should be allowed to enjoy Pearl Jams music. And Pearl Jam should only play charity shows for free, or play concerts where people foot the bill themselves, not where their bosses pay for it.

Got it.

rival.

H.Chinaski wrote:

i don't like this :nono:

if this won't get the band to back out of the show, i don't know what would!





lighten up people. it's a rock band that owes you nothing.

PJ_Soul

jordan k wrote:

Heres the thing I dont understand: Why begrudge the band from making a few bucks?

I dunno... I don't think i've seen anyone do that in this whole thread, so I guess the answer is: you don't.

Kel Varnsen

Vedd Hedd wrote:

In summation:

People who work in IT or with Oracle are not actual people. They are greedy for working in the computer industry. And the fact that they attend a conference for their jobs means they suck as human beings. And as such, they don't deserve to hear the awesomeness that is Pearl Jam.

Only those without jobs in IT, or those who work for charity should be allowed to enjoy Pearl Jams music. And Pearl Jam should only play charity shows for free, or play concerts where people foot the bill themselves, not where their bosses pay for it.

Got it.

Oh don't forget the standard post you see on here all the time where if a 10club member won millions in a big lottery jackpot they would get Pearl Jam to play a private show for them. Somehow that is obviously OK to suggest that, but if an actual billionaire tries to do the same thing, for himself and his employees and business associates, this is bad.

amethgr8

I LOVE THEM FOREVER.
:ugeek:
amy

callen

This is all just the cycle of life with a bit of marketing thrown in.

In our twenties, we see injustice, greed and the destruction of the planet. We fight back.

Those with a stage have the ability to express these injustices and we the audience feel solace that we’re not the only ones and it draws us closer to “the band”. This is great marketing and has been used since the beginning or rock n roll as well as music since the beginning. Not that the bands don’t believe..they did and probably still do.

As we get older, see our friends die, realize our own mortality, that being comfortable is really fkn sweet and come to realize we can’t change the machine. We still care and will correct injustices when able just measure effort versus results.

In the end, we are lucky bastards that these humans are still playing, allowing us to relive our angst and enjoying some really great music.

Enjoy the ride.

PJ_Soul

callen wrote:

This is all just the cycle of life with a bit of marketing thrown in.

In our twenties, we see injustice, greed and the destruction of the planet. We fight back.

Those with a stage have the ability to express these injustices and we the audience feel solace that we’re not the only ones and it draws us closer to “the band”. This is great marketing and has been used since the beginning or rock n roll as well as music since the beginning. Not that the bands don’t believe..they did and probably still do.

As we get older, see our friends die, realize our own mortality, that being comfortable is really fkn sweet and come to realize we can’t change the machine. We still care and will correct injustices when able just measure effort versus results.

In the end, we are lucky bastards that these humans are still playing, allowing us to relive our angst and enjoying some really great music.

Enjoy the ride.

Do people really want to relive their angst, and do so by listen to PJ? I'm seriously asking - I never felt angst for even a second when I was young in the 90s (I never felt that PJ was very angsty, despite the song lyrics... Nirvana was, and I never really loved them). I loved every fucking second of my youth in the 90s. So I don't know what it's like to relive angst or why anyone would want to do so.