I lurk over @ RM a lot b/c this board is kind of lame sometimes like that (I know they have to run a tight ship here)... plus I could honestly do without the hot ed threads and other stuff like that... but I don't really post there... I just have an easier time posting here I guess... sometimes over @ RM it feels a bit elite... but w/e, we're all fans eh?
I've never been a fan of permanent /death penalty banning here. For those who have made thousands of posts, it is certain you are going to make a questionable posts now or then.
I think it's fair. I was once banned for like three days for making an off color comment. I wasn't banned for life.
Wow……
I just want to say that the censorship on this board has gotten too strict.
I’m not talking about the first hot Eddie thread either. I understand why that was deleted.
I wish somebody would explain it to me, but I don’t understand it. Seems like there’s a double standard.
AND one reason I’m a fan is because I thought the band was cool about sharing things. …for the love of the music. But that was back then and people do change. But I want to know what changed? Can there be some kind of official statement? Was there an official statement I missed? Don’t leave me in the dark!
Examples:
Entertainment Weekly and imdb have pics of Eddie’s solo tour, yet we are not allowed to post pics. Is Eddie suing EW and imdb?
There’s hundreds of concert clips on youtube but self pollution radio videos were removed.
Why, why, why?
there is not censorship, this is a private board, opened to the public, no freedom of speech, rules apply, no biggie
"Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)
This is one of the reasons that I spend most of my time at a board with no restrictions. I mean come on, you can't even post pictures or have avatars here. What kinda crap is that? This is 2008, not 1998.
This is one of the reasons that I spend most of my time at a board with no restrictions. I mean come on, you can't even post pictures or have avatars here. What kinda crap is that? This is 2008, not 1998.
I think picture/avatar has more to do with bandwidth..but yeah, avatars would be nice
I've never been a fan of permanent /death penalty banning here. For those who have made thousands of posts, it is certain you are going to make a questionable posts now or then.
i agree with this... if someone has 15000+ posts then its highly unlikely they are here to just wind people up and enter into fights... and out of those 15000+ posts only 3 of them are ban-worthy then thats pretty good odds.
its a shame when the big posters get banned as they have probably made a lot of actual real friends from these boards and its a good way of keeping in touch with them...
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
i agree with this... if someone has 15000+ posts then its highly unlikely they are here to just wind people up and enter into fights... and out of those 15000+ posts only 3 of them are ban-worthy then thats pretty good odds.
its a shame when the big posters get banned as they have probably made a lot of actual real friends from these boards and its a good way of keeping in touch with them...
I asked them to bring back Bostonlou, they just laugh at me, and till this day i still take heat every now and again about lou.
London 2005
Toronto 2011 night 2
Hamilton 2011
London 2013
Although censorship in any form is wrong, the bottom line is. This is a corporate message board, run by a corporation. Dont kid yourself. Pearl Jam is big business. Theres a method to their madness. And they will do (right or wrong) whatever they have to to keep a limit to what is accessed.
Thats just my 2 cents. Not that you asked.
This just seems like one of the instances when someone was just looking for the opportunity to use the term "corporate" and "big business" when referring to Pearl Jam. Some people use that and think it means something, and/or think they are getting a rise out of people or enlightening them on something they didn't know. Save it.
Is Pearl Jam most likely a Corporation, probably. And all that means is that the entity Pearl Jam is financially separate from the members individual financial situation. Are they publicly traded, nope. Do they buy and sell companies, nope. Are they a Fortune 500 company, nope. Are they "big business," nope.
Just because something is a corporation, doesn't automatically make them bad. In PJ's case, the only share holders would be the band members. There is no one else to answer to. No board of directors or trustees. Just a the band.
Personally, I think that this board has gotten far more reasonable as time has gone on. They censor some stuff for whatever reason, but in days gone by you couldn't really say anything un-rah-rah about the band without facing umbrage. In the past, I wouldn't come here for fear of puking, that's how crazy I thought it was. Now, I'm pretty much happy with the place. I think they do a pretty good job of balancing everyone's interests.
and yes i know censorship wasn't really the best word to use, but i knew it would catch people's eyes.
________________
just for the record i'm not a fan that would bug pj by asking them to release this and that.
just thought i saw a double standard happening. But it wasn’t the case.
*~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*
I think picture/avatar has more to do with bandwidth..but yeah, avatars would be nice
It would only use their bandwidth if the posted pictures were hosted on their server. Being that we don't have access to their server it would use none (zero) of their bandwidth. Avatars would more than likely be hosted on their server, but they can be limited to a very small size. Besides, most hosting companies offer unlimited BW nowadays anyway. I've seen some people say it's for the dial-up people; it would take too long for the pages to load for people using dial-up. I say fuck the dial-up people. Most of the internet is now geared for high speed access and if you're still using dial-up you might as well shut the computer down and us it as a door-stop because that's pretty much all it's good for without high speed access.
The no picture thing probably has to do with people posting inappropriate pictures. It's inevitable that someone (some people) would post something objectionable. I mean really....38,000+ members....someone is bound to post something graphically violent or sexual. Seeing as anyone of any age can view threads, the mods don't have to risk dealing with the headache of exposing some 10 year old to some graphic picture if they don't allow pictures to be posted. I don't know about the legality of it, but I believe they could be held accountable for the inappropriate pictures.
The avatars could have to do with bandwidth and server space. Avatars can be on the host server or can be a stored link that is called much like a picture would be called in a post. If they would store an avatar on their own server, then that would take up their storage space and use their bandwidth. It would be their prerogative to allow or deny that from happening. Also, they would have to monitor avatar pictures as closely as regular pictures because you never know what someone is going to come up with.
I think they just took a pre-emptive strike on having to deal with too much objectionable content and I can't say that I really blame them for it.
This is one of the reasons that I spend most of my time at a board with no restrictions. I mean come on, you can't even post pictures or have avatars here. What kinda crap is that? This is 2008, not 1998.
Good God I hope they don't add avatars. If the purpose of the message board is the discussion of topics related to Pearl Jam, then they add nothing to the discussion (I think the signatures are enough). Personally I think adding avatars is one step away from a message board where most of the messages are "omg, I luv eddie, hez soooo hawt !!!!!!".
Good God I hope they don't add avatars. If the purpose of the message board is the discussion of topics related to Pearl Jam, then they add nothing to the discussion (I think the signatures are enough). Personally I think adding avatars is one step away from a message board where most of the messages are "omg, I luv eddie, hez soooo hawt !!!!!!".
It's a privately owned message board and the owners/moderators can choose to censor whoever they want for whatever reason they want without having to give explanation. If they feel someone has gone beyond the limits of what they allow, they should be able to lock/delete threads and ban users.
These are the terms you agreed to when you signed up, if you don't like it well deal with it because thats the way it is.
{if (work != 0) {
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}
Good God I hope they don't add avatars. If the purpose of the message board is the discussion of topics related to Pearl Jam, then they add nothing to the discussion (I think the signatures are enough). Personally I think adding avatars is one step away from a message board where most of the messages are "omg, I luv eddie, hez soooo hawt !!!!!!".
RM has avatars and it's about the opposite direction to that compare to here!
Avatars put 'a face' on a poster the way just a name can't for many, especially as there are many similar names here.
Avatars could be moderated (they were on Oink, I got told off for not having a cutesy one :rolleyes), and those that don't like them or that have dial-up can switch them off in the settings.
RM has avatars and it's about the opposite direction to that compare to here!
Avatars put 'a face' on a poster the way just a name can't for many, especially as there are many similar names here.
Avatars could be moderated (they were on Oink, I got told off for not having a cutesy one :rolleyes), and those that don't like them or that have dial-up can switch them off in the settings.
Good God I hope they don't add avatars. If the purpose of the message board is the discussion of topics related to Pearl Jam, then they add nothing to the discussion (I think the signatures are enough). Personally I think adding avatars is one step away from a message board where most of the messages are "omg, I luv eddie, hez soooo hawt !!!!!!".
Just confine them to the "pictures of how hot Ed is" threads.
Not that anyone here would create or contribute to such a thread.
we're all sentient snowflakes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm a number that doesn't count
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the nothing ventured - the nothing feigned
This just seems like one of the instances when someone was just looking for the opportunity to use the term "corporate" and "big business" when referring to Pearl Jam. Some people use that and think it means something, and/or think they are getting a rise out of people or enlightening them on something they didn't know. Save it.
Is Pearl Jam most likely a Corporation, probably. And all that means is that the entity Pearl Jam is financially separate from the members individual financial situation. Are they publicly traded, nope. Do they buy and sell companies, nope. Are they a Fortune 500 company, nope. Are they "big business," nope.
Just because something is a corporation, doesn't automatically make them bad. In PJ's case, the only share holders would be the band members. There is no one else to answer to. No board of directors or trustees. Just a the band.
There are two Pearl Jam entities registered with the State of Washington: Pearl Jam Touring, Inc., and Pearl Jam, LLC. One's a corporation and the other is a limited liability company:
And, while I agree with you that not all corporations are bad and that the corporate entities involved here are "closely held" (not publicly traded), I'd posit that Pearl Jam is most definitely some form of "big business." While they may not be as "big business" as other big businesses, their game is no small cookies. For example, in '03 they raked in $29.1 million in tour revenue alone:
Edit: One more thing - Pearl Jam Touring, Inc. is actually incorporated in Nevada. Why? Nevada has no corporate income tax and no tax on corporate shares. Sounds like incorporating in Nevada was a money-making, big business decision to me.
Edit 2: Just to clarify, I have no problem with corporations in general or making money in general. I'm just pointing out the above information for information's sake.
Comments
I think it's fair. I was once banned for like three days for making an off color comment. I wasn't banned for life.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Celebration, the ball's in play
there is not censorship, this is a private board, opened to the public, no freedom of speech, rules apply, no biggie
Stop by:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
i agree with this... if someone has 15000+ posts then its highly unlikely they are here to just wind people up and enter into fights... and out of those 15000+ posts only 3 of them are ban-worthy then thats pretty good odds.
its a shame when the big posters get banned as they have probably made a lot of actual real friends from these boards and its a good way of keeping in touch with them...
Toronto 2011 night 2
Hamilton 2011
London 2013
Is Pearl Jam most likely a Corporation, probably. And all that means is that the entity Pearl Jam is financially separate from the members individual financial situation. Are they publicly traded, nope. Do they buy and sell companies, nope. Are they a Fortune 500 company, nope. Are they "big business," nope.
Just because something is a corporation, doesn't automatically make them bad. In PJ's case, the only share holders would be the band members. There is no one else to answer to. No board of directors or trustees. Just a the band.
your private home videos aren't in front of thousands during a show, and you weren't at work doing what your job is
__________________
and yes i know censorship wasn't really the best word to use, but i knew it would catch people's eyes.
________________
just for the record i'm not a fan that would bug pj by asking them to release this and that.
just thought i saw a double standard happening. But it wasn’t the case.
It would only use their bandwidth if the posted pictures were hosted on their server. Being that we don't have access to their server it would use none (zero) of their bandwidth. Avatars would more than likely be hosted on their server, but they can be limited to a very small size. Besides, most hosting companies offer unlimited BW nowadays anyway. I've seen some people say it's for the dial-up people; it would take too long for the pages to load for people using dial-up. I say fuck the dial-up people. Most of the internet is now geared for high speed access and if you're still using dial-up you might as well shut the computer down and us it as a door-stop because that's pretty much all it's good for without high speed access.
The avatars could have to do with bandwidth and server space. Avatars can be on the host server or can be a stored link that is called much like a picture would be called in a post. If they would store an avatar on their own server, then that would take up their storage space and use their bandwidth. It would be their prerogative to allow or deny that from happening. Also, they would have to monitor avatar pictures as closely as regular pictures because you never know what someone is going to come up with.
I think they just took a pre-emptive strike on having to deal with too much objectionable content and I can't say that I really blame them for it.
Good God I hope they don't add avatars. If the purpose of the message board is the discussion of topics related to Pearl Jam, then they add nothing to the discussion (I think the signatures are enough). Personally I think adding avatars is one step away from a message board where most of the messages are "omg, I luv eddie, hez soooo hawt !!!!!!".
These are the terms you agreed to when you signed up, if you don't like it well deal with it because thats the way it is.
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}
Avatars put 'a face' on a poster the way just a name can't for many, especially as there are many similar names here.
Avatars could be moderated (they were on Oink, I got told off for not having a cutesy one :rolleyes), and those that don't like them or that have dial-up can switch them off in the settings.
I hate Rats
put it under a dif name
or Mod--Pods
Where I'm not ugly and you're lookin' at me
Just confine them to the "pictures of how hot Ed is" threads.
Not that anyone here would create or contribute to such a thread.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm a number that doesn't count
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the nothing ventured - the nothing feigned
There are two Pearl Jam entities registered with the State of Washington: Pearl Jam Touring, Inc., and Pearl Jam, LLC. One's a corporation and the other is a limited liability company:
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/corps/search_results.aspx?search_type=simple&criteria=all&name_type=starts_with&name=pearl+jam&ubi=
And, there was actually a Pearl Jam, Inc. registered with the California Secretary of State, too, but it has "merged out," whatever that means:
http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/corpdata/ShowAllList?QueryCorpNumber=C1697498
And, while I agree with you that not all corporations are bad and that the corporate entities involved here are "closely held" (not publicly traded), I'd posit that Pearl Jam is most definitely some form of "big business." While they may not be as "big business" as other big businesses, their game is no small cookies. For example, in '03 they raked in $29.1 million in tour revenue alone:
http://www.livedaily.com/news/5928.html
Edit: One more thing - Pearl Jam Touring, Inc. is actually incorporated in Nevada. Why? Nevada has no corporate income tax and no tax on corporate shares. Sounds like incorporating in Nevada was a money-making, big business decision to me.
http://sos.state.nv.us/business/comm_rec/whyinc.asp
Edit 2: Just to clarify, I have no problem with corporations in general or making money in general. I'm just pointing out the above information for information's sake.