The Locking of the Avril Thread

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (792 of them)

Also, Vice is kinda "3 years ago"

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Momus, I grew up in southern California. There is nothing Vice can tell me, and certainly nothing you can tell me, about racial pluralism as it occurs in vivo.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I like Fred Durst because, like Pepsi before him, he reflects the new generation.

― CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I pretty certain that Aja stopped posting to ILX because she's so busy on the writing staff of Vice Mag, she doesn't have time anymore for all her fans here. Instead, she's reaching out to the vast readership of Vice Mag, all of whom crave (and are influenced by) her message. It's a great gig and an honor for a recent high school graduate to have landed a paid staff position on such a respected journal. But that's our Aja. If anybody could do it, it was bound to be her.

― Skottie, Friday, 18 June 2004 19:44 (twenty-two years ago)

http://gorehole.org/mpls/faction/wolf_eyes.gif

― WOLF EYES (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:45 (twenty-two years ago)

http://sindivision.net/stuff/hxc.gif

― MOSH (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Out of curiosity's sake, have we ever firmly established whether or not Momus has ever read an issue of Answer Me! ?

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:47 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.carbonrecords.com/photos/finkbeiner_sawzall_olneyville_friendenemy_08_08_02/pictures/oss1.gif

― I LUV TEH OSS (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Highlights for Children
Publisher: Highlights for Children, Inc.
Established: June 1946
Frequency: Monthly
Circulation: 2.5 million

much more interesting than vice too

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:48 (twenty-two years ago)

xpost Daddino - we have firmly established that Momus has never read ILX. Or a freakin' history book.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Now which one of those dancing kids is Aja? She was so clever.

― Skottie, Friday, 18 June 2004 19:49 (twenty-two years ago)

ranger rick is 500,000+

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Highlights? We've gone from "Do's And Don'ts" to "Goofus And Gallant"

― CeCe Peniston (Anthony Miccio), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

teen people: 577,817
ym 1.5 million
seventeen 2.5 million

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

I like how some can and do make an argument explaining away Vice's shock tactics as some sort of sociological sea change, and yet what no one has tried to refute is the unassailable fact that it's fucking boring and awful

― Gear! (Gear!), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Update: most people on ILX have now shifted their views on Vice. Many read it and find it amusing.

Haha, they have? I am so behind the times, I still find it a juvenile piece of filth written by people who are scared so shitless by people that aren't like them that they have to put a magazine out mocking everything that's not them. I suppose I am not reading the subtext properly.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:51 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.dailyprobe.com/arcs/102201/goofus.jpg

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:51 (twenty-two years ago)

mad magazine: 250000

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Thanks Momus. I know I partly disagree with you on that stance (as a songwriter) though your take on it makes more contextual sense now.

I don't want to put words in J0hn's mouth, but I suspect he's not quite as cavalier* about "saying the unsayable" as you seem to be, but then I'm not nearly as familiar with your work as I am with his.

* Note that I mean "cavalier" more as "nonchalant" than "arrogant," but I think it's a good word in this case because of both potential readings.

(holy xpost Batman... it's like I can't be at work, form a coherent thought and post it and keep up with the thread all at the same time!)

― martin m. (mushrush), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

guns and ammo: 600,000

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Better Homes and Gardens magazine: circulation of 7.6 million and a readership of 38.5 million

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

what are the readership stats for sound on sound magazine, jon?

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

(haha Gear!, if you'll notice all of my original criticisms of the quote on this thread related directly to how I felt it was an utter rhetorical failure in terms of construction and tone.)

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

sound on sound circulation: 24,000/month

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:55 (twenty-two years ago)

rolling stone 1.25 million

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:56 (twenty-two years ago)

rolling stone sux0r though!

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:58 (twenty-two years ago)

America sux0r

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:58 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.toyotter.com/dc/spy.jpg

― Jon Williams!!!!! (ROFFLE!@!@!@) (ex machina), Friday, 18 June 2004 19:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Jon: Ladies Home Journal?

― St. Nicholas Ridiculous (Nick A.), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:09 (twenty-two years ago)

I find Momus far more nefarious than C-Man now.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Thank God you didn't take my boxes last year, you would probably have gnawed them to bits by now (or at least stolen my headphones out of the top one).

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:14 (twenty-two years ago)

naw I just would've made better music than you possibly could. And don't even think I "donated" my headphones.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:15 (twenty-two years ago)

and at least I didn't laugh at your predicament but actually tried to help out, you smug fuck.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:16 (twenty-two years ago)

What's your connection to Degraw, by the way, Herbert?

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:20 (twenty-two years ago)

none except he quite possibly stole my connection betwixt my ears and turntables. I don't know the dude, don't know what he looks like, but I do know Todd P asked me for headphones to borrow because "one of the djs doesn't have any" and I know that Dan Selzer and Mike Troubleman didn't use mine.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:23 (twenty-two years ago)

and if he didn't steal but lost them out of negligence is no different to me, as I do not deal in intentions.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

'Hoist on your own petard' makes for quite nice poetic justice, though. What would the French Revolution have been without the sight of those guillotines being used on the very aristocrats who used to use them on everyone else?

and wasn't the reign of terror just so cute?

momus you have a formidable intelligence. do you think perhaps you should apply it to the world as it exists before you've wasted too many decades?

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:32 (twenty-two years ago)

What, you mean go into politics?

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:35 (twenty-two years ago)

at least that would disillusion you enough to come back down to earth.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:40 (twenty-two years ago)

in fact, i just mean give up on the relentless sophistry and make an argument you actual have some stake in.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:42 (twenty-two years ago)

actually, i meant to write.

sorry to "bait" you, but i keep coming up with counterarguments to your prodigious nonsense and then lack the energy and interest to post them, seeing as how you so rarely respond to such things in an honest manner anyhow. i probably should just be silent on the matter.

― amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:43 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.gamejam.co.uk/prod_images_blowup/defjamvendetta-gc.jpg

― christhamrin (christhamrin), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd still be interested in why de-escalation doesn't apply to Nick's own approach myself. Just curious.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Sophisty? I speak nothing but the plain unvarnished truth.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Oughtn't and can't are the same voice as far as I'm concerned.

Before I get to this - I'm not "keeping quiet," just keeping busy! Now. If you really believed "oughtn't" and "can't" were the same voice, you wouldn't have reacted as you did to the bit about telling someone whose mother is recently dead that you fucked her fat dead cunt. You CAN do that! No man can deny you your right to do it! "Oughtn't" IS different, and you know it or you'd never bother being polite. (And please: don't even suggest that it's becaue politeness "works." If you were interested in what "works," you wouldn't be an artist.) Oughtn't refers to whether we feel we should be decent to one another. Can't refers to oppression, authority, all that stuff you like to IMAGINE you hear in "oughtn't" and which you PRETEND people are implying, because it's always easier to argue from the point of the persecuted. But there isn't any persecution, censorship, or threat of interference! Just people saying that things they've read made them feel angry, not in a "this challenges my preconceptions!" way but in a "this is hurtful to people I love!" way. One ought to avoid being hurtful, I think, unless one has a point that desperately needs getting across: and I know that you agree with me on this question. Vice is not challenging nor daring; it's just hurtful. That's everybody's complaint, I think.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:51 (twenty-two years ago)

also, just to be a pedant about it, "oughtn't" is optative and "can't" is imperative: your namesake knew the difference!

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Ned: I think it's to do with my use-patterns. I come here to argue and joke, basically. Not because that's the kind of person I am, but because in other parts of my life -- and on other parts of the internet -- I get only love and support. So for me, dialectics and even argy bary is ILX's USP. But if I had power here, I don't think that would be the right thing to do.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:54 (twenty-two years ago)

~~argy bary~~ argy bargy

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Not argy Barry?

― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 18 June 2004 20:58 (twenty-two years ago)

I really don't think Vice has hurt anyone, though it's clearly trying to get up some noses. And I think that oughtn't and can't are the same voice when they're just two different ways to make someone shut up. It's the old argument between poets in the Soviet Union and poets in the West:

Poets in the Soviet Union: Here they kill you for it.
Poets in the West: You're lucky. Here they ignore it.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 18 June 2004 21:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Skipping 692 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.