Approaching people because of the song they’re blasting

[re:dream]

i find your sausage remark offensive and degrading. as a man, i am not a piece of meat to be bundled together with other pieces of meat in pit of flames licking my firm bulging skin.

Skoal!

What sausage remark?

[H20nly]

this sausage remark:

+2!

[regretfullySaid]

Tom,you can't +2 when you originally made the request man, come on now.

re:dream, you already made a +1, you can't do +3 because Tom's +2 doesn't count, and you can't do a +2 because you already made a +1

Only one + statement allowed per user but you can make a +1000 AND you can edit your previous + post but no double +! This is 2014 not the wild west!

Copenhagen!

j/k if you didn't get that

[beats me]

I have a topic prepared about topless Republican nuns that in no way could go anywhere weird or offensive. But rules are rules.

[TomViolenz]

Tom,you can't +2 when you originally made the request man, come on now.

re:dream, you already made a +1, you can't do +3 because Tom's +2 doesn't count, and you can't do a +2 because you already made a +1

Only one + statement allowed per user but you can make a +1000 AND you can edit your previous + post but no double +! This is 2014 not the wild west!

Copenhagen!

j/k if you didn't get that

What happened was, that while re.dream did his +1, I had written another unrelated post, but then thought if [STM] is still reading this would dilute the request, so I edited it into something like a poll count, hoping maybe others would add their +1s as well.

re:dream doing a +3 is really cheating though

[TomViolenz]

I have a topic prepared about topless Republican nuns that in no way could go anywhere weird or offensive. But rules are rules.

Uhhhhh....that's nasty...

(read in the voice of the fat black neighbour of American Dad )

[beats me]

I have a topic prepared about topless Republican nuns that in no way could go anywhere weird or offensive. But rules are rules.

Uhhhhh....that's nasty...

(read in the voice of the fat black neighbour of American Dad )

Or the voice of Quagmire to keep things in the Seth Macfarlane wheelhouse.

[H20nly]

I had written another unrelated post, but then thought if [STM] is still reading this would dilute the request, so I edited it

you can't hide from your sausage bashing ways.

[TomViolenz]

I have a topic prepared about topless Republican nuns that in no way could go anywhere weird or offensive. But rules are rules.

Uhhhhh....that's nasty...

(read in the voice of the fat black neighbour of American Dad )

Or the voice of Quagmire to keep things in the Seth Macfarlane wheelhouse.

I think I messed up my cultural references I meant Familiy guy (But I still think that it's the fat black neighbour who always said this not the goofy womanizer neighbour (Quagmire))

[TomViolenz]

I had written another unrelated post, but then thought if [STM] is still reading this would dilute the request, so I edited it

you can't hide from your sausage bashing ways.

Is this not a known term for an all male party?!
(which are by definition not all that they could be...)

[H20nly]

[regretfullySaid]

Imo you don't have to pussyfoot, just exercise some sound judgement if you think a topic or statement is likely to or end up offending someone.
Beats's religion thread didn't get banned until (possibly I) made an offensive statement, so it's not like mentioning a poitical or religious sentence in itself will get you banned. Like they said they try to be lenient but there's a judgement call to made if it seems like something is asking for trouble.
If you feel like you have to pussyfoot then this isn't the place. But if there's a non-political comment and the president of the us gets mentioned because it's related to the topic and then someone else says 'Obama is a poopyface' but the thread stays on course devoid of an uproar or offense then it should be cool.

Personally I'd rather posts be cut unless the poster is downright unruly.

[beats me]

My religion thread had a good long run considering and had pretty much lost steam by the time it was deleted anyway. I didn’t post it to push Ableton’s buttons and don’t plan to make it a habit. I got a warning PM but they didn’t get all up in my grill about it. All good.

[H20nly]

^ the last time i saw it... that was a pretty good thread.

i'm with shadx... and i think [stm] is with us (although he can't say that because grey areas are hard to define)... we just need to keep it reasonable and somewhat objective... even with our sarcasm and the fucked up sense of humor that some of us DEFINITELY have.

@ Tom - i hope you know i'm just joking with ya about the sausage-fest comment. i'm sure it would be cool if we had more women's opinions, but Live is just not the kind of product that brings a strong female following with it. that's not by design. it's just the way it is. the same could be said about Fender guitars.


back on topic:
when i was still a part of something that was generating completed songs, one of the best compliments we ever got on one of them was this girl who said "wow, that's really cool. if i was bumping that on my stereo at a red light with the windows down, i would totally not even turn the volume down"

that really painted a vivid picture i could relate to and it felt good to get that as a compliment.

[TomViolenz]

Imo you don't have to pussyfoot, just exercise some sound judgement if you think a topic or statement is likely to or end up offending someone.
Beats's religion thread didn't get banned until (possibly I) made an offensive statement, so it's not like mentioning a poitical or religious sentence in itself will get you banned. Like they said they try to be lenient but there's a judgement call to made if it seems like something is asking for trouble.
If you feel like you have to pussyfoot then this isn't the place. But if there's a non-political comment and the president of the us gets mentioned because it's related to the topic and then someone else says 'Obama is a poopyface' but the thread stays on course devoid of an uproar or offense then it should be cool.

Personally I'd rather posts be cut unless the poster is downright unruly.

I hadn't seen your last comments, but I had this thread in mind when I wrote this. Because as far as I had followed it it was very civil and quite interesting. So I was sad to see it go.

I agree on the stern warning aproach instead of direct banning of posters!