.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to the_taste_of_cigarettes.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="the_taste_of_cigarettes:354429"]brian_dc said:[QUOTE]nick, I agree with your logic...but how many chances do you give someone? When he says that he'll do better, and then doesn't...are we back at square one again? When Kenny booked the Despised Icon, I heard that it was his first show in awhile and he made all sorts of promises that he had stopped drinking (since he was an alcoholic)...everyone saw him drinking (a lot) at that show. I don't know. Would it be possible to find out if touring bands that have been ripped off by Kenny want to press charges? Just curious.[/QUOTE] I think it's a matter of the type of chances we give him. Putting him to an acid test lets him know clearly where everyone stands. A boycott plus demands gets everyone something in the end. If he really wants to book shows or feels that he is not in the wrong, then we can put him in a spot where he can prove that in a way we all think is fair. I think the past experiences were all people working with him and him fucking it up. If we change it to him needing to have his responses to certain necessary items accounted for then it's less about how anyone feels and more about what we can all see, plain-as-day, as fact.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.022 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][