Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[david3103]

I was a huge Gary Glitter fan back in the day, I had all his songs on 8 track and I could do all the moves. I even had 6in platform soles. (I flirted with the idea of black eye liner but decided it would lead to real black eyes).

Now I can't even listen to his music.

people are such arseholes.

Pics or it didn't happen

[teamonkey]

I was a huge Gary Glitter fan back in the day, I had all his songs on 8 track and I could do all the moves. I even had 6in platform soles. (I flirted with the idea of black eye liner but decided it would lead to real black eyes).

Now I can't even listen to his music.

people are such arseholes.

This is quite an interesting one

recently there has been the scandal of the lead singer of the Lost Prophets, Ian Watkins, and his jailing for child sex abuse.

Now dont get me wrong, his actions and thoughts are, to me, disgusting. But i still actually like the music that was made by the band.

So why should we be concerned that the music by someone such as Glitter and Watkins, if enjoyed by an individual, associates the individual to the actions of the artist?

Not sure if this has made sense, and a bit of a derail from the old fellas diary, apologies

[tikay]

I was a huge Gary Glitter fan back in the day, I had all his songs on 8 track and I could do all the moves. I even had 6in platform soles. (I flirted with the idea of black eye liner but decided it would lead to real black eyes).

Now I can't even listen to his music.

people are such arseholes.

This is quite an interesting one

recently there has been the scandal of the lead singer of the Lost Prophets, Ian Watkins, and his jailing for child sex abuse.

Now dont get me wrong, his actions and thoughts are, to me, disgusting. But i still actually like the music that was made by the band.

So why should we be concerned that the music by someone such as Glitter and Watkins, if enjoyed by an individual, associates the individual to the actions of the artist?

Not sure if this has made sense, and a bit of a derail from the old fellas diary, apologies

Derail away Tea, its a very interesting subject.

It's SO hard to debate on a forum, of course, because it is such an emotive thing, especially to those with children.

I have no case to make for or against Gary Glitter, the law will presumably take it's course, & his past record will presumably be taken into account. None of us know the true facts. We think he's guilty, of course, but we don't know.

I'm almost scared to write this, as it will so likely be misconstrued.

One of the charges - several actually - against Mr Gadd, suggested he plied females with alcohol, so as to help him get his wicked way. If "under-age" is involved, that's not my point, let's assume for the moment they were of legal age.

Taken IN ISOLATION, (not this case, or with a similar past record) how many young men have done the same thing?

Take it a stage further. How many youngsters have experienced under-age sex? I seem to recall that Bill Wyman openly admitted to sexual relations with Mandy Smith whilst she was 14. I don't recall him being prosecuted, though, or even widely villified at the time? Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's my recall.

Most of the big rock stars in the "golden age" between 1970 & 2000 frequently boasted of their conquests with different young girls nightly, but seem to have escaped media interrogation.

For the record, based on past convictions, I abhor Mr Gadd. Not sure I could happily listen to his music these days, either.

I happen to like, say, Antony Keidis & Steven Tyler, & I can't imagine anything they did would stop me enjoying their music. But if they were charged with rape, or under age sex, I'm not sure how I would then perceive their music. I suppose, whether I wanted to or not, I'd be obliged to suddenly stop enjoying their music?   

It's an immenely complicated mix of emotions.

[tikay]

As a sort of PS to that, & how quickly our perceptions can change towards those we like, have you seen the beating that 'Stars are getting right now?

They've been adored by most ever since they began, but now it's hard to find anyone to say a good word about them - all in the space of 4 or 5 weeks.

OK, some of that is Amaya based, but the problems they had earlier this week would have happened with or without Amaya, & so they have become a pantomine villain in the eyes of many. (Maybe a loud minority?).

Did they really transform from a Princess to an ogre so quickly, or is some of it just in our minds, & we are doing the herd instinct & peer pressure thing? Anyone who even remotely tries to defend them now gets short shrift.   

[DaveShoelace]

As a sort of PS to that, & how quickly our perceptions can change towards those we like, have you seen the beating that 'Stars are getting right now?

They've been adored by most ever since they began, but now it's hard to find anyone to say a good word about them - all in the space of 4 or 5 weeks.

OK, some of that is Amaya based, but the problems they had earlier this week would have happened with or without Amaya, & so they have become a pantomine villain in the eyes of many. (Maybe a loud minority?).

Did they really transform from a Princess to an ogre so quickly, or is some of it just in our minds, & we are doing the herd instinct & peer pressure thing? Anyone who even remotely tries to defend them now gets short shrift.   

This.

The stars stuff, and the whole HUSNG cartel thing, have been the most interesting stories of the poker year for me.

Still very much think that the hate is just a very vocal minority. I'd wager that by the time SCOOP rolls around, their traffic and their profits are as strong as ever.

[tikay]

As a sort of PS to that, & how quickly our perceptions can change towards those we like, have you seen the beating that 'Stars are getting right now?

They've been adored by most ever since they began, but now it's hard to find anyone to say a good word about them - all in the space of 4 or 5 weeks.

OK, some of that is Amaya based, but the problems they had earlier this week would have happened with or without Amaya, & so they have become a pantomine villain in the eyes of many. (Maybe a loud minority?).

Did they really transform from a Princess to an ogre so quickly, or is some of it just in our minds, & we are doing the herd instinct & peer pressure thing? Anyone who even remotely tries to defend them now gets short shrift.   

This.

The stars stuff, and the whole HUSNG cartel thing, have been the most interesting stories of the poker year for me.

Still very much think that the hate is just a very vocal minority. I'd wager that by the time SCOOP rolls around, their traffic and their profits are as strong as ever.

Absolutely amazing.

I've read every word about it, 2+2, Poker Media, everything, I find it all so compelling.

The "digital age" I suppose, so many more of us have comms platforms now, & it's like a forest fire, once it starts it soon gets out of control.

I simply can't believe they could go from hero to zero so quickly. It just shows us, every business, no matter how good or dominant, is at the mercy of Social Media & Forums these days. We certainly can't argue that they have always been the best.

I'm pretty sure that once the dust settles, they'll continue pretty much as they are, & all will be well. We don't like change, whether it be poker, or where the bread shelves in Tescos are, but we adapt quickly & soon forget.

One of the problems is that every poker player thinks they know how to run an Online Gaming Site. But it's an immensely complex business, especially when you are the size of 'Stars.  Views are put forward, generally, based on one criteria - self-interest.

"It does not suit me, so it must be bad". 

Therer was a debate on 2+2 this week after their site crash, when a kid who thought he was entitled to $30 told the 'Stars Rep "I hope you roll over a cliff". That can't be the sensible majority thinking.   

It sort of boils down to putting the price up, & it'd wholly understandable why that would not be well-received. As a Business, any Business, it has to find ways to increase revenues year on year. Stable revenues are a no-no. Online poker is not growing, globally, so those increases revenues have to be found in other ways. Price increases, bolt on House Games, da de da.  We are never going to like it, but it's inevitable.

[VBlue]

I happen to like, say, Antony Keidis & Steven Tyler, & I can't imagine anything they did would stop me enjoying their music. But if they were charged with rape, or under age sex, I'm not sure how I would then perceive their music. I suppose, whether I wanted to or not, I'd be obliged to suddenly stop enjoying their music?  

It's an immenely complicated mix of emotions.

Totally this.  I still love Michael Jackson's music (quite a bit of it anyway).

[DaveShoelace]

The thing which has really surprised me is how much pessimism/despair there is. I may be remembering things wrong, but the 2+2ers seemed way more optimisitic just after Black Friday than they do right now.

Also amazes me how many players call Stars greedy for focussing on profits, when the only reason the players don't like the changes is because it affects their profits. I've never bought into this thing that a corporate entity making more money is somehow morally corrupt, whereas an individual making money by directly taking it out of the pockets of recreational players is fine. Neither are bad IMO. I think we just naturally have a them vs us, david vs goliath, bias against big companies. We also seem to have this sense of natural justice which makes us assume a for profit business has an obligation to act like a democracy.

I'm not saying that I like all the Stars changes, certainly don't like the manner they were communicated, but to expect anything less from any company is naive.

[RED-DOG]

I was a huge Gary Glitter fan back in the day, I had all his songs on 8 track and I could do all the moves. I even had 6in platform soles. (I flirted with the idea of black eye liner but decided it would lead to real black eyes).

Now I can't even listen to his music.

people are such arseholes.

This is quite an interesting one

recently there has been the scandal of the lead singer of the Lost Prophets, Ian Watkins, and his jailing for child sex abuse.

Now dont get me wrong, his actions and thoughts are, to me, disgusting. But i still actually like the music that was made by the band.

So why should we be concerned that the music by someone such as Glitter and Watkins, if enjoyed by an individual, associates the individual to the actions of the artist?

I can't watch Mel Gibson films either.

[Nakor]

I happen to like, say, Antony Keidis & Steven Tyler, & I can't imagine anything they did would stop me enjoying their music. But if they were charged with rape, or under age sex, I'm not sure how I would then perceive their music. I suppose, whether I wanted to or not, I'd be obliged to suddenly stop enjoying their music?  

It's an immenely complicated mix of emotions.

Totally this.  I still love Michael Jackson's music (quite a bit of it anyway).

Would you wear an MJ t-Shirt?

I ask as I have a new young starter in our office at work and on dress down Friday he rocked up wearing one, it caused quite stir.

[david3103]

John Peel became a very establishment figure in later life with the very popular and critically acclaimed R4 show Loose Ends.
Yet he openly disclosed his earlier activities in his autobiography, including sex with under age girls. He married one of them, does that make it ok? Bill Wyman did the same.

Should we now stop listening to the music Peel championed, or all old recordings of The Stones?

[tikay]

John Peel became a very establishment figure in later life with the very popular and critically acclaimed R4 show Loose Ends.
Yet he openly disclosed his earlier activities in his autobiography, including sex with under age girls. He married one of them, does that make it ok? Bill Wyman did the same.

Should we now stop listening to the music Peel championed, or all old recordings of The Stones?

John Peel is a great example, imo. (Perhaps not literally....).

I was not aware of his situation until quite late in his life, but I so loved listening to John that I never thought any less of his work because of the other matter.

Incidentally, "Loose Ends"?

I think you mean "Home Truths"?

If John was still with us, hosting Home Truths, I'd not miss a word - best radio programme ever.

[Nakor]

John Peel became a very establishment figure in later life with the very popular and critically acclaimed R4 show Loose Ends.
Yet he openly disclosed his earlier activities in his autobiography, including sex with under age girls. He married one of them, does that make it ok? Bill Wyman did the same.

Should we now stop listening to the music Peel championed, or all old recordings of The Stones?

Peel states that he didnt have Sex with underage girls;

Talking about his time as a in the US.
‘Well, of course I didn’t ask for ID,’ he said. ‘All they wanted me to do was to abuse them sexually which, of course, I was only too happy to do.’ He complained that American girls had ‘this strange notion of virginity as a tangible thing which you surrendered to your husband on your wedding night. So they would do anything but s*** you’.

Not aware that he ever confirmed or denied he had an "active" relationship with Shirley Anne whom he married.

Not trying to justify his actions just offer some balance.

Lori Lightning's list of "conquests" would put you off just about every major artist from the mid 70's, Bowie, Page, Moon, Finn, Jagger and many more.

Lets Spend the night together by Pamela Des Barres (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lets-Spend-Night-Together-Supergroupies/dp/1556527896) is quite an insight into that period of time.  I would hope its a time gone by, but having recently seen the teenage girl population of London encamped outside a London hotel in the hope of seeing 1D who were in situ' recently, I would be surprised if little has changed.
 

[Tal]

Think this is what David was referring to:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/1999/jan/23/weekend.julieburchill

[tikay]

Think this is what David was referring to:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/1999/jan/23/weekend.julieburchill

Yikes!

That felt a bit harsh. Much of that was new to me.

The 60's & 70's were strange times. Not sure "enlightened" is the word, but things were viewed differently then. 

Again, not saying it is right, but many a young man, were they in John's situation, may well have done the same things. Not saying they should, but they would.