Is your music better or worse than this?

[ghettosynth]

Here is a full room just chock full of enthusiasm. The audience seems to love the performance. Now, there's something of a common interest at work here. Is that so very different from someone singing lyrics that you identify with?

I have some other thoughts on this, but I'll see if others want to comment first.

[AsPeeXXXVIII]

I don't even know what to say.

[ghettosynth]

ROFL! That was great.

[Zombie Queen]

This is so bad, but I'm oddly completely in love with it.

Daniel Johnston is not someone to overlook. If you're not familiar with his music and story, there's great documentary about him:

[ATN69]

Rednecks also want to have fun

[nineofkings]

This is so bad, but I'm oddly completely in love with it.

Daniel Johnston is not someone to overlook. If you're not familiar with his music and story, there's great documentary about him:

Blocked by Sony on copyright grounds . I'm definitely gonna look out, though. Based on his Wikipedia he seems like an interesting fella.

[Zombie Queen]

Blocked by Sony on copyright grounds

Yeah... sorry. It still shows here though. I was lucky to see it on film festival in Warsaw, it's worth to look for.

[jancivil]

there's nothing hard about your point, but you applied the fallacy incorrectly (on the quoted bit anyway) as harryupbabble was not making an argument - he was merely saying that he found those stats important for forming a personal view. That is not committing a logical fallacy, that's recounting a chain of influence. If someone says they like artist 'X' because she is popular there is no point of logic that can make that claim untrue.

In fact, he said "my music is worse" than The Shaggs based in ratio of upvotes to downvotes. So now he's only recounted a 'chain of influence'? Influence on WHAT? He's evaluated views and likes in order to evaluate The Shaggs as good or bad. This is not good reasoning and the fault is 'popularity in itself denotes quality' is a fallacy. Equally, your attempt to confuse the issue is fallacious: no one has said 'this fallacy means your claim of basing your assessment on popularity can't be true'. That's quite absurd. I'm not the one confused here.

Yeah, you are a bit confused but I'm not going to try and help you with that anymore. Don't lose the shouting though - works a treat.

No, the obvious confusion is that you went for "If someone says they like artist 'X' because she is popular there is no point of logic that can make that claim untrue." which is either a DELIBERATE distortion of the point (or completely stupid). Do lose the arrogant snottiness, and maybe your enthusiasm for pointless gainsaying.

[Daags]

Here is a full room just chock full of enthusiasm. The audience seems to love the performance. Now, there's something of a common interest at work here. Is that so very different from someone singing lyrics that you identify with?

I have some other thoughts on this, but I'll see if others want to comment first.

hoho, so much fail and thus win.

thread eventually delivers.

is the common interest my little ponies by the way ? some dude starts throwing out flyers for a my little pony convention at one point.

[woggle]

there's nothing hard about your point, but you applied the fallacy incorrectly (on the quoted bit anyway) as harryupbabble was not making an argument - he was merely saying that he found those stats important for forming a personal view. That is not committing a logical fallacy, that's recounting a chain of influence. If someone says they like artist 'X' because she is popular there is no point of logic that can make that claim untrue.

In fact, he said "my music is worse" than The Shaggs based in ratio of upvotes to downvotes. So now he's only recounted a 'chain of influence'? Influence on WHAT? He's evaluated views and likes in order to evaluate The Shaggs as good or bad. This is not good reasoning and the fault is 'popularity in itself denotes quality' is a fallacy. Equally, your attempt to confuse the issue is fallacious: no one has said 'this fallacy means your claim of basing your assessment on popularity can't be true'. That's quite absurd. I'm not the one confused here.

Yeah, you are a bit confused but I'm not going to try and help you with that anymore. Don't lose the shouting though - works a treat.

No, the obvious confusion is that you went for "If someone says they like artist 'X' because she is popular there is no point of logic that can make that claim untrue." which is either a DELIBERATE distortion of the point (or completely stupid). Do lose the arrogant snottiness, and maybe your enthusiasm for pointless gainsaying.

that's some consistently nasty stuff jancivil - you seem to me to be unable tolerate any disagreement. Just the slightest hint that someone is failing to acknowledge your own deeply felt sense of superiority seems to hurl you into inappropriate outbursts of vindictive anger. I would think that will have impacted on your ability to maintain friendships, find satisfactory long-term employment and successfully undertake higher education and training. Such is life for some.

[Daags]

[jancivil]

there's nothing hard about your point, but you applied the fallacy incorrectly (on the quoted bit anyway) as harryupbabble was not making an argument - he was merely saying that he found those stats important for forming a personal view. That is not committing a logical fallacy, that's recounting a chain of influence. If someone says they like artist 'X' because she is popular there is no point of logic that can make that claim untrue.

In fact, he said "my music is worse" than The Shaggs based in ratio of upvotes to downvotes. So now he's only recounted a 'chain of influence'? Influence on WHAT? He's evaluated views and likes in order to evaluate The Shaggs as good or bad. This is not good reasoning and the fault is 'popularity in itself denotes quality' is a fallacy. Equally, your attempt to confuse the issue is fallacious: no one has said 'this fallacy means your claim of basing your assessment on popularity can't be true'. That's quite absurd. I'm not the one confused here.

Yeah, you are a bit confused but I'm not going to try and help you with that anymore. Don't lose the shouting though - works a treat.

No, the obvious confusion is that you went for "If someone says they like artist 'X' because she is popular there is no point of logic that can make that claim untrue." which is either a DELIBERATE distortion of the point (or completely stupid). Do lose the arrogant snottiness, and maybe your enthusiasm for pointless gainsaying.

that's some consistently nasty stuff jancivil - you seem to me to be unable tolerate any disagreement. Just the slightest hint that someone is failing to acknowledge your own deeply felt sense of superiority seems to hurl you into inappropriate outbursts of vindictive anger. I would think that will have impacted on your ability to maintain friendships, find satisfactory long-term employment and successfully undertake higher education and training. Such is life for some.

Had a kind of detailed response to this insanity but computer crashed and that's that. SO, all I have to do is more or less match your tone and this is your story about my psyche. It's pretty fucken wild, man. It resembles reality not at all, of course but who'm I to judge somebody. What did I ever do to you.

[ontol]

[ghettosynth]

I had a complete 120,000 word essay that would have resolved all these issues forever, but some people just like arguing, so I ate it.

With cheap wine on ice.

Yum, cheap win on ice!

[Ridan]

Could we just transform this thread into the "Cheap Wine on Ice Club" instead?

A thread where nobody wins, but everyone gets wasted.