slushy

There have been plenty of people suggesting they believe the word is completely okay to use. Three years ago isn't that long ago. It's not like he's 18 at present and was just a kid at the time. He wrote those tweets as an adult, and if an adult is thoughtless enough to think that kind of attitude is okay then he fully deserves any backlash that comes along with it. If the guy truly wants to redeem himself maybe he should undertake some accountability processes and then spend some time away from the band to volunteer at a homeless LGBT youth shelter or something along those lines.

It's not really about me being offended or hurt, it's about how stunned I am that people still believe the freedom to use this word flippantly for shitty internet jokes is more important than having just a tiny little bit of respect for fellow humans. The fact is that hundreds of thousands of people have suffered extreme intimidation and violence by people who love to use this word. Every night people are followed home from bars by groups of men screaming this word. Countless members of our communities end up in hospitals with cracked skulls and mental scars that never fade, and the perpetrators of these violent acts are shouting this word as they lay their boot in. Why would any reasonable person just not use such a pointless, useless word that causes so much hurt in the world? Is it really that much to expect?

Adults using words as ugly and hurtful as that isn't really something that you easily forget. It's one of those things that sticks around and tarnishes that person in your mind forever. Someone probably recalled him speaking like that on twitter and told someone else that he was a shitty homophobe and that person they told didn't believe them so they took the time to dig up the proof and realised that in reality it was actually way worse than they had remembered.

You did not think the band took more of a (the bad kind of) pop punk approach with the songwriting on FOL? The first EP had loads of character but the follow-up just sounded like faux-pop punk with a dream pop filter applied. This new track sounds like a slicker, more evolved version of what they were doing on the first EP.

I did not say you were homophobic, sir. I said that the slurs used by the individual in question were homophobic. The information is out there, everybody who cares will process it however they see fit. Of course it's clickbait journalism, I acknowledged as much in the post you quoted. However it's also good that people are aware of this kind of thing, and that the discussions about why hate speech is unacceptable can happen. It's so very clearly a huge issue embedded within our culture, and the fact that there are still people who are all "lol, it's no big deal" is enough for me to believe that the articles are warranted. If you are cool with it or think it's okay cause it was in the past, do whatever you want, nobody is going to stop you. Plenty of other people will agree with you and see these slurs as no big deal too. But in my opinion a person using the word "faggot" over and over again is a pretty hateful act and a band being accepting of a person that hateful to the point of allowing him to continue playing with them in their band is enough for me to not want to support them. Even if it was a few years ago, I still don't think it's cool. It's not like this guy was 12 when it happened, he was an adult. Simply, I would rather give that money to bands who don't tweet the word "faggot" over and over again.

Life is too short to be accepting of bigots. Life is also too short to be finding comedy of that calibre "pretty funny".

I believe it's important for this kind of information to be out there and available. I do not believe that these articles are being published as genuine PSAs and are all about the clicks, however this stuff needs to be reported on. A lot of people do not want to support art created by homophobes and bigots, and this allows the individual to make up their own mind. If homophobic slurs are okay with you, you'll have no problem still supporting the band. If you think homophobic slurs are wrong, then this probably enough reason for you to steer clear of the band. It's pretty easy.

Feast Of Love just sounded like (the bad kind of) pop punk produced to sound shoegazy to me. Dark World had a real slow burning, crackling, gooey warmth to it and just was just a really cute and juvenile record. By comparison FOL sounded really sterile and ditched anything unique they had going for them.

Ah, this makes perfect sense!

The only reason I found it interesting to ask was that I know she had mentioned on twitter a few times she'd like her name changed on the No Idea site, and the only page she's mentioned on there is for the RAR credits. And if she has said she would like those credits changed, I wonder if that request would be extended to physical releases. Obviously it would be difficult to expect the labels to fix the credit with existing stock, but it would be easy to rectify on new/future pressings. I just wonder if Laura was asked about that and she said "No, keep the credit as Gabel" or "Eh, I don't mind either way, do what you prefer label guy", or was the question never asked and the credits reproduced exactly as they originally appeared.

This track is way better than everything on Feast Of Love, but still isn't anywhere as good as the EP.

This is very true! From all of my experiences most people selling punk records are okay-to-great for the most part. If I am buying punk records from a seller who has 300 or less items that are all mostly punk stuff then you know it's just someone who has picked them up new, probably listened to them a couple of times, stuck them on their shelf and are now doing a bit of a cull or selling their collection. Any times when I've received something I believe to be over graded to the extent where I actually feel disappointed it's been the more indie rock/indie pop/alternative leaning stuff from sellers who have an ungodly amount of listings covering numerous genres/styles. Those are the people that are no doubt picking up stuff in bulk and listing quickly without paying much attention to their stock, and just grading everything as NM, unless cosmetically something is obviously in awful shape and then they'll drop down to a VG+ at worst.

I also said that I would do all I could to make the buyer happy and refund them if necessary, but you conveniently left that part out when picking out quotes to try and make out that I was trying to justify record sellers doing shitty things. I am not justifying it. I have acknowledged that it's a shitty thing to do and that I personally avoid doing it at all costs, to the point where I will check a record when listing, at the point of invoicing, and then again before shipping. AND if by some chance I realise that I have missed something will always mention it to the buyer so the transaction can be cancelled or a discount can be arranged. In saying that, I am also acknowledging that if by some chance I was to send a record without checking it because in my head the record was in a certain condition the last time I looked at it and it had only been sitting on my record shelf/storage, then it's not hard to imagine that internally I would be thinking that the buyer was sketchy due to my own paranoia (largely due a few experiences where buyers have complained about defects that IMO were definitely not present when inspected by myself). I personally would work with the seller until they were happy, but not everybody is like that and tend to let their ego/arrogance get in the way. It's not justifying his behaviour, it's just thinking about what is probably going in on the head of the seller, about how this situation came to be, and how to spot these kind of sellers in the future, which is way more productive than just saying "REFUND!" and "PAYPAL CLAIM!"

Yep, you nailed it with this. It's that paranoia that somebody is pulling a fast one that comes with buying from an unknown source combined with the ego and anal retentiveness of record collectors. "How DARE you suggest that my NM grading was actually a VG+! Do you know how long I have been selling records, kid?"

Where are you getting the idea that I am justifying this? I fully believe that this lady deserves a refund and that the seller has screwed her around. But I also don't believe that this guy is a scammer and that he sold records that he knew to be in awful condition cackling to himself as he informed her over and over that they were in great shape knowing that he'd soon have her money and there was nothing she could do about getting it back because he had this little plan all worked out. He's just one of the many people listing huge amounts of stock for sale without really bothering to check the accurate condition of any of it (or sometimes if they even actually own a copy at all) and just chucking in the vague "NM/EX" for everything. He's probably been doing this for a decade and is too trusting in his memory of what he has and in what condition. I think he is lying about him checking the stock, but I think in his head the records were in the condition he graded them as being in, and he's defensive that somebody is challenging him on that. Rather than just saying "this guy is wrong, demand a refund!" it's better to acknowledge that these people exist, that there's nothing we can do about them existing and that it's better and more productive to talk about how to identify them so people know to avoid them in the first place.

I always inspect, photograph and describe as I am listing, however on this one occasion I did not, and instead inspected before invoicing/shipping. The point was that I thought my memory was pretty good, and it was for the most part, but there were a few items that weren't as I remembered, and I am willing to bet that loads of these sellers with hundreds/thousands of listings are doing the same thing, except they are doing it for all/most of their listing.

I bet this guy isn't actively trying to scam anybody and just didn't bother looking at or playing the records (despite claiming he did) and the initial gradings were based on some distant memory of how they looked the last time he played them, probably several years ago. Now that his gradings have been challenged he is offended and defensive. I recently listed a whole stack of records without inspecting each one as I was short on time and just described them from memory. When it came time to ship I made sure that each record was as described and while the vast majority of them were, a few older Ramones presses were way worse than I had recalled and I ended up offering a discount/chance to cancel the order as the record was not as I claimed when they agreed to buy it. If I had not checked before shipping, I probably would have thought the buyer was sketchy if they complained about them being not up to scratch for the grading I gave them or that they were damaged. I would have worked out a resolution no doubt (or just refunded them and let them keep the records if they were that unhappy), but in my head I would be thinking "this motherfucker has NO idea!!".

It can be a pretty straight forward or super complex question depending on who you ask, I guess. Most trans folks will say that the person that they became is the person they always were and would prefer credits to be changed to reflect that, however in the eyes of anal retentive Wikipedia/Discogs editor types, they would argue that the credit should remain as it originally appeared on the release.

I would be really, really surprised if you don't get your money back.

I wonder if it was discussed and they decided to keep things the same as the initial pressing and maintain the original credit for posterity sake or what.

Just wondering, is Laura credited as Laura Jane Grace or Tom Gabel with this reissue? I know that recent RAR pressings still credit her as "Tom Gabel" (though that may be because they haven't reprinted inserts) and the No Idea site still uses "Tom Gabel" on the release page (despite a couple of twitter requests I have seen asking for it to be changed).

Pretty bummed I slept on the limited Night Birds! The first one I will have missed!

A HWM "Best Of" would basically just be a No Division reissue.

Retrospectively, I think Dear You was a pretty earnest attempt at a major label debut, like they weren't trying to make a punk record that appealed to the masses and instead just completely shifted into alternative rock territory. Obviously at the time people were put off by the completely different vocal style and slicker production, and it's fair enough that they expressed their dislike through letters to the editor or whatever. I think the general consensus on that record changed when Jawbreaker really got a huge second wind and were picked up by a new lot of people who had grown up on glossy sounding mallpunk, and to them obviously there was nothing wrong with "emo" or "punk" music sounding that slick as it was a typical done thing by that point. Though even in a lot of those cases, Dear You was was what got them hooked and as they work their way through the discography, they end up way preferring the earlier records anyway.

I'm gonna grab one of these and pay for it by selling whatever earlier pressings I have, as I'm willing to bet that these won't sound any worse. I really do wish there was an additional material collection included though!