Oblivions

I read that if you hold a black light to the record jacket it says "Men in Black Score Tribute" and all the songs are actually Ross and his friends recreating the score acapella.

Was this Dr. Space Mummy 7" released? And was it a proper single or a 2 minute TV show song? All my research turned up was a separate 7" for Burger Rain, a TV show song, which is being sold for $19.99.

I have never liked the Beatles but I'll stop short of declaring their music as bad for everyone.

Nm.

Dear Lord, it's finally happening.

You can apologize for things, even if those things aren't criminal acts or if they aren't at the level of Jesse Lacey or other entertainment 'scandals'. We let down people we care about all the time, often in small or subtle ways, and we feel sorry for it and apologize. In his specific case, it's hard to know exactly what to make of what he's shared. There is the best case scenario, which is that he is a good dude who got into some murky waters as far as treating women poorly/uncaringly, him being in a semi-popular band helped facilitate that, and he wants to do a personal inventory before he tries to go on tour again, and there is the other scenario, which is that he did something pretty bad and he is getting out ahead of it with his version which minimizes and frames things to his advantage. I really hope it's the former and that the person he's referencing is OK.

Why are we talking about Jesse Lacey and the way his actions affect the context around his music? The real story is that the guy from the Who killed someone and, for some reason, no one here wants to talk about it.

We need a petition for Nada Surf to cover all of Brand New's discography so it can be listenable again. Edit: so it can be listenable.*

$60 is a great price. You have to remember that buying music, especially on vinyl, is an event and it only happens one to two times a year- three if Taylor Swift, Coldplay, and Adele release records in the same year.

I'm trying to be sincere here so I apologize in advance if I can't help but veer into snark. Asking whether perhaps the victims are more deserving of culpability/scrutiny or the perpetrator less deserving of culpability/scrutiny is not playing devil's advocate or providing a thoughtful perspective that has been overlooked. It is literally regurgitating how a majority of people have viewed abuse since the beginning of time. Adding "I'm not blaming the victim but" or "I'm not taking away the severity of what he did but" before immediately proceeding to blame the victim or take away the severity of what the perpetrator did does not relieve yourself of the burden of bearing the negative reaction you know you'll receive. Instead of saying "Here's something no one has said or considered", preface your rant with "I know this is the same opinion everyone comes up with when they pull a theory out of thin air but, for the sake of allowing me to participate, what if the victim is to blame/the perpetrator wasn't fully responsible/this is all actually about *your* hypocrisy?" Ugh. I knew I'd end with snark. Sorry!

If they are being sincere, they sure have an 'interesting' perspective of the world. My instincts tell me that it's likely a smoothie of trolling and lashing out though. Either way, it's a bummer that, of all the words and ideas someone can share on this particular subject, those are the ones they decided to go with.

My post wasn't fully specific to yours, more of a general comment toward the idea that we are "missing" something when we condemn Lacey and the actions without a "but..." or any caveats. But, for the sake of clarity, I do think you can just say what you meant (that rehabilitation is important and "rehabilitation isn't an escape from consequences") and leave out the part about people being in glass houses and public hangings. I agree with you that rehabilitation is important but, IMO, the other comments are kind of a muddy cloud of ideas that feel like a plea to leave him alone, divert his culpability toward mental health (which is its own huge debate), and deflect the attention put toward his actions toward the public reaction. It sounds like you didn't mean to convey those latter ideas, so you probably don't need to mix a good point about rehabilitation with an angsty middle finger toward people who want legal accountability. If I am really far off from your intent and meaning, I apologize. I'm OK spending words trying to clarify and reach agreement but I don't want to start side arguments that take us away from the needed attention toward Lacey and how his actions deserve consequence (and rehabilitation!), especially if its due to a mistake in my reading comprehension.

Something to consider is that victims live for a long time being doubted, called liars, having their flaws magnified, and being dehumanized, all because someone else victimized them. Meanwhile, almost instantly and sometimes prior to being outed, perpetrators often experience the opposite. They are more likely to be humanized, have their actions minimized, have their feelings prioritized and protected, and have friends/fans advocate for them to be rushed past the consequences phase and into the forgiveness phase. Jesse Lacey didn't wake up one morning inserted into another person's mess. He did what he did to those women and he was able to continue being a rock star with a cult-following with little public fall out and start a family and lead his life. If you really feel for him and wish him relief and comfort and an escape from these consequences, consider the last 15 years an advance payment of that empathy and comfort. Now, the grace period has ended and he's reaping what he's sown.

I didn't even think about how Jesse Lacey grooming underage girls for sexual encounters and fans boycotting his records affects eBay and Discogs sellers.

You're starting from a position that the victim is not credible and then you proceeded to look through their social media account looking for clues. That is not what I'd call a rational response. What are the characteristics of a credible victim? Is there a consistent enough set of behaviors amongst all victims of this kind of crime that one can confidently decide which are credible? Who decides whether a victim's behavior, absent of the law's assessment, is credible or believable or correct? Would that person need any training or skills to be able to confidently make those assessments? If there is an absence of enough information to answer any of these questions reliably, what do the national statistics on victims of this crime say about false reports? As boring as they are, those are rational questions you might ask if your gut instinct is to doubt the victim. Instead, what a lot of people have done, is try to improvise their own theory or philosophy on assault using very faulty information (such as their love of Brand New/Jesse Lacey, their memory of the Conor Oberst case, their gut feelings about women, their gut feelings about men, and, in extreme cases, overt propaganda against women). It makes total sense that you'd mishandle the reaction to this if you're cranking out a hot take on the fly but, if you really are trying to be rational and helpful, please be open to your initial assessment being misguided. Please don't double down on your on-the-fly hot take when you're presented with information that is new to you in regards to this specific case and also sexual assault/harassment cases, in general. The person "correcting" you may be doing it in a dickish way and I know it sucks to have someone mock or push back against something you came up with but please temporarily overlook that frustration and be open to the idea that women have some decent information to add to your perspective and that phrases like "believe victims" are used for a reason and that reason isn't to eradicate due process of law or to personally emasculate the male gender. There will be bad dudes who will delight in running victims through the mud, making LOL memes about sexual assault, and pretending to love sexual harassers/assaulters. Don't fall on their side of this stuff. Be OK with making mistakes and improving your reactions to these stories. At the very least, if you're not ready to go full 'believe victims', give the person speaking out a little more space and don't be the 100th dude saying "What happened to innocent until proven guilty/It says on her Tumblr that she is bipolar/She could have lied to him about her age" etc etc.

There are some good conversations about this happening on less HARDxCORExLOLxBRO forums if you poke around. Really sad that so many people who hold positions of respect and admiration have used those positions to do these things but glad there are finally consequences.

I have that German one too. All research pointed to that one as the pressing to get.

Yeah. And the Automatic bonus songs seem way better and less redundant than the Out of Time duplicate demos they put on the 3xLP edition. Maybe the OoT deluxe didn't sell too well?

Black Numbers is sick. Everyone grab two of these.

Maybe the Deluxe just comes with a free copy of the new deluxe St. Vincent record.

Dig these dudes. As with past pre-orders, everything ships from the UK so shipping is steep for US customers. I'll pick up a deluxe copy on Amazon when it gets there.

Her boyfriend loves her like she's Brand New?

I hope they play Pacific Daydream in full and then a second set of 4-5 tracks from Raditude and Hurley.

If there is one thing I learned from watching 25 minutes of the HBO Scientology documentary, it is that people will straight up lie and distort reality if they think they are doing it in service of a noble cause or project. He might believe his pseudo-science media empire is so valuable to the world of entertainment that it's worth blending reality and fiction to tell a captivating meta-story about aliens and time travel.

You're describing your own approach to adding information to a database but I think it's different than the one Discogs has chosen and enforces. It looks like people do often add information however they think is best but then it gets removed or edited to fit the official rules. I don't know that there's a way to effectively circumvent that moderation.