Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


Posts posted by daniel

  1. 4 hours ago, Derek™ said:


      Reveal hidden contents

    I’m all for it especially since a moderator politely requested we do just that.  Seems really fucking dense to ignore that and continue but I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, all things considered.  I’ve yet to receive a PM, but I doubt it could compete with a frustrated response that stoops to name calling.  That’s basically how you know we’re done here.  I won’t be quoting his posts anytime soon – not publicly, anyway – but I really do hope Danny boy doesn’t let this whole exchange sour his holidays.  If he’s pounding away on the keyboard instead of helping his wife’s son make paper hand turkeys, I’m going to feel really bad.



    You did the exact same thing. Continued the argument after the mod's post.

    I have not received anything but I heard a second hand account from a friend who told me that it's apparently unlistenable. Best off just waiting for a proper vinyl release I think.

  2. 1 minute ago, Derek™ said:

    That’s all I really wanted.  I’ll read his little special-snowflake soapbox manifesto over the holiday weekend if I get bored enough, but I’m afraid I’ll be a little too busy doing real world shit to respond anytime soon.  Someone feel free to give me a quick rundown if he’s made any valid points, or if he’s just being a hyperbolic drama king again.  Or if any relevant Glassjaw shit happens, I guess.


    Either way, good job Danny boy.  Way to not care.

    Oh my god, the classic "I was trolling you the whole time, loser". And "snowflake" just rounds out the vocabulary. I guess you'd rather stay in the safe space (I'm learning your terminology) of other people who think I'm an idiot than actually engage critically with what I've said. You're an idiot.

  3. Just now, V3XED said:

    I am not even going to read this. Just Like I haven't read any of the other giant morality posts. I am just going to point out you obviously are getting super triggered and its pretty funny that you feel the need, the URGE to respond, but still try to prefix it with "this means nothing to me" :P

    Actually I edited that line out because it does mean a lot to me. "Triggered" is one of those words, though, huh? I wrote what I wrote because I think it's important. Same as Derek.

  4. 15 hours ago, Derek™ said:

    I know I probably shouldn't waste time responding to this, but I'm gonna' do it anyway.

    Ok, I changed my mind. I have some free time and I don't want your thesis to go to waste.

    1) Your post I originally called "gross" in the BN thread was disgusting. A woman accuses an artist you like of being an abusive pedophile, and your instinct is to "play devil's advocate" by sharing with us that she has problems with depression and anxiety. Stop trying to frame it like it's some service you did in the interest of conversation. You kept saying her character was in question. It was not. Not until you brought it up. Jesse Lacey's character was in question. You brought that shit up because you wanted a reason to doubt her. 

    2) You made your little quip and quoted what I originally said to you. I made a little quip back. But somehow my sentence was super serious business whereas yours was just a joke? See the hypocrisy there?

    3) Rooks' little gotcha moment was cute, and, at first, valid. I explained why the situations are different to me, and laughed at how dumb it was that he jumped at a chance to "get me" because of the BN stuff. Then he got all mad we argued. At this point I'm guessing you knew you'd have the support of all your fellow SJW haters with their sandwich jokes and decided to join in. Rooks brought the argument over, I did not. I stated my excitement for this LP. In both cases in this thread, you and Rooks initiated the personal attacks.

    4) Yeah, I said I "absolutely destroyed" him. But, we can both tell jokes from serious business, right? It was a ridiculous phrase. Tongue in cheek.

    5) Your love letter to me. God, where to begin. You went from "lighten up" to a novel on your personal life that I don't care one bit about. Some of my favorites:

    • "I explicitly gave you the option of being overly sheltered or an internet white knight. You've always had the courtesy of choice. So knock it off". Is it supposed to be funny because of how obviously hypocritical it is? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say "good joke".
    • Pretending you don't know what The Red Pill is. Ok, dude. I mean, just, lmao. It's cool you're not an MRA. But I don't believe anyone with as much internet experience as you hasn't heard of that trash.
    • Linking to the definition of tongue in cheek. That made me lol. Can I refer you back to "absolutely destroyed you" btw?
    • "Does that not seem a little excessive over a one-line callback/joke?". So you can make one-sentence jokes and I can't. Gotcha. Also, you wrote me a damn essay. That's pretty excessive.
    • I'm glad to see you think of yourself as an ally of positive change, and you're just annoyed by the condescending and pretentious "SJWs" as you call them. Yes people who monopolize conversations about social justice to boost their egos exist, and yes they are annoying. Imagine if you were as mad about bigotry and injustice as you are about those keyboard warriors. That's why I didn't give you the benefit of the doubt.
    • "The official statement that Lacey made dodged the age difference entirely, and that was enough for me to fold and put my cards down.  I used rationality as an adult.  You should try it out sometime". I mean, I guess I'm glad we both recognize that his apology was meaningless? Cool rationality burn, though? 
    • "We are in fact thrust into the treacherous waters of SRS BSNS with captain Daniel at the helm". Again. I said I was excited for the LP. Rooks brought the shit over here and you capitalized on it to have your little moment. I'm a passenger on this argument, dude.

    I know you said you weren't after some "gotcha" moment, but your wall of text is littered with them, so I don't believe you. I'm sorry that conversations about bigotry and racism/misogyny/homophobia are annoying to you because a small percentage of the people who talk about those things can be annoying. But don't act all high and mighty as if you're some totally chill dude who doesn't care about what someone says on these boards when you clearly do. I wasn't going to waste my time responding to this, but, you know, we hit the same brick wall that people who disagree about this shit always do. And, because even though I disagree with you, and I think you're kind of a dork, I acknowledge that you're probably a smart dude. And I assume nobody on my side of the disagreement has ever taken the time to explain why we disagree with your perspective, so here it goes. You entered a conversation about a person facing multiple accusations of predatory behavior and your first instinct was to suggest that one of the accusers could be lying. You saw a conflict that on one side had a possible pedophile abuser, and on the other side had a possible SJW lying for attention or recognition. And the thought of some SJW making up shit about an artist you admire got you more riled up than the thought of Jesse Lacey being an abuser. At least, that's what your post suggested. Now I ADMIT that my initial responses weren't constructive, because it pisses me off when people approach conversations about abuse that way. It makes other survivors feel unsafe and afraid to share their experiences. And everything since then has just been a pissing match between us because we're annoyed with one another.

    So, I hope one day soon we can have constructive conversations about bigotry and abuse without the discussions being clouded by outright misogynists and abusers (which I do not believe you are) and self-important keyboard warriors looking for a sense of superiority rather than making a positive difference (which I am not). I explained to you why I called your post gross, and explained why your perspective on this pissed me off. Remember, I have been a Brand New fan for almost 15 years as well. We were all on edge. I reacted non constructively, but I stand by my sentiment, and I hope you understand it now that I've given you an actual explanation.

  5. 2 minutes ago, At The Mars Spartamasque said:

    Derek vs daniel vs sunshine. Kinda like that brand new song, only brand new fans care though. Shouldn't we be debating on how rediculous this release may be?

    I don't even think Brand New fans care about this lol. I don't even care about this at this point. I'm gonna quote myself:


    7 hours ago, daniel said:

    Well you're not wrong. I do always assume the worst. And I know it's a waste of my time to talk to you guys about this shit because we're never going to agree. So, whatever. Peace. Enjoy your records.


  6. "White night", "SJW", "politically correct". It's all there, lol. I will never understand why people like you are so mad that our culture is finally shifting toward one of accountability. And yes, I've been a member longer than you, but have almost 8k less posts. "Hyper sheltered life on the internet", huh. Surprised you have so much time to spend on here between 4chan and The Red Pill or wherever.

    And yeah, it's a tumultuous time politically. It's gonna creep into everything. The worst things people used to argue about on here were flippers and limited variants. Those were the days.

  7. Just now, Derek™ said:

    Not terribly long or anything; don’t get too excited there.  I just now associate your Costanza avatar with some dude who lives a hyper sheltered life on the internet, so it came pretty naturally when I saw it pop up in this thread.  Lighten up.

    I would genuinely like to know how you reached the hyper sheltered conclusion. Was it when I pointed out that your first reaction to accusations of abuse was to point out that the girl in question suffers from depression and anxiety, insinuating that she shouldn't be trusted? Oh right, you were playing "devil's advocate". :rolleyes:

  8. 4 minutes ago, rooks said:

    The sound?


    What do you like music for? The taste?

    Like everyone, I like different things for all kinds of different reasons. When it comes to a lot of music, I like the whole package. But I think at this point you're just trying to derail the original conversation because I absolutely destroyed you and your ridiculous logic, so I'm done. Good luck picking fights with other people you feel superior to because they don't want to support pedophiles.

  9. Just now, rooks said:

    Ohhhh I got you, that's my bad. Because it's my favorite song on the album, I must be a misogynistic prick - because the song is misogynistic. But, since you like it just a little,  and because you deemed his apology worthwhile, you're not.


    I'm learning so much about values and self-delusion.

    Don't put words in my mouth. I don't even like that song "just a little". Did you read my first post before you quoted it? I never even mentioned EYEWTKAS, because that album is garbage. And no, I never called you a misogynistic prick either. But honestly, if you're not, what do you enjoy about that song?

  10. 1 minute ago, rooks said:

    Lol you're funny. For the record, it's my favorite track on the album. Because I'm able to separate art\fiction from reality. I was just wondering how someone like you is able to convince yourself that it's different. 


    The more you know!

    Well "someone like me" doesn't usually enjoy violently misogynistic fiction. The fact that that's your favorite song on the album tells me a lot about what it means to be "someone like you", and certainly makes your perspective on the Brand New stuff make a lot more sense.

  11. 9 minutes ago, rooks said:

    Wow, pretty surprising that your conscience lets you enjoy Glassjaw, considering the heavy overtones of misogyny and sexism.


     gets the ole daniel thumbs up, eh?

    Lol, this is pathetic. You're seriously targeting people on these boards who disagreed with you in the Brand New thread?



    Took me 30 seconds to find two interviews, years apart, wherein Daryl literally apologizes for those lyrics and acknowledge that they were immature and inappropriate. Why do you think they don't play those songs anymore? People make mistakes, and good people own up to them.

    Also, before you even try to make the false equivalency, writing misogynistic fiction and then apologizing and owning up to it is totally different than taking advantage of underage girls and then apologizing for cheating on your girlfriends when called out.

  12. 22 minutes ago, DecayToDeath said:

    The leap in logic here is ludicrous. Like I said in a prior post a few pages back, should we have "seen it coming" that he's also a mobster and a murderer because he penned Luca? No. It might not be a coincidence that he wrote this song, but we can't just look at songs from artists' repertoires, take them at face value, and assume it's logical to make assumptions or to "see it coming" that they do the same things that a fictional narrator in one of their songs did. 

    Again, you're comparing two very different things. Jesse Lacey being a mobster is far-fetched. Him being an abuser is not. Not because of his lyrics, but because it's simply a much more realistic scenario for a person to be an abuser than a "mobster". Also, let's not forget, HE ADMITTED TO IT.