puntiniCAZpuntini

DeRank : 14,44 • DeAge™ : 7949 days

  • Contact
  • Here since 21 october 2003
Voto:
<< The situation is different if the new "old review" is lacking: at this point, I believe that a censorial intervention by the current editor wouldn't scandalize anyone. >> There was a time when everything worked that way, and many got angry. Accusations of nepotism, mafia, extortion for the sake of publication on the Homepage. Things you can’t understand until you read them. As for the "cleansing": I would be happy about it, but I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of whoever has to choose from 24046 reviews. Twenty-four thousand, it hurts. Hurts hurts hurts.
Can Future Days
24 aug 09
Voto:
"<< you must at least try to go in different directions, give new keys of interpretation >> And what, you really don't like this? It's the cover of the song by Luca Carboni, but only cultured people like me understand it. "I also bought a motorcycle, used but well-kept..."
Can Future Days
24 aug 09
Voto:
<< if we only wanted to review "immaculate" albums on Debaser, there would be these possibilities: >> Since 1974, no album by Can has been reviewed, so you had a total of ELEVEN options, including Saw Delight, which is from the same year as S.O.Babalooma (reviewed). If you're not familiar with the unreviewed albums, there's a beautiful way to save face: stay silent. Or another option: listen to them, and then write.
Voto:
<< Well done! The autobiography is posthumous. Don’t you know that posthumous books are only published to make money for the publishing houses? >> But your sister will be posthumous. The autobiography is from 2000, and he died in 2005.
Voto:
"<< And you voted for it. >> Of course. One must always remember that these are "reviews" and not "free essays," therefore if inaccuracies are written – for me – the vote is zero. And I repeat as above that if not even one piece of information is provided: neither years nor release numbers nor components, I am actually "happier."
Voto:
"Bill's brother doesn't fully play on this record" = he left halfway through the recording, which is why there was a change. Two different ways of saying the same thing. "I don't think I did it to show off" and what does that have to do with it? The discussion wasn't yours, but mine, and I just wanted to talk about the fact that by writing inaccuracies you add to the sea of errors that floods the internet, and it was only for that reason that I was correcting. To stem the tide for a moment. I contest the reviews; right now, I don’t even know what kind of user you are, what you listen to, what you like, what you've already written, if I like it, if I don't like it, if we have common tastes—I really don't know. So how can I judge? I just corrected a mistake and explained why I was correcting it, without any pretentious mental gymnastics or attacks of arrogance and various issues. I only read the bold part, not even the whole review.
Voto:
I have the Booklet, and during this album, there was a change. There are songs played by one and played by the other; I don't have time, otherwise I would scan it for you. The sites, as I was telling you, are worthless. One can quote debaser and say the worst nonsense, like that Nico was a man, that Bohemian Rhapsody is the longest song of all time, that the Melvins are not metal, and so much more.
Voto:
If you wanted to talk about him, you could have reviewed the autobiography, since it's beautifully detailed. Instead, you took one of his masterpieces and didn't describe it at all.
Voto:
This is not the third but the Fourth album. The third came out a couple of years earlier, and it's called N°3. Among other things, N°3 is the only one that deviates a bit from the Firebird scheme, being full of more folk than hard pieces. You also got the lineup wrong; Bill's brother doesn't completely play on this record, he was replaced by Armstrong from End Of Level Boss. But wouldn't it be better not to write biographical notes if you don't know them? If you trust the first shitty site you find, 90% of the time you’ll just end up writing inaccuracies. Now maybe someone will read yours and write inaccuracies again: it’s a vicious circle. Read the booklets; if you don’t have them, talk about the album and that's it.
Voto:
...It still exists.