puntiniCAZpuntini

I wish that people who can make music could live off of it, so they can make more records for me to listen to, and 100 bands don’t break up every month because one member has to get a job. That’s the reason. But as we’ve known for years, you are limited and you couldn’t get there on your own.

Imagine how wonderful it would be, millions of people in the square burning Scialpi t-shirts... hordes of kids drowning the usual jerk who offers you "the nice t-shirt" with his acoustic guitar on the beach... just thinking about it makes me feel better.

Cpt, your argument makes sense, but it applies to you, as you already have a refined taste from the fact that you know how to seek out records. Let's try a thought experiment: someone who doesn't buy records, lacks refined taste, and always hangs out on Radio Deejay and similar crap. By eliminating the possibility of crap, after a few years of stagnation, there would be a turnaround. For example: at the beginning of the 1900s, cocaine was legally used, and it was nice to offer it to guests, like coffee. Freud recommended it to many of his patients. Then they made it illegal, and after a few years of chaos, now it's seen by most as the devil. If you made crap music illegal, I believe the same would happen. Let's arrest Cremonini, crucify the Pooh, I don't know, let's cut the hair of the Tokio Hotel guy. If nothing happens after that, well, at least we tried. And at least there’s one less awful hairstyle in the world.

Yeeeh, now you're doing the cleaning... but no one believes it...

<< Don't generalize >> I'm not generalizing. As far as I've understood in the two or three days I've been around, we're discussing art here. Art has nothing to do with utility. Therefore, no one denies the usefulness of the intercom, which saves you from climbing the stairs, but if I had to read a review of my new Bticino with video, I would include one. Beyond this, the main reason I wrote here was the self-review. Since I'm not in the head of the reviewer, I can't know if they admitted to being the author out of honesty or out of pride. Obviously, I think poorly of it, and I assess it as pride. So there!

Come on, one doesn't need to write "for me" 189 times in every comment. It's obvious that, since we're talking about things where personal taste reigns supreme, the "for me" is implied by default. Sure, if they turned off all the radios, I'd be happier because people would be forced to look for records themselves, and they would definitely find better things than what’s playing around. Maybe you walk into a bar at Termini Station and find yourself in the middle of "The Best Band You Never Heard In Your Life," or even Suomi Finland Perkele. There would be more personality in public places, and not just that damn Linus or Albertino. For me, you know, for me.

<<< I find audiobooks extremely useful >>> a can opener is useful too. Let's review them! << Caz, Caz... it makes sense for you, but only for you, right! >> For me, only what makes sense to me has the right to exist. Since it's a personal opinion, I am my own law. I'm not saying you’re all idiots, I'm just saying I would feel like an idiot. But since when do we debate a personal opinion here? <<< free hands easily lead to distraction. >>> That has a pretty good double meaning.

<< And a smile every now and then, right >> Actually, I've been laughing since yesterday. You can't imagine what expression I have. << you didn't discuss the work, >> Oh really? I discussed the work in its primary essence, which is: it makes no sense to exist. << Good for someone to tell me "look, I listened to this audiobook and it sucked": >> As I told you before, look in the address bar: it says debaser, not audiobooks. But you promoted yourself, didn't you? Now I'm laughing (just informing you since I notice your interest in my state of mind).

<< Given that if you don't like audiobooks, you can simply choose not to listen to them, >> that's a pointless argument. You wrote a review on a site where works are discussed. And I am discussing the work. Of course, if I don't like the work, I won't take it, but that doesn't change the fact that if you write here, it is assumed you want to discuss it. If you didn't want to discuss it, then you shouldn't have written, that seems like a much more straightforward argument than yours. <<< I find much of it petty and a bit childish >>> From bad to worse! You use this site to promote yourself, and I'm the childish and petty one. You give it a four, because five would be a bit exaggerated, and I'm the childish and petty one. << in Anglo-Saxon countries, audiobooks have a huge tradition >> And Muslims don't eat pork. So what? And after the fact that audiobooks are popular in Anglo-Saxon countries, how should that change anything for me? In Italy, Maria Di Filippi is popular... so, is Maria De Filippi a good and right thing? It doesn't seem so to me. << who is tired of listening to music. >> You're a site that's 90% about music; it was very likely to find someone (in this case, me) who would tell you that listening to something other than music is pointless for them. << all these little moral lectures are a bit exaggerated >> Little moral lectures? I just said that I think it's a stupid thing. That is, my opinion. If you like it, well, good for you. Some people like to be frustrated, some people like to kill and torture others, so it's not that I'm scandalized by the fact that you listen to a book. I was just shocked by another fact that testifies (for me) to the immense laziness that pervades our time. If you wanted to receive praise or discuss the technical side of what you've done, you should have written your review on audiobooks.com, but remember that you wrote it on Debaser, where people use their stereo for other things.