odradek

Really sharp, LucaGranziero, Lapalisse would be bewildered. Anyway, you're right at least when you say that it's not important.

Thank you for the dedication and the wish, SuperNetta. And for the tip on Seasick Steve - 4 simple and rustic stars for him and the others. Sweaty greetings.

And what a delightfully pompous little song "Forget Myself" is (it reminds me a bit of those by Ian McNabb). Hi, terrone.

And, still regarding some underlying themes of the dialogue, I am rereading these days "The Smart Axle’s Wing" by Glen Gould, which opens with a pseudo-interview of the musician with himself. He apparently "evades" the question of the relationship between performer and audience, addressing it in a very peculiar way. But the whole book is rich with many interesting pages. Adelphi, page 416, 11.00 euros. - After pointing out two texts that are probably well known to some of the DePassanti, I would ask for some suggestions regarding books (in Italian, please) that tackle the same themes... Thank you.

Here, yes. Barenboim's book would be an excellent tool to try to shift this dialogue, whose premises seemed fruitful and whose outcome appears to have derailed, onto an interesting terrain. A book worthy of great attention even from those, like myself, who do not have the same expertise and familiarity with the two duelists. I feel compelled to recommend it to all passersby of this page, particularly to Kyrielison (who will soon delight us with a review) - Daniel Barenboim: Music Awakens Time - Feltrinelli, 192 pages - euro 15.00

Buy this, Ghemi.

Good job, Nino. His album that I love the most.

Count, I understand and agree with what you’re saying, but I must intervene again to correct the term "lynching," which I do not think is appropriate, and I will tell you why. However, there remains a question for me, at this point, unavoidable, which your post evades, and that is the issue of limits: can we tolerate everything? I cannot, and especially regarding cancer, I am not just angry; I am simply, but absolutely, DISGUSTED - Honestly, the dynamics related to interpersonal relationships do not concern me; everyone can manage those as they see fit: certainly, it is not pleasant to become aware of them, but that is indeed a private matter. I was raising, and I raise, a question of MANAGING A PUBLIC SPACE, and the question remains the same: can we tolerate, just because there are clearly disturbed personalities involved, things like those written by the user in question? I say no. And be careful: do not speak of lynching. It is not a personal issue of one user against another; I do not care about him or his troubles with anyone. It is, I must repeat, because it seems to slip away, a question of limits. Far from lynching. It is a question of civilization. It may seem exaggerated, but in my opinion, it needed to be raised. Also because, if there is no limit, the proliferation of similar behaviors can be considered acceptable. Evidently, as I said, there are reasons for which the limit, in this case, has been set beyond the execrable sequence of absurdities posted by the user. I do not know them. I believe it is correct that they be clarified, at least as much as the rules for reviews. I do not enjoy at all wearing these annoying shoes. But pretending nothing is happening I like even less. Okay, I hope this makes it clearer. Bai bai.

Well, no, Conte, evidently this isn't clear enough: for me this is a fundamental issue, and it concerns the minimum acceptable levels of decency in a space like this. It matters little how the discussion originated. As far as I'm concerned, the posts I've copy-pasted (and many others of the same nature) are OBJECTIVELY GRAVELY SERIOUS. There are no justifications whatsoever. I don't understand what the hell this user is still doing here, why they haven't been banned in due time. If the individual in question remained silent and admitted the misery of their behavior, it might even make sense, but they insist on euphemisms and puerile justifications. Fantastic. - At the same time, I see that the editors are concerned about the form of the reviews, the rules to be followed. A comprehensible and shareable concern. Personally, I worry about the minimum level of respect for other rules: if someone writes things of such gravity, they must be removed. Not only is this person still here, but they deny the obvious and even play the victim. - Clearly, we have different conceptions and concerns. The staff must have excellent and valid reasons for not having acted in due time. I didn't get involved because I wasn't affected, and if the user hadn't insisted with their miserable attitude, I wouldn't have brought it up even here. But now I have: if this is an irrelevant matter for you and others, I understand, but it surprises me a bit... I won't intervene anymore and have nothing else to say except that I can't stay in a space where behaviors like those of the user in question are tolerated. Regards.

@CaptainHowdy: "... but I can't express myself regarding the 'strongly tinted photography' since I don't know what it is..." ??? Didn't you read the brief excerpt above? Is more needed? Because there is more, but this seemed gross enough to me. - And then you talk about "... common sense, civilization, and mutual respect": do you see any of that in those posts? Well, you wouldn't want to be a Christian Democrat, but even Andreotti never denied such obviousness. - Anyway, personally, I consider the matter closed: the user in question, despite these and many other similar outbursts, still has access to the site and has the nerve to deny it, using pathetic euphemisms. This, I repeat, is intolerable to me. I just felt it was necessary to say it; you can't tolerate everything.