JimMorrison

Hello trell :)

Thank you, lukin, I really appreciate your comment and I'll keep it in mind for future reviews. In fact, Josi_ can explain the issue of the tracks being out of order better (hence the "damn") since he followed the birth of this review step by step. The schematic nature of the writing is "intentional," and I'll tell you why: I received this demo from Josi_ and immediately threw it into the player. Here, I poured out the sensations of the first listen for each single track, trying to recreate the atmosphere that surrounded me. However, it’s obvious that someone like me, who only knows this work from dEUS and very few subsequent developments, has a very limited view of the work, and to the eyes of a "hardcore" fan, it may seem "cold." I swear, though, given the extreme pleasure they brought me, I’ll join your club. Who among you is the president that can send me the membership card?

What type? If you make a serious comment, I swear I’ll respond in a serious tone.

Devon It's made much better. :)

Nooooo, why?! :-)

An anonymous person wrote on my review of dEUS: "What could possibly be Sturm und Drang in dEUS is something only you know." Should you explain it to him, or should I go find him with a bat?

So Gee, explain to me what might bother you in a tracklist down there or of the year up top that I just don't get. I would accept comments like: "The review doesn't convey the idea" or "You talk too little about the music and too much about the trip" or even "You hype up an album that I consider crap." Okay, there I'd respond. You made a sensible comment, can I not respond?

Come on, Jos_ just save at least The Wall and The Final Cut. I'll throw away the one in the middle and all the post-Waters stuff for you, alright?

@dottmarcus: I understood the meaning of your post, and that's exactly why I expressed myself that way. So we have: a website that hosts reviews. A solid point: OK. We have thousands of reviews: whether good or bad. A solid point: OK. We have thousands of users: idiots, smart people, creatives, fakes, whatever. A solid point: OK. There's no limit to the posts, a universal language for the site. Everyone, for better or worse, expresses whatever they like, either pretending or stating opinions without understanding the subject. What's wrong with that? If I choose to butt into a silly discussion, that's my choice. If I decide to read a meaningless review, that's my choice. If I comment, it means I've still been stimulated by something. Otherwise, I wouldn't post. I’d move on to another review and/or discussion. That's what I mean... understand?

Gee, believe me, you're a desperate case: you need help, new stimuli, someone to pull you out of the abyss you're sinking into. Let me explain once more, in more detail, so I hope you'll understand: you see, when you write a review, the site (debaser) gives you the opportunity to link to another site (freeDB.org to be precise) for the official tracklist, which is considered by many (hence the request) to be a fairly important piece of information. Since the album in question is a demo, there wasn’t one on freeDB, and since many see it as an important detail (I’ll reiterate), and I’ve put the titles of the tracks in complete disarray in my review, I wrote it down below. Even if for you it’s a trivial detail and you don’t give a damn about it, since it’s placed at the end of the review, you can skip it altogether. But you insist because you have nothing to argue with, especially since you’ve only read the line about the year and the tracklist at the bottom. The year, in fact, or the context and/or what I deem appropriate to include, is at the top of those reviews where I find it necessary to provide context (see others) or, as in this case, it concerns an album decontextualized from the "official" activity of the band, to better highlight it. Do you want a summary?