Fidia

But Fjell, I am very open-minded and extremely tolerant of other people's tastes, trust me. In fact, I haven't questioned the musical tastes of the reviewer in the slightest, who is obviously free to listen to and consider deserving whatever they believe. But since I absolutely disagree with everything they say, my vote is a consequence of that. Let me give you an example: what score would you give to a brilliantly written review that criticizes all metal by claiming it's satanic music, devoid of quality, and other clichés, inviting people to listen to a real band like, I don’t know, Lunapop?

My dear Fjelltronen, the review may be written in correct Italian, but it contains content that I believe is terrible and completely off the mark, so my 1 is fully justified. For me, it deserves a 1; if you’re okay with that or if you think Lovelorn can write better than me, honestly, I couldn’t care less.

Alright, an ignorant kid who mistakes me for a woman doesn't deserve a response.
One piece of advice, though. Be careful if you happen to meet your idol... you could end up like the brother you’re named after.

I disagree with Nick. The U2 are now a mediocre band. In my opinion, "Boy" was a great album. "October" was a step down but still good. Then gradually fading down to today's kitschy stuff.

"not just for lovers of dark sounds like me.."
Okay, that sentence is enough for me; I can easily do without reading the rest..

"...you don't even know where music lives...".
Excuse me, but first I have to have a good laugh.
Okay, and what do you think this sentence denotes if not absolute mental arrogance since you don't know me?
Did I perhaps write that you don't understand a damn thing about music because you listen to Michael Jackson? Where, I pray?
The lack of arguments is a nasty beast to face since one immediately resorts to standard phrases like "you don't know where music lives."

He may be innocent and have never done anything wrong in his life, but personally, rather than leave my son alone with him, I would rather have an arm amputated without anesthesia.

And yes, it’s hard to know how to respond in the face of the objectivity of a man (I repeat, a man, not a musician) who is certainly not all there, and then come the discussions: but here we are commenting on the music, etc. etc.
It’s true, here we comment on the music, but I jumped into a conversation where the music hasn’t even been touched upon, and I continue willingly expressing my thoughts on the person of Jackson.
I have two more observations to make: first of all, it’s at least strange that several users logged in just to comment on this review (which makes me think that the various authenticated and non-authenticated nicknames belong to the same mind), but that’s neither here nor there; the second thing, and please answer me honestly if you can: would you trust leaving a child alone with Michael Jackson?
I doubt you have the courage to answer me, given that you didn’t respond to the question I asked earlier.
This is to say that it’s true we need to talk about music, but we also ought to have the decency not to argue lengthy defenses about an unbalanced character (a fact) and one that is at least questionable.

Of course, I'm against violence, but if I had happened to walk into his room that day, I think I wouldn't have spared him a good kick in the balls.

And -I’ll say it again- my judgment is not about the music, which can be liked or not, but about the man. Because anyone who does what he did with his newborn son, showing him with no respect and spinning him around like a toy, careless that he could slip from his hands in front of millions of people, to me, is just a big piece of shit. But clearly my standards are different from yours, given that you insist on justifying him by writing nonsense about how he held him tightly to show him to the fans. Yes, yes, I really saw how he showed him to the fans.