Headliners 2023

[Hugh Jass II]

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

All paths lead to the same place though, don’t they?

Ridiculous or not it seems true and was broken long before Neil got wind of it.

[Neil]

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

All paths lead to the same place though, don’t they?

Only for the incredulous. 

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

Ridiculous or not it seems true and was broken long before Neil got wind of it.

It doesn't seem true, which is my point. A story to help sell it as it went against the nodding dog no-thinking. Of the crowd. 

[Hugh Jass II]

4 minutes ago, Neil said:

It doesn't seem true, which is my point. A story to help sell it as it went against the nodding dog no-thinking. Of the crowd. 

“Doesn’t seem true…” what evidence do you actually have that it isn’t true though? Strikes me that you are presenting your own opinions as fact without supporting evidence.

Not a single person here knows what goes on inside that farmhouse or who was or wasn’t approached before GnR was settled on. It seems fairly conceivable that they had their hopes pinned on Taylor returning and when she custard pied them they had to look elsewhere. Matt knew about Beyoncé’s dates for this summer back in 2021 so again it’s conceivable that the likes of Bey and Pink were already booked up which is how they ended up with GnR.

This is just a theory, it might be true, it might not be, but what I’m not doing is presenting it as a fact.

[Freddyflintstonree]

On 11/7/2022 at 8:12 PM, ITK19889 said:

Green Day, will headline 2023 🫵🏻 
 

Dis you? 

[MEGABOWL]

13 hours ago, Gnomicide said:

The curveball was Guns n Roses.

Exactly. If it hadn’t leaked so spectacularly and just been announced out of the blue that would have been a huge surprise.

[CaledonianGonzo]

But I want a curveball I like!

[Neil]

8 hours ago, Hugh Jass II said:

“Doesn’t seem true…” what evidence do you actually have that it isn’t true though? Strikes me that you are presenting your own opinions as fact without supporting evidence.

some things just don't seem believable.

 

[stuie]

18 minutes ago, Neil said:

some things just don't seem believable.

 

Are you saying that when someone else said it was gnr it was bollocks but when you heard it it was then true? I’m genuinely confused here.

[Suprefan]

18 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

But I want a curveball I like!

Ask Serrano about curveballs

 

[Neil]

3 minutes ago, stuie said:

Are you saying that when someone else said it was gnr it was bollocks but when you heard it it was then true? I’m genuinely confused here.

i got my info from a known and proven source, the other came from an unproven source and with a ridiculous story.

 

if you xdon't get why i rejected that story and that info you'll go along with any old shit and you don't have a basis to question my take.

Edited March 2, 2023 by Neil

[stuie]

Just now, Neil said:

i got my info from a known and proven source, the other came from an unproven source van with a ridiculous story.

But ultimately the same info? 

[Neil]

Just now, stuie said:

But ultimately the same info? 

from a trusted, proven source, that part is relevant.

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

Just now, Neil said:

i got my info from a known and proven source, the other came from an unproven source van with a ridiculous story.

To clarify:

Their source: received earlier than yours, but complete guesswork and a total coincidence that it materialised

Your source: received later but from better-connected contact, based upon a fact that it had been booked at that time

[Neil]

1 minute ago, stuie said:

But ultimately the same info? 

if i had to accept the rough bloke version i'd have also had to accept his ridiculous story.

[Neil]

Just now, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

To clarify:

Their source: received earlier than yours, but complete guesswork and a total coincidence that it materialised

no coincidence, cos there hasn't been all the other times that source has given me info, you're just looking  to question my  take because you took in the other story without question.

 

Just now, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

Your source: received later but from better-connected contact, based upon a fact that it had been booked at that time

 

[BenG92]

Oh good I see we're back here again 

[Neil]

stuie are you embarrassed that you believed that story? you should be.

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

1 minute ago, Neil said:

no coincidence, cos there hasn't been all the other times that source has given me info, you're just looking  to question my  take because you took in the other story without question.

 

 

I'm not questioning either take, regardless of who said it or where it came from, it's happening. I'm just trying to untangle the logic behind the difference in the sources. I'll move on...

[sisco]

And here once again is the reason people now won’t share info here 

[Neil]

Just now, sisco said:

And here once again is the reason people now won’t share info here 

its only info its believable.

[km9]

Jesus Christ 🤯

[Neil]

4 minutes ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

I'm not questioning either take, regardless of who said it or where it came from, it's happening. I'm just trying to untangle the logic behind the difference in the sources. I'll move on...

the difference is that i found one believable and the other unbelievable, i have to apply thought about what people say, cos otherwise i'd be going along with any ols shite, as some appear to have done here.

[Neil]

3 minutes ago, km9 said:

Jesus Christ 🤯

people say they don't want more of my opinion about this, and then drag it out of me.

[Freddyflintstonree]

Or perhaps the difference is one came from you and one did not.