SZA

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, Alvoram said:

That’s a mean hearted thing to say, especially when the solution is so clear and easy, you’re just being stubborn at this point.

So did we btw, saw everything we wanted to, including the sets that got closed off. Because we got there early. 
 

But more importantly, if the festival takes that attitude then it just become a never ending vicious circle, people will need to get there earlier and earlier each year, to the point that it will ruin the sets before. (Already reports of people’s enjoyment of Nothing But Thieves being spoilt a little this year by the arriving Avril crowd.) 

Yeah, honestly I've got down way to early for acts I really want to see in the past but I would never in my life have guessed I needed to get to the Other stage early to see anyone, I don't believe that field has ever been closed off before?

[gizmoman]

4 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

And you can present it way you just did and we can have a reasonable discussion. But the minute someone chimes in with phrases like "woke ideology" as a pejorative then every sane person here knows we are not going to get anywhere. That person is either trolling or awful. 

I'll have most arguments on here, but the second I see stuff like that I'm just on to the next post because you'll never have anything constructive come from that mindset. It's driven by hate and anger, not discussion and debate.

The phrase "woke ideology" wasn't used, Calgon and you have put it in quotes but it's not in the original post, so it can't have been used as a perojative. The overall flavour of the post is offensive to some on here to be sure but that shouldn't be the limiting factor on discussion. I really don't want to be seen as defending this, better for the original poster to make his own arguments, if they are outrageously racist etc. then ban him then.

[Alvoram]

Just now, Colorblindjames said:

How is it a mean thing to say? Everyone knows you won’t get to everything you want at Glastonbury. At the pyramid stage support acts are frequently disrupted by people getting there early for the headliner. Just the way it is. 

Because it doesn’t just affect the person that wants to see the next act. If you read the rest of my comment.

 

If that was the attitude the festival took, ‘get their earlier next time,’ then that’s what people would do. Earlier and earlier each year, until YOUR enjoyment of a band on before one of these oversubscribed artists is ruined by the crowd waiting for the next artist. 

[DeanoL]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

The phrase "woke ideology" wasn't used, Calgon and you have put it in quotes but it's not in the original post, so it can't have been used as a perojative. The overall flavour of the post is offensive to some on here to be sure but that shouldn't be the limiting factor on discussion. I really don't want to be seen as defending this, better for the original poster to make his own arguments, if they are outrageously racist etc. then ban him then.

Okay "woke" as a pejorative then. Honestly I have learned to just skip any post the second I see that word used and I'm a Star Wars fan in 2024 so I do it a lot.

[CaledonianGonzo]

[gizmoman]

2 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Okay "woke" as a pejorative then. Honestly I have learned to just skip any post the second I see that word used and I'm a Star Wars fan in 2024 so I do it a lot.

Maybe the forum software needs updating so "w*ke" joins the other asterisked words!😄

[CaledonianGonzo]

11 minutes ago, The Nal said:

 

Snapped this walking through 

 

Looks alright.  Bigger than Janelle Monae at any rate.

[The Orgazoid]

There seems to be an awful lot of throwing the baby out with the bath water and overreaction on this thread.

 

Firstly, This happens every year (despite having warnings from the council) people always talk about 'one year something bad will happen' but it doesn't. This type of thing regularly happens at any large scale event. The reality is some crowds will be big and oversubscribed, but most won't. For those that are it generally means a bit of inconvenience, rather than a risk to life.

 

As someone so eloquently said earlier, Glastonbury do not know who is going to attend, so getting each act on the right stage isnt as easy as it would be for a festival who sold tickets to the people who want to see the acts they bought the tickets for in the first place. They also book acts fairly early and don't know what will happen in the months after that to change their popularity.

 

95%+ of acts are no issue at all and are placed correctly, every year about 5% arent, but its the nature of the beast and it really isnt the end of the world that people make it out to be.

 

On the SZA issue, this really isn't an issue either. I know some don't like to believe the intel because it didn't come directly from efests (in the same way nobody wanted to believe Kasabian were the Woodsies act, but they were all along, it just wasnt Efests intel so easily brushed under the carpet) but they tried to book two acts before her. After they didnt work out, what was Emily supposed to do, book KOL? She already had to release a grovelling Guardian article last year because it was all male acts headlining, so why not got for another available female.

 

That happened to be SZA, and the scheduling requests of other acts meant it had to be Sunday, but so what? The alternatives would have been worse in different ways.

 

I have no interest in SZA, but i dont blame the festval for booking her because i understand the circumstances and thankfully there was plenty for me elshwere.

[Colorblindjames]

29 minutes ago, Alvoram said:

Because it doesn’t just affect the person that wants to see the next act. If you read the rest of my comment.

 

If that was the attitude the festival took, ‘get their earlier next time,’ then that’s what people would do. Earlier and earlier each year, until YOUR enjoyment of a band on before one of these oversubscribed artists is ruined by the crowd waiting for the next artist. 

That as I said has been happening for years. It’s what happens at festivals. 

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

I can't see the post now, I've been busy. Someone had a post deleted for saying the words "woke ideology"?

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

Which is odd because, after I reported a message which used racial slurs, I've received messages from mods saying that racial slurs are actually allowed under eFest guidelines.

 

How confusing.

 

What *are* the site guidelines?!

Edited Wednesday at 02:22 PM by MEGATRONICMEATWAGON

[Ben7amin_]

28 minutes ago, The Orgazoid said:

There seems to be an awful lot of throwing the baby out with the bath water and overreaction on this thread.

 

Firstly, This happens every year (despite having warnings from the council) people always talk about 'one year something bad will happen' but it doesn't. This type of thing regularly happens at any large scale event. The reality is some crowds will be big and oversubscribed, but most won't. For those that are it generally means a bit of inconvenience, rather than a risk to life.

 

As someone so eloquently said earlier, Glastonbury do not know who is going to attend, so getting each act on the right stage isnt as easy as it would be for a festival who sold tickets to the people who want to see the acts they bought the tickets for in the first place. They also book acts fairly early and don't know what will happen in the months after that to change their popularity.

 

95%+ of acts are no issue at all and are placed correctly, every year about 5% arent, but its the nature of the beast and it really isnt the end of the world that people make it out to be.

 

On the SZA issue, this really isn't an issue either. I know some don't like to believe the intel because it didn't come directly from efests (in the same way nobody wanted to believe Kasabian were the Woodsies act, but they were all along, it just wasnt Efests intel so easily brushed under the carpet) but they tried to book two acts before her. After they didnt work out, what was Emily supposed to do, book KOL? She already had to release a grovelling Guardian article last year because it was all male acts headlining, so why not got for another available female.

 

That happened to be SZA, and the scheduling requests of other acts meant it had to be Sunday, but so what? The alternatives would have been worse in different ways.

 

I have no interest in SZA, but i dont blame the festval for booking her because i understand the circumstances and thankfully there was plenty for me elshwere.

 

Well put 100% agree with all of that. 

They literally do not know how thousands of people attending will act. 

 

If they believed the stuff they read on social media the amount of people watching Coldplay would be about 5 because apparently everyone hates them. 

 

They will learn from all the overcrowding incidents they have but for the best will in the world they can never completely predict all of them. 

 

Last year about 150 people watched Barry Cant Swim play.  This year he exploded in popularity. 

 

Who knows at what time they had his booking locked in against his popularity spurt In the last 12 months......

 

[fraybentos1]

7 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

Which is odd because, after I reported a message which used racial slurs, I've received messages from mods saying that racial slurs are actually allowed under eFest guidelines.

 

How confusing.

 

What *are* the site guidelines?!

What was the racial slur? 

[DeanoL]

36 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

I can't see the post now, I've been busy. Someone had a post deleted for saying the words "woke ideology"?

No, they had a post deleted for saying sexist and racist stuff about an act. The fact that they were also talking about the festival going "woke" was just the reason some of us just straight up scrolled past it.

[gizmoman]

1 hour ago, The Orgazoid said:

There seems to be an awful lot of throwing the baby out with the bath water and overreaction on this thread.

 

Firstly, This happens every year (despite having warnings from the council) people always talk about 'one year something bad will happen' but it doesn't. This type of thing regularly happens at any large scale event. The reality is some crowds will be big and oversubscribed, but most won't. For those that are it generally means a bit of inconvenience, rather than a risk to life.

 

As someone so eloquently said earlier, Glastonbury do not know who is going to attend, so getting each act on the right stage isnt as easy as it would be for a festival who sold tickets to the people who want to see the acts they bought the tickets for in the first place. They also book acts fairly early and don't know what will happen in the months after that to change their popularity.

 

95%+ of acts are no issue at all and are placed correctly, every year about 5% arent, but its the nature of the beast and it really isnt the end of the world that people make it out to be.

 

On the SZA issue, this really isn't an issue either. I know some don't like to believe the intel because it didn't come directly from efests (in the same way nobody wanted to believe Kasabian were the Woodsies act, but they were all along, it just wasnt Efests intel so easily brushed under the carpet) but they tried to book two acts before her. After they didnt work out, what was Emily supposed to do, book KOL? She already had to release a grovelling Guardian article last year because it was all male acts headlining, so why not got for another available female.

 

That happened to be SZA, and the scheduling requests of other acts meant it had to be Sunday, but so what? The alternatives would have been worse in different ways.

 

I have no interest in SZA, but i dont blame the festval for booking her because i understand the circumstances and thankfully there was plenty for me elshwere.

 

9 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

No, they had a post deleted for saying sexist and racist stuff about an act. The fact that they were also talking about the festival going "woke" was just the reason some of us just straight up scrolled past it.

Except it wasn't sexist, Emily has a clear agenda on this, suggesting SZA was chosen (partly) because of her gender isn't sexist and is probably accurate as Orgazoid's post also suggests, should his post be deleted too?

[gigpusher]

3 hours ago, DeanoL said:

I think the other thing to bear in mind is as ever there will be loads of people on eFests that didn't go this year for whatever reason, but still have an interest in the festival. I'm one of them. And yeah, I'm mostly hanging out discussing stuff in the negative threads because that's where there is interesting discussion to be had, theorising about why certain things went wrong.

I can't be the only one, and it's probably why these threads are busier than ones with people going "how awesome was X?" 

For some context though people are wired more for negativity than positivity. My personal thoughts on the festival this year. Nothing (or at least very little) went wrong it was as near a perfect festival as I have ever experienced. Having been to every year bar one since 2010 this year is in my top 2 and I missed so much that I hope to catch up on tv. The demise of the festival is being greatly exaggerated. One of my Spanish colleagues was eager to talk to me about it this morning she's determined to get tickets next year. She knows a friend who went and she couldn't get over how amazing it looked.

 

We're the luckiest people in the world but typically a lot of people just don't seem to realise it. Trust me it was a vintage year. Even the admittedly small bit of SZA I saw looked good and I didn't bother going to any other Pyramid headliner. I also genuinely didn't think the crowd was that bad. I was just a bit too tired and as my husband had injured himself I knew I would be doing most of the packing up which was the only reason I didn't stay longer.

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

1 hour ago, fraybentos1 said:

What was the racial slur? 

 

Someone used a perjorative remark for talking about skin colour.

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

30 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

 

Except it wasn't sexist, Emily has a clear agenda on this, suggesting SZA was chosen (partly) because of her gender isn't sexist and is probably accurate as Orgazoid's post also suggests, should his post be deleted too?

 

I thought this was true as well hence the "two female headliners" line she coughed up last year. 

 

Not to mention box ticking/diversity/representation has been mentioned about 5 million times on efests, like it loathe it.

 

Edit: not that I've seen the original deleted post.

Edited Wednesday at 03:41 PM by MEGATRONICMEATWAGON

[DeanoL]

22 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

 

Except it wasn't sexist, Emily has a clear agenda on this, suggesting SZA was chosen (partly) because of her gender isn't sexist and is probably accurate as Orgazoid's post also suggests, should his post be deleted too?

I mean you're right, it said she was *partly* chosen for her gender. Then it said the other parts she was chosen for were her body image and race. 

 

It wasn't saying "in addition to her musical talent" or anything else, it said just for those reasons. Beyond being offensive, that's not a coherent point that one can debate. I can't go to that person "actually did you know she has four Grammys, maybe that was the reason she got booked?" and have them go "oh, yeah, sorry didn't know she was actually talented, my bad!"

 

That was never going to happen, there was no value in that comment, no good discussion to be had. It was just someone being nasty. And that seems to have been obvious to everyone except for you. I mean, if you looked at that post and thought, "you know what, he seems reasonable, I should chat more with him and try and convince him of the error of his ways" then fair play to you. Maybe drop him a DM.

[MEGABOWL]

1 hour ago, The Orgazoid said:

There seems to be an awful lot of throwing the baby out with the bath water and overreaction on this thread.

 

Firstly, This happens every year (despite having warnings from the council) people always talk about 'one year something bad will happen' but it doesn't. This type of thing regularly happens at any large scale event. The reality is some crowds will be big and oversubscribed, but most won't. For those that are it generally means a bit of inconvenience, rather than a risk to life.

 

As someone so eloquently said earlier, Glastonbury do not know who is going to attend, so getting each act on the right stage isnt as easy as it would be for a festival who sold tickets to the people who want to see the acts they bought the tickets for in the first place. They also book acts fairly early and don't know what will happen in the months after that to change their popularity.

 

95%+ of acts are no issue at all and are placed correctly, every year about 5% arent, but its the nature of the beast and it really isnt the end of the world that people make it out to be.

 

On the SZA issue, this really isn't an issue either. I know some don't like to believe the intel because it didn't come directly from efests (in the same way nobody wanted to believe Kasabian were the Woodsies act, but they were all along, it just wasnt Efests intel so easily brushed under the carpet) but they tried to book two acts before her. After they didnt work out, what was Emily supposed to do, book KOL? She already had to release a grovelling Guardian article last year because it was all male acts headlining, so why not got for another available female.

 

That happened to be SZA, and the scheduling requests of other acts meant it had to be Sunday, but so what? The alternatives would have been worse in different ways.

 

I have no interest in SZA, but i dont blame the festval for booking her because i understand the circumstances and thankfully there was plenty for me elshwere.

This is an excellent post. Only thing I can add is those saying ‘well just swap Janelle and Avril’ might be underestimating how complicated it is. What if Janelle and Burna Boy would only take a Pyramid slot? What if Janelle was so keen on being up there after 2 goes at West Holts that she was willing to take a reduced fee? There could be plenty we don’t know.

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

 

I thought this was true as well hence the "two female headliners" line she coughed up last year. 

 

Not to mention box ticking/diversity/representation has been mentioned about 5 million times on efests, like it loathe it.

 

Edit: not that I've seen the original deleted post.

I mean, Emily has been quite clear that she has an active objective to get better gender equality at the festival. Yes, that's true and it probably factored into the SZA booking. She's even talked about that quota with "two female headlines". So that's fair grounds.

 

She's nearly never talked about booking more acts of colour, or having more acts with LGBT representation, or more acts with certain body types (I don't even know what that means, it was in the post). She maybe mentioned race once to try and justify the three male headliners last year.

 

That stuff is all made up. Especially given we know she was essentially replacing Madonna!

[DeanoL]

5 minutes ago, MEGABOWL said:

This is an excellent post. Only thing I can add is those saying ‘well just swap Janelle and Avril’ might be underestimating how complicated it is. What if Janelle and Burna Boy would only take a Pyramid slot? What if Janelle was so keen on being up there after 2 goes at West Holts that she was willing to take a reduced fee? There could be plenty we don’t know.

Then put Seasick Steve or the Birmingham Ballet on Other then? I mean there's a chance you're right and they did everything they could but the line-up didn't work with Avril on the Pyramid no matter how they sliced it... it just doesn't seem that likely.

[4AssedMonkey]

8 minutes ago, MEGABOWL said:

This is an excellent post. Only thing I can add is those saying ‘well just swap Janelle and Avril’ might be underestimating how complicated it is. What if Janelle and Burna Boy would only take a Pyramid slot? What if Janelle was so keen on being up there after 2 goes at West Holts that she was willing to take a reduced fee? There could be plenty we don’t know.

 

See what you did there.  Well played.

 

Back OT after all the echo chamber shouting.  Watched a bit of the SZA slot on iPlayer to give it a chance.  Thought it was total boring shite.

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

40 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I mean, Emily has been quite clear that she has an active objective to get better gender equality at the festival. Yes, that's true and it probably factored into the SZA booking. She's even talked about that quota with "two female headlines". So that's fair grounds.

 

She's nearly never talked about booking more acts of colour, or having more acts with LGBT representation, or more acts with certain body types (I don't even know what that means, it was in the post). She maybe mentioned race once to try and justify the three male headliners last year.

 

That stuff is all made up. Especially given we know she was essentially replacing Madonna!

 

Yeah, I've never heard anything direct from EE about sexuality or race. I just meant on the forums with the box ticking/representation/diversity stuff. 

 

What did the original post say exactly?

 

Must have been pretty strong to prompt all the "smash the fasch" posts.

Edited Wednesday at 04:32 PM by MEGATRONICMEATWAGON

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

36 minutes ago, 4AssedMonkey said:

 

See what you did there.  Well played.

 

Back OT after all the echo chamber shouting.  Watched a bit of the SZA slot on iPlayer to give it a chance.  Thought it was total boring shite.

 

I'd love it if a music reviewer working for one of the media outlets was this brutal, lol.

 

Coldplay, Pyramid, Glastonbury 2024:

 

3/5 stars.

 

"An absolute stack of old sh*t"