Would the Rumours line-up still be together if ...

[Ench]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

OMG Another thread on this
None of us were there. But when you add up all the circumstantial evidence, the tour dates excuse seems pretty lame.

Jury: Exhibit A

Stevie refuses to join Fleetwood Mac in the studio claiming records don't sell. However that did not stop Stevie from recording 2 solo albums recently and touring to support them.

Exhibit B
Fleetwood Mac did record Buckingham/McVie but dared not to call it a Fleetwood Mac album. Clearly this would upset Stevie or she was pissed the band went on without her.

Exhibit C
The changing stories from Mick. First it was about tour dates. Lately it was just that they did not feel good with Lindsey. Huh? We know Stevie is the only band member who does not get along with Lindsey. Its a fair assumption that Stevie gave an ultimatum …"I refuse to record with him, and I refuse to tour with him" Being the band wants to tour, Mick made his pick and the rest is history.

Back to tour dates. Lindsey's solo tour ends about a month after the Mac tour started. When you lie like Stevie did about touring, you know there is another reason.

What you have posted is a general discussion about the event. It doesn't address the issue of whether the tour would have gone ahead with Lindsey had Lindsey been more agreeable during the negotiations for the tour.

Your claim that Stevie lied about touring is an assumption. So is your claim that Stevie was pissed by the Buckingham McVie album happening without her or that they wouldn't 'dare' call it a FM album. Later you claim to have a 'fair assumption', but it's based on other assumptions based on other assumptions.

Stevie's most recent album was in 2014. There's nothing inconsistent with her having recorded albums in 2011 and 2014, and deciding based on those albums that she didn't want to do any more. And nothing I've seen has said that that is the only reason she didn't want to join in on the album that because Buckingham McVie, so still no inconsistencies. It's clear from various evidence (e.g. SYW doco) that Stevie does not like working with Lindsey, from decades ago, but she has completed a large number of tours with him. No strong evidence that a tour with both Stevie and Lindsey was off the table from before the negotiations.

There's nothing inconsistent with the bust up having been about touring details and Mick and other members then not feeling good about continuing with Lindsey. A plausible scenario is that due to the nature of the discussions on touring a majority of the band decided that they didn't want to tour with Lindsey, the 'bad feeling' being caused or (more likely I believe) intensified by touring negotiations. EDIT: As an example, if the other band members decided that Lindsey was being an *ss, then that could easily have put them off and even later compromises by Lindsey would be too late. (I've discussed this possibility above.)

None of that is incompatible with a scenario where Lindsey being more agreeable during negotiations, from sufficiently early on, would have led to a full Rumours line up tour. Note that a full Rumours tour with a Stevie not being happy is entirely plausible - it's happened before.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by Buster

Of course Lindsey played a role in all of this. We will likely never know the truth, regardless of what the detectives in this board think. The problem I have is how it was done and that it doesn’t appear everything was done to try to work it out.

Yes to this.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by Ench

What you have posted is a general discussion about the event. It doesn't address the issue of whether the tour would have gone ahead with Lindsey had Lindsey been more agreeable during the negotiations for the tour.

Your claim that Stevie lied about touring is an assumption. So is your claim that Stevie was pissed by the Buckingham McVie album happening without her or that they wouldn't 'dare' call it a FM album. Later you claim to have a 'fair assumption', but it's based on other assumptions based on other assumptions.

Stevie's most recent album was in 2014. There's nothing inconsistent with her having recorded albums in 2011 and 2014, and deciding based on those albums that she didn't want to do any more. And nothing I've seen has said that that is the only reason she didn't want to join in on the album that because Buckingham McVie, so still no inconsistencies. It's clear from various evidence (e.g. SYW doco) that Stevie does not like working with Lindsey, from decades ago, but she has completed a large number of tours with him. No strong evidence that a tour with both Stevie and Lindsey was off the table from before the negotiations.

There's nothing inconsistent with the bust up having been about touring details and Mick and other members then not feeling good about continuing with Lindsey. A plausible scenario is that due to the nature of the discussions on touring a majority of the band decided that they didn't want to tour with Lindsey, the 'bad feeling' being caused or (more likely I believe) intensified by touring negotiations. EDIT: As an example, if the other band members decided that Lindsey was being an *ss, then that could easily have put them off and even later compromises by Lindsey would be too late. (I've discussed this possibility above.)

None of that is incompatible with a scenario where Lindsey being more agreeable during negotiations, from sufficiently early on, would have led to a full Rumours line up tour. Note that a full Rumours tour with a Stevie not being happy is entirely plausible - it's happened before.

What's your point?

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by Ench

What you have posted is a general discussion about the event. It doesn't address the issue of whether the tour would have gone ahead with Lindsey had Lindsey been more agreeable during the negotiations for the tour.

Your claim that Stevie lied about touring is an assumption. So is your claim that Stevie was pissed by the Buckingham McVie album happening without her or that they wouldn't 'dare' call it a FM album. Later you claim to have a 'fair assumption', but it's based on other assumptions based on other assumptions.

Stevie's most recent album was in 2014. There's nothing inconsistent with her having recorded albums in 2011 and 2014, and deciding based on those albums that she didn't want to do any more. And nothing I've seen has said that that is the only reason she didn't want to join in on the album that because Buckingham McVie, so still no inconsistencies. It's clear from various evidence (e.g. SYW doco) that Stevie does not like working with Lindsey, from decades ago, but she has completed a large number of tours with him. No strong evidence that a tour with both Stevie and Lindsey was off the table from before the negotiations.

There's nothing inconsistent with the bust up having been about touring details and Mick and other members then not feeling good about continuing with Lindsey. A plausible scenario is that due to the nature of the discussions on touring a majority of the band decided that they didn't want to tour with Lindsey, the 'bad feeling' being caused or (more likely I believe) intensified by touring negotiations. EDIT: As an example, if the other band members decided that Lindsey was being an *ss, then that could easily have put them off and even later compromises by Lindsey would be too late. (I've discussed this possibility above.)

None of that is incompatible with a scenario where Lindsey being more agreeable during negotiations, from sufficiently early on, would have led to a full Rumours line up tour. Note that a full Rumours tour with a Stevie not being happy is entirely plausible - it's happened before.

Threads like these is like a dog chasing its tail. They don't go anywhere.
We can only read between the lines of the statements we know. The statements are not logical IMHO so they are lies. As Judge Judy says, if it does not make sense, its not the truth.

Your statement:
"What you have posted is a general discussion about the event. It doesn't address the issue of whether the tour would have gone ahead with Lindsey had Lindsey been more agreeable during the negotiations for the tour".

Your statement is not logical because you are assuming Lindsey was not agreeable to tour dates. There is no proof of that. And as I mentioned, Lindsey's tour really does not interfere with the Mac's tour. They only are together for one month. So that tells me right there, scheduling was not an issue. I don't buy that argument because there are enough known facts to dispute that claim. You are asking me to comment on something I don't believe in so its a moot point. IMHO Stevie and Mick have been caught in false statements. False statements about not recording, false statements about tour schedules, false statements about not being happy with Lindsey. I also find the Christine explanation suspicious. So I am sorry I cant help you any further

So what about you. Do you believe Stevie when on why she refused to join the Mac in the studio? You don't find any circumstantial evidence or something to make you go hmmmmmmm to Stevie not choosing to record with Lindsey and not touring with Lindsey?

[Ench]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

Threads like these is like a dog chasing its tail. They don't go anywhere.

I disagree. This thread has had some posts which lead to reasonable discussion.

We can only read between the lines of the statements we know. The statements are not logical IMHO so they are lies. As Judge Judy says, if it does not make sense, its not the truth.

My point above was that the statements are not illogical. The reason for the double negative in that statement is that there are plausible contexts when they could be true. As an example it is entirely plausible that Stevie recorded albums in 2011 and 2014 and then decided that it wasn't worth recording any more. That would make sense.

Your statement:
"What you have posted is a general discussion about the event. It doesn't address the issue of whether the tour would have gone ahead with Lindsey had Lindsey been more agreeable during the negotiations for the tour".

Your statement is not logical because you are assuming Lindsey was not agreeable to tour dates. There is no proof of that. And as I mentioned, Lindsey's tour really does not interfere with the Mac's tour. They only are together for one month. So that tells me right there, scheduling was not an issue. I don't buy that argument because there are enough known facts to dispute that claim. You are asking me to comment on something I don't believe in so its a moot point. IMHO Stevie and Mick have been caught in false statements. False statements about not recording, false statements about tour schedules, false statements about not being happy with Lindsey. I also find the Christine explanation suspicious. So I am sorry I cant help you any further

No, there's no proof of that, but quite a bit of the evidence that we have says that it is true. E.g. direct statements from Mick and Stevie that point to the negotiations being a contributing cause of the breakdown. And, note that my OP and the more refined version I'm using now after constructive follow up posts is: 'If Lindsey had been more agreeable in negotiations concerning the tour, would the Rumours lineup still be together and go out on tour?' It does not assume that Lindsey wasn't agreeable (though evidence points elsewhere). If you feel you can support the claim that Lindsey was super-cooperative right from the start, then that would allow you to answer the question as 'no, Lindsey could not have been more agreeable, and therefore there was nothing he could have done that would have resulted in the Rumours lineup staying together.' Do you claim that? If so, based on what evidence?

So what about you. Do you believe Stevie when on why she refused to join the Mac in the studio? You don't find any circumstantial evidence or something to make you go hmmmmmmm to Stevie not choosing to record with Lindsey and not touring with Lindsey?

Like many of these points, I think her explanation was over-simple. And other things she has said show that there was more than just one factor involved. She has pointed out that albums don't sell well, as we are discussing here, and they aren't worth the money invested. She has also pointed out that she doesn't find recording albums fun, and that it's a whole year of not being fun. We know that she doesn't like what Lindsey does to her songs. There isn't just one reason for her not wanting to record that album. That she mentioned one reason in one single interview is not a lie, it's what happens in human conversation when you ask something. You get an answer, because people don't usually stop and spend half an hour explaining every pro and con that has led to a decision. This isn't lying, it's just normal discussion.

Also, I wouldn't find it to be a lie if Stevie decided to record another album in the future, because the circumstances may change. E.g. if FM2018 decided to do what Neil Finn did and record a new album in a small number of sessions in Neil Finn's studio, then this would address many of the reasons Stevie has for not recording an album. It would be cheaper, take an order of magnitude less time, and perhaps Stevie would appreciate the challenge of recording so quick. At least she wouldn't be stuck there for a year. And, she might decide that she wants to write with Mike again after reconnecting on the tour. So, even if she decides to record another FM album, that wouldn't make what she said a lie. It would be circumstances changing, leading her to change her mind. Which people are allowed to do.

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

What's your point?

It looks to me as if Mac4Life has understood the post I quoted, and has responded to it as per the quoted materials above.

If you're asking what my point is in general, I've read a number of posts on this forum that disagree with Lindsey being ejected, and that something should have been done to fix the problem. With some, far from all, posts, this seems to be an assumption that Lindsey is the victim of the breakdown and that it should have been FM2018 that should have acted to fix the problem and keep Lindsey in the band. The overall point of this thread is that in all likelihood it was fully in Lindsey's power to have acted in such a way that the band could have stayed together, and that therefore he should be blamed as well. He's not just a victim in this, despite what #teamlindsey says.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

But when you add up all the circumstantial evidence, the tour dates excuse seems pretty lame.

Too bad you can’t tell the WHOLE truth when presenting “evidence.”

Jury: Exhibit A

Stevie refuses to join Fleetwood Mac in the studio claiming records don't sell. However that did not stop Stevie from recording 2 solo albums recently and touring to support them.

1. She was under contract to make those albums.

2. She came to the conclusion that albums don’t sell after two years of working the first of the two aforementioned albums.

3. The second album was just rerecordings of old demos she found on YouTube. She spent like all of a week recording it. Why put a lot of effort recording something that‘s not going to sell?

4. These are her EXACT, FULL quotes about a new FLEETWOOD MAC album:

http://www.fleetwoodmacnews.com/2016...d-mac.html?m=1

"The only reason that I don’t really wanna do a record is because I think that, in a year and a half, we’ll probably go out and do another Fleetwood Mac tour, since Christine has come back,"

"Do we want to go and close ourselves up in a studio for a year, [and] make a record that’s really good but that probably won’t sell, because records don’t really sell that much?" she asks. "And then we'll have been stuffed together for a year in one room, and...when you come out of that room, we may not want to go on a tour!"

"I think that we should choose the tour over the record," she tells ABC Radio. "Because touring is much more fun than making a record when you don’t have any idea how that record’s gonna come out."

As with anything, these quotes are open to interpretation. To me, it reads that she’s more concerned about the band dynamics (read: the SnL dynamic) being able to survive an album than simply being against making new music.

Exhibit B
Fleetwood Mac did record Buckingham/McVie but dared not to call it a Fleetwood Mac album. Clearly this would upset Stevie or she was pissed the band went on without her.

OR, they concluded that it would have been too confusing having an otherwise full, active member of the band on hiatus from a project.

Exhibit C
The changing stories from Mick. First it was about tour dates. Lately it was just that they did not feel good with Lindsey. Huh? We know Stevie is the only band member who does not get along with Lindsey. Its a fair assumption that Stevie gave an ultimatum …"I refuse to record with him, and I refuse to tour with him" Being the band wants to tour, Mick made his pick and the rest is history.

I agree that changing stories is never good. But there could be reasons for it, like quickly changing the subject during an interview. I’d guess there might be a gag order preventing any of them from discussing what went down, or they would have by now.

Back to tour dates. Lindsey's solo tour ends about a month after the Mac tour started. When you lie like Stevie did about touring, you know there is another reason.

Huh? Fleetwood Mac’s tour starts Oct. 3, goes through Dec. 13 and picks back up Feb. 5 going through Apr. 5. Lindsey’s tour starts Oct. 7 and goes through Dec. 9.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by Ench

If you're asking what my point is in general, I've read a number of posts on this forum that disagree with Lindsey being ejected, and that something should have been done to fix the problem. With some, far from all, posts, this seems to be an assumption that Lindsey is the victim of the breakdown and that it should have been FM2018 that should have acted to fix the problem and keep Lindsey in the band. The overall point of this thread is that in all likelihood it was fully in Lindsey's power to have acted in such a way that the band could have stayed together, and that therefore he should be blamed as well. He's not just a victim in this, despite what #teamlindsey says.

and again, I ask, what is your point exactly?

You have a different opinion to others on here. That's great. You've expressed that opinion. That's great.

What is your point of continuing on? Are you demanding that everyone suddenly change their perspective and agree you are entirely correct and thank you for setting everyone straight?

Both points of view are here and well-documented. Some people may choose to change their minds; others may not.

Circling around the same discussion points over and over and over proves nothing and may not change people's opinions one iota. That's life. And I say this to folks on every side of this issue. Until someone involved makes a definitive statement we won't know; and honestly, even if one of the band did say something people who support a different band member will find reasons to not believe what they say anyway.

You have your opinion, and you've laid out your reasons. Others, including me, have given our opinions and reasons. I enjoy hearing well-reasoned opinions from everyone. But frankly, at the end of the day, it honestly doesn't matter to me one way or another what anyone wants to believe.

[Ench]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

and again, I ask, what is your point exactly?

You have a different opinion to others on here. That's great. You've expressed that opinion. That's great.

What is your point of continuing on? Are you demanding that everyone suddenly change their perspective and agree you are entirely correct and thank you for setting everyone straight?

Both points of view are here and well-documented. Some people may choose to change their minds; others may not.

Circling around the same discussion points over and over and over proves nothing and may not change people's opinions one iota. That's life. And I say this to folks on every side of this issue. Until someone involved makes a definitive statement we won't know; and honestly, even if one of the band did say something people who support a different band member will find reasons to not believe what they say anyway.

You have your opinion, and you've laid out your reasons. Others, including me, have given our opinions and reasons. I enjoy hearing well-reasoned opinions from everyone. But frankly, at the end of the day, it honestly doesn't matter to me one way or another what anyone wants to believe.

Because I think the question I asked (and have refined) is worth answering. Useful information has come out, e.g. SteveMacD posted very useful information about the 'evidence' posted by MacFan4Life. That seemingly incorrect 'evidence' has been posted shows that things are not done and dusted. One reason for asking a question is to see what is used to support arguments on both sides.

I'm prepared to change my views should good arguments be posted. E.g. at present there is more doubt than I previously thought about whether the deal-breaker was due to Lindsey asking for a delay, or other factors.

I care very little about what others believe. But, I care about what they base those beliefs on. Because, if after investigation they do have strong verifiable evidence, then that could make me change my mind.

Note that I came into this thread with a question, not a statement. I did post initially what I thought the answer is, but it's a clear invitation to 'prove me wrong'. I've seen quite a few posts, and I think the evidence against my belief is weak and the evidence for my belief is strong. So, I don't believe that the reasons for both beliefs are well documented. There is an awful lot of straw down at the bottom.

I'm not demanding that people do anything. But, I would like to see if people can back up their claims, particularly the extreme claims. People don't have to back up their claims. It's a free world. But, if people make claims and don't back them up, then that's a bit of a giveaway by omission.

[saniette]

Originally Posted by Ench

Because I think the question I asked (and have refined) is worth answering. Useful information has come out, e.g. SteveMacD posted very useful information about the 'evidence' posted by MacFan4Life. That seemingly incorrect 'evidence' has been posted shows that things are not done and dusted. One reason for asking a question is to see what is used to support arguments on both sides.

I'm prepared to change my views should good arguments be posted. E.g. at present there is more doubt than I previously thought about whether the deal-breaker was due to Lindsey asking for a delay, or other factors.

I care very little about what others believe. But, I care about what they base those beliefs on. Because, if after investigation they do have strong verifiable evidence, then that could make me change my mind.

Note that I came into this thread with a question, not a statement. I did post initially what I thought the answer is, but it's a clear invitation to 'prove me wrong'. I've seen quite a few posts, and I think the evidence against my belief is weak and the evidence for my belief is strong. So, I don't believe that the reasons for both beliefs are well documented. There is an awful lot of straw down at the bottom.

I'm not demanding that people do anything. But, I would like to see if people can back up their claims, particularly the extreme claims. People don't have to back up their claims. It's a free world. But, if people make claims and don't back them up, then that's a bit of a giveaway by omission.

You keep saying "evidence." There's no evidence of any kind to support either interpretation. It's just the band's word vs Lindsey's, and by extension his wife's. You can't prove any of it. News stories that just repeat the band's story aren't corroborating evidence.

I think we all have to read between the lines to figure out what happened. Considering the history of SnL, it's not exactly going out on a limb to say things reached a head. Both are to blame for their relationship, but only one person got fired. So, yes, Lindsey is the victim if he got fired for the reasons the band is saying. If it's something bigger than that, they should have said from the get go.

Some fans are angry because Stevie has been allowed to keep the band from touring and recording, simply because she's the biggest draw. But the band is bowing to money if that is the primary consideration. And while understandable, it's not right.

Lindsey is touring for 2 months, and FM is starting at about the same time. They could have waited, even if the band's story is true. Clearly the November 2019 date from Stevie makes no sense. I wonder if it was November this year, and everything got pushed back after Lindsey got fired. They waited for Stevie for years, so what's 2 or 3 months?

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by Ench

I'm not demanding that people do anything. But, I would like to see if people can back up their claims, particularly the extreme claims. People don't have to back up their claims. It's a free world. But, if people make claims and don't back them up, then that's a bit of a giveaway by omission.

Good to know you aren't demanding people provide "evidence" that meets your approval, and that you aren't judging.

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Too bad you can’t tell the WHOLE truth when presenting “evidence.”



1. She was under contract to make those albums.

2. She came to the conclusion that albums don’t sell after two years of working the first of the two aforementioned albums.

3. The second album was just rerecordings of old demos she found on YouTube. She spent like all of a week recording it. Why put a lot of effort recording something that‘s not going to sell?

4. These are her EXACT, FULL quotes about a new FLEETWOOD MAC album:

http://www.fleetwoodmacnews.com/2016...d-mac.html?m=1

"The only reason that I don’t really wanna do a record is because I think that, in a year and a half, we’ll probably go out and do another Fleetwood Mac tour, since Christine has come back,"

"Do we want to go and close ourselves up in a studio for a year, [and] make a record that’s really good but that probably won’t sell, because records don’t really sell that much?" she asks. "And then we'll have been stuffed together for a year in one room, and...when you come out of that room, we may not want to go on a tour!"

"I think that we should choose the tour over the record," she tells ABC Radio. "Because touring is much more fun than making a record when you don’t have any idea how that record’s gonna come out."

As with anything, these quotes are open to interpretation. To me, it reads that she’s more concerned about the band dynamics (read: the SnL dynamic) being able to survive an album than simply being against making new music.



OR, they concluded that it would have been too confusing having an otherwise full, active member of the band on hiatus from a project.



I agree that changing stories is never good. But there could be reasons for it, like quickly changing the subject during an interview. I’d guess there might be a gag order preventing any of them from discussing what went down, or they would have by now.



Huh? Fleetwood Mac’s tour starts Oct. 3, goes through Dec. 13 and picks back up Feb. 5 going through Apr. 5. Lindsey’s tour starts Oct. 7 and goes through Dec. 9.

Oh Please...you are selling Stevie short. She loves to record music. She loved performing so many 24k gold songs on her last solo tour and telling all the stories behind them. Its fine you want to defend Stevie, but your blinders are a bit tight. You seem to roll over the obvious and don't connect Stevie not participating with Lindsey in the studio and not participating with Lindsey on the road. To me its a fairly easy conclusion IMHO. All those rationalizations are laughable IMHO. But to each their own
Mick was praising Lindsey and Christine how their album should be nominated for a Grammy. So why does Mick now say things with Lindsey were miserable?

[DownOnRodeo]

Yes (about Stevie's enmity toward Lindsey).

Dear Ench--You appear to be a thoughtful young fan and have every right to make a post here like anyone else (ideally after having done a bit more homework) , but I think the mistake you're making is to approach this from a rational, logical angle, whereas the most convincing narrative borne out from the totality of the existing info we have to work with is that Stevie is Not operating from a rational, logical, or fair angle, at least as far as her decision to eject Lindsey goes. Emotion comes first, and bizarre, contradictory attempts to rationalize it come later.

[wondergirl9847]

Say You Will Tour – 2003–2004

5 year gap!

Unleashed tour – 2009

4 year gap!

Fleetwood Mac Live – 2013

1 year gap!

On with the Show – 2014–2015

3 year gap!

An Evening with FM 2018-2019

They couldn't wait a bit for him or try to allow him to do solo dates during the FM tour? REALLY?

[jwd]

Originally Posted by Ench

Because I think the question I asked (and have refined) is worth answering. Useful information has come out, e.g. SteveMacD posted very useful information about the 'evidence' posted by MacFan4Life. That seemingly incorrect 'evidence' has been posted shows that things are not done and dusted. One reason for asking a question is to see what is used to support arguments on both sides.

I'm prepared to change my views should good arguments be posted. E.g. at present there is more doubt than I previously thought about whether the deal-breaker was due to Lindsey asking for a delay, or other factors.

I care very little about what others believe. But, I care about what they base those beliefs on. Because, if after investigation they do have strong verifiable evidence, then that could make me change my mind.

Note that I came into this thread with a question, not a statement. I did post initially what I thought the answer is, but it's a clear invitation to 'prove me wrong'. I've seen quite a few posts, and I think the evidence against my belief is weak and the evidence for my belief is strong. So, I don't believe that the reasons for both beliefs are well documented. There is an awful lot of straw down at the bottom.

I'm not demanding that people do anything. But, I would like to see if people can back up their claims, particularly the extreme claims. People don't have to back up their claims. It's a free world. But, if people make claims and don't back them up, then that's a bit of a giveaway by omission.

Who are you? A ****ing lawyer? It's like you're trying this like some kind of high crimes case! We've discussed this ad nauseum over countless threads for months now. Most of us believe on what we've seen/ heard that Mick and Stevie dismissed Lindsey because of Stevie's unwillingness to work with him anymore and Mick's love of money! Case closed! Unless of course there is further evidence that contradicts the verdict of this forum..........

[HomerMcvie]

Many posts today have the stench of Sugar Mick all over them.