Mick denies Stevie Nicks kicked Lindsey out of

[Sugar Mouse]

Originally Posted by Angel75

Sugar Mouse - what I do not understand is why you insist on wanting to believe 'as gospel' what the band says, or your sources say or that was written by a media outlet. Has it not once occurred to you that people LIE and don't tell the truth as the truth is possibly a little shocking?!
Lindsey's friends, family and non FM bandmates have in their own way said this is all lies and he did not want to wait until Nov2019 to tour. He did want to tour both FM and solo together, he and others confirm this. Why did FM not mention this in their media reports if they were telling the truth?

I have seen nothing from Lindsey's famly/friends/non Mac bandmates other than the Rick Turner Facebook posts saying that he heard the band/Lindsey were negotiating his solo dates alongside the Mac tour.

The following is what appears most likely to have happened (based on the accounts of all who have spoken thus far):

1. Fleetwood Mac was planning this tour for the last 1-2 years with all band members having agreed to the tour

2. Lindsey changed his mind and decided that he also wanted to have a solo tour in parallel with the Mac tour.

3. The band said "no solo tour" and the band/Lindsey spent a while negotiating over this issue as noted in Rick Turner's Facebook posts.

4. Lindsey wouldn't back down and mentioned delaying the Mac tour until after his solo tour.

5. The band fired him.

[saniette]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Actually ... not. I've been a Mac fan for over 40 years and have decades of experience teaching about communication at the highest educational levels.

I know all about critical analysis and that's what is so shocking about this forum. There is no critical analysis just angry vitriol aimed at the remaining band members without any evidence to support claims made.

I've repeatedly asked for evidence and all I get from forum forum members is "you can't trust the media" or "I trust my gut feelings" which is frankly garbage critical analysis.

I keep asking to see the statements from Lindsey or Lindsey's friends/associates or Lindsey's family members and no one can find anything except a Facebook thread from Rick Turner saying he heard certain things.

Perhaps you and your buddies on this forum might want to take some classes on critical analysis and use those skills before deciding to vindicate Mr. Buckingham and vilify the remaining band members.

What critical analysis? You're just accepting the band's narrative without questioning it at all. Just because Lindsey hasn't denied it yet, doesn't make their story true. It's only been a couple months, and there may be legal reasons why Lindsey and his family can't speak out.

So if you just believe "media outlets," if Lindsey denies it, you'll accept his story then when a bunch of outlets report on it? Or is that when your critical analysis comes into play? Let's face it, you'll find a reason to discount it no matter what happens.

But if you're just going to believe media stories as they come out, then I guess your opinion will keep changing? The story is still evolving, and so far the band has only presented their side. And there are issues with their narrative, if you choose to look closer.

I'm not trying to vindicate Lindsey, but firing the guy is an extreme move. And their ostensible reason isn't making sense. There has to be more to the story even if you accept the band's narrative. So no matter what, they're not telling the whole truth.

And not everyone disputing the band's narrative is engaging in angry vitriol. So you're painting with a pretty broad brush, in an effort to discount opinions you don't agree with. Not to mention your obvious bias in the band's favor from the get go with all of this.

It is possible the negative opinion of the band expressed here is correct. Just because you have a positive opinion of the new lineup doesn't mean the band didn't screw Lindsey in getting the new lineup. It's just funny how the guy Stevie wanted in the band is in there now, and the guy she no longer wanted to work with is out. Funny how all that worked out for her.

[JohnL]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Apparently you are correct. The level of ignorance and angry conspiracy theories on this forum is astounding.

You could have God descend from the clouds and tell these people that Stevie is not the cause of Lindsey's firing and they still wouldn't believe it. She is the Anti-Christ and Mick is her messenger. Don't you know that by now?

Seriously...I would give up the fight. They thrive on it. I do love the hypocrisy of the statement about Bekka Bramlett or however you spell her name. Sure...bring on new members as long as they are replacing Stevie.

And for all the statement claiming that Lindsey's wife and family are spewing the truth. Well, lets see. How about we get Chris Nicks to chime in here. Would that be taken as gospel? Ridiculous!! They know what Lindsey has told them. He has never taken responsibility for any of the trouble he has caused in the band. He wants his way and he wants it now or he will threaten to not participate.

And for all of those folks PO'd that Stevie didn't participate in the recording and it became Buckingham/McVie...well give this some thought. They have agreed since 1981 that they go back and forth between band and solo efforts. Now all of the sudden she is supposed to give that up and participate in something just because he says so. Take a hike control freak!!

[TrueFaith77]

Now, is there a way to filter out comments with ignored people's posts embedded?

Ignoring people is good for the blood pressure.

[missundercover]

Originally Posted by JohnL

And for all of those folks PO'd that Stevie didn't participate in the recording and it became Buckingham/McVie...well give this some thought. They have agreed since 1981 that they go back and forth between band and solo efforts. Now all of the sudden she is supposed to give that up and participate in something just because he says so.

I must agree, that I don't see the connection with the current situation. As much as I want a new album or would have wanted a record by the Rumors 5 > I have accepted that the dynamic between Stevie and Lindsey prevents it. Say what you want but artists and art are deeply personal and obviously because of old hurt feelings it just doesn't work - art is not about compromise.
Maybe it is not about that and Stevie really doesn't create that much anymore, either reason: I can accept and live with.

Touring is a different thing and the scheduling reasoning is hard to accept because all in all: it seems to be a minor thing which could have been worked out if one would have wanted.
This is why I think there might be other things we don't know about, but whatever. The result is the same and Fleetwood Mac doesn't owe us anything. We may love them but they don't have to love as back. I can enjoy the music nonetheless. With Lindsey missing not in the same way, but I can enjoy it.

[saniette]

Originally Posted by JohnL

You could have God descend from the clouds and tell these people that Stevie is not the cause of Lindsey's firing and they still wouldn't believe it. She is the Anti-Christ and Mick is her messenger. Don't you know that by now?

Seriously...I would give up the fight. They thrive on it. I do love the hypocrisy of the statement about Bekka Bramlett or however you spell her name. Sure...bring on new members as long as they are replacing Stevie.

And for all the statement claiming that Lindsey's wife and family are spewing the truth. Well, lets see. How about we get Chris Nicks to chime in here. Would that be taken as gospel? Ridiculous!! They know what Lindsey has told them. He has never taken responsibility for any of the trouble he has caused in the band. He wants his way and he wants it now or he will threaten to not participate.

And for all of those folks PO'd that Stevie didn't participate in the recording and it became Buckingham/McVie...well give this some thought. They have agreed since 1981 that they go back and forth between band and solo efforts. Now all of the sudden she is supposed to give that up and participate in something just because he says so. Take a hike control freak!!

Stevie was supposed to participate in what became the BuckVie album, because everyone else in the band is on it! Not just because Lindsey said so, like he holds that kind of sway. And why couldn't that be called a Fleetwood Mac record anyway? Stevie had nothing to do with that either right? The only member who gets to decide what is and is not Fleetwood Mac is her apparently.

You take umbrage at Stevie being made the villain of the piece, but it's OK for Lindsey to be the villain? Explain to be how that's the superior, logical viewpoint? Just because you don't like Lindsey?

The hypocrisy is on all Stevie's side sorry. She should have been fired already based on the rules they're applying to Lindsey. But money talks right? So that justifies the unfairness of the situation?

[Sugar Mouse]

Originally Posted by saniette

Stevie was supposed to participate in what became the BuckVie album, because everyone else in the band is on it! Not just because Lindsey said so, like he holds that kind of sway. And why couldn't that be called a Fleetwood Mac record anyway? Stevie had nothing to do with that either right? The only member who gets to decide what is and is not Fleetwood Mac is her apparently.

You take umbrage at Stevie being made the villain of the piece, but it's OK for Lindsey to be the villain? Explain to be how that's the superior, logical viewpoint? Just because you don't like Lindsey?

The hypocrisy is on all Stevie's side sorry. She should have been fired already based on the rules they're applying to Lindsey. But money talks right? So that justifies the unfairness of the situation?

Let's be clear about Buckingham/McVie ... Stevie never promised to participate in that project. Lindsey kept pushing her to participate and she kept saying "no". He then go Mick and John to participate and kept pushing Stevie but she kept saying "no". In recent years, Stevie has had no interest in another Mac studio album primarily because of the way Lindsey records albums which tends to drag on for months and months and is a very unpleasant experience for most involved. That's very different then the upcoming tour where Lindsey agreed to participate and then decided that he wanted to re-work the tour schedule to accommodate his solo tour. In Stevie's case, she never agreed to something and then changed the plan. In Lindsey's case, he agreed to something and then wanted to change things around.

[sue]

Originally Posted by saniette

Stevie was supposed to participate in what became the BuckVie album, because everyone else in the band is on it! Not just because Lindsey said so, like he holds that kind of sway. And why couldn't that be called a Fleetwood Mac record anyway? Stevie had nothing to do with that either right? The only member who gets to decide what is and is not Fleetwood Mac is her apparently.

You take umbrage at Stevie being made the villain of the piece, but it's OK for Lindsey to be the villain? Explain to be how that's the superior, logical viewpoint? Just because you don't like Lindsey?

The hypocrisy is on all Stevie's side sorry. She should have been fired already based on the rules they're applying to Lindsey. But money talks right? So that justifies the unfairness of the situation?

As a sitter on the fence in the whole of this, I’m not a Lindsey supporter neither am I for Stevie....I AM A FM FAN
However I can say there is hypocrisy on both sides, loads on Stevie’s side I agree and loads on Lindsey’s side.
Both sides should take a bow, we middle of the road types applaud you both.
Tho it can be tedious.!!!

Bytheway......has Sugar Mouse racked up some kind of record for most posts in the shortest time.
136 and counting since May 18th !!!!

[elle]

Originally Posted by sue

As a sitter on the fence in the whole of this, I’m not a Lindsey supporter neither am I for Stevie....I AM A FM FAN
However I can say there is hypocrisy on both sides, loads on Stevie’s side I agree and loads on Lindsey’s side.
Both sides should take a bow, we middle of the road types applaud you both.
Tho it can be tedious.

can you clarify on this - where is hypocrisy on Lindsey's side in this firing from FM issue?

obviously as a primarily LB fan, i can be biased and would like to make sure that is the case as little as possible. thanks so much!

[Storms123]

Stevie actually said on the red carpet for “School of Rock” on broadway there would be a new FM album, that was December 2015. One would assume the reference there is Buck vie since Christine and Lindsey were laying her tracks down before they hit the road for OWTS

[saniette]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Let's be clear about Buckingham/McVie ... Stevie never promised to participate in that project. Lindsey kept pushing her to participate and she kept saying "no". He then go Mick and John to participate and kept pushing Stevie but she kept saying "no". In recent years, Stevie has had no interest in another Mac studio album primarily because of the way Lindsey records albums which tends to drag on for months and months and is a very unpleasant experience for most involved. That's very different then the upcoming tour where Lindsey agreed to participate and then decided that he wanted to re-work the tour schedule to accommodate his solo tour. In Stevie's case, she never agreed to something and then changed the plan. In Lindsey's case, he agreed to something and then wanted to change things around.

That's a bit of a logical fallacy though. So Lindsey could have initially refused to tour altogether, and he wouldn't have been fired? No, they definitely would have fired him for that.

Touring is more important to this band than recording, I get it. And I get Stevie never wanted to record with Lindsey again. But why does she get to refuse to do things, and no else in the band does?

All of the above about BuckVie is fine, but it's pretty obvious the one member who wasn't on the record prevented them from calling it a Fleetwood Mac record. Why wasn't it called a Fleetwood Mac record? 4 of 5 members are on it, and majority rules right?

There's a lot of contortions needed to justify Stevie's past refusals and Lindsey's firing at the same time. She held back the band from touring before too, but an outright refusal is okay? Just not trying to change plans that are already made? Makes no sense.

[elle]

Originally Posted by Storms123

Stevie actually said on the red carpet for “School of Rock” on broadway there would be a new FM album, that was December 2015. One would assume the reference there is Buck vie since Christine and Lindsey were laying her tracks down before they hit the road for OWTS

yes she said they had tons of tracks already and that she'll join FM for the new album.

we know they kept giving her many chances, and the last one was somewhere towards the end of 2016, before they went to the studio to wrap up all their tracks. that's when Stevie said her definitive and last no, and went to the media outlets with interviews about how she doesn't see why they would release what they have so far, that there's no point, nobody buys music anymore, especially not from old bands, or something to that effect. there were discussion on these boards at the time that with her statements she's basically daring them [not to] release what they have without her.

[dreamsunwind]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

I have seen nothing from Lindsey's famly/friends/non Mac bandmates other than the Rick Turner Facebook posts saying that he heard the band/Lindsey were negotiating his solo dates alongside the Mac tour.

Go on Instagram.com and look up Kristen Buckingham (she has two accounts, one personal and one of designs) and read every single one of her recent posts. She all but holds a neon sign saying that the band isn't telling the whole story. And there's also the BM band member that ALSO said Lindsey wasn't trying to delay anything, he was looking forward to the tour and had shared the rehearsal dates with him.

[dreamsunwind]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Let's be clear about Buckingham/McVie ... Stevie never promised to participate in that project. Lindsey kept pushing her to participate and she kept saying "no". He then go Mick and John to participate and kept pushing Stevie but she kept saying "no". In recent years, Stevie has had no interest in another Mac studio album primarily because of the way Lindsey records albums which tends to drag on for months and months and is a very unpleasant experience for most involved. That's very different then the upcoming tour where Lindsey agreed to participate and then decided that he wanted to re-work the tour schedule to accommodate his solo tour. In Stevie's case, she never agreed to something and then changed the plan. In Lindsey's case, he agreed to something and then wanted to change things around.

Christine didn't seem to mind at all!

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Actually ... not. I've been a Mac fan for over 40 years and have decades of experience teaching about communication at the highest educational levels.

If this is true, and you do understand how media outlets on the internet work, then I can only assume you are being willfully intellectually dishonest when you offer their number as support for your argument.

Your communication classes apparently do not include ethics, I take it.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. It turns out you did not deserve it.