My Anti-Stevie Customer

[David]

This happened to me once. I walked into a music store to buy something & look around & my private comments about the store music playing elicited a lecture from the salesperson, so I reported the unpleasantness to the manager. But I did so politely. I never cause a scene in a retail establishment--only here at the Ledge!

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by foxyluva

And I totally understand how people don't like Stevie

I know LOTS of Fleetwood Mac fans who can't stand her.

[JazmenFlowers]

Originally Posted by chiliD

I know LOTS of Fleetwood Mac fans who can't stand her.

that's probably true, but there are just as many and maybe more who love her with FM and solo

can't please everyone all the time.

[JazmenFlowers]

Originally Posted by David

This happened to me once. I walked into a music store to buy something & look around & my private comments about the store music playing elicited a lecture from the salesperson, so I reported the unpleasantness to the manager. But I did so politely. I never cause a scene in a retail establishment--only here at the Ledge!

that's very nice of you. I wish I had that amount of self-restraint. I guess I feel like she's worth standing up for and to hell with anyone thinking it's rude or childish or whatever.

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

You're such a hold out! Why can't you admit that those people were rude? Why is that so hard?

I wasn't there, but from Fox's post I just don't believe they were rude, and I don't think just because I'm a Stevie fan I should suspend all logic and go with the popular opinion. I've given several instances of the same cenario without including Stevie in the mix and the responses I've gotten are "Well, that's different, it's not Stevie". Which just strengthens my point that it's only OK because it was Stevie and that's not rational behavior. I even said that I understand that and what I think is wrong about that is at least not admitting it's not rational. I know lots of people that would probably have done the same thing, but they don't try to make it seem like it is normal behavior.

[cliffdweller]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

I've given several instances of the same cenario without including Stevie in the mix and the responses I've gotten are "Well, that's different, it's not Stevie"

Well I didn't say that, and it's not just because I'm a Stevie fan that I made my arguments either. I would make these same arguments about anything I hold dear. See, you're example about the ugly shirt and the clerk was a straw-man type of argument because you built your argument on a very weak premise and then tried to "muscle it up" from something that is really not comparable to the original argument at all. Love for one's favorite musician is not comparable to one's preference in some haphazardly random article of clothing. And yes, my musical taste, is a touchy subject, because I feel strongly about the music I love, so I really don't like to hear people's rude comments about how bad my taste is because they don't like it. For instance if someone said to me, "you know I don't really like that" or "I really don't like that music and here's why".... that's one thing, but for someone to criticize the music I like in a ****ty manner and then act as if they have an informed opinion on it but don't, THAT'S when the claws come out. I don't mind informed and/or respectfully worded criticism, I mean, that's what makes the world go 'round right? It's when people are ****ty unnecessarily in relaying their opinions that really bothers me.

[David]

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

I don't mind informed and/or respectfully worded criticism, I mean, that's what makes the world go 'round right?

Yabbut the problem is that "respectfully worded criticism" isn't cut & dried. What constitutes respectfully worded criticism? Whose standards are used to gauge such things? Certainly not mine--I know that by now. People post old rolling stone reviews that I consider good criticism that isn't unnecessarily ad hominem or whatever, & people here still go red with rage over it. That's happened so many times, I've lost count.

There are some people here who get turned off by any expression of dislike for Fleetwood Mac & who say so, & there are others who very much enjoy reading critical opinions & say so. That is I think the crux: some do enjoy & some don't enjoy hearing stuff they like criticized.

by the way, I'm speaking about opinions that don't turn ad hominem against other Ledgies but that stick to the subject of the criticism. The actual attacks against other Ledgies aren't justifiable. If you searched my old posts, I think you'd find almost zero actual attacks against other specifically named Ledgies. I really do try to avoid that at all times. But I certainly speak freely about Fleetwood mac & even the fan base in general because that's a perfectly valid subject for comment.

[cliffdweller]

Originally Posted by David

Yabbut the problem is that "respectfully worded criticism" isn't cut & dried. What constitutes respectfully worded criticism?

I can't answer this completely, but I bet it wouldn't go something like this: "Man, you LIKE that? Woa, I'm so sorry for you (insert condescention here)." I think we all know when someone is criticising something unmercilessly, I mean, language and communication have not broken down to such a degree that we still do not understand one another's and/or one another's intentions has it? I mean, I like Derrida and all, but let's not take his claims about the gaps within language to new and absurd heights!

There are some people here who get turned off by any expression of dislike for Fleetwood Mac & who say so, & there are others who very much enjoy reading critical opinions & say so. That is I think the crux: some do enjoy & some don't enjoy hearing stuff they like criticized.

I love to hear criticism when it's well thought out and reflected upon by the critic even if it's something I don't agree with! Some of my favorite theorists are ones that I don't always agree with, or in some rare instances, don't agree with much at all. But it's the WAY they make their arguments, the way they use rhetoric, the way they are able to be creative in their persuasion that intrigues me and makes me respect their positions even if I don't agree with them. Respectful criticism does not necessarily equal criticism you agree with, it is criticism that takes into account its audience and at least tries to make a well thought out, well informed argument.

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

I can't answer this completely, but I bet it wouldn't go something like this: "Man, you LIKE that? Woa, I'm so sorry for you (insert condescention here)." I think we all know when someone is criticising something unmercilessly, I mean, language and communication have not broken down to such a degree that we still do not understand one another's and/or one another's intentions has it? I mean, I like Derrida and all, but let's not take his claims about the gaps within language to new and absurd heights!

Again, here is an instance where Fox's original post is being embellished to strenghthen your argument. No one said "Man, you like that? Woa, I'm so sorry for you" and the condescention talked about could be misinterpreted. If communication was so cut and dry companies around the world would not provide training in order to understand things like tone, gestures and facial expressions in relationship to how things expressed verbally are intended. Overhearing something negative about someone you hold on a pedestal would definatley affect how further things would be interpreted because the person who was offended is already in defensive mode.
You can't write off my examples as not being related to ones love of a musical icon and a shirt because you are assuming that a shirt or designer can't mean the same thing to someone else; however, if you wish you can insert any similar scenario such as two people talking about a paticular author in a bookstore, two people talking about a specific actors performance while in a video store, whatever you want. Everyone values different things so to write off one over the other is an ineffective arguement.

On edit: another example would be someone making fun of a celebrities baby's name on a message board. Since most of us use screen names how would anyone know if a member here didn't share the same name as the one being made fun of?

[cliffdweller]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

Again, here is an instance where Fox's original post is being embellished to strenghthen your argument. No one said "Man, you like that? Woa, I'm so sorry for you"

Oh but didn't they? They did basically I mean, the intent was definitely there. And for the record, they DID specifically say, "sorry" as in "sorry you like that."

You can't write off my examples as not being related to ones love of a musical icon and a shirt because you are assuming that a shirt or designer can't mean the same thing to someone else;

I'm sorry, but this is just laughable

however, if you wish you can insert any similar scenario such as two people talking about a paticular author in a bookstore, two people talking about a specific actors performance while in a video store, whatever you want. Everyone values different things so to write off one over the other is an ineffective arguement.

I'll give you authors and actors but in NO WAY am I giving you inanimate objects Look, I said it 100 times before---those people were rude, just. plain. rude. Rude I say! RUUUUUUUUDE! That's really the thrust of my argument, these people were rude and didn't think before they opened their mouths. And then to top it all off, after being told and I DO paraphrase, "oh, that's my favorite singer," were snarky because they put their foot in their mouth. Who's the ****ty one? I know you'll never admit it, maybe it's because you identify so strongly with those customers, is that it?

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

Oh but didn't they? They did basically I mean, the intent was definitely there. And for the record, they DID specifically say, "sorry" as in "sorry you like that."

No they didn't. You yourself just wrote "basically". You are interpreting what they said that way, as did fox, only you weren't even there.

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

I'm sorry, but this is just laughable

Here you are assuming what other people value. I didn't say it wouldn't be odd for someone to place the same vaule on a shirt or designer, but it's not up to me to judge what people value. Isn't this the same thing that the two customers in Fox's store are being accused of? Some people think it's laughable that I regard Stevie Nicks so highly, again it's subjective. You think the possiblility that someone would value sometihng you think is silly is laughable?

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

I'll give you authors and actors but in NO WAY am I giving you inanimate objects Look, I said it 100 times before---those people were rude, just. plain. rude. Rude I say! RUUUUUUUUDE! That's really the thrust of my argument, these people were rude and didn't think before they opened their mouths. And then to top it all off, after being told and I DO paraphrase, "oh, that's my favorite singer," were snarky because they put their foot in their mouth. Who's the ****ty one? I know you'll never admit it, maybe it's because you identify so strongly with those customers, is that it?

I don't believe they were rude, and I've stated that, there's nothing for me to admit. They didn't say anything that anyone else wouldn't have, and what they did say to Fox was after Fox questioned them. I can relate to them in the sense that I probably have said things outloud to other people that may have made someone who overheard feel badly. As I am sure you may have done: http://www.fleetwoodmac.net/ledge/sh...420#post518420

Perhaps there are Ledgies named moses? Are you assuming there are not, and if so would what you said here:

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

"Actually, maybe people should just keep their mouths shut sometimes, because you never know who you might offend unnecesarily"

be applicable?

[cliffdweller]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

Here you are assuming what other people value. I didn't say it wouldn't be odd for someone to place the same vaule on a shirt or designer, but it's not up to me to judge what people value. Isn't this the same thing that the two customers in Fox's store are being accused of? Some people think it's laughable that I regard Stevie Nicks so highly, again it's subjective. You think the possiblility that someone would value sometihng you think is silly is laughable?

I think you're silly .

Even if we're not getting anywhere, at least we're upping the post count on this thread...

This argument is entering the realm of the absurd and has grown "most tiresome." I refuse to argue the finer points of how a person is more valuable than a shirt. That makes me laugh just typing it!

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

I think you're silly .

Even if we're not getting anywhere, at least we're upping the post count on this thread...

This argument is entering the realm of the absurd and has grown "most tiresome." I refuse to argue how a person is of more value than a shirt. That makes me laugh just typing it!

I got a chuckle out of it.

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by cliffdweller

I think you're silly .

Even if we're not getting anywhere, at least we're upping the post count on this thread...

This argument is entering the realm of the absurd and has grown "most tiresome." I refuse to argue the finer points of how a person is more valuable than a shirt. That makes me laugh just typing it!

So then chose one of the alternates that you already accepted and argue it from there instead of focusing on what you already dismissed. I said it was odd, but really like I said, who are we to decide what is valuable to others, anymore than they are justified in passing judgement on what we value?

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

So then chose one of the alternates that you already accepted and argue it from there instead of focusing on what you already dismissed. I said it was odd, but really like I said, who are we to decide what is valuable to others, anymore than they are justified in passing judgement on what we value?

Ok youve made your point. Can we please drop it now? I respect your right to have your opinion and express it, but I think this has gone far enough.