sounds crazy you didn't even get a free copy of the FM box, John.
(do i sound like a sycophant, Mr. Brooks, or simply like someone expressing his opinion?)
Thread
Posts in chronological order
BTW, Mr. Brooks... You've been asked, "do QP own a master copy of Golders Green?"
As part of the deal you made with Queenzoners a while back, couldn't you provide a clear answer to that?
Thank you.
As part of the deal you made with Queenzoners a while back, couldn't you provide a clear answer to that?
Thank you.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zak Royen wrote: [/QUOTENAME]BTW, Mr. Brooks... You've been asked, "do QP own a master copy of Golders Green?"
As part of the deal you made with Queenzoners a while back, couldn't you provide a clear answer to that?
Thank you.
[/QUOTE]the list he gave didn't make us much wiser. first we were going to be told more about existing video and then suddenly there was video and audio in the list. for example:slane castle, only audio or also video? munich '79, of course there is audio but there is also video:the entire show?
He promised us to deliver and he didn't.
Sorry greg, but that's what I think. Fans gave as much datailed info as possible and still do about every day. Your part of the deal wasn't detailed. You will agree with me, I hope.
I fully understand that QP can't give detailed info but maybe it's better to say so than promise things without keeping the promises.
This forum proves that Queen has many fans and there's still a lot to be done in the Queen world. Sadly, it looks like the fans are more concerned about these things than QP. I hope QP will prove I'm wrong.
This is how they can do that: releasing the anthology box sets. Releasing 70's concerts or a box with several shows on Cd or audio-DVD from the 70's. And many other projects that are NOT rereleases of Greatest Hits sets!
As part of the deal you made with Queenzoners a while back, couldn't you provide a clear answer to that?
Thank you.
[/QUOTE]the list he gave didn't make us much wiser. first we were going to be told more about existing video and then suddenly there was video and audio in the list. for example:slane castle, only audio or also video? munich '79, of course there is audio but there is also video:the entire show?
He promised us to deliver and he didn't.
Sorry greg, but that's what I think. Fans gave as much datailed info as possible and still do about every day. Your part of the deal wasn't detailed. You will agree with me, I hope.
I fully understand that QP can't give detailed info but maybe it's better to say so than promise things without keeping the promises.
This forum proves that Queen has many fans and there's still a lot to be done in the Queen world. Sadly, it looks like the fans are more concerned about these things than QP. I hope QP will prove I'm wrong.
This is how they can do that: releasing the anthology box sets. Releasing 70's concerts or a box with several shows on Cd or audio-DVD from the 70's. And many other projects that are NOT rereleases of Greatest Hits sets!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]John S Stuart wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Greg:
Could it be that if we keep picking away at that scab, further unsavioury things will be lurking underneath? For example, how is it possible that a tape could be stolen from EMI and end up being bootlegged without being noticed - or how is it possible for material locked up in the Queen vaults to end up here in Queenzone? [/QUOTE]
That is a good point (although possibly should be under a new topic) - it does appear that any time something gets out from under the nose of QP or EMI, they are very quick to attack the people who collect such material under good faith, as collectors and not for monetary gain, rather than having a good look at their own security procedures and employees to find out exactly how the item in question escaped their vaults.
Im sure someone will now say that if somebody acquires a rare track then they are stealing from QP or EMI, and deserve all the attacks that come their way. My argument would be that if the material is owned by QP or EMI, and therefore presumably only handled by people directly employed or sub-contracted to them, then any 'leak' could actually be considered official as it MUST have come from somebody employed by QP or EMI.
Could it be that if we keep picking away at that scab, further unsavioury things will be lurking underneath? For example, how is it possible that a tape could be stolen from EMI and end up being bootlegged without being noticed - or how is it possible for material locked up in the Queen vaults to end up here in Queenzone? [/QUOTE]
That is a good point (although possibly should be under a new topic) - it does appear that any time something gets out from under the nose of QP or EMI, they are very quick to attack the people who collect such material under good faith, as collectors and not for monetary gain, rather than having a good look at their own security procedures and employees to find out exactly how the item in question escaped their vaults.
Im sure someone will now say that if somebody acquires a rare track then they are stealing from QP or EMI, and deserve all the attacks that come their way. My argument would be that if the material is owned by QP or EMI, and therefore presumably only handled by people directly employed or sub-contracted to them, then any 'leak' could actually be considered official as it MUST have come from somebody employed by QP or EMI.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Archivist wrote: [/QUOTENAME]GB: In fact, to be accurate, we were getting nowhere EXCESSIVELY SLOWLY.
[/QUOTE]
Thats the way we (Majority) of fans feel about the box set and other Queen stuff. We try to get as much as we can (information, songs e.t.c). All we want is something new or interesting every so often. JSS has provided us with a lot more inforamtion and tracks e.g. the skip demoes then you have. Although we recognise you cannot disclose secret stuff from QP but maybe tell us something from your private collection for instance. Just my thought on the matter.
Thanks for your time and best regards.
[/QUOTE]
Thats the way we (Majority) of fans feel about the box set and other Queen stuff. We try to get as much as we can (information, songs e.t.c). All we want is something new or interesting every so often. JSS has provided us with a lot more inforamtion and tracks e.g. the skip demoes then you have. Although we recognise you cannot disclose secret stuff from QP but maybe tell us something from your private collection for instance. Just my thought on the matter.
Thanks for your time and best regards.
The simple conclusion is that Greg likes to generate his own attention, so in that regard, he's rather like Britney Spears and other similarly talentless old trollops.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr Faron Hyte wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The simple conclusion is that Greg likes to generate his own attention, so in that regard, he's rather like Britney Spears and other similarly talentless old trollops.[/QUOTE]
(mentally places Greg's face on Brittany's body)
*shudder*
(mentally places Greg's face on Brittany's body)
*shudder*
sad scottish twat lol............ life after qz? na nah
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]newcastle 86! wrote: [/QUOTENAME]sad scottish twat lol............ life after qz? na nah [/QUOTE]
...huh?
...huh?
John Stuart...
Furthermore, for the life of me, I can not understand why either you - or Queen Productions have so much to fear from a simple man like myself.
GB: You are so full of crap it's laughable. You arrogant arse, you seriously believe QP or me (or anyone else) has anything to fear from an indivdiual as simple as you. What planet are you living on???
Fear???????? HAVE A WORD WITH YOUR SILLY SELF, and make it an urgent priority. God only knows where that concept came from, or why it filtered its way into your head. When do you dream these things up Mr Kray-Stuart... you big frightening terrifying man you?
I hope you heard the mass collective wave of QZ-ers at home who exclaimed aloud together in their collective astonishment. Who the hell do you think you are that anyone would 'fear' you. Have you heard yourself? You truly are diluded. "simple' man is right.
"I can not understand why either you - or Queen Productions have so much to fear from a simple man like myself" LISTEN TO YOURSELF. My God! I've heard some arrogance in my time from you - among the 'pity me' and 'be my friend' bullshit - but now you are in a superleague all on your own.
And then you spout off the legal crap too, about libel and your solicitors. GROW UP for goodness sake.
Yesterday I called you nothing more that a wet wimpy limp sponge, and I bloody stand by it.
Don't threaten me with your legal rubbish John, just because I have aired my true feelings for you and showed you up for the big girls blouse you are. This is a forum to air our respective views. You did so, I did so. I don't like all the crap you write, and you feel likewise. But don't then suddenly get all up yourself and stamp your feet and have a tantrum and resort to legal threats because that only makes you look like a complete and utter pleb with nothing better to say or dream up.
If YOU had not hijacked Justin Leiter's thread, directed at GREG BROOKS, and not you, it was nothing to do withyou whatsoever, and left well alone, kept your moaning and complaining that we've ALL heard before MANY times already - then none of this would have followed and you wouldn't be all upset and tearful and hurt.
STOP going on about your bloody lost tape in unrelated threads left right and centre, stop boring 96% of QZ-ers to death with your particular way of 'reporting' things, and then you and I won't have to clash. That would suit you and me and everyone.
You're threatening solicitors and libel charges today, are you going to be telling your mum about me next? Stop being so damned WET and puny and pathetic.
Are you a man or a great big mouse, for God's sake?????
If I never have to speak with you again, or hear you drivelling on and on about what a shitty time you have had, and how hard done-by you are, and how all QZ-ers should feel sorry for you and your terrible plight, it will be too soon.
Show just a tiny bit of backbone John. You don't like what I say, fine. You bore me to death too. I find your comments insulting in the extreme also. But if I were to find myself resorting to threatening you with solicitors over points of libel, just because you expressed yourself candidly and honestly, I would think myself a complete and utter wet wimpy pitiful spineless twat who ought to be ashamed of my sorry self.
I am very happy to "leave you alone" and not frighten you any more, or "intimidate" you (as if!!!) or hurt your poor fragile sensibilities. I was very happy doing so for this past few months until you got on everyone's tits again with yet another mention of your tape. I was happy to avoid you and ignore all signs on QZ of you being you. Let me get back to that... and stop going on about that sodding tape PLEASE.. Enough already.
Libel and solicitors indeed!!!! Grow a back bone for goodness sake.
Furthermore, for the life of me, I can not understand why either you - or Queen Productions have so much to fear from a simple man like myself.
GB: You are so full of crap it's laughable. You arrogant arse, you seriously believe QP or me (or anyone else) has anything to fear from an indivdiual as simple as you. What planet are you living on???
Fear???????? HAVE A WORD WITH YOUR SILLY SELF, and make it an urgent priority. God only knows where that concept came from, or why it filtered its way into your head. When do you dream these things up Mr Kray-Stuart... you big frightening terrifying man you?
I hope you heard the mass collective wave of QZ-ers at home who exclaimed aloud together in their collective astonishment. Who the hell do you think you are that anyone would 'fear' you. Have you heard yourself? You truly are diluded. "simple' man is right.
"I can not understand why either you - or Queen Productions have so much to fear from a simple man like myself" LISTEN TO YOURSELF. My God! I've heard some arrogance in my time from you - among the 'pity me' and 'be my friend' bullshit - but now you are in a superleague all on your own.
And then you spout off the legal crap too, about libel and your solicitors. GROW UP for goodness sake.
Yesterday I called you nothing more that a wet wimpy limp sponge, and I bloody stand by it.
Don't threaten me with your legal rubbish John, just because I have aired my true feelings for you and showed you up for the big girls blouse you are. This is a forum to air our respective views. You did so, I did so. I don't like all the crap you write, and you feel likewise. But don't then suddenly get all up yourself and stamp your feet and have a tantrum and resort to legal threats because that only makes you look like a complete and utter pleb with nothing better to say or dream up.
If YOU had not hijacked Justin Leiter's thread, directed at GREG BROOKS, and not you, it was nothing to do withyou whatsoever, and left well alone, kept your moaning and complaining that we've ALL heard before MANY times already - then none of this would have followed and you wouldn't be all upset and tearful and hurt.
STOP going on about your bloody lost tape in unrelated threads left right and centre, stop boring 96% of QZ-ers to death with your particular way of 'reporting' things, and then you and I won't have to clash. That would suit you and me and everyone.
You're threatening solicitors and libel charges today, are you going to be telling your mum about me next? Stop being so damned WET and puny and pathetic.
Are you a man or a great big mouse, for God's sake?????
If I never have to speak with you again, or hear you drivelling on and on about what a shitty time you have had, and how hard done-by you are, and how all QZ-ers should feel sorry for you and your terrible plight, it will be too soon.
Show just a tiny bit of backbone John. You don't like what I say, fine. You bore me to death too. I find your comments insulting in the extreme also. But if I were to find myself resorting to threatening you with solicitors over points of libel, just because you expressed yourself candidly and honestly, I would think myself a complete and utter wet wimpy pitiful spineless twat who ought to be ashamed of my sorry self.
I am very happy to "leave you alone" and not frighten you any more, or "intimidate" you (as if!!!) or hurt your poor fragile sensibilities. I was very happy doing so for this past few months until you got on everyone's tits again with yet another mention of your tape. I was happy to avoid you and ignore all signs on QZ of you being you. Let me get back to that... and stop going on about that sodding tape PLEASE.. Enough already.
Libel and solicitors indeed!!!! Grow a back bone for goodness sake.
Being quiet for most of the time, I'd like to add a reply to this thread.
I have never been bored by any of John's posts (and I have read many of them). John S Stuart is obviously one of the top Queen experts who is willing to share lots of information and even downloads on Queenzone. GREAT!!
BUT I am terribly shocked that there is a unbelievably rude guy called GB on Queenzone who regularly abuses Queen fans.
I he were just another Queen fan, it would be sad enough. However, this - may I dare write -primitive guy is in charge of the archive of one of the biggest rock bands there has ever been.
This is very strange.
If this guy is representative of QP we are in big trouble...
I simply cannot believe it.
I mean, where is the style??
PS: Do we have any proof that "GB" is indeed the real Greg Brooks?? I still can't believe it.
I have never been bored by any of John's posts (and I have read many of them). John S Stuart is obviously one of the top Queen experts who is willing to share lots of information and even downloads on Queenzone. GREAT!!
BUT I am terribly shocked that there is a unbelievably rude guy called GB on Queenzone who regularly abuses Queen fans.
I he were just another Queen fan, it would be sad enough. However, this - may I dare write -primitive guy is in charge of the archive of one of the biggest rock bands there has ever been.
This is very strange.
If this guy is representative of QP we are in big trouble...
I simply cannot believe it.
I mean, where is the style??
PS: Do we have any proof that "GB" is indeed the real Greg Brooks?? I still can't believe it.
To Queen Archivist: Thank You, that was all I needed, especially as you have written this under the use of your 'official title'.
All this leaves me is to ask you one final question - are your views divorced - or sanctioned by Queen Productions Limited?
If they are NOT sanctioned by QPL, by what authority do you use this title? If you are indeed sanctioned by QPL, and use this title with full authority - you are sure you have the full backing of Jim Beach & co for their contents?
Not that it really matters, but, as the internet is a printed medium for all to read (and therefore certainly covered by libel laws - but I am sure Mr. Beach will keep you correct on that score) it really is only a question of responsibility, and regardless whether written as 'Greg Brooks' or 'Queen Archivist', it matters not in the slightest for you, but it could make a world of difference for your employer.
All this leaves me is to ask you one final question - are your views divorced - or sanctioned by Queen Productions Limited?
If they are NOT sanctioned by QPL, by what authority do you use this title? If you are indeed sanctioned by QPL, and use this title with full authority - you are sure you have the full backing of Jim Beach & co for their contents?
Not that it really matters, but, as the internet is a printed medium for all to read (and therefore certainly covered by libel laws - but I am sure Mr. Beach will keep you correct on that score) it really is only a question of responsibility, and regardless whether written as 'Greg Brooks' or 'Queen Archivist', it matters not in the slightest for you, but it could make a world of difference for your employer.
I would just like to state for the record that JSS is not Ian Levine, nor is he at all similar.
Thank you, and good day.
Thank you, and good day.
Mr. Brooks, it is YOU, not JSS, who sound utterly pathetic.
Why do you have to keep rewording the same "idea" over and over again whenever you lose your temper?
"Wet wimpy limp sponge"? Alright, I think we got it now.
And by the way, who besides yourself has complained about the 'lost tape story' being boring? Don't speak on "everyone"'s behalf. You don't like that story because it is embarrassing YOU, that's it.
(How ironic that an archivist should advise someone to "stop living in the past" :P)
Why do you have to keep rewording the same "idea" over and over again whenever you lose your temper?
"Wet wimpy limp sponge"? Alright, I think we got it now.
And by the way, who besides yourself has complained about the 'lost tape story' being boring? Don't speak on "everyone"'s behalf. You don't like that story because it is embarrassing YOU, that's it.
(How ironic that an archivist should advise someone to "stop living in the past" :P)