What REALLY happened

[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
Gf: I partly agree with you - except I have additional inside info I am not willing to place on a public forum.
Indeed I am torn between two minds.
I did not begin this thread I only replied.
My point was to answer - not air more dirty laundry in public.
Now you ask to much.
Although David has unface-booked me - I still have him on mine and all his correspondence.
So do I release all this personal mail to make a point - or do I release my personal mail to demonstrate an Internet discussion?[/QUOTE]
Now you won´t trust in anybody anymore??

[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
I meant "too" my iPhone predictive text can be a pain!
Ps: my argument is in my experience Mr. Fuller is a thief and a liar. Am I the only one who has ever had this experience?
Of course; being a thief and liar elsewhere does not prove that he is in this case - but it does demonstrate a character trait and statistical past track record.
[/QUOTE]
Well at least you know what freddie felt when he wrote Death On Two Legs...
Thanks anyway for what you have shared here in the past (i mean the bbc sessions, the quality was OUTSTANDING)

[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
.....So do I release all this personal mail to make a point - am I willing to release my personal mail to demonstrate an Internet discussion?[/QUOTE]
Please don't. I have the strange habit of returning here a few times a day for some news tidbits about a british band called Queen. Maybe an admin on QZ can create a special forum called "Legal Cases"? It could be placed right under "Badger Mating Habits".

After Fuller joined the group, he should have followed the rules set by the members. If it was decided that nothing would be leaked in this way, then he should not have done it.

Set aside whether the stuff was stolen in the first place or not. Set aside the matter of ownership. In a mutual agreement, man to man, a promise should be a promise. If Fuller broke that promise, then he did betray his group and let them down.

[QUOTE] [b]ParisNair wrote:[/b]
After Fuller joined the group, he should have followed the rules set by the members. If it was decided that nothing would be leaked in this way, then he should not have done it.
Set aside whether the stuff was stolen in the first place or not. Set aside the matter of ownership. In a mutual agreement, man to man, a promise should be a promise. If Fuller broke that promise, then he did betray his group and let them down.[/QUOTE]

And it's as succinct as that, yet look how much it has blown out of all proportion.

[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]MERQRY wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
Gf: I partly agree with you - except I have additional inside info I am not willing to place on a public forum.
Indeed I am torn between two minds.
I did not begin this thread I only replied.
My point was to answer - not air more dirty laundry in public.
Now you ask to much.
Although David has unface-booked me - I still have him on mine and all his correspondence.
So do I release all this personal mail to make a point - or do I release my personal mail to demonstrate an Internet discussion?[/QUOTE]
Now you won´t trust in anybody anymore??[/QUOTE]
That is correct. Once bitten twice shy. Dos that surprise you?[/QUOTE]
No... it doesnt surprise me at all... i admit it was a stupid question

Would someone be willing to post a tracklist for this proposed Fanthology? I've enjoyed the reissues for the most part, but thought the bonus track selection was anaemic...I'd be very curious to know what else is "out there".

WTF is this group of dicks The Illuminati of Queen Bootlegs or something?

Don't tell them what we've got. What a bunch of horse crap. Everyone who has ever owned any music which has not been officially released is in procession of stolen art, but it's so wide spread that most bands and record companies turn a blind eye to it.

However these dicks are acting like they've got a bunch of never seen before Di Vinci master pieces.

In the the real world ( out side of your elitist Illuminati type secret coven ) you don't even legally have any rights of ownership to these recordings.

Jealousy has spoken.

Fuck I only thought this happened in David Bowie land !!!!!

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
Jealousy has spoken.[/QUOTE]

You haven't got a clue, but I'm guessing your one of the Dick head, horse crap elitist bootleg group.

Are you sure you won't end up swinging from a bridge somewhere, having broken your vow of total elitism, and posted your name and inner most thoughts on a public forum. . . . . .

"my argument is in my experience Mr. Fuller is a thief and a liar. Am I the only one who has ever had this experience?"

Not like he's ever stolen from me or really lied to me, but in private communication he's a little ... dim. And somewhat quick to change his opinion of you, depending on what he can get from you.

I just like hamming it up a bit and calling him a moron. He probably isn't. After all, he did that really wicked Photoshop where he's like, IN Queen. How the hell did he do that??

[QUOTE]

[b]John S Stuart wrote: [/b] Gf: I partly agree with you - except I have additional inside info I am not willing to place on a public forum.
Indeed I am torn between two minds.
I did not begin this thread I only replied.
My point was to answer - not air more dirty laundry in public.
Now you ask too much.
Although David has unface-booked me - I still have him on mine and all his correspondence.
So do I release all this personal mail to make a point - am I willing to release my personal mail to demonstrate an Internet discussion?[/QUOTE]
I'm not asking anything.  I'm pointing out how fundamentally dishonest - intentionally or unintentionally - your initial post on this thread was.  It purports to be a 'gotcha' and is nothing of the kind.  It doesn't address Fuller's defense in any way, and yet you sit idly - literally idly, either ignoring points to the contrary or blowing proverbs or whatever at them - allowing people actively posting to think you proved something with the digital security information. (lookin' at you tcc)  You proved nothing, and the effect of whipping up frenzy over David and his alleged 'lies' means the debate stays at how treacherous he is instead of where it should be: David claims he kept the letter of law as it related to expectations within Fanthology and only leaked material he obtained elsewhere.  Is this justifiable? Is it something like civil disobedience? Or is it actually harmful to the overall cause, and not just harmful to an artificially rigid system of control.  The guy could be a complete douche bag - which he may be - and that debate should still be happening.  But instead we have a disingenuous and completely over the top smear campaign that clearly feels no obligation to justify itself in any real way when it can just coast on indifference that grows from David not being an insider or seemingly a very likable guy, and gullibility, because you speak with a mantle of authority.  I really couldn't be more skeeved by this use of the bully pulpit by many of you.  Fortunately for you, few seem to care.

If the position of the collecting community is correct you should not be afraid of taking the debate where it belongs.  Maybe the thing you fear most is having people sit up and notice that David, massive douchebag or no,  is the only one who actually seems to think of the fan community as a stakeholder with interests rather than a great unwashed charity case.

PS.  I don't care about your private email problems.  Anybody prepared to make a public accusation and reap the rewards of the public response should be prepared to be able to publicly prove it.  I wouldn't publish private correspondence myself, under any circumstances,  and I wouldn't make an unsupportable public accusation either.  If those two things worked against each other, I'd keep my silence on the matter in the first place and deal with the larger issues.