Fuller's channel terminated again

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b]

Just look at the way he tried to weasel out of admitting being caught redhanded with the fanthology sources leaking out :-)[/QUOTE]

"The fanthology source"... That almost makes it sound like the fanthology had some claim to the material, doesn't it?

Did you ever ask Brian what he felt about David leaking "your" material to the public despite your wishes?

[QUOTE] [b]Thistleboy1980 wrote:[/b]
^ lol, thanks - but there's a slight tinge of irony in that statement: I'm a raving lunatic :p[/QUOTE]
I know that. I said you make this place saner, not sane.

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b]

Hahahahahaha, yeah totally!! I wouldn't put it past him to come up with some lameass excuse like that.
Just look at the way he tried to weasel out of admitting being caught redhanded with the fanthology sources leaking out :-)[/QUOTE]

Weren't you recently talking about being the victim of bullying Richard? Perhaps you might consider not making weak accusations against Fuller as if they've been proven. 'Redhanded' my ass. It remains unclear what happened in that case, certainly as far as anything like proof goes. You'll recall that the huge thread that examined those accusations is now full of more holes, literally, than Swiss cheese. Virtually every single accuser to a wo/man went back and deleted their posts when their 'proof' and arguments were challenged. Whatever the motivation for that the result was surely one of the more cowardly and morally questionable displays I've ever seen on the internet. By their own actions their own words can no longer be held up to examination, so it's completely inappropriate to be claiming anybody was caught 'red handed'. Bullshit.

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

Collectors have shared thousands upon thousands of things over the years. Plenty of live material, studio outtakes, alt versions and BBC sessions, all for free. No new things need to be shared to prove this point, my friend. It's been happening for ages - long before you were around these quarters.

But without a doubt new ones will come when they'll come..

If you want them to come at a different time, then you're welcome to search and put them out as you see fit :-)[/QUOTE]

This was your chance to prove once and for all that David Fuller had absolutely no function at all, and you chose not to take it.

Unless another fanthology member is willing to take up the challenge, we can safely say that David indeed had a unique role in serving the general public.[/QUOTE]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you suggesting that Fuller is the only person who has ever shared any Queen of remote value at this place or elsewhere.. ?

If so, you might want to check again.

Are the contributions of others over the last two decades somehow less valid because they weren't on attention-seeking missions?

If you want new music to be available here when you want it to be available, then go and find it and make it available. Nobody shares music on command. Especially when you're basically telling them that they're somehow inferior to an ingrate like Fuller. You aren't helping.

I wish Freezer were still alive to see this. I'm dedicating this thread to him.

[QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b] [QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b] Hahahahahaha, yeah totally!! I wouldn't put it past him to come up with some lameass excuse like that. Just look at the way he tried to weasel out of admitting being caught redhanded with the fanthology sources leaking out :-)[/QUOTE] Weren't you recently talking about being the victim of bullying Richard? Perhaps you might consider not making weak accusations against Fuller as if they've been proven..[/QUOTE] I don't suppose you recall then that it was proven to be his copies leaking out because of the unique digital "glitch" watermark inserted into each fanthology member's copy then?

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b] [QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b] [QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b] Hahahahahaha, yeah totally!! I wouldn't put it past him to come up with some lameass excuse like that. Just look at the way he tried to weasel out of admitting being caught redhanded with the fanthology sources leaking out :-)[/QUOTE] Weren't you recently talking about being the victim of bullying Richard? Perhaps you might consider not making weak accusations against Fuller as if they've been proven..[/QUOTE] I don't suppose you recall then that it was proven to be his copies leaking out because of the unique digital "glitch" watermark inserted into each fanthology member's copy then?[/QUOTE] Stop trying to speak logic to people who aren't listening. Maybe I should take my own advice too.

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]
Did you ever ask Brian what he felt about David leaking "your" material to the public despite your wishes?[/QUOTE]

Have YOU even asked him that yourself? Or Roger for that matter? :)

I was never a part of Fanthology, although I WAS invited initially but declined due to lack of free time, so your question is accordingly rendered invalid :-)

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b] I don't suppose you recall then that it was proven to be his copies leaking out because of the unique digital "glitch" watermark inserted into each fanthology member's copy then?[/QUOTE] I recall the whole thing in great detail. Fuller never denied having a copy from Fanthology, and he never denied putting that copy online. What he claimed was was that he never publicly made anything available that he only received from Fanthology. His claim was that he also received the track in a separate trade and thus felt entitled to do whatever he wanted with it. If the 'market' had been suddenly flooded with Fanthology stuff, there might have been a strong case. As it was, with one or two tracks out several months apart, it was an extraordinarily weak case presented as 'redhanded' and 'proof' that was anything but. Even the whole 'watermark' claim started to look a little shaky by the end of that thread. Difficult to point you to anything now, as so many of the 'accusers' removed their posts once the self serving damage was done.

[QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b]

What he claimed was was that he never publicly made anything available that he only received from Fanthology. His claim was that he also received the track in a separate trade and thus felt entitled to do whatever he wanted with it.[/QUOTE]

And that is called bullshit.

If you understand the concept of audio watermarking, you wouldn't have written that last paragraph. You would've said, "You're right."

I understand watermarking just fine. YOU are the one still peddling illogic in your massive sense of entitlement to have your self serving trader 'ethics' accepted as the gold standard for the rest of us. That Dave put an allegedly watermarked track out says NOTHING, NADA, ZERO about whether he also got the track from somebody else. NOTHING. Never did, never will. You all jumped the gun and are still jumping it with all this time passed.

So, just to clarify - you don't believe the people who were the source of material for the guy who was shut down by QP.

Tell us more about how you are able to think logically.

What?! You're so absurdly arrogant that you don't even require it of yourself to make a lick of sense. Stick to the unsupportable accusations of 'proof' that are at hand. Failing that, why don't you go hit personal and tell us again how your 'logic' told you that 9/11 was an inside job? Maybe Queen Fan can help you out.

Right, because you were there when the watermarking and file comparisons took place.

My mistake.

Do you have epilepsy?

If I provided doctor records you'd say they were forged, so what's the point?