Fanthology - Index

kosimodo wrote:

I do get the point. And ofcourse i am putting some oil on the fire...

Well DON'T lol - try to "Put Out The Fire" instead :)

Why try to inflame the situation? That's just trolling.

Rascal.

Battler wrote:

I'm member of a website called BetaArchive which is about sharing old and pre-release software. And many people there have shared for free what they have paid lots for. I don't see why the people here can't do the same.
Also, as for trading... what is achieved by it other than enlarging some private collections? People will always say "why should I share when there's stuff to trade it for" so it will never make it outside of those 1% of traders. This is why I think sharing is superior.

As for Fuller "biting the hand that fed him", this is what I'm asking for reliable and verifiable evidence for. Since their whole case rests on the hypothesis that Fuller did not have the stuff before joining Fanthology and that the shared stuff came from Fanthology. And so far, the only evidence that was provided, was an alleged watermark which is however no evidence because I doubt any audio watermark would get preserved after the audio is converted to a much more lossy YouTube format. You claim otherwise, so it'd be nice to see some evidence for it, rather than just "we say it's so so believe us".

Excuse me, all of us are already on the 50th storey of this situation and you are at ground zero. Please go and read up all the threads with the word "fanthology" to reach our level. Thank you.

Battler wrote:

And so far, the only evidence that was provided, was an alleged watermark which is however no evidence because I doubt any audio watermark would get preserved after the audio is converted to a much more lossy YouTube format.

Well, for starters, he was SELLING the tracks - so unless he made the files lossy before selling them on (which would further illustrate how slimy he is) the watermark would still be there. And you only DOUBT that it wouldn't transfer to YT. DOUBT. NO proof to back up YOUR stance.

Not trolling..

I can see your point...

Hope you can see mine.

>>@ Battler: I forgot to say in my previous post to you - who says they will continue to trade among themselves? Quite a bit of what you have, right now, came from them. Take, for instance, JSS - he gave us the complete BBC recordings, straight from the masters, and in lossless FLAC format. He also provided many of the tracks - to QPL - for the Freddie box set from 2001, gratis. You benefited from that quite a bit, didn't you? I don't know ALL of the fanthologists, but another example is Craig (Jam Monkey) - for at least a couple of years, his avatar linked to a website where he had uploaded a plethora of gems, for you to download, gratis.<< OK, granted, I didn't know about this. Nice to see they did release some stuff to the general public. >>They have been doing what they have been doing for years, and are entitled to either keep or share. It's not for you to demand, and you can't go about saying that their purpose is only to boost the collection of private collectors: that's just hearsay, and I think that they would be happy to, once everything has been collected, verified and documented, share - just like they have been doing previously.<< Yes but my point is, that as long as there's the even vaguest possibility of the existence of even ONE thing they don't have, they won't share because they'll want to trade. So they could refuse to share indefinitely. >>What are you contributing? Why do you think you should get without giving?<< I am contributing nothing, because I have nothing at the moment. If I had anything, I would post it right here on this forum for all to hear. Also, why not trade audio material for contributions of knowledge too. It would motivate the people here at QueenZone to post thoughtful and insightful discussions, as opposed of all the crap that's being posted these days. I never said "immediately release it all at once", I just said a system needs to be found so the general population has the opportunity to get the rarities, in exchange for their own contributions of any kind. For example, on BetaArchive, people are required to have a certain minimum number of contributing posts before they even get access to the FTP where the stuff is shared. Something similar could be done here. >>I've said it before, and I'll say it again - going by your logic, we should all be philanthropic: let's extend that to way beyond Queen music. As explained, I lost my job. I had been contributing to society whilst I was working, but can't right now, and am struggling financially: I'll expect a payment, direct from you, to be in my bank account soon, just to tide me over. No?.....why doesn't this surprise me????<< Well actually, if I wasn't broke myself right now, I would gladly give you some money. >>Well, for starters, he was SELLING the tracks - so unless he made the files lossy before selling them on (which would further illustrate how slimy he is) the watermark would still be there. And you only DOUBT that it wouldn't transfer to YT. DOUBT. NO proof to back up YOUR stance.<< All nice and well but do we have any reliable and verifiable evidence of the existence of such a watermark? Which would mean both an audio recording of said watermark, as well as an explanation of the watermark, how was it made. We don't have any of that. And my other point is, conversion to a more lossy format causes just that, loss of information, so I doubt the watermark would be preserved unaltered. It all depends though on how the watermark actually sounds like though, but that's again a piece of information we were never given.

Valyard: It wasn't only about the music. Here is another idea.

http://www.genesis-publications.com/book/killer-queen-the-official-signed-limited-edition/collector

John S Tuart - thanks for the response. are bootleg books even possible or would these be uploaded as pdfs.

Battler - your proof far a watermark is a redherring. you are right we will never now what happened behind the scenes so we only have 2 versions we can believe either fullers or the fantholgys. in all likelihood which is the most reasonable to believe. a group of fans who have given to us all free before. or some guy who is selling the same stuff he got for free?

I am not antifuller I am not profanthology but on the whole to me it sounds like the fanthology have nothing to prove because they are giving us before and have the fans best intentions and multiple witnesses. Perhaps there is good reason for them not to divulge the whole story because maybe they have sources they need to protect. maybe not.
But fuller has done nothing for anyone but himself. as far as I can read. why is not anyone asking him for proof to refute this.

I think we are all biting the hand that feeds us in favour of a fair weather friend who is only a pssing ship in the night. in the meantime we have lost all long-term vision for the sake of instant gratification now. but I could be wrong but unless anyone can PROOF me wrong no one can call me a liar.

My point is though exactly that - neither side should expect us to believe them until either side provides sufficient reliable and verifiable evidence. I think the best thing to do is to just agree to disagree and end it there.

Holly2003 wrote:

The Real Wizard wrote:

Holly2003 wrote:

Did teacher give you your wowwypop yet?

And you wonder why most people here don't take you seriously...

You seriously have the potential, but resorting to one-sentence bullying posts probably isn't the best course of action.

And of course not a word from you about "Mr Animal Sex's" disgraceful attempt to bully GF above, or brenski calling her a "cu*t".  You are very predictably hypcritical.

Haha, Holly2003, what a sad pathetic excuse of a man you are! You don´t even have the balls to go after the original post - me, and you keep going after The Real Wizard to bully him. Since the beginning of this thread you keep waiting for The Real Wizard to post so you can call him Hypocrit, or Mr. Hypocrit. And you have the nerve to call him and John S Stuart bullies. What a sad pathetic fuck you are, after everything that both The Real Wizard and John S Stuart gave to Queenzone, to go after them like you do, without any good reason whatsoever.

They´re just too nice to deal with people like you. Well, i´m not nice, and by this time you´ve already realized that i don´t give a fuck about people like you.

So, let me adress your question to me the best way i can considering your IQ level.

- "Did teacher give you your wowwypop yet?"

Yes, she did, and it was sweet! Thanks for asking.
By the way, i have one "wowwypop" for you that i´m shure you´ll like. It´s your favourite flavour- meat!

And why do you keep calling it wowwypop instead of lollipop? Did your tongue got stucked in something tight? You´re a kinky man indeed!

Holly2003, you can make fun all you like about my English, but i´ll never be a hypocrit like you. You´re amongst the greatest!
And this is my last reply to you. I don´t respect you, and you´re not worth of my time.

And for the others who think this is strong language, get over it! There are worst things in life.
If this site was moderated, some people didn´t have to use this sort of language against bullies and trolls.

And to Queenzone in general, open your fucking eyes and get your priorities in place. You´re witnessing great posters of this site being smashed by trolls and you show no suport for them.
If you think that this site is a better place without the likes of John S Stuart you´re wrong! What he and the Real Wizard gave to this site (with others of course!) can´t be measured, but i don´t see the support to them that they deserve. This is a forum with no moderation, so it´s up to the users to at least show some support for people who are under attack, with no reason whatsoever!

This is my last reply to this thread.

Sheers

If you got your wowwypop why are you so angry? Maybe you need a nap?

kosimodo wrote:

Not trolling..

I can see your point...

Hope you can see mine.

I don't think you are a troll, but admitting that you're adding oil to the fire, instead of adding something sensible, is tantamount to trolling. Don't be that man :)

Also, I do see your point....I just don't think it's the right view to have.

Thistleboy1980 wrote:

kosimodo wrote:

Not trolling..

I can see your point...

Hope you can see mine.

I don't think you are a troll, but admitting that you're adding oil to the fire, instead of adding something sensible, is tantamount to trolling. Don't be that man :)

Indeed, we already have too many people on the trollwagon to deal with. Don't encourage them :-)

@ Battler: really busy just now so I'll try to keep this as short as i can - thanks for your kind response to my first point! It's good that you have shown some appreciation to these guys.

As for your response to my second point, your pointis valid, but also speculative: I believe there will be a cut-off point of what can be obtained, and eventually the tracks will see the light of day.

Now, about YOUR contributions: that's very noble of you to say so, for the time-being - but it wouldn't make sense for you to do it. Say, for instance, you unearthed some recording of The Hectics, a soundboard Ibex show, or a pro-shot complete knebworth - are you seriously saying that you'd post it right here? Seriously? You wouldn't use it as a bargaining tool until your own collection was fulfilled before going all out and sharing? Can't see it, tbh.

Also, about the money thing - thanks, lol. Shucks!

Finally, regarding the watermark - some of the tracks he shared had deliberate glitches (as far as I'm aware).

But you're right, you don't have all of the facts, so pointless speculation and circular retort is all that can happen.

Hands shook and discussion over?

>>are you seriously saying that you'd post it right here? Seriously? You wouldn't use it as a bargaining tool until your own collection was fulfilled before going all out and sharing? Can't see it, tbh.<< I would, just like whenever I find any old software, no matter how rare, I share it on BetaArchive. >>Hands shook and discussion over?<< Yeah, agreed, hands shook and discussion over.

I dont think i was trolling. I just wanted to point out my point in a way it is getting more clear. It is a digital age. More possiblities. Easy possiblities.

Wether Fuller was right or wrong we will never find out. I give him the benefit of the doubt.

I just want queens music to be shared. Last time i did get exited was with the multitracks.. What a share that was.

Furthermore, at my minor collecting scale, my queen concerts bought on album and cassette mid 80's are free available at queenconcerts. And thats where they should be!
I have the album with a nice sleeve:)