Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by Pepe Silvia on Aug 16, 2018 19:10:36 GMT -5
i for one do not mind some lucky duck getting a solid headliner in the 11th hour. makes it interesting. jealous i traded away all my picks so i couldn't of tried it.
Post by black bush on Aug 16, 2018 19:10:36 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with acts becoming eligible when were well into the game, that's how it is in real life too. I'm sure there's been plenty of times where a festival missed out on a act because of their window of availability. Also it's not like Walaka had any information the rest of didn't have or had power over when they announced. He saw an opportunity and took it.
Post by 3post1jack1 on Aug 16, 2018 19:14:41 GMT -5
i'm open to hearing the counter argument, but what am I missing here? all acts must have played two live shows right? KSG has played zero live shows? like, that's the end of the discussion right?
i'm open to hearing the counter argument, but what am I missing here? all acts must have played two live shows right? KSG has played zero live shows? like, that's the end of the discussion right?
i'm saying it shouldn't be and there probably could of been a rule in place for a situation like this.
i'm open to hearing the counter argument, but what am I missing here? all acts must have played two live shows right? KSG has played zero live shows? like, that's the end of the discussion right?
They are a new act, announcing their first date, in a draft where we are supposed to be able to draft all acts. No They haven’t performed twice but far more legitimate than some of the acts on posters thus far. I’d be for anybody getting it. If this gets shot down and they announce more dates and somebody else tries to get them down the road I will support it.
There is no counter argument aside from well that rule shouldn’t be a rule
would you have felt this way when there were rules putting people into different classes? Not saying the two are comparable but on principle this is an awful statement.
There is no counter argument aside from well that rule shouldn’t be a rule
would you have felt this way when there were rules putting people into different classes? Not saying the two are comparable but on principle this is an awful statement.
There is no counter argument aside from well that rule shouldn’t be a rule
would you have felt this way when there were rules putting people into different classes? Not saying the two are comparable but on principle this is an awful statement.
Wait what? People in different classes? Are you talking about India’s caste system or something?
I just was vocalizing that in my opinion i have not seen an argument that says that this fits within the rules, rather that the rule shouldn’t exist so the pick should be allowed. That’s what this poll is to decide, no?
would you have felt this way when there were rules putting people into different classes? Not saying the two are comparable but on principle this is an awful statement.
I literally made this face when i read the above post. To be clear i am not for blindly following rules that murder or marginalized people
There is no counter argument aside from well that rule shouldn’t be a rule
I think the more accurate argument is that the rule is not serving it's correct purpose. The intent of the rule was to prevent people from creating acts out of nowhere. We can all agree that KSG is a real act and is not going against what the rule is intended to do.
There is no counter argument aside from well that rule shouldn’t be a rule
I think the more accurate argument is that the rule is not serving it's correct purpose. The intent of the rule was to prevent people from creating acts out of nowhere. We can all agree that KSG is a real act and is not going against what the rule is intended to do.
I see your point. And agree you stated it a bit better than i did
There is no counter argument aside from well that rule shouldn’t be a rule
I think the more accurate argument is that the rule is not serving it's correct purpose. The intent of the rule was to prevent people from creating acts out of nowhere. We can all agree that KSG is a real act and is not going against what the rule is intended to do.
This is a valid point.
Taking a step back, I find the psychology behind this fascinating. Some people are judging the pick within the context of the rules, and others are judging the rules within the context of the game. That's pretty dope.
I think the more accurate argument is that the rule is not serving it's correct purpose. The intent of the rule was to prevent people from creating acts out of nowhere. We can all agree that KSG is a real act and is not going against what the rule is intended to do.
This is a valid point.
Taking a step back, I find the psychology behind this fascinating. Some people are judging the pick within the context of the rules, and others are judging the rules within the context of the game. That's pretty dope.
If we were talking about an act who announced a whole tour and that act didn’t include Kanye and Cudi, two very unstable humans, then I could understand it. But there is a very real chance that this show doesn’t happen.
Taking a step back, I find the psychology behind this fascinating. Some people are judging the pick within the context of the rules, and others are judging the rules within the context of the game. That's pretty dope.
If we were talking about an act who announced a whole tour and that act didn’t include Kanye and Cudi, two very unstable humans, then I could understand it. But there is a very real chance that this show doesn’t happen.
Eh, yeah, but I think that if we've reached the point where we're debating whether or not an artist's potential mental state affects their eligibility, we've gone too deep.
Taking a step back, I find the psychology behind this fascinating. Some people are judging the pick within the context of the rules, and others are judging the rules within the context of the game. That's pretty dope.
If we were talking about an act who announced a whole tour and that act didn’t include Kanye and Cudi, two very unstable humans, then I could understand it. But there is a very real chance that this show doesn’t happen.
and I’ve stated multiple times I’m taking that gamble with “booking” them for my fest.
If we were talking about an act who announced a whole tour and that act didn’t include Kanye and Cudi, two very unstable humans, then I could understand it. But there is a very real chance that this show doesn’t happen.
Eh, yeah, but I think that if we've reached the point where we're debating whether or not an artist's potential mental state affects their eligibility, we've gone too deep.
1) they must be an act. 2) they must have played two publicly accessible shows.
KSG is an act.
KSG have not played two publicly available shows. They've played zero publicly accessible shows. They don't even have two future shows announced.
These are the rules that we have been playing with the entire game. The unfairness is you acknowledging that this doesn't meet that criteria but that it shouldn't matter for you.
i'm open to hearing the counter argument, but what am I missing here? all acts must have played two live shows right? KSG has played zero live shows? like, that's the end of the discussion right?
i'm saying it shouldn't be and there probably could of been a rule in place for a situation like this.
Then you should've asked for a rule change and those participating in the view should've had a vote on it.
If we were talking about an act who announced a whole tour and that act didn’t include Kanye and Cudi, two very unstable humans, then I could understand it. But there is a very real chance that this show doesn’t happen.
Eh, yeah, but I think that if we've reached the point where we're debating whether or not an artist's potential mental state affects their eligibility, we've gone too deep.
Yeah, were not gonna poll Moz for his history so I don't see why that should disqualify this
I think the more accurate argument is that the rule is not serving it's correct purpose. The intent of the rule was to prevent people from creating acts out of nowhere. We can all agree that KSG is a real act and is not going against what the rule is intended to do.
This is a valid point.
Taking a step back, I find the psychology behind this fascinating. Some people are judging the pick within the context of the rules, and others are judging the rules within the context of the game. That's pretty dope.
Taking a step back, I find the psychology behind this fascinating. Some people are judging the pick within the context of the rules, and others are judging the rules within the context of the game. That's pretty dope.
Psst, think big picture!!!
^ That post was better before you edited it. I could have made a dumb joke playing off of it, you'd have maybe half-smiled; it'd have been fun. We'd have bonded. But now that dream is dead.
1) they must be an act. 2) they must have played two publicly accessible shows.
KSG is an act.
KSG have not played two publicly available shows. They've played zero publicly accessible shows. They don't even have two future shows announced.
These are the rules that we have been playing with the entire game. The unfairness is you acknowledging that this doesn't meet that criteria but that it shouldn't matter for you.
Cheating? I am out. I am saying that I am drafting an act that makes question eligibility. But I’m not trying to steal or do wrong or pull one over like crisp. I have had a bad day at work and for my liesure and entertainment to call me a cheater for testing boundaries, fuck this. I’m out. Y’all can fight over who gets Prince.
Again, Nick Mason's Saucerful of secrets, has multiple shows planned ahead, none as of yet, he could die before, he could (probably won't). Is it eligible?
1) they must be an act. 2) they must have played two publicly accessible shows.
KSG is an act.
KSG have not played two publicly available shows. They've played zero publicly accessible shows. They don't even have two future shows announced.
These are the rules that we have been playing with the entire game. The unfairness is you acknowledging that this doesn't meet that criteria but that it shouldn't matter for you.
Cheating? I am out. I am saying that I am drafting an act that makes question eligibility. But I’m not trying to steal or do wrong or pull one over like crisp. I have had a bad day at work and for my liesure and entertainment to call me a cheater for testing boundaries, fuck this. I’m out. Y’all can fight over who gets Prince.
Come on dude. You’re better than rage quitting. This is a game and you knew you’d get pushback for this. Breathe and come back, please? We’ll miss you, not to mention the bitchin poster I started for you will go to waste.
For the record I would have been fine and had my pick ready for when this pill inevitably ended not in my favor but I will not be told I am cheating for trying to draft something that tests limits
