Rolling Stone magazine has become no more reliable when it comes to posting Stones news than the Daily Mail or the Sun. Poorly reported journalism and gossip. This is just as nebulous as it ever was. The Rolling Stones are not a functioning band - they are a brand and an organization largely run by Mick Jagger and he will have the final say on anything "official". That said, sure, I hope this happens - but my hopes for it are no brighter than they were prior to RS.com posting this "news".

Quote
MightyStonesStillRollin50

Quote
Eleanor Rigby
..well it's certainly not "official" !!!

It never is until Mick says, "enough"! He is really taking us to the limit this time around. I know exactly what he is doing but it still is driving me crazy! I thought I would hold up better!

Go see a doctor. Do you feel like you have a close personal relationship with Mick Jagger? Yeah, go see a doctor

Quote
Jah Paul

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Jah Paul
Since it's all official now, shouldn't this be a Sticky thread?

No!!!

Why not? According to the thread title, it's "official."

Are you telling me it's not official?

Not at all. I stand by the title of the thread. When they convene in London, they won't be gathering simply to pore over accountancy spreadsheets. I just think threads should be allowed to lapse and not hang around forever.

stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

you make my brain hurt!

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

you make my brain hurt!

unofficially, of course

Quote
Send It To me

The universe is unfolding as it should. Dope track, by the way.

Quote
MightyStonesStillRollin50
Well, I warned you a long time ago how this thing was going to go down.

You sure did, stonescrow!

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
MightyStonesStillRollin50
Well, I warned you a long time ago how this thing was going to go down.

You sure did, stonescrow!

I think you have him confused with watchwoman.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

So based on that definition of yours, shouldn't your subject heading be "Keith officially says that Stones are to discuss about whether or not they will record an album and Keith officially says that he'd like to play some concerts and they're considering going out on tour"?

There's nothing in that article that states that they are going to record an album and tour. It's not official. A press release is official. Keith saying "yes, we are recording, we have booked 3 months worth of studio time" is official.

Edit: It's like me saying "I'm officially going to Paris on vacation" but first I have to look at my financial situation, see if I can get time off work, look for a babysitter for my cat, etc. I want to go but it's not quite confirmed yet, I don't have a ticket in my hand. So saying that I'm going, it's official, it's a misleading thing to say. Understand?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-20 18:09 by GumbootCloggeroo.

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

So based on that definition of yours, shouldn't your subject heading be "Keith officially says that Stones are to discuss about whether or not they will record an album and Keith officially says that he'd like to play some concerts and they're considering going out on tour"?

There's nothing in that article that states that they are going to record an album and tour. It's not official. A press release is official. Keith saying "yes, we are recording, we have booked 3 months worth of studio time" is official.

right, but come on, don´t blame him to be one of the first to read that article and make a thread out of it, which I basically welcome! the article is "good news" and, yes, it has no "official" tour- or record-announcment, but some good and "new" news!

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

So based on that definition of yours, shouldn't your subject heading be "Keith officially says that Stones are to discuss about whether or not they will record an album and Keith officially says that he'd like to play some concerts and they're considering going out on tour"?

There's nothing in that article that states that they are going to record an album and tour. It's not official. A press release is official. Keith saying "yes, we are recording, we have booked 3 months worth of studio time" is official.

Edit: It's like me saying "I'm officially going to Paris on vacation" but first I have to look at my financial situation, see if I can get time off work, look for a babysitter for my cat, etc. I want to go but it's not quite confirmed yet, I don't have a ticket in my hand. So saying that I'm going, it's official, it's a misleading thing to say. Understand?

i'm confused...when are you going to paris again?

Quote
muenke

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

So based on that definition of yours, shouldn't your subject heading be "Keith officially says that Stones are to discuss about whether or not they will record an album and Keith officially says that he'd like to play some concerts and they're considering going out on tour"?

There's nothing in that article that states that they are going to record an album and tour. It's not official. A press release is official. Keith saying "yes, we are recording, we have booked 3 months worth of studio time" is official.

right, but come on, don´t blame him to be one of the first to read that article and make a thread out of it, which I basically welcome! the article is "good news" and, yes, it has no "official" tour- or record-announcment, but some good and "new" news!

True. This thread was inevitable. I was merely the first to post it.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
muenke

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

So based on that definition of yours, shouldn't your subject heading be "Keith officially says that Stones are to discuss about whether or not they will record an album and Keith officially says that he'd like to play some concerts and they're considering going out on tour"?

There's nothing in that article that states that they are going to record an album and tour. It's not official. A press release is official. Keith saying "yes, we are recording, we have booked 3 months worth of studio time" is official.

right, but come on, don´t blame him to be one of the first to read that article and make a thread out of it, which I basically welcome! the article is "good news" and, yes, it has no "official" tour- or record-announcment, but some good and "new" news!

True. This thread was inevitable. I was merely the first to post it.

the next thread i start will be inevitable, too....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
stonesnow, do you know the definition of the word "official"?

there's several unofficial definitions, you know....

Sure. Official: the difference between "rumor" (i.e., The Mirror UK) and "news" (i.e., the Rolling Stone article). News tells us something concrete from verifiable sources, as opposed to hearsay based on unnamed "sources."

So based on that definition of yours, shouldn't your subject heading be "Keith officially says that Stones are to discuss about whether or not they will record an album and Keith officially says that he'd like to play some concerts and they're considering going out on tour"?

There's nothing in that article that states that they are going to record an album and tour. It's not official. A press release is official. Keith saying "yes, we are recording, we have booked 3 months worth of studio time" is official.

Edit: It's like me saying "I'm officially going to Paris on vacation" but first I have to look at my financial situation, see if I can get time off work, look for a babysitter for my cat, etc. I want to go but it's not quite confirmed yet, I don't have a ticket in my hand. So saying that I'm going, it's official, it's a misleading thing to say. Understand?

i'm confused...when are you going to paris again?

ask mickscarey, he say it's a done deal. He's seen the paperwork, apparently.

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo


Edit: It's like me saying "I'm officially going to Paris on vacation" but first I have to look at my financial situation, see if I can get time off work, look for a babysitter for my cat, etc. I want to go but it's not quite confirmed yet, I don't have a ticket in my hand. So saying that I'm going, it's official, it's a misleading thing to say. Understand?

No, I don't understand, actually. All I did was post a link to an article that someone else would have posted later that day anyway. And the tone of the discussion and speculation would have been exactly the same as it is here. I'm officially delighted that the Stones are set to record and tour.

But you do sound as though you need a vacation. Enjoy Paris...

You did it stonesnow - by posting an article with nothing groundbreaking and giving it a fals title, you have a thread officialy about yourself now...Jeeez, where do all those characters keep comming from?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-20 18:41 by Happy24.

Quote
Happy24
You did it stonesnow - by posting an article with nothing groundbreaking and giving it a fals title, you have a thread officialy about yourself now...Jeeez, where do all those characters keep comming from?

Some people just want to be the first to say "I told you so. I was the FIRST to tell you all". They want us to "eat their words". mickscarey and superrevvy are two that come to mind. Look at the latter, half the time his posts consist of "I was the first to tell you" or "As I reported months ago".

As far as false titles go, I guess there are those that read an article and see what they want to see out of it despite their perception being inaccurate.

Quote
Happy24
You did it stonesnow - by posting an article with nothing groundbreaking and giving it a fals title, you have a thread officialy about yourself now...Jeeez, where do all those characters keep comming from?

I haven't said a word about myself. I'm just replying to those who address me by moniker. Nothing more. I think it irks a few people that I've only been posting here for 3 weeks.

At this point, I should remind you of the title of the Rolling Stone article:

Rolling Stones Gather to Plot 50th Anniversary Bash

The byline belongs to Mr. Patrick Doyle. Why not send your complaints to him?

Yeah, this thread has a misleading title.
VERY annoying to open and realize its just the same BS.

Haven't any of you heard the story about the little boy who cried wolf?

____________________________________________________________________

New Track - Indoor Sunshine
[www.thepowergoats.com]

Completely different.

Quote
jamesfdouglas
Yeah, this thread has a misleading title.
VERY annoying to open and realize its just the same BS.

Haven't any of you heard the story about the little boy who cried wolf?

I've heard of the wind crying mary...is that the same?

Quote
theimposter
Rolling Stone magazine has become no more reliable when it comes to posting Stones news than the Daily Mail or the Sun. Poorly reported journalism and gossip. This is just as nebulous as it ever was. The Rolling Stones are not a functioning band - they are a brand and an organization largely run by Mick Jagger and he will have the final say on anything "official". That said, sure, I hope this happens - but my hopes for it are no brighter than they were prior to RS.com posting this "news".

I thought 'rs.com' referred to the band's official site.

Anyway, Rolling Stone magazine havent claimed to have posted anything official. They're simply doing their job - reporting a news story relating to the band with a quote from a band member.

The journalist in question is the same one who interviewed Keith late last year, when he stated that he was hoping to get the band together in a few weeks for a jam session. THAT took place, as we know. He appears to be in semi-regular contact with Keith as he's published first hand quotes from him a few times since.


There's no comparison to the likes of the Daily Mail or (to use the Glastonbury story) the Daily Mirror, who are simply posting distorted (or sometimes totally fictional) stories from unnamed 'sources' and putting their own 'spin' on them to confuse people who are gullible enough to take anything in print at face value.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Happy24
You did it stonesnow - by posting an article with nothing groundbreaking and giving it a fals title, you have a thread officialy about yourself now...Jeeez, where do all those characters keep comming from?

I haven't said a word about myself. I'm just replying to those who address me by moniker. Nothing more. I think it irks a few people that I've only been posting here for 3 weeks.

At this point, I should remind you of the title of the Rolling Stone article:

Rolling Stones Gather to Plot 50th Anniversary Bash

The byline belongs to Mr. Patrick Doyle. Why not send your complaints to him?

If "Rolling Stones Gather to Plot 50th Anniversary Bash" is "Stones officially set to record and tour" to you, then there is really no point in arguing with you

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
jamesfdouglas
Yeah, this thread has a misleading title.
VERY annoying to open and realize its just the same BS.

Haven't any of you heard the story about the little boy who cried wolf?

I've heard of the wind crying mary...is that the same?

Please, someone put a candle in it! (the wind. i mean)

Quote
Gazza

Quote
theimposter
Rolling Stone magazine has become no more reliable when it comes to posting Stones news than the Daily Mail or the Sun. Poorly reported journalism and gossip. This is just as nebulous as it ever was. The Rolling Stones are not a functioning band - they are a brand and an organization largely run by Mick Jagger and he will have the final say on anything "official". That said, sure, I hope this happens - but my hopes for it are no brighter than they were prior to RS.com posting this "news".

I thought 'rs.com' referred to the band's official site.

Anyway, Rolling Stone magazine havent claimed to have posted anything official. They're simply doing their job - reporting a news story relating to the band with a quote from a band member.

The journalist in question is the same one who interviewed Keith late last year, when he stated that he was hoping to get the band together in a few weeks for a jam session. THAT took place, as we know. He appears to be in semi-regular contact with Keith as he's published first hand quotes from him a few times since.


There's no comparison to the likes of the Daily Mail or (to use the Glastonbury story) the Daily Mirror, who are simply posting distorted (or sometimes totally fictional) stories from unnamed 'sources' and putting their own 'spin' on them to confuse people who are gullible enough to take anything in print at face value.

Do we know that Gazza? AFAIK, the alleged Jam Session was not reported by every major media outlet, and no bootlegs have been put into circulation. Why have we not heard anything official?

Quote
Happy24

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Happy24
You did it stonesnow - by posting an article with nothing groundbreaking and giving it a fals title, you have a thread officialy about yourself now...Jeeez, where do all those characters keep comming from?

I haven't said a word about myself. I'm just replying to those who address me by moniker. Nothing more. I think it irks a few people that I've only been posting here for 3 weeks.

At this point, I should remind you of the title of the Rolling Stone article:

Rolling Stones Gather to Plot 50th Anniversary Bash

The byline belongs to Mr. Patrick Doyle. Why not send your complaints to him?

If "Rolling Stones Gather to Plot 50th Anniversary Bash" is "Stones officially set to record and tour" to you, then there is really no point in arguing with you

But I wasn't looking for an argument in the first place.

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
jamesfdouglas
Yeah, this thread has a misleading title.
VERY annoying to open and realize its just the same BS.

Haven't any of you heard the story about the little boy who cried wolf?

I've heard of the wind crying mary...is that the same?

Please, someone put a candle in it! (the wind. i mean)

Speaking of candles and such, before you go to Paris, be sure to pack a can of spray paint for Morrison's grave.